What Camera would typical Amateur Photographers upgrade to for next level ??

[nicpng1994]

Hi Nicpng,

Glad we can talk about such issues.
The head can rule the heart thou mostly it's the other way round when it comes to posioning. Lolx
The heart will 'naturally' give way to head when u fall in love with the equipments. Big monsters we'll talking about.

You're doing lots of landscape, street etc. Sometimes it will be crazy to mount a flash and expect to blast it all over, especially when the light is low.
This I think where most bros will propose, a 5Dmiii.

I am stuck on it too. Who don't want the best? You have tested the Cams ... what's your take on it?

Av Bro is right, crop or full, Canon cameras does their job well and seldom failed us.

I agree. Canon has seldom failed us in terms of pic quality. Coming back to me testing out the cameras. Firstly, comparing 5d2 & d3, both the built quality is good. But I personal prefer the d3 ergonomics better. More 7d like. Buttons are nice by the touch. 61 point AF is better then 9 AF of 5d2 as such very responsive. LCD screen resolution of d3 is quite sharp. Image quality wise, d3 has a slight edge over the d2 in noise performance no doubt. D3 has dual card slot as to d2/7d with Cf card only. Didn't tried the video mode so can't comment on that my apologise.

Overall d3 is indeed a great cam in both video and pic taking aspect. D2 is still not a bad cam being it ff and good tackling in noise performance. 7d, is great in having 8fps good for sports/action photography. I personally feel that 7d and d3 are responsive in AF then d2. But each have their good points ultimately. Hahas!!!

 

[jsprtan]

I agree. Canon has seldom failed us in terms of pic quality. Coming back to me testing out the cameras. Firstly, comparing 5d2 & d3, both the built quality is good. But I personal prefer the d3 ergonomics better. More 7d like. Buttons are nice by the touch. 61 point AF is better then 9 AF of 5d2 as such very responsive. LCD screen resolution of d3 is quite sharp. Image quality wise, d3 has a slight edge over the d2 in noise performance no doubt. D3 has dual card slot as to d2/7d with Cf card only. Didn't tried the video mode so can't comment on that my apologise.

Overall d3 is indeed a great cam in both video and pic taking aspect. D2 is still not a bad cam being it ff and good tackling in noise performance. 7d, is great in having 8fps good for sports/action photography. I personally feel that 7d and d3 are responsive in AF then d2. But each have their good points ultimately. Hahas!!!

U forget to include 5d3 is also all most twice the cost of a used 5d2.

I had 7D once but I don't like the image quality and the iso performance (Don't flame me it is just my observation). Found the AF system too complicated over the simple 9 point that is why I upgraded to the 5d and simply love the IQ.

If u don't have too much dough than I suggest to get a used 5dc or a 5d2 with a 35mm f2.

 

[nicpng1994]

U forget to include 5d3 is also all most twice the cost of a used 5d2.

I had 7D once but I don't like the image quality and the iso performance (Don't flame me it is just my observation). Found the AF system too complicated over the simple 9 point that is why I upgraded to the 5d and simply love the IQ.

If u don't have too much dough than I suggest to get a used 5dc or a 5d2 with a 35mm f2.

Thanks for feedback!! Shall greatly consider it.

 

[WhaleGaga]

Just want to check,

What EF lens is suitable to replace EF-S15-85?
This is if I've decided to move to FF Cameras.

I need to clear before I buy to balance the bank accounts.


Current lens (Not much)

EF50mm f/1.8 II
EF-S15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (I'm using this almost 100% now)
EF75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM

I think getting makes sense? - EF17-40mm f/4L USM - I wish to retain the wide angle feel I got from EF-S15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
EF16-35mm f/2.8L II USM is nice but on the hight side thou.

 

[tecnica]

in a sense, 15-85 is like the equivalent of 24-105L.

15 x 1.6 = 24mm, so yes you still retain the ultra-wide angle.

 

[WhaleGaga]

in a sense, 15-85 is like the equivalent of 24-105L.

15 x 1.6 = 24mm, so yes you still retain the ultra-wide angle.

Slap me ... I'm using 450D now you see. so I throw away this 15-85 and got 17-40 ... instead of getting 24mm (based on what you given) .. I can get even lower to 17mm??? (meaning ultra wide?)

If this is so, why the hack I got 15-85 in the first place when I can go straight to 17-40 lolx

 

[tecnica]

Slap me ... I'm using 450D now you see. so I throw away this 15-85 and got 17-40 ... instead of getting 24mm (based on what you given) .. I can get even lower to 17mm??? (meaning ultra wide?)

If this is so, why the hack I got 15-85 in the first place when I can go straight to 17-40 lolx

you got the 15-85 due to it's versatile focal length which goes from ultra-wide to tele.

you gotta slap yourself real hard again, in order to decide which one to go for.

because i feel that these 2 lenses cannot replace each other, it's more of complementing each other.

choose your poison wisely but if you can't, then dive in and get both! haha!

by going for the 17-40, you will gain end wider end but you will lose the tele end altogether.

i'm not even considering the 75-300 which you currently have, cause' you prolly will replace it with a L telezoom, sooner or later~

 

[WhaleGaga]

well. ..shall 5Dmii is the direction I'm going ... 15-85 have to go I guess.
unless I change my bloody mind again and go for 7D , nothing changes other than getting an extra grip and CF card.

