I’ve been thinking of getting the EOS 5D MK II but this might be tempting instead. I’ve currently got a 40D and the 8fps would be excellent for some shots and if the sensor is as good as they say in low light it also be very handy.
According to people who know more than me it ( the 7D ) is supposed to be the nuts.
Makes it an ‘interesting’ decision over the 5D mk11. If you’re in that market.
I too am a 40D user and I love it, just feels right.
The 7D might be a bit overkill for me, just a bit too much going on, and I’m not bothered with video capability. It’d take a numpty like me a year to access and understand all. the features, but I am an old dog, so new tricks come hard
If you shoot in Raw file sizes are going to probably about double those of the 40D, but that also goes for the 5D mk11 - makes the storage manufacturers happy!
In an ideal world I’d keep the 40 and buy a 5D as well for the full frame capability - but then, of course you have to have the right lens collection to suit both as EF - S lenses don’t fit full frame.
Unfortunately I don’t live in an ideal world, so instead of upgrading to the 50D or 5D I spent my money on L series lenses, as an ‘enthusiast’ I don’t really need any more picture quality than I already have.
But aside from my personal outlook, to (eventually), come back to the start point - if you don’t need speed, need very high res images, and have the right lenses then the 5D probably better, plus it’s been out a while and firmware is (now) sorted.
If you have to have the speed and video capability, and only have an EFS lens collection then it’s got to be the 70D or of course a second hand 1DS MK 111 - now there’s a thought, speed and high res…
Depends on what your needs are innit … horses for courses.
If I were to update my 40D tomorrow - it would be for a 5DII … but my bag’o’lenses are all EF … and I wouldn’t really need the increase in speed/handling of a 1D. That being said … if I had deep enough pockets … then I’d have one of each
Two grand for a camera? Are they having a laugh? At that price I would expect it to take bloody good photos and video as well as paint my walls, clean my bike, and accurately predict the winning lottery numbers every week.
My only EFS lens is my 10-22mm, which I’ve only had for 6 months and love it. Don’t nearly get out enough and use it which is a shame.
There is a Canon pro show next month to go and play with all the toys if anyone is interested. http://www.canon.co.uk/prophotosolutions/
Hmmm, now that’s a lotto purchase to be added to the list for when i win
Too right, which is why I “only” spent £5k on my brand new 1250cc baby a couple of years ago, with much Dominic Littlewood-style haggling and lots of lovely goodies thrown in :Whistling:
On the subject of this camera, I can’t really see the advantage of it over my lowly 300D other than the fact that you can use it for video and you can blow photos up to the size of a bus. Don’t really need those features so I think I’ll stick to my 300D (currently available for about £100 on Ebay).
No doubting your 300D is still - at 6 years old - a very competent and able machine - as recent examples demonstrate on flickr’s camera finder page.But … technology develops … and taking image quality out of it (having established your camera can take a ruddy good picture) - and video (which I personally think is a complete crock) … advances like 8 frames per second rather than 2.5 … 19 AF points rather than 7 … an LCD of 3 inches rather than 1.8 … higher ISO capabilities … and spot metering … just make life easier.As said though - it’s horses for courses - depends on what you are interested in doing. Sport which would need the super-quick focussing and big frames per second … fashion/high art where the Leica would shine. If you’re happy with the results you are getting and aren’t sold on the new tech then fair play to you Personally though - I love a gadget/gizmo/sh*t I don’t actually need
just been up and down tottenham ct road as I’m now in need of some pro (or at least semi-pro) kit. managed to sort out a bit of work and hopefully this will build into something
anyway, was looking at the 1d and 5dii (and wincing) and hadnt actually seen/considered this cam. had a play with it in one of the canon stocked suppliers, have to say i do like. given i’m not sure what direction i’m going to end up going with all this, it seems to offer a good compromise, esp as you can get it for 1700 with a kit lens (as opposed to north of 2grand for the body only versions of the 1 and 5).
also has a very neat feature of an inbuilt level display which would help with the property interior shots i’ve been doing.
do you reckon the 7d will be the kind of thing that would cover me for most eventualities? the savings would make the extra lens purchases a bit less painful…
had seen this adertised in the canon franchised places. prob is i’m moving house that week (altho into what i dont actually know yet …). will prob be knee deep in boxes if not at work
been doing a bit of searching and fair few people seem to think that a lot of 5dii owners are kicking themselves as the 7d has some impressive functionality it doesnt. however many of these appear to be the usual keyboard warrior stuff.
there was a guy at the gym with a 5dii and a 70-200 L today. was ever so slightly envious (even if it was his ‘works’ camera)
is it essentially a question of the 7d being probably a better camera for features, but the 5d is a full frame so is therefore more capable for DOF and wide shots?
Really like the lok of this camera. I am looking to upgrade from my 400d, and am tempted by either the 50d or this at a stretch. Fortunatly I havea good set of EF lenses so it would be body only… Now just to find the funds
Ben I know you’re very keen and all puppy-like with excitement of having a new new toy, but seriously unless money is plentiful I really stand by my advice of a 2nd hand 5D.
Yes the 7D will have more fancy bits on it for sure but for the stuff you are likely to be doing I’d still say you’ll get a great image off the 5D especially with it being roughly half the price, perhaps the only shortcoming will be the ISO where the newer camera is likely to be better. But where is that really likely to be used in a critical environment? The stuff you’ve just been doing wouldn’t want high ISO material, no matter which camera - you’d use a tripod and long exposure it.
If you have a couple of grand I’d look at Ebay and price up a 2nd hand 5D, a Canon L 17-40 and mebbe either a Sigma EX 24-70 f2.8 or Canon’s 24-105 f4 L. That would be a sweet set of options for interior shooting. Once you’ve been paid a few times, perhaps add a 70-200 f4 to that (the 2.8 option is far more expensive and not necessary for you imho).
Meanwhile I’m wondering where I’m gonna get the money for a Mark IV, damn that looks awesome spec.
ruff, ruff! yeah saw the 1div has been announced, had a drool! fortunately its going to be stupidly expensive (for me that is) that it doesn’t feature in my current agonising
am still giving serious thought to a 2nd hand 5d. money is far from being no object. having said that, i can live with paying for value. is the mark ii actually work the cash over the 5 do you think?
the ISO is actually a bit factor in the decision making as it happens. have had a couple of occasions where the lack of sensitivity on my cam has been a source of deep aggravation. also if i do branch out into the wedding stuff (which i’m hoping I will) then shooting in churches and other non-flash appropriate circumstances are a factor. also just for fun when i’m trying to shoot friends and family candidly the flash firing off isn’t very subtle.
been reading up on the 5 and there seems to be a lot of moaning about the AF? much of an issue on anything apart from sports?