There are also alternatives for FF users la... Tamron 28-75/2.8, sigma 24-70/2.8 hsm, and the coming tamron 24-70vc.. for UWA, there is also the 17-40L which is excellent... Have to spend more of course... but not as much as your examples...
Canon 5D mark ii, 5D mark iii or 7D
- Thread starter icekiddo
- Start date
There are also alternatives for FF users la... Tamron 28-75/2.8, sigma 24-70/2.8 hsm, and the coming tamron 24-70vc.. for UWA, there is also the 17-40L which is excellent... Have to spend more of course... but not as much as your examples...
It is all depends on your shooting style . Personally, I have upgraded to 5D2 from 7D. FF is really a great in low light performance. I shoot landscape and portrait.
7D also great for landscape and portrait but it is a crop sensor. Shooting sport and action would be excellent of its AF system which was extracted and further enhanced in 5D mark III body.
If you don't shoot sport, go for FF 5D2 it will worth every penny
7D also great for landscape and portrait but it is a crop sensor. Shooting sport and action would be excellent of its AF system which was extracted and further enhanced in 5D mark III body.
If you don't shoot sport, go for FF 5D2 it will worth every penny
Since the topic is on ff and crop, just like to confirm on this...
1) Bokeh: For the same len, FF can get the same bokeh at f2.8 while Crop needs to shoot at f1.4 to get the same level of Bokeh.
2) DOP: However If I want to have a deep DOF, while ff needs a f8 to get the same dof, crop camera dont have to stop down so much say f5.6 to get the same dof...
in conclusion, does that mean that
1) FF can handle higher ISO but due to pt 2, for low light condition yet deep dof requirements, the ISO advantage of ff over crop camera is minimal since FF need higher ISO capablilties to compensate using smaller aperature to achieve the same dof compared to crop cameras.
2) Does that mean FF is more for bokeh, since it can stop down to f2.8 to reduce softness yet maintain same level of bokeh? If users seldom shoot a lot of bokeh, they may as well get crop cos they will shine in low light deep dof department?
1) Bokeh: For the same len, FF can get the same bokeh at f2.8 while Crop needs to shoot at f1.4 to get the same level of Bokeh.
2) DOP: However If I want to have a deep DOF, while ff needs a f8 to get the same dof, crop camera dont have to stop down so much say f5.6 to get the same dof...
in conclusion, does that mean that
1) FF can handle higher ISO but due to pt 2, for low light condition yet deep dof requirements, the ISO advantage of ff over crop camera is minimal since FF need higher ISO capablilties to compensate using smaller aperature to achieve the same dof compared to crop cameras.
2) Does that mean FF is more for bokeh, since it can stop down to f2.8 to reduce softness yet maintain same level of bokeh? If users seldom shoot a lot of bokeh, they may as well get crop cos they will shine in low light deep dof department?
if this is a first camera u owner i think u should get 7D to training shooting first, cause that's a crop frame u can use all the lens of canon (can buy cheap ef-s lens to use first), 5D mark 2 or 3 that's a full frame camera u only use expensive lens (EF lens). U will spend a lot of money. Hope u can choose a new camera u like
can't quite agree with this.
using 5DMKII doesn't mean you have to use expensive EF lenses. some EF lenses are quite value for money, for e.g 50/f1.8, 85/f1.8. even some of the L-lenses are quite affordable too, despite the luxury branding, e.g 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-200L f4 non-IS, 135L.
on the other hand, some EF-S lenses are more expensive than L-lenses, e.g 10-22, 15-85, 17-55. these croppers do perform well, despite them being EF-S lenses.
photography really is boils down to individual preferences and it will affect how you spend your money on your equipment.
Look. Your questions are a little strange to me. I don't see how you can compare the 5D II or 5D III to the 7D. The 5D series and 7D are completely different cameras intended for completely different markets and purposes. The fact that you are asking the question implies that you don't know the differences between these cameras and you haven't worked out the purpose of your intended purchase.
In photography you need to understand that more is sometimes not better. Some camera buyers here purchased very expensive cameras but use less than 10% of the features. If you are targeting to spend in the hope that it will get you more lovelier photos then you need to understand that there is a tipping point at which more spent equals less in other ways, like excess bulk, weight, image file sizes etc. In camera technology, like in any technology, the law of diminishing returns also applies. You can spend $50,000 on a Hasselblad but unless you really need the medium format sensor and 200MB giant poster size resolution images, you really aren't going to care.
Having said all that, do some research and ask yourself if you really need a full frame sensor. APS-C sensors like in the 7D are what the majority of the world uses now, and the selections and capability of these sensors are more than enough for the average joe and enthusiast alike.
Secondly, if the APS-C sensor is good enough do you really need all the features present in the 7D? Because the 600D produces identical image quality using also an APS-C sensor and is much much cheaper, and is also heavily used by average joes and enthuasts alike. So why do you want the 7D features so bad?
Thirdly, do you really need the bulk and weight of a DSLR? Why not consider mirrorless formats that use the same APS-C sensors and thus produce the very same image quality, but are significantly smaller, lighter and more usable?
Sorry for my rant, but your question raises more questions with me. I hope you know what you are doing.
In photography you need to understand that more is sometimes not better. Some camera buyers here purchased very expensive cameras but use less than 10% of the features. If you are targeting to spend in the hope that it will get you more lovelier photos then you need to understand that there is a tipping point at which more spent equals less in other ways, like excess bulk, weight, image file sizes etc. In camera technology, like in any technology, the law of diminishing returns also applies. You can spend $50,000 on a Hasselblad but unless you really need the medium format sensor and 200MB giant poster size resolution images, you really aren't going to care.
Having said all that, do some research and ask yourself if you really need a full frame sensor. APS-C sensors like in the 7D are what the majority of the world uses now, and the selections and capability of these sensors are more than enough for the average joe and enthusiast alike.
Secondly, if the APS-C sensor is good enough do you really need all the features present in the 7D? Because the 600D produces identical image quality using also an APS-C sensor and is much much cheaper, and is also heavily used by average joes and enthuasts alike. So why do you want the 7D features so bad?
Thirdly, do you really need the bulk and weight of a DSLR? Why not consider mirrorless formats that use the same APS-C sensors and thus produce the very same image quality, but are significantly smaller, lighter and more usable?
Sorry for my rant, but your question raises more questions with me. I hope you know what you are doing.
Last edited:
No such thing. Closest would be the NEX, but they use a better sensor than the 7D.
Sorry. Thanks. I meant to say just "APS-C". Typo corrected
Yup...as a newbie the 5dm2 is a competent & fantastic body to own.No point getting the 5dm3 for now.TS,u should really understand what you need,what genre of photography you are into.That way,you are able to narrow down to what suits you best.Hope you can get something that you like.Cheers bro!
Well TS,try to learn to walk first before you even know how to fly.I am only 1 year plus into dslr photography & there still so much things to learn.Get your facts right & learn from everyone.It takes years of learning be it the practical & the theory side.Shoot more & learn more.Cheers!
