few reasons why i think of upgrading:
- loss of detail when i develop the photos to poster size
- dark and grainy pictures when taking in low light condition
i tried my friend's canon 7d and the pictures are simply awesome as compared to mine.
APS-C body vs Full Frame Crop diff
- Thread starter blurboiboi
- Start date
few reasons why i think of upgrading:
- loss of detail when i develop the photos to poster size
- dark and grainy pictures when taking in low light condition
i tried my friend's canon 7d and the pictures are simply awesome as compared to mine.
TWmilkteaTW
Senior Member
edutilos-
Senior Member
Suggest nto to swing the other way just because others have put forth strong viewpoints.
One makes one's decisions in life, others can only offer advice. What's important is that at the end of the day, you consider their points and come to a properly informed decision. If you have considered the points on IQ and you feel that it's still important to you and the other differences in cam body matter, then by all means upgrade.
But if you really have no use for the improvements in the area of picture quality and that is your sole reason for upgrading cam body then don't upgrade cam body. I don't get how the choice of not upgrading cam body equates to getting a good lens instead. It's not as if you have a sum of money that you will have to spend on camera equipment before it combusts. After all, do you need the 24-105? You should ask yourself that question, and of course, don't forget that there is always, always the remaining option of putting the money away for a rainy day.
Cheers.
edutilos-
Senior Member
1) Poster size? What poster size?
2) What ISO was used which resulted in the dark and grainy pictures?
3) How are the 7D pictures superior, are you familiar with what causes the differences? Is it cam body? Lens? Was a similar situation compared? If you're comparing broad daylight pictures to night photographs taken handheld...
Not too sure what caused the difference. comparing broad dayllight to night photos taken handheld
edutilos-
Senior Member
Thanks for clarifications.
Not too sure if 15 megapixels versus 18.1 megapixels really makes such a huge difference for A1 poster size. The two cameras are from different timeframes, but I suspect it should not be visible at low ISOs, all other things being equal. Naturally the 7D has an advantage for high ISO performance.
Some things to consider, given that your observations are wholly accurate -
1. How often would you print A1 poster size?
2. How often do you use ISO 3200?
The key issue here is, how good is this "good to have" capability of being able to print large and shoot at high ISO? If you feel that it is worth the price difference, and taking it along with the other differences between the 2 cameras (7D larger, heavier, supposedly better handling, better AF performance, additional features), then you can go for it.
I think most people are just trying to remind that many a time it is a user issue rather than a camera body issue. But it's also true that camera body can make a difference, across different generations, and within the same generation of technology. Cheers.
That's the thing that has been on my mind all these while - the "good to have" features! i have been asking myself if i really need it. or more of a want? that's the reason why i borrowed my friend's camera to try it out and see if these "good to have" features are really a necessity to me. so far, i have been pretty impresssed by the quality of the photos taken. my only complaint is the bulkiness and weight of the 7d!
If you have to use till ISO3200, does that kind of shooting conditions allows you to use flash?
I know it's kinda tempting to see those newer models having better high ISO performance, but before upgrading, why not take the chance to see what are the workarounds those situation. If after the alternatives tried and still CMI, then consider an upgrade. *I use a 500D, I know how bad it can be >ISO 1600*
Simply stop comparing
It's a mental thingy, stop telling yourself "if you have this and or that you can shoot better", it WON'T work (as I've realized after getting those lens -.-)
But OTOH, if your shooting environment, requires you to shoot >1600 frequently, I suggest a better camera....but if not, it's just a "want" and this "want" will depends on how much you want to spend in this hobby.
Last edited:
Halfmoon
Senior Member
For me, I look at the bank account balance, and I will stop...... :sweat::sweat::sweat:
haha. that's a good one.
i am very "poisoned" with getting a new body and lens (24-105mm)!
Halfmoon
Senior Member
Seriously, there's no point to buy buy buy buy buy buy buy......
Just buy what you need and use it. You can compare to know the difference, but if I buy a body, I expect to get a certain mileage out of it too... usually, 4 yrs...
Body price depreciate very fast, no point changing so regularly.... especially if you changing 500D that have a new model annually... so maybe get a 5D III and stop thinking about it for 4-5 years.... I only changed my 400D after.... 3-4 years....
Note... 400D no spot metering, and a lot of things do not have, no swivel screen, etc....
But I cannot be bothered with it... I am still using 400D quite regularly and it still delivers... ISO must keep below 400 usually, a con.... but I tend to shoot with flash, so I am ok......
Just get a grip of yourself, and tell yourself not to be conned by the marketing!!!
Just buy what you need and use it. You can compare to know the difference, but if I buy a body, I expect to get a certain mileage out of it too... usually, 4 yrs...
Body price depreciate very fast, no point changing so regularly.... especially if you changing 500D that have a new model annually... so maybe get a 5D III and stop thinking about it for 4-5 years.... I only changed my 400D after.... 3-4 years....
Note... 400D no spot metering, and a lot of things do not have, no swivel screen, etc....
But I cannot be bothered with it... I am still using 400D quite regularly and it still delivers... ISO must keep below 400 usually, a con.... but I tend to shoot with flash, so I am ok......
Just get a grip of yourself, and tell yourself not to be conned by the marketing!!!
Halfmoon
Senior Member
Just go according to your budget and try not to overspend..... unless you are paid for your job, if not, I would advice you to be prudent.... Which body are you thinking of???
If you buy 5DIII, not sure if the 24-105mm is still the kit lens... you could save a bit there if buy both together.... but I think 24-105 on FF have a bit of weakness....... esp on 24mm & the corners....
For lens buying, I have a habit.... I waited for 24-70II cos the 24-70 have a bit of weakness, and I tend to read MTF chart for lens sharpness, and only buy a lens that I feel will not need replacing... to cut down on double buying.... So this is me.... just sharing with you and I go photozone.de for this....
I upgraded after 4yrs plus. I am now using both 7D & 400D.
To me, the camera is just the tool, and knowing the strength and weakness of the body help you to overcome the limitation....
Trust me, my 400D have a lot of weakness..... but I survived with it.... it hunted like bad in low light events, and I think that is not a cross centre AF point... I could be wrong... lol... =)
Last edited:
Of course 5D3. New camera usually better. It may turn all your lousy shots into great shots. Canon is going to make the 5D3 better than the D800 so you can expect nothing short of a wonder cam. You should pre-book it just in case the factories get flooded or earthquaked again and supplies get disrupted. Alternatively stick to your current camera and improve your skills.
David Kwok
Senior Member
MechaEd said:
Not true. Read more in clubsnap. This topic has been discussed previously in a heated debate.
gundamseed84
New Member
MechaEd said:
To be more exact if having the same framing and settings, setup the same, having full frame means you need to get closer to the subject than crop. The difference in the subject to camera dist affects depth of field.
Similar threads
