Which is right for me?

[tailz03]

So i've been saving up for a 5d mark II for ages after using them at Uni but i'm still way off target and im thinking why not settle for a 7d? I need a camera ASAP as i can't go on borrowing Uni's. I've looked at reviews but im still no closer to deciding. Heres a few points.

- I currently own 3 lenses, an EF 50mm, EF 70-200mm and an EF-S 18-55mm.
- I no longer own an external flash as the batteries have destroyed the connectors in mine.
- Primarily i do live music work at Birmingham Academy/Wolverhampton Civic/Nec/Nia and studio portraits however i wish to move into weddings too.
- Considering this its understandable that i work in high ISO a lot of the time for my music work.

Which would be better for me and if i picked the 7d would i be disappointed and wishing i had bought the 5d?

Thanks in advance for helping.

 

[Natalie]

I say keep saving for the 5D... It's what you've used and are comfortable with, and if you are going to be getting into professional photography, you'll likely be wanting to have a full-frame camera anyway. The 7D is not a substitute/replacement for the 5D, and I think there is a good chance you might not be completely satisfied with your purchase if you went for the former.

 

[tailz03]

See im a total n00b when it comes to full frame etc, im one of those ppl who cant learn by reading something i have to try it to learn. Try explaining simply why i need full frame? hehe sorry that sounds really amateurish.

 

[usayit]

EF-S 18-55mm is not compatible with the 5D so you'll have to figure in a plan for replacement.

 

[tailz03]

EF-S 18-55mm is not compatible with the 5D so you'll have to figure in a plan for replacement.

I know, i dislike that lens and very rarely use it anyway i was considering getting a 135mm instead... nothing alike but heyho!

 

[Overread]

For what you are intending and are shooting I would think that the high ISO abilities of the fullframe camera bodies are really what you are going to need. Fast glass can only get you so far then you need more usable high ISOs - and whilst at some places you can setup a flash based lighting setup, often you won't get the option.

Have you considered the 5D camera body (2nd hand) as a cheaper way to get into the fullframe market? If the uni has 5DM2s I'm sure there must be at least one 5D kicking around the place you could try (ask a fellow or upper year student or teacher)

 

[usayit]

I know, i dislike that lens and very rarely use it anyway i was considering getting a 135mm instead... nothing alike but heyho!

ah.. ok.. just wanted to make sure you knew...

btw.. 135L is a very good lens. I use to shoot with it along with: 24L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, 135 f/2L. For me.... I could shoot almost anything with any three of those 4 lenses.

 

[tailz03]

well i was just looking at prices and i can get a 28-135mm now, but would you recommend the 135mm prime? I seem to prefer zooms but i just fancied your opinion.

As to the 5d mark I comment, no thanks its awful, i've done one gig with it and i barely got photos worth using. The iso is horrible on it and i can afford a 7d so id pick that over a mark I. I like to work between 1200 and 2400 iso speed so the 7d will be capable of that but i have a feeling ill get much smoother images from the 5d mark II.

So is everyone saying 5d only for the full frame? Hmm interesting. I'm still just as uncertain. Hah. Does anyone have some normal photos taken with both to compare? (or a link)

 

[Overread]

Have you considered a shop - chances are they will be able to get in (or should have) a 7D that you coudl try out ( at least in store) or you could see if there is a camera club in Birmingham (I'm sure there is one) and you can pester the members to have a try if someone has one.

5DM2 vs the 7D for high ISO the 5dm2 beats the 7d in the ground - however 7d vs 5d I am far less sure as to the comparative results from each.

on the 135mm check out the canon group on flickr
Flickr: Search Canon DSLR User Group
but be carefull - they are addicted to that lens on that site

 

[Derrel]

well i was just looking at prices and i can get a 28-135mm now, but would you recommend the 135mm prime? I seem to prefer zooms but i just fancied your opinion.

As to the 5d mark I comment, no thanks its awful, i've done one gig with it and i barely got photos worth using. The iso is horrible on it and i can afford a 7d so id pick that over a mark I. I like to work between 1200 and 2400 iso speed so the 7d will be capable of that but i have a feeling ill get much smoother images from the 5d mark II.

