Canon full frame or cropped?

[Kyle72]

Hi all

I want to get a second camera to carry around, but im not sure what to buy, I currently have a 50d with the 15-85mm IS lens, the 70-200 f/4 IS lens and the macro 100mm f2.8 IS lens.
Im thinking of a full frame camera, and i will mainly want to use the lens i currently have, for landscape to portrait to sport, What camera would you recommend, Im thinking no more then 3k for the camera. Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks
Kyle

[fess67]

Only choices you have are 5Dmk2 or mk3 - if you can stretch your budget a bit.

I have the 50D, 5Dmk2 and 1DmkIV. You will not be disappointed with the 5Dmk2, it is a beautiful camera and gives exceptional results. Keep the 50D for sports and use the 5D for landscapes / portraits.

[Bennymiata]

If you go FF, only your 70-200 and 100macro will work onit however, leaving a hole for using it with a wide-angle lens.

If you go fo rthe 5D2, you might just have enough left over from your budget to get an EF-17-40 for your wide angle stuff.

Don't forget that 17mm on a FF, is like a 10.6mm on a crop camera like your 50D.

[neil70]

go the ff and then you will have one of each. Get the best for your budget and use the lenses you have. you cam always keep adding lenses later. A freind of mine bought the 5dm2 just recently and has been kicking himself that he didn't spend the extra and get a m3.

have fun with your choice:th3:

[jjphoto]

1/ You already have a crop camera so I can't see the logic in getting another one. It won't improve or change you photography so why do it? A FF body is your only sensible option in that it gives you something the crop camera doesn't, a larger sensor with greater scope for shallow depth of field which can be used for creative effect.
2/ You have no reason to limit yourself to either the lenses you already have or for that matter Canon lenses. There are lots of very cheap 'alt' or 'legacy' manual focus lenses which can easily be used on Canon FF bodies. (http://photocornucopia.com/1027.html) It's not for everyone but if it suits your applications, such as portraits, then you should at least look into it. It would be a bad idea for sport or anything that needs AF. I rarely use Canon lenses when I go shooting for myself (I tend to be lazy and use the Canon zooms for work).
3/ Why do you need another camera at all? A lot of people are happy with crop cameras (not me) but if the 50D does what you need then maybe you would benefit from a new lens or 3 rather than a camera which will swiftly be superceded anyway. On the other hand the lenses will last a very very long time.

[Old Skool]

From left field, get the new 650D, ( better high ISO low noise,Exposure and AF than 50D, plus articulated touch screen LCD) sell the 50D and save the money for the new 7D Mk2 or 70D that hopefully is due before the end of the year.

[Analog6]

I have just bought a 1DsMkII - in immaculate condition and with new shutter - for $1650, and I am delighted with it. I'd had one before and sold it and when I decided to get abnother canon FF body, I looked about and still like this model best. Don't be blinkered just by NEW bodies, have a look at good quality used bodies which are available due to others upgrading.

[jjphoto]

I have just bought a 1DsMkII - in immaculate condition and with new shutter - for $1650, and I am delighted with it. I'd had one before and sold it and when I decided to get abnother canon FF body, I looked about and still like this model best. Don't be blinkered just by NEW bodies, have a look at good quality used bodies which are available due to others upgrading.

+1

I miss my 1ds2. It farts in the general direction of my 5d2, which I only use because it has Live View (the 1ds2 doesn't, it's main failing IMHO). The 1ds2 is a bit too heavy to walk around with, for an extended period. I found I tended to avoid using it for that reason alone. However the image quality at ISO100, especially shadow details, where IMHO superior with the 1ds2 (over the 5d2). Horses for courses, the 5d2 is excellent in other respects.

[Kyle72]

Hi All

Thanks very much for the replies, the reason i mainly want to update as i see alot of photo where the quality almost looks HD, I understand that a good quality lens does help, but i also believe a good camera and good lens will make things pop. Dont get me wrong i am very happy with the 50d, and it was on this site that made me help make the decision in buying that camera. But i have developed a passion for photography and want to go futher. As already stated i like taking mainly landscape shots, along with portrait shots. So far the 5dmkII seems to be the choice by most of you. So this is the way i look like i will be heading. But im not someone who will rush out either, i dont mind saving a little more if it means im going to get something that i will be extremely satisfied with.

