Canon 5D Mkii v 650d

More detail, better dynamic range, shallower depth of field.

The upgrade would only be worthwhile depending on what you shoot. Portraits and landscapes definitely, sport and wildlife not so much.
 
Mystery57 said:
Ok I know its full frame but what benefit is that in a final photograph as being a relative novice still Im not certain
Click to expand...

With a 5D you'll see an improvement at the higher ISO's and probably when pixel peeping or printing the size of a barn.

If most of your shots are at low to middling ISO's and you print A3 or smaller and avoid pixel peeping you may struggle to see any improvement.

DoF is another matter. With a full frame camera you may be using longer focal length lenses or shooting at closer distances and both can lead to thinner DoF which can be a positive or a negative thing. Using a FF camera can also lead to using slightly higher ISO settings or longer shutter speeds, so it's swings and roundabouts really.

Personally I've found that if I shoot RAW and process each shot to get the best out of it my 5Dc only shows a significant advantage over my previous 20D and current Panasonic G1 at the higher ISO settings.
 
I tend to photograph whatever catches my eye - mainly land and seascapes, flowers and recently a lot of macro stuff like bees, spiders etc

Most shots are ISO 100 to 400 range.

Very rarely print photos off now - if I do it tends to be A3 canvas type sizes from shops

With the macro shots there is often a lot of cropping
 
Last edited:
It's better for:
Ergonomics / controls menus
Better dynamic range
better DoF control
faster to use
better viewfinder.

The downside might be lens upgrades.
 
Phil when you say the downside might be lens upgrades could you amplify on this.

At present all my lens are EF, L type - because of my own health / eye sight issues, I prefer to use zooms and not prime, so have a super wide, 24-105 and 100-400 lens, plus 100 macro lens, I cant see any other sort of lens that I would actually need as these cover everything imaginable for me.

And finally of course it is a hobby for me in my retirement, not a business or similar.
 
I don't think you'll need any more lenses as all yours seem to be FF lenses but you'll see a difference in the lenses you have now. The wider focal lengths will be... wider, and the longer focal length will not look as long.

One of the biggest differences I noticed when going from APS-C to FF was with my 150mm macro... I noticed that I had to get much closer to the subject (in my case mostly flower shots) and as a result of the reduced camera to subject distance I needed to use smaller apertures which pushed my shutter speed down and caused me to use slightly higher ISO settings.

I think that you need to be careful with FF camera "goodness" expectations as IMVHO unless you are using the highest ISO's or pixel peeping you may not actually see much difference if you are shooting RAW and processing shots to get the best out of them - and you should be doing that if thinking about a higer end DSLR, IMVHO.

In most of my shots I can't tell MFT from APS-C from FF when viewed normally or even at quite high magnification.
 
Mystery57 said:
Phil when you say the downside might be lens upgrades could you amplify on this.
Click to expand...

What Alan said really. Initially I didn't know what your lens collection was. Despite me only having a couple of EFS lenses, a move to FF would cost me a fortune in lenses.

From my perspective, I can't understand why anyone would buy a 24-105 to use on a crop camera, 24mm is frustratingly not wide enough and 105 is really not necessary as it becomes 170ish. So I wouldn't have guessed you owned one:)
 
Mystery57 said:
Funny you say that Phil as its my most used lens of all :)

The quality is very good though
Click to expand...

I'd guessed it would be - it covers a lot of common FL's even on a crop, but for me f4 doesn't offer enough separation on a crop (that's a bonus you'll find with the 5d)
 
If you can afford it, there's no choice, none at all. No really, it's simple. IMO in photography if it costs more generally there's a reason for that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top