Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Hi, I'm currently using 7D with 17-55mm F2.8 as walk around lens plus 55-250mm and 50mm F1.4.

Always want to try using Full frame, see that used 5D2 is dropping to around $1500 in the used market which is a good price for what it is. My 7D is about $950 to $1100 used.
Understand that my EF 17-55mm and 55-250mm won't be compatible on a full frame. I will have to change my gears as well to trade/sell my 17-55mm to a 24-105L and the 55-250mm to a 70-300mm F4.

Body and gears will probably cost me an additional of $1000 to switch over.
I'm just debating....

The biggest question is....do you really want the full frame look? are you always wanting awesome shots at 3200 ISO?

I never made the switch since the 5Dmk2 is horrifically slow with AF. I rather have ho hum quality sharp shots than missed shots.

I have no idea what the full frame look is but it doesn't seem worth the upgrade for better iso performance alone. Both of these cameras have the same dynamic range and about the same mpx. Unless you shoot a lot of concerts, weddings, and other low light type events; I'm not sure what the need is.

A full frame camera isn't the answer for anyone looking to be a better photographer or have better quality photos. It's merely a tool that makes life a bit easier in certain situations.

I've always felt that these kinds of questions should always be posted along with a link to the users photography.

+1 to Bart's post.

A plethora of riches we have when the 7D produces "ho hum quality" though I do agree with bhrm's point on the AF.

Ya, I did some research as well. Not worth the trouble. Keeping my set up

7D is a good choice.

Research is great, going out and shooting is better. Find out what you can't do with what you got before reading about it. Just general advice I have to remind myself of once in a while.

Why don't you rent a 5D mk2, or even better ask a friend (I am sure you have a lot now, being on TPMG) to play with their 5D and see if it's worth the trouble. I don't think it would be, but then again, I too had a sudden urge to dump my 7D for that "better dynamic range and high iso performance". It's just a "new toy" effect

It depends on what you plan on doing. For being an enthusiast and just serious hobby, stick with the 7D. The AF is definitely much better and there are a lot of options for glass. You won't be stuck with just an EF mount. I have the 7D and it's great to lug around and do stuff with it. I have the 5D2 but the only reason I bought it is because I use it primarily for weddings. I need better ISO performance during low light conditions. If I could put the AF sensor of the 7D into the 5D2, I would...

... which is why I'm saving up for the 5D3. LOL!

What type of photography are you into? Just curious.

Ugh! Me too. Save a bit and wait for the price to drop some more. And in all honesty I don't *need* the higher iso but sure would like it.

I want both the AF and the ISO of the 5D3. I tinkered around with it during one wedding and it makes one helluva difference compared to the 5D2.

Oh and the fact that it's got 2 slots for memory.

I refer to the 5DIII as the 7DII. In terms of feel and evolution its got more in common with the 7D than the old 5D models. Anyway, the 7D doesn't really let me down in any way but iso performance. As silly as that is, but it is a 4 year old sensor. And I guess maybe I'd like more detail too I guess but that's a bit of a slippery slope. All I really want is a better sensor, the rest of the camera is hard to improve on, and so far barely has been with the 5DIII.

Full frame is definitely worth it. One way or another, you will still be upgrading soon. Why not just do it now and regret it later.

Being a 7D user AF is not something I particularly need updated. Sure, the 5DIII AF is unquestionably better, since it is an evolution of the 7D AF that makes sense, but it's not like I've got a pile of misses or a bad AF footprint now. Two memory slots are nice of course, but again, not enough of a reason to spend $3k on a camera.

7D is an amazing camera, it'd only be worth upgrading to the 5D MKIII if you really wanted full frame.

While 7d is capable of producing beautiful photos, the 5dIi is in a different league IMO. One of the best bangs u can buy atm.

Same league - camera. Same players - photographers. Same world - photography. Arguably any camera is capable of taking a beautiful picture. The same isn't generally said of photographers. Anecdotally, I've noticed photographers that go on ad nauseam of the value, league, inevitability of full frame don't take beautiful pictures... though I've been proven wrong. Once.

Ugh. If this were my forum I'd delete empty full frame fanaticism.

Have you guys seen this - since we are talking about crop vs full frame.

http://www.eoshd.com/content/9474/proto ... d-mark-iii

I think there are a lot more issues here than comparisons on a computer screen. If all people want to do is to look at their images on a computer screen, a point a shoot would do the job. For me the real comparison is if both images were blown up to 50 inches and printed, will the Nex look just as good as the Canon. If it is I would go for the Nex at a fraction of the price, size and weight. My experience is that it isn't and that is why I pay the big bucks to lug around an oversize piece of dead weight with a lens attached to it.