Once again thanks for the advice give so far

Cheers
Kyle

[selaw]

G'day Kyle, you mentioned a budget of 3K, the new 5D3 is about that now on the grey market. Alternatively, grab a new 5D2 & EF17-40 for about the same price. That way you have the wide angle for landscapes. Exciting times, lining up for new gear :th3:

[patrickv]

IQ is 95% about the lens. All the current DSLRs are stellar if you use high end lenses with them, particularly in good light (wide aperture helps, so does flash when used well). Give me good glass and a 1100D, I'll do A LOT better than with average glass and a 5D Mark2/3. For landscape I'll probably do better with a compact and a good tripod than a FF DSLR hand held.
By the way, good FF glass is A LOT more expensive that good crop glass, because many lenses other that L series are good in the center and not so good on the edges, which you can't see as much with a crop.

What do you mean by "almost looks HD" ?

[Bennymiata]

Full HD is only 1920 X 1280 pixels, where the image from a FF camera (like a 5D3) is around 5760 X 3840 pixels.
A LOT more than HD.

Soon we will have 4K video, where the image is around 4000 pixels wide, better than twice the resolution of Full HD, but still not as good as a FF camera.

[Kyle72]

Thanks again for the advice its all making good sense which i like, My next question would be, i have read that you should only shoot in raw with these cameras, how true is this, and what software would you recomend in editing raw photos.

Cheers
kyle

[fess67]

Ahh the RAW / JPG discussion....now there is an oldie but a goodie :)

Depends what you want to do. I shoot RAW 95% of the time and process in photoshop or Lightroom. If I need to post shots on social media etc pretty quickly then JPG is great. RAW just gives you more options when processing. Do a search, lots of threads about it.

[Mark L]

My next question would be, i have read that you should only shoot in raw with these cameras, how true is this, and what software would you recomend in editing raw photos.

http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?104707-Raw-JPEG

I still only use DPP that came with my 60D

[TOM]

There are compromises with any camera you choose, so it depends which compromises you are prepared to accept. Remember that ALL cameras are full frame, so don't let this loose term fool you into thinking you are missing out on something when compared to "crop".

[jjphoto]

There are compromises with any camera you choose, so it depends which compromises you are prepared to accept. Remember that ALL cameras are full frame, so don't let this loose term fool you into thinking you are missing out on something when compared to "crop".

Are you genuinely unaware that the term'full frame' refers to the 35x24 format (in this context)? There is nothing vague about it.

[William W]

Hi all

I want to get a second camera to carry around, but im not sure what to buy, I currently have a 50d with the 15-85mm IS lens, the 70-200 f/4 IS lens and the macro 100mm f2.8 IS lens.
Im thinking of a full frame camera, and i will mainly want to use the lens i currently have, for landscape to portrait to sport, What camera would you recommend, Im thinking no more then 3k for the camera. Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks
Kyle

My bias is toward a dual format kit, IF one NEEDS two cameras and in this case I would advocate a 5DMkII as ideally placed for a partner to the 50D in terms of budget satisfying the job description.
But the purchase of a 5DMkII necessitates (if sticking with zooms) the Purchase of a 16 to 35 or 17 to 40 (and maybe a 50 Prime).
Then that means consideration of selling the 15 to 85 . . . which is a pretty fine Walk Around Lens for that 50d – and it has IS.

So thinking ahead and keeping in mind your specific requirements Landscapes, Portrait and Sports . . . you have a 5DMkII and a 17 to 40 and a 50D and a 15 to 85 . . . (and the macro and 70 to 200). What real world advantage do you actually have?

On the other hand, IF you asked “what’s a really good kit for ‘Landscapes, Portrait and Sports’?” perhaps you might reap answers like:
“sell the 50D and buy a 7D’ –
‘look at a buying a 10 to 22 to add to your lens kit.
‘get a fast 50 prime . . . and also get a fast 85 Prime’

I am not convinced by what you have disclosed you really NEED a second camera in THAT kit.
Are you convinced, if so what are the reasons?

