Upgrade advice please! :)

[Bella]

Back in 2006 I bought a 400D twin lens kit and it's served me well, but I think it's now time for an upgrade. I thought I knew what I wanted - the 7D... Now the 5D Mark III has come out it has me drooling... but is it really worth three times as much as the 7D???

I take a lot of photos of animals (which are often running and jumping around) but also would really like to try my hand at sunrise/sunset and night time photography. I'll definitely be sticking with Canon as I already own the 70-200 F4 L IS which I love and I'm comfortable with using the Canons.

I'd either be looking at some sort of 7D bundle of goodies (inc probably two lens) suggested by the good people of ausphotography ($ - Probably 3K max)

OR

A 5D Mark III with one lens and an additional battery and probably one filter ($ - don't want to think about it! )


Any suggestions please? Would love some suggestions for camera/lens and accessory combos. I currently have a 8gb CF card - I'd think that would suffice? The 70-200 would also be staying

Thanks in advance!

[roastman]

Another option might be picking up a 5D MKII. Cheaper than the MKIII and if you don't need the additional speed, not a lot of real difference between the cameras. The full frame sensor is truly amazing. I took some shots while on a business trip to Italy and Germany and was amazed by how many people on the trip asked to order canvas prints of my photos. I have viewed the photos on my widescreen TV to get a feel for the resolution and the results are amazing. I would have no hesitation doing large prints, as the detail is phenomenal.

As an alternative argument, you will get a camera with quite a high frame rate for less money, if shooting speed is a priority. The 5D would be better for landscapes etc, but if you want to shoot action then a less expensive crop body may be the way to go.

Of course, if the budget was limitless, the 5D MKIII will give you the fantastic resolution PLUS the fast frame rate.... Tough decision! The main thing is to buy the best camera you can afford, which is suitable for the things you wish to shoot. Compromise now and you will just be upgrading again soon.

[ricktas]

Based on this thread, how do you feel your 400D is letting you down? Upgrading for the sake of it, is not the right reason to upgrade. You need to be able to tell us what you cannot achieve with your current gear, that validates the need to upgrade.

You say you like taking photos of animals (running and jumping) and would like to try sunrises and sunsets. Guess what, your 400D is quite capable with a skilled photographer, of achieving these goals.

[Bella]

Thanks roastman

Rick - not sure what you mean by based on that thread, but what I find with the 400D is that I have a lot of trouble focusing and getting sharp images on moving objects in low light conditions and I get a lot of noise if I crank the ISO. I basically don't use the 70-300 kit lens because it's never really seemed to focus well which is why I brought the L lens as a replacement. The 18-55 used to be ok but it has started to play up sometimes too. I was going to get a replacement for that ages ago and had some helpful suggestions on here but couldn't get the OH to agree (no longer an issue as he's not around now).

Of course, I could just get a new lens or two for the 400D but if I spend a decent amount of money on crop lens and then decide to go full frame I'll lose some money on that.

Open to suggestions

[ricktas]

What I meant was, as that is the only thread with photos you have posted in a while, what is it about your current camera that you find lacking and you are limited by your gear? No use upgrading to take better photos, cause 90% of photography is the person behind the lens. My post was to make you think about WHY you want to upgrade, and if it is to 'take better photos', then you are upgrading for the wrong reason.

If you can tell me limitations of your gear that are restricting your current photography experience, then you are giving me reasons that upgrading might be worth considering.

So based on your reply, it seems you have considered this and know that the 400D is limiting your photography, and therefore, yes you should upgrade. I just wanted to make sure you were not upgrading just hoping that a new camera would take better photos, without understanding why

[Bella]

Thanks Rick, I understand now. Absolutely agree with you, and I will endeavour to post more now that I'm getting back into photography again. I do have a lot to learn still and have been reading through some of the threads.

What are your thoughts between the two cameras? Is the 5D worth the extra money?

[ricktas]

I am a Nikon shooter so not the best person to ask re Canon, but if I was buying, and shooting at higher ISO was a factor in my upgrading (as you have stated) I would buy the one that offered the best high ISO image quality. Simplistic view, but things like this would be how I assessed my upgrade needs and the model I wanted. I make lists...(I am an Aries), and I put the options across the top, then list what I want and tick which one offers that, and then tally up my totals and go with the one that I gave the most ticks to.

[roastman]

It's always nice to have something new and shiny (I am a sucker for this). When I compare the shots taken on my old 350D (not a big jump from the 350D to to the 400D?), the difference is startling. Having said that, I am sure a 60D or 7D would also be a huge leap from a 400D. One thing you may consider is that if one of your problems is not being able to focus on moving subjects, maybe it is the lens, not the body? I don't know enough about the 400D to comment, but maybe a faster lens would be of benefit? If you buy a good lens that can be used on a full frame body (like the 70-200 f2.8), you will be able to take it with you if you eventually upgrade to full frame.

The 5D MK II is still far more advanced than I am. I need to get a whole lot better before I consider upgrading. In reality, I could probably do nearly as well with a lower spec camera, but I don't drink, smoke or waste money on other things, so this was my indulgence. I also work hard, so guess I can spend my spare care as I please. Well, as long as my wife agrees!

[Mary Anne]

I have had 3 Canon camera and have been happy with them over the year. 20d 40D and 5D Mk11
I have out grown two of them mind you I still use the 40D a lot though when it comes to macro it lets me down as its only 10mps so Its the twinlite all the time
Not the 5DMk11 is a great camera for everything, I bought it two years ago this Month but I am sorry to say I dont like the performance of the 24-105 L f/4 mm lens
I wish now I had not bought that lens and waited till I had enough money for the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 L lens though going Overseas at the time I could not afford the extra.
The 5D Mk 11 has 21 mps and I dont have a problem with that camera I really like it.
If you bought that as its way cheaper than what I paid in 2010 and coupled with the 16-35mm lens for landscapes that would be a great twosome.

