- Last post
- 55 Responses
After enjoying the debate on the 7D, I thought I'd toss in my dilemma and see if anyone had thoughts (or rather, cared to share them).
I am looking for a semi-pro camera (mostly starting, but will be taking pics for clients soon), currently I have a Nikon D80, but only a kit lens, so jumping to Canon doesn't pose a problem.
I was hoping the Nikon D800 would be out by xmas, but it looks more like next summer, otherwise that would be my choice (assuming the specs are comparable to the 5DMkII).
I can't wait another 7-8 months.
I am leaning towards the 7D or 5DMkII, but am not sure the full frame is worth it (as I'll be only using it for client work here and there). Maybe a 7D and upgrade to a 5DMkIII in a year or two?
Money is always a concern, but the purchase would be part of a project, so not as large a concern as if it were just for fun.
Completely agree, but since this will be for some professional work I also don't want to compromise (much).
Great photos, btw
Ive been curious about that myself. What mandates a certain tier of photo equipment for professional work. I could understand you would go with a full sensor and a L tier lens if you would shoot a 300dpi ad for a fullsize magazine. But anything less than that? With the amount of post processing we do.
Say a photo for a billboard ad or similar is photo retouched and edited heavily enough anyway not to suffer from size issues right?
There is so much other things coming in to play.
You can always rent a camera body for the day if you're shooting for a client, then you're free to buy whatever camera you want for yourself (or keep your D80, which is a fine camera).
I'd get the d700
does anyone have an idea of when the next 5d will be released? i personally think it'll be a while....
that's a good question. Seems like the 7D improved on a few items on the 5D, if it would out in a year I wonder if it'd be better to get a 7D and plan on upgrading in a year or so.
I love how the D700 feels, but for even more $$ than the 5D and such a lesser spec sheet (I do want video), it is hard to justify. If it were closer to $2k, then maybe it'd feel like a better value.
Its not about resolution or ISO, professional lenses suit full frame bodies (especially on the canon side). Its the focal length that you should be thinking about as all the cameras above are capable of taking great (and large) shots with good lighting.
If you want to use L lenses then go full frame. If you are happy to shoot EFS lenses buy a 7D. If you are planning to go full frame later just do it now, will save you in the long run.
I havent shot with much Nikon gear although I love the D3 I tried. Might be a different story with Nikon.
so slappy, pardon my ignorance, but you mentioned 'If you want to use L lenses then go full frame.' Why? Is it based on preference? What if I get a 7D and rent an L lens? would the final product look different?
OSFA, "What affect does the FOVCF have on lenses? None - physically. The lenses are the same and retain all of their same physical attributes. But, there are some differences in how these lenses are used that should be mentioned." Best site in the world for Canon Lens info ... It's my bible. http://www.the-digital-picture.c…
How large will you enlarge? Will you crop a lot?
A fullframe 5D mark I has done me very well for ads printed on posters 30x40. Canon L lenses and prime (non-zoom) lenses are comparable in image quality, so a 50mm 1.4, 28mm f2.8 and 85mm f1.8 can give great results without spending thousands on each lens.. 5D mark II has better low-light, high ISO results than 7D, but 7D has faster AF. It's all a trade off and a matter of what doesn't drive you crazy.
The only time to get new gear is when the stuff you have drives you crazy and you know it's a gear issue, not a rule of physics you're up against....
Also... lighting and lenses....
Most lenses have almost identical image sharpness at F8 to F11. Even cheap ones. You don't get the out of focus background that's so hip, but if you can really, really light a product or person at F8 to F11, that's a case when it's about lighting, not lenses.... and you don't have to spend a fortune on lighting.. lighting is more about your eye, your skill and your patience.
I am aiming at mostly model shots, with some landscapes for personal fun (no sports are high speed activities).
I've been planning on going for a 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 and some cheaper all purpose/travel lens (like 18-200 just for flexibility). We'll see how I start, but I want to get good glass, there have been enough times where I needed 2.8 in a studio to make it worthwhile (and then I don't have to think about it later on).
I am just learning, but don't want to think about numerous upgrades (beyond a new body down the road), if possible, and focus on evolving, lighting, etc.
why to the Canon EOS Mark II have only 8.2 Megapixels but still cost waay more?
And how come the d300 only has 12 Megapixels, but is supposed to be comparable to the canon 7d?
if you guys ever feel like trying out lenses/bodies before buying them:
i use these guys all the time for jobs.
- I've heard good things about them... avoid the Chicago Helix Hazing experience too....vaxorcist
- hahahaha HELIX. yeah i had a hell of a time with them the first couple times i rented.bigtrick
- some crotchety old rental people that can't admit they made a mistake. but now i'm a regular and it's been ok.bigtrick
- everyone seems to have a similar Helix experience!vaxorcist
- the retail guys are a nightmare too. won't accept returns that have never been usedbigtrick
- also sold me a broken used flashbigtrick
- photo assistants use to say of stuff from helix "Don't be gentle, it's rental"vaxorcist
- but Helix does have oddball stuff nobody else in town stocks.... used to have lots of underwater gear(!)vaxorcist
vax, you got a link to your work anywhere?