Full Frame - worth the leap?

robbys82

robbys82

Messages
549
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi All,

I'm going to keep this short and sweet. Need to get another body to go with 40D (use that as a second body). Want something thats good in low light and generally an all round great camera. I've researched and mulled this to death but just interested in some opinions. Tried both cameras in Jessops and really liked them both 7D and 5D did feel awesome .

I mainly take portraits / landscapes and do paid work but only part tim - don't have massive budget

Mainly Use EF-S 17-55 f2.8 at the moment along with sigma 70-200 f2.8

Torn between 7d and stick with same lenses or..... (cheaper but still good in low light and use EF-S. Look to upgrate to FF in the future)

5D mkII and then looking to get a 24-70 f2.8 (even better in low light and L quality + extra DOF etc - take the plunge and extra expense now)

Everything about what I use camera for etc suggests full frame but don't know if the benefits really add up to the extra cost.

Is it really worth taking the leap at this stage as the 17-55 is a great lens and get great pics with it at the moment!

Any opinions on this / advice really appreciated.
 
Once you try it you will wonder how you ever enjoyed your photography without it! :)
 
yeah I can fully believe that. I was using my old film praktica slr last week to get a feel for shooting at "real" focal lengths.

I guess what I want to know is a 5D mkII worth the extra 1K over a 5D?
 
If you really need to shoot high ISO yes, if you really need the video, yes. Otherwise no.

Is a very brief synopsis of the other threads I've read on here comparing the two.
 
If you shoot mainly potrait and landscape then i'm guessing the high iso performance isn't of huge interest to you. I'd got with a 5D Mk 1. You could also look at some non-canon glass. I'm considering the sigma 24-70 EX DG, since it consistently gets better reviews than the now quite old canon lens.
 
I'm always open to non-canon, got a tameron 28-75f2.5 which is tidy. I had to get some repairs done to my 17-55 this year (sticky zoom) and as a result was thinking it may be worth looking at L glass for the build quality. I'll defo have a look at that lens though!

I do sometimes enjoy doing gig photos too and ISO is useful as I've shot a number of weddings where photos on inside a churchs where flash isn't allowed (and I wouldn't want to use it!)
 
I should really stop reading other people's threads!! I had almost convinced myself to go for a second hand 40D as an upgrade from my current 400 and now i read this and think "Hey, maybe i should just go for a 5D too"!! Good luck in your choice, i'll probably still be deciding what to go for this time next year!
 
AliB said:
If you really need to shoot high ISO yes, if you really need the video, yes. Otherwise no.

Is a very brief synopsis of the other threads I've read on here comparing the two.
Click to expand...

:agree:

I have both Mk1 and Mk2. Obviously the Mk2 is a leap forward but the Mk1 was always a great camera.... and it still is.

That said, a better camera is not a replacement for better technique. Why are you thinking of buying it?
 
yeah completely agree nomorem6

I'm getting it as I need a backup camera for weddings and 350d isn't up to that task, its pretty knackered and has had a lot of snaps on it.

I basically figured it's an oppertunity to move another rung up the ladder. I do love taking shots with narrow DOF and appreciate FF will help with that too.

I'm aware the 5DI is a good body and agree just because there is a newer model doesn't take away from what it can achieve. I think that about my 40D, I've got some great photos with it and still do.
 
I'm about to get the 5d2 - after recently selling a 40d.. I'll be shifting a few pieces in the classifieds tomorrow - and once sold - I'll be going full frame - 5d2 with 24-70 2.8 and 50 1.2... I'm looking to expand the amount of weddings/partnerships I do - and am looking especially at the lower light capabilities of the 5d2... Good luck in whichever you choose :)
 
50 1.2 nice!! be interested to hear what you make of 5d mk2

Yeah thats the dilemma as I'm not looking to do weddings full time or expand on what I'm doing but do want to invest in decent gear :)
 
I know most of you are Cannoneers, but although I occasionally miss the extra 'reach' that shooting DX gave me, I much prefer the feel of the FX format...
It means I can now use my fave lens again ('old' Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8) whereas my mainstay with FX was the 17-35...

And the ISO range of the D3 has really given me shots I could only dream of this time last year...
 
robbys82 said:
50 1.2 nice!! be interested to hear what you make of 5d mk2

Yeah thats the dilemma as I'm not looking to do weddings full time or expand on what I'm doing but do want to invest in decent gear :)
Click to expand...

If there's a sound reason to do it - go for it... If you don't think the reason justifies the expense - why not wait 6 months and see if prices drop?
 
Right now the 5D2 is £1850 at Jessops but with Quidco you can get cash back worth £160, making it just £1690 delivered or for collection....

http://www.quidco.com/jessops/

I bought one last week and the cash back has tracked. Payment of the cash back will take ~3 months. I am guessing this cash back offer will reduce significantly after today, as the amount increased recently from a typical 3% to the current 10%, which coincided with the "10 days of deals" to celebrate 10 years of jessops.com. The 10 days of deals runs out at midnight tonight, after which I suspect the cash back % will return to normal.