P.S. Just been looking at the price of the 5D Mk 11 and I am almost tempted to buy another one rather than wait for the 7D Mk 11 ? to come out

[roastman]

Mary Anne, have you had focussing issues with your 24-105? Mine is near perfect (well, perfect enough for me, but I am sure I will get fussier as I improve), but a friend of mine has reported some issues with his. He told me his focus tends to be a bit out for no apparent reason and it is not always in the same direction (not always back focussing or front focussing). The early models of these lenses apparently had a flare issue which could be corrected by Canon service. Shame, because they are quite sharp and have quite low distortion (for the range of zoom) and vignetting is pertty mild.

So far, mine is good (fingers crossed).

[Speedway]

I upgraded from the 400D to the 7D a few years ago, after first upgrading my lenses. My main reasons were the better focusing system and faster frame rate for motor sports and wildlife/birding. The extra megapixles that help when cropping and the much better high ISO performance were added bonuses. I have recently added the 70-200 f2.8L is ii to my lens collection and am finding a whole new world out there with the performance of this lens. I am still very happy with the performance of the 7D. I still have the 400D and it still gets a fair bit of use
Keith.

[Bella]

I am also curious to know why you don't like the performance of your 24-105 lens. It's one that I had considered as well as the 24-70.

I probably would go for the 7D over the 5D II due to speed, which is why the specs of the 5D III are so appealing - it seems to have the best of both worlds so to speak. But at such a hefty price difference....

I guess what I would probably be looking at is something like the 5D III + 24-70 (not II as its too expensive) or 7D + 10-22 + 24-70. Or if anyone had some suggestions that would be great!

I've also read that the 24-70 has some issues that the II has fixed? Are the issues common in the first 24-70?

[Bella]

Thanks Keith. I have the f4 version of that lens and love it! I'm sure I'll love the 7D if I go that way, but then the 5D III would be awesome too

[mudman]

I am a Nikon shooter so not the best person to ask re Canon, but if I was buying, and shooting at higher ISO was a factor in my upgrading (as you have stated) I would buy the one that offered the best high ISO image quality..

That makes the Pentax K5 the obvious answer

[fabian628]

good to decide on bodies, but what about lenses, imo are more important. Your choice of lenses may be different for different body. Are the two lenses for 7d upgrade of your current, or addition eg. faster lenses?
I would reccomend a 24mm f/1.4 lens for sunset etc, or maybe something wider if using the 7d. running and jumping animals, if they are far away, longer lens may be useful eg 400mm+.
Personally i find the 35mm f/1.4 very nice to use on 1.6x and full frame body, a lens worth considering if you like walk around prime.

[Bella]

fabian628 - I would love some recommendations on camera/lens combinations. Thanks for your suggestions so far. I agree, lenses are very important, but being that one of the cameras is full frame and a great deal more expensive also, it will determine what lens(es) I get, so needs to be taken into consideration. I would look at selling my 400D & kit lens, only retaining the 70-200 F4L IS lens that I currently have. Therefore I need something to replace the 18-55 lens I have at the moment.

I can probably only afford one really good lens with the 5D III but two with the 7D due to the price difference. That is why I thought the 24-70 would be a good choice with the 5D III as it gives me a decent range along with the 70-200. If I opted for a prime with the 5D III, I think I'd find myself wanting more options. Down the track I would look at another lens, once the bank balance has recovered.

With the 7D my thinking was that the 10-22 would be good for the wide end, then the 24-70 for walk around, coupled with my existing 70-200 would provide a good range.

Would love to hear any suggestions of combinations with either body, also suggestions for filters would be appreciated. There are probably better combinations that I haven't thought of

Budget - ideally no more than 5K but could stretch it a little if it was worthwhile. With the 7D, I would ideally want to keep it to 4K.

Thanks to everyone that has helped so far and thanks in advance to anyone else who has time to provide some assistance

[Arg]

...With the 7D my thinking was that the 10-22 would be good for the wide end, then the 24-70 for walk around, coupled with my existing 70-200 would provide a good range. ...Budget - With the 7D, I would ideally want to keep it to 4K....

7D $1200
10-22 wide $800
17-55 2.8 IS walkaround $1000
=======
TOTAL $3000 (your original budget)


If your budget is actually 4K and you want to do night photography, suggest you add:

Quality tripod $500
Canon flash 430 II or higher $300
2 more CF cards $200 (moving animals + faster frame rates + shooting more RAW now, right? )

5D III is outside your budget, when we think of system cost. Anyhow, I reckon you actually can take better photos with a 28mm sensor than a 44mm sensor for general photography within a $5k budget, because of the better total system that can be bought.

[Speedway]

With 400D's struggling to get $400 I would keep it as a back up. With the 7D I have a Sigma 10-20, Sigma 18-250 , Tamron 90mm macro, Canon 50 1.8, all purchased for the 400D. I purchased the 7D with a Sigma 150-500 just over 2 years ago and have just added the 70-200 2.8L is ii and a 2X iii extender to the collection. I thought about the FF 5D but for sports and wildlife the 7D seemed a better choice for me and so far I am very happy with my selection.
Keith.

[Paddyob]

I second Arg's suggestions re equipment combo. My gear includes these and I am happy with them.
I believe Tannan has been using the 7D lately and I would be thrilled if I could achieve that quality.

[reaction]

7D is a good choice for "photos of animals (which are often running and jumping around) ", definitely beats 5D2 for AF speed by all reports.
5D3 is probably worth 3x 7D, the question is, do you have 3x $$$? and do you want to use it in a 5D3? I'd say no. Use the 7D for 1-2yrs and switch to 5D3 if you still feel you want it.