Damn ... why kena poison till this stage ...

 

[Halfmoon]

well. ..shall 5Dmii is the direction I'm going ... 15-85 have to go I guess.
unless I change my bloody mind again and go for 7D , nothing changes other than getting an extra grip and CF card.

Damn ... why kena poison till this stage ...

Stop reading club snap will helps..... haha.....

 

[MechaEd]

I upgraded to full frame. The choice for me was easier because I had a 60D.

 

[crysmeth]

Hi.

I upgraded from a 500d to a 5dm3. Reason why I upgraded was because of the IQ in the L lenses. There's no denying that. Also was getting frustrated with the 3fps on it. Lastly was fedup with the low ISO. That would mean I have to lug my flash even when I shoot at 2.8.

I'm no amatuer or pro photographer. I'm just a hobbyist who likes to shoot family, my 3 kids, landscapes, street shots for my own viewing. But I just felt limited by what the 500d has to offer. I used it for 2 years plus. It has gone on all my holidays, birthday parties, birth of my last kid, my walkarounds, etc.

So back to the point. Should I upgrade then to 7d 60d or 600d or ff. For crop only 7d is the answer. Fast fps was the key. But having discussed on the 7d or 5dm3 thread, the fps between 6 and 8 is really not much difference. Also the 5dm3 had excellent ISO. Most say it came from the 1Dx. That allows me to shoot at low light area without the need of flash nor a f 2.8 L lens which are frightfully expensive.

So the last issue is lens. What lens should I get? I got the kit lens, excellent lens, not greater than the 2470 but hey, I just went from tamron 1750 so I'm not complaining . A second hand 1740 cost me 700 - 800. A few months later I'll probably go for the 70 200 f 2.8 non IS. The high ISO in the 5dm3 should compensate the lack of IS. Why 2.8 for this is to get excellent DOF.

Soooooo suddenly the 5dm3 gave me so many options in choice of lens because of the useable high ISO.

Summarise, I would say its the best choice I have made. Its expensive, yes, but don't forget, the resale value is there. You are likely to lose 30 percent only before the next one comes in. That will be 5 years from now. Surely this will last till that long and more.

If don't have the budget, I say you save up then go for it. I looked through my place and sold whatever I didn't need. Hehe. My laptop, tablets, existing camera, to fund it.

Just my 2 cents. Quite a long 2 cents Hehe.

 

[stevenc]

A few months later I'll probably go for the 70 200 f 2.8 non IS. The high ISO in the 5dm3 should compensate the lack of IS. Why 2.8 for this is to get excellent DOF.

I think the IS for telephotos matter quite abit unless u shoot from tripod; I have been reading from other threads.
Thats why people narrow down on 70-200 f4 IS or 70-200 f2.8 non-IS. Although 70-200 f2.8 IS MkII is the best, but its really ex.
I am also thinking of the 70-200, but am still undecided which to get.

 

[LittleSid]

Proof that this is a rich forum ... lolx

True, u will wow when u see what is happening here

 

[avsquare]

True, u will wow when u see what is happening here

not rich enough.. I don't think anyone here owns the 1200L (joking)

 

[crysmeth]

True, u will wow when u see what is happening here

Haha. I have a theory.

DSLR boom was in the early to mid 2000s. So guys like us were about early 20s. Not earning much, so bought the cheapest in the market. 30d, 450d etc. Stuck with it for a while. Ff was for the short rich or for pros.

We fell in love with photography, and earning power increase so gradually upgrade our gears to the 500s and 50ds.

Now in our mid 30s earning power increase and we move on to ff lor. None of us will ever quit our jobs because of the financial stability it gives us, so we're still hobbyist lor.

Am sure the majority of the chaps here are 30s.

 

[crysmeth]

Haha. I have a theory.

DSLR boom was in the early to mid 2000s. So guys like us were about early 20s. Not earning much, so bought the cheapest in the market. 30d, 450d etc. Stuck with it for a while. Ff was for the short rich or for pros.

We fell in love with photography, and earning power increase so gradually upgrade our gears to the 500s and 50ds.

Now in our mid 30s earning power increase and we move on to ff lor. None of us will ever quit our jobs because of the financial stability it gives us, so we're still hobbyist lor.

Am sure the majority of the chaps here are 30s.

Correct. Ff was only for the super rich or pros.

 

[MechaEd]

Correct. Ff was only for the super rich or pros.

That's not true.

 

[crysmeth]

That's not true.

I meant during the early 2000s, ff was only for the super rich or pros. not now.

 

[WhaleGaga]

crysmeth :
ive read ur thread. interestg topic n relevent thoughts.
i gathered going for miii is a no-brainer decision for most n frankly speakg, if it wasnt for e lens, i might go for FF now.
even mii i also no regrets. now thinkg, thinkg, thinkg lolx

 

[MechaEd]

I meant during the early 2000s, ff was only for the super rich or pros. not now.

Oh. In 2000, even my lowly 1.8MP Oly C2040 already cost me 1,000 SGD. ;p