The 10% will apply to anything, not just the 5D2. For some product types (not DSLRs) there is an additional 5% off with a voucher code you will see when you visit Jessops from Quidco.
 
Anorakus said:
The problem with the 5D mk II is that you'll soon know if your lenses aren't sharp :(

A.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily true. The low pixel density of the 5D2 is only equal to a 30D, and thus very forgiving of small focus errors, shake/blur or lens softness that a camera like the 50D or 7D would more easily reveal. Of course, corner softness is another matter, since croppers don't test the edges and corners of the lens but the 5D2 surely will.

Also, assuming you don't crop, the enlargement factor to get you from a full frame image to your final displayed image is going to be 1.6X less than with a cropper. Thus any softness/blur/shake/diffraction etc. will be magnified 1.6X less and thus will not be so obvious.

Furthermore, assuming you want equal DOF with a full frame image vs an equivalent image from a cropper, you will need to stop down by about 1 stop, so where you might shoot at f/2.8 with a cropper you could shoot at f/4-f/4.5 with full frame, thus sharpening up the lens optics somewhat. Of course, that will have a knock-on effect for shutter speed and/or ISO, but if you have enough light that will not be an issue of concern. e.g. where you have the 17-55/2.8 IS on a cropper you could use the 24-105/4 IS on full frame and you will have a wider wide end and a longer long end. Plus you'd get L build quality for pretty much the same price as the 17-55. If the slower aperture was a problem regarding shutter speed then the superior high ISO performance of full frame will allow you to match shutter speed with no penalty.
 
thanks for all the useful in - quidco tip is brill though dont think i'll be making decision yet -

t-dodd some good info there too - I've read mixed things about full frame both getting better results out of lenses and showing up weaknesses but think you covered that well.

I think a 5D would be a good option, just need to decide weather the iso improvement is worth 1k - I've got by ok so far but it would be nice to have the option

Lots of good threads on here about these various bodies at the mo

eitherway the 24-70 seems to be an amazing lens so would like to get that :) - just wont tell the lady
 
Another body worth considering if you are doing landscape and want weather sealing and a somewhat more rugged body is the 1dsmk2.........Paul (grumpybadger) got one off here for 1k.
 
yeah was just looking at some threads comparing them - if only it were straightforward (insert Nikon comment below ;-)
 
Excuse me for hijacking this thread but I'm pretty much at the same decision point as Robby. The main difference for me is that my snaps are for magazines and I need the extra MP of the 5d2 over the Mk1 for those double page spreads at 300dpi. I'll have to upgrade the entire caboosh, glass n all, so...

...no Nikon comment as their FF models take the Michael price wise...

Sony A900?

I'd invest in the CZ wide angle lens for bread-and-butter interiors that I do, but am wondering if it's worth sticking Sigma glass on for the few longer shots, or if that's defeating the entire object of investing in such a camera.

I've heard that the ISO over 400 on a Sony can be dodgy which makes it second choice after the Canon for weddings and stuff, but I don't think I'll be venturing into that field.

Sorry again to hijack the post... but there is a HUGE overlap in interests!

Cheers. :thumbs:
 
Hey Andrew, no worries at all. I've got a couple of sigma lenses which are great - particularly the 70-200 f2.8 but doubt that will help you with interiors :)

I'm sure you've seen it but was looking at this site last night which is great for comparing lenses though there aren't huge numbers of sigma ones on there.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/
After looking at 24-70 f2.8 im going to struggle not to get one - looks amazingly sharp
 
ajdesq said:
Excuse me for hijacking this thread but I'm pretty much at the same decision point as Robby. The main difference for me is that my snaps are for magazines and I need the extra MP of the 5d2 over the Mk1 for those double page spreads at 300dpi. I'll have to upgrade the entire caboosh, glass n all, so...
Click to expand...

or a 1Ds MkII :)

16MP of full frame lovlieness.

Do you really need the extra MP? I recently sent off some files for publication out of the 1DsII @300dpi TIFF and they were 70Mb!!!!
 
I went through the same problem nearly, i ended up with a 50d and 5d II, each camera has its own quality, although I love the 5dII for indoor work with the canon L lens.

Full frame will be the future, so take the hit now or later.

Your EF-S 17-55 f2.8 is a sweet lens on the crop body, but should make good money and you could go for 24-70mm L series which is sharper than a pin.

You can shoot that in the dark nearly !!! :-) well almost.
 
must admit I don't really know much about 1D mk2 - I'll have to have a real good look into them too though I am leaning towards a 5D and spending some money on some good glass . Thanks for all the input so far everyone!
 
Worth the leap? I hope so, as today I have purchased a 5D. I am expecting it to nicely complement my 30D.
 
nice one patrick, let me know what you make of it. I'm pretty much between 5d or 5dmkII

5d would be much more comfortable on my wallet but the extra ISO and video would be brill
 
I would recommend a used 5D and some faster glass. I did think about getting a 5D mk2 but I am not a pro so couldnt justify dishing out so much money.