WW

[roastman]

I think adding a 5DII to the bag would be a great addition for you. I had the 50D and it was a fantastic camera. Having said that, the 5DII is a far better landscape camera than the 50D. My only regret was selling the 50D for the 5DII. Yes, it is a better camera for landscapes and the evidence of that was in my low light shots of the city (shot same location with both cameras and the difference in low light was startling). After selling the 50D, I suddenly realised I was missing its frame rate and the extra length the crop factor gave me. Keeping the 50D and saving a few extra bucks for the 5DII would have been a better idea. I have since added the 7D to my bag, basically to get the frame rate back. I would never use the 7D for shooting landscapes while the 5DII is in the bag. It is visibly better than the 7D. Alternatively, I will never take the 5DII to shoot sport. If I had the 5DIII, I could leave both at home :D.

The jump from a 50D to a 5D is a far greater leap than to the 70D. If I had not had the choice of going full frame and had the chance to use all of these cameras before I upgraded, I would not have upgraded my 50D to the 70D. I would still be waiting.......

The only problem now is I am a bit of a "gear junky". Carrying both bodies is a pain (literally) in the neck. My walk-around kit consists of the 5DII, 24-105 and 17-40. The 70-200 and 7D stay in the bag at home. When travelling, I will take all of these and take the body/lens combination with me with a clear focus on what I am going to shoot. If I want candids in busy areas, I will take the 70-200 and the 7D. If I am more interested in scenics, I will take the 5DII and the wider lens combination.

I wish I had saved some $$$$ and not sold my 50D, as upgrading my second body to the 70D would never have been required. The 50D was good enough for the limited amount of sports shooting I would have used it for. I will never want to enlarge those photos as much as I need to do my landscapes.

[Arg]

... the reason i mainly want to update as i see a lot of photo where the quality almost looks HD, I understand that a good quality lens does help, but i also believe a good camera and good lens will make things pop. ....

When I read this bit I realised you don't need an upgrade to your camera. In fact even with a 1Dx your photos will probably look much the same, except for the psychological factor (i.e. contextual bias: this is taken with a super camera so the file is sooo good).

My recommendation for your next spend is a photography workshop or 2 particularly in image conceptualisation and composition, and post processing of images.

Hope this helps

[roastman]

When I read this bit I realised you don't need an upgrade to your camera. In fact even with a 1Dx your photos will probably look much the same, except for the psychological factor (i.e. contextual bias: this is taken with a super camera so the file is sooo good).

My recommendation for your next spend is a photography workshop or 2 particularly in image conceptualisation and composition, and post processing of images.

Hope this helps

While I agree with part of your sentiment, without having seen the OP's photo's it is a little difficult to determine if a new camera is justified or not. I am a bit of a techno geek (love having the latest toys), but understand that in photography it is more about how you use it, rather than what you are using. Having said that, if the photographer is keen on improving, then a top of the range camera will certainly not hurt your chances of getting a keeper. Then, when you do have a keeper, you can get the maximum enlargement from the image.

Sometimes having a new camera may inspire you to use it more, learn some new techniques and improve your skills as a photographer. Some people get tied up in their daily lives and need that inspiration occasionally (I am one of them). I am not a great photographer, but I AM getting better. Yes, having a good camera makes me feel more confident, because I know that if I get the basics right, I will get a nice image.

Having said that, I agree that things like photography workshops can be useful. I went on a Red Balloon photography workshop that taught me absolutely nothing about technique (the other participants hardly knew how to turn their cameras on, so they learnt more technically). What I did get out of the workshop was some inspiration. It forced me out of my comfort zone and made me try techniques that I had already learnt, but never put into action. Maybe a new 5DII (or 5DIII if you an afford it), a nice lens AND a photography workshop would be a good combination....? If the OP is quite skilled, then the workshop may be unnecessary.

[Arg]

Hi roastman, very nice post.