full frame

[david1701]

I am in a pickle - one to be solved by the fact I can't do much as I have no cash.

I have a 50d and keep having urges to swap it for a 5d (mkII better but won't happen). I do use the crop factor as I shoot sport and only have a 200mm max reach, but I want the portrait luverlyness, and the fact that a 50mm prime is a 50mm prime.

Do you guys think I'm mad?

on a more practical note how does the high iso performance fair, I would imagine it to be better but don't really know (mkI obv mkII is miles better)

David

 

[Richard.T]

I'd save for a 1.4 TC I've recently upgraded my kit from a 20D to a 1DMKII and in between that I sold my 90-300mm for a 70-200 f/2.8,The 200mm reach on the 20D was fine,But on my 1D with only the 1.3 crop is quite short,Too short in fact that I've had to buy a 1.4tc(which is in the post).So the 5D will make the 200mm very short(in my opinion) and I'd assume it will be a major step back in terms of fps too

 

[HoppyUK]

I am in a pickle - one to be solved by the fact I can't do much as I have no cash.

I have a 50d and keep having urges to swap it for a 5d (mkII better but won't happen). I do use the crop factor as I shoot sport and only have a 200mm max reach, but I want the portrait luverlyness, and the fact that a 50mm prime is a 50mm prime.

Do you guys think I'm mad?

on a more practical note how does the high iso performance fair, I would imagine it to be better but don't really know (mkI obv mkII is miles better)

David

Yes, frankly.

You need to have some specific and very good reasons to go full frame, and a lot of cash.

I don't get your point about portraits at all, and a 5D is one of the last cameras to choose for sport (loss of reach, average AF, slow frame rate).

Mad. Certifiably

 

[david1701]

ok, canon's advertising works far too well , just not feeling my 50d at high iso, but I think it should be a job for better glass not a body