Is it worth the leap? Yes cos everything looks so wide, its like upgrading from a 4:3 TV to a 16:8 widescreen (well almost).
 
The 17-55IS is a great lens and I love mine to bits, but after getting a 5D markII + 24-105L I'm gonna sell mine as I don't see the need for it anymore as I'm NOT going back to a crop camera. High ISO is amazing on the 5D and the DOF at f4 actually seems slightly shallower than my 17-55 @f2.8 on a crop cam. Sharpness is also great and the cropability is also amazing.
I took some shots using my sigma 30mm f1.4 on the 5d and it vignetts heavily, I can crop out 90% of the dark edges and still get a 15-12mp picture left!
 
robbys82 said:
must admit I don't really know much about 1D mk2 - I'll have to have a real good look into them too though I am leaning towards a 5D and spending some money on some good glass . Thanks for all the input so far everyone!
Click to expand...

I assume you are talking about the 1Ds2, if you are considering full frame. If so, have a look at this massive thread on POTN - http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=609078 started by someone who felt the 1Ds2 suited his needs better than the 5D2.
 
just thought i'd give an update. Thanks for all the input from everyone which led me to my decision on a 5d mk2.

I decided i really would benefit from live view and the improved iso following a really dark wedding shoot the other weekend. I'll probably sell on my 17-55 in time and get a 24-70 but will need to get some money first :(

I'll post comment on how I get on with it next week (kerso's posting it out monday :) :)
 
Woo-hoo! Well done that man! :clap:

I will be VERY interested to hear how you get on with it. Since gatecrashing the thread I've started doing a little bit of video so that now excludes the Sony and leaves only the Canon.

Awaiting updates with baited breath. And stand by for 100 numpty questions from me when you get it. Enjoy! :thumbs:
 
robbys82 said:
I mainly take portraits / landscapes and do paid work but only part tim - don't have massive budget
Click to expand...

Well you certainly won't lose anything by going full frame as neither of these benefit from the extra 'reach' a cropped sensor gives you.

Is it really worth taking the leap at this stage as the 17-55 is a great lens and get great pics with it at the moment!
Click to expand...

If you're happy with your images now, what do you feel that you will gain from buying a full frame body? How many pictures have you missed or haven't been as good as you would have hoped would you have been able to nail with a full frame body?

I have three formats, (FX, DX and 4/3) and 9/10 the one thing that drives my decision as to which body to grab is size. The other 10% of the time my decision will be to use the D3 for sepcific shots I have in mind that require either higher ISO or shallower depth of field, or my D300 for the added 'reach' and better AF coverage (e.g. sports)

Moving to full frame requires the best optics you can get so if you would have to upgrade your glass it's a good opportunity to see what other systems might suit. Even if money is tight, a full frame body and a 24-70mm lens will be fine for most of your needs in the short term.

Finally, if you do plump for full frame, don't go for a Canon 5D, at launch it was a great sensor in a below average body. Now it's years old it's an average sensor in a very poor body.
 
wow - my 5dmk2 just arrived and I'm blown away by it already :) :) :)

The screen on the back is stunning, much more detail than my 40d which I am happy with now. Just fired off a few test shots using 50mm f1.8 and tameron 28-75 f2.8. I now get what people are on about when they say it can show up flaws in your lenses but also how sharp the 50 is!!!

Love the fact its so similar in operation to my 40d though not had a play with video yet! Also really pleased with the focal lengths of my 70-200 and 28-75 on it, i'm sure ill be using the 70-200 a lot more on it at gigs etc.

Did some test shots at higher ISO and really pleased with the results, I can live with a little noise and its a big improvement over the 40d. This will be great for gig photos, I was doing some last night on my 40d and it was just so dark it was at its limits!

Will post more once I have more of a play with it!
 
Nice one! :clap:

Interested to hear how you get on with the video. I understand that the video output is .mov files and that there is no auto-focus, only manual? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Looking forward to the next update :thumbs:
 
NorthernNikon said:
Finally, if you do plump for full frame, don't go for a Canon 5D, at launch it was a great sensor in a below average body. Now it's years old it's an average sensor in a very poor body.
Click to expand...

Whilst I don't disagree with the sentiment, a 5d is still a very capable camera and arguably worthy of it's second hand price. Obviously it won't compete with the newer version, but most people would shudder paying close to two thousand pounds for a body alone if it's just a hobby.

It may not have too many bells and whistles, but it still takes great pictures. It has all you need and the new version doesn't improve on things like auto-focus. Clearly if you have an infinite budget you will choose the latest and greatest, but it still has plenty to offer for rather less than the latest cropped sensor releases.

I own one and don't think a MKII would suddenly free me from being an average photographer!

Graham
 
I own one too and have done for two years. I have looked after it so it's still in excellent condition but I have used it a fair bit. It's seen about ten weddings this year, been on building sites, been popped in a rucksack for the day, been wet cleaned a few times and it still works perfectly and is often my weapon of choice where I want a lighter camera than the 1Ds.

I used it for most of a shoot on Sunday and it still produces images like this.
showphoto.php
[/url][/IMG]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top