So is everyone saying 5d only for the full frame? Hmm interesting. I'm still just as uncertain. Hah. Does anyone have some normal photos taken with both to compare? (or a link)

What do you mean the original 5D is "awful"? The 'ISO' on it is pretty good if you expose properly with any half-decent lens. If you realy want to go into portraits, weddings, and band photography, a FF sensor makes all the premium Canon lenses behave like they were designed to; your 50/1.4 on FF will be a valuable lens,usable at close distances to medium distances, whereas on 1.6x it's a narrow-field lens. Your 70-200 on FF is a short tele to medium telephoto...on 1.6x it is too narrow even at 70mm indoors inside of 30 feet for events, unless all you want to be able to manage are half-body or tighter photos. The 18-55 lens is worthless on the 7D; the 7D's sensor demands high-quality glass, and the Canon 18-55 is very kitish, very full of CA,and if you've seen 7D shots out of the 18-55, you know what I mean. Do you want a FF camera or to use you words, do you want to "settle" for the 7D and 1.6x on every lens you mount???? The 18-55 is not an anchor lens, but more like a paperweight, when deciding on what system to go with.

The 135/2 L is a good lens,and on FF it's got a great angle of view and lovely selctive depth of field; on 1.6x, you need to be 40 feet or so from a person in order to shoot a "tall" full-length figure with a 135mm, and by then you are so far distant from the subject that BOTH the subject AND the background (in most instances) will both be acceptably in focus to the point that the shallow DOF, selective focus look of the 135/2 is squandered.

Most concert shooters of much experience like fast primes for the sheer aperture: 24/1.4, 35/1.4,85/1.8, 100/2,135/2 in Canon are all popular with higher-end concert shooters. My question: how come you can no longer borrow from the Uni?? I think you ought to re-evaluate the 5D with an eye to getting good exposures that are shot in RAW and processed well.

 

[tailz03]

i just found with the 5d i got too much noise even at 1600. I used 24-105mm lens and 70-200mm but neither of which i could get to take a decent shot. With the m2 i can get lovely shots each time with either lens and the 50mm.
I cant use Uni's for much longer as i finish my degree in May, also they don't allow over weekends/holidays so i am very limited.
Your advice has made a lot of sense to me and i really want it i'm just way off target and i have no idea when ill be able to afford it, im only on £1300 at the moment and i need to buy a body and the 24-105mm lens and a new speedlite.

Birmingham Live! <-- some of the 5dM2 shots.

 

[usayit]

<< confused...

* You are the only person I have ever heard use 5D and awful in the same sentence....
* Why oh why are you hung up on the 24-105L if you are a low light shooter? (coming from a person who shoots with a 24-105L)

there's obviously something else at work here....

btw.. which 70-200mm are you talking about? There are 4 of them.

 

[tailz03]

Talking about the 70-200mm f2.8

I just don't feel that the 5d's ISO range is anywhere near as good as the mark II. It's a fine camera if your in the studio.

I like the 24-105 for location work such as my commercial shoots but i guess its not entirely necessary, it just comes cheaper if i bought it with the mark II, id save £200.

 

[Overread]

Heh I guess unlike many (who went from 5D to 5DM2) you have gone the other way in moving from 5DM2 backwards to trying the 5D - which of course means the ISO performance is worse - however I think that when you give even the new 7D crop sensor camera a try you will find the 5D superior

In addition it might be (guessing here) that you were less experienced when you tried the 5D than you are now - good shooting method as well as the right situation (might be your test day was a really bad day) will make a massive difference to your results

 

[tailz03]

Heh I guess unlike many (who went from 5D to 5DM2) you have gone the other way in moving from 5DM2 backwards to trying the 5D - which of course means the ISO performance is worse - however I think that when you give even the new 7D crop sensor camera a try you will find the 5D superior

In addition it might be (guessing here) that you were less experienced when you tried the 5D than you are now - good shooting method as well as the right situation (might be your test day was a really bad day) will make a massive difference to your results

So your opinion is that the 5d is nicer than the 7d? Which means another vote for continuing saving for the mark II