5D Mark II

Lugztaz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 21, 2004
Messages
1,783
I'm about to order the Canon 5D mark II after saving for awhile. I've read lots of good things about the camera and the 24-105mm f/4L IS USM AF Lens which I have also read great things about.

I've done a bit of research and havent found anything that has turned me away so I guess I come here to see if anyone has anything to inform me of before I buy?

I currently own a Rebel XT with a few lenses, although I know not all will work. I will be shooting a wide range of things, storm chasing, weddings, and other random sorts of things. I guess it's a bigger step into photography. I though about the 7D but I like the nice sensors and full frame....I just need input on this large purchase, who can help?
 
Great camera! I have to admit I'm quite jealous :p

Just keep in mind the fact that while the 24-105 is a great walk around lens, it just barely reaches into what would be considered a normal telephoto lens on a FF body. Coming from the XT, the field of view would be equivalent to a 15-66mm on your current camera, so expect it to be wider than a standard kit lens, and not especially long. A telephoto lens of some sort would be a good thing if you don't already have one.

f/4 is not especially fast, so I'd normally recommend having a good flash for indoor, low-light situations but the ISO performance of the 5DII is so good I don't think it'll really matter :D

Enjoy your new toy, we look forward to seeing your results!
 
Great camera! I have to admit I'm quite jealous :p

Just keep in mind the fact that while the 24-105 is a great walk around lens, it just barely reaches into what would be considered a normal telephoto lens on a FF body. Coming from the XT, the field of view would be equivalent to a 15-66mm on your current camera, so expect it to be wider than a standard kit lens, and not especially long. A telephoto lens of some sort would be a good thing if you don't already have one.

f/4 is not especially fast, so I'd normally recommend having a good flash for indoor, low-light situations but the ISO performance of the 5DII is so good I don't think it'll really matter :D

Enjoy your new toy, we look forward to seeing your results!

Yea, I do recall seeing that the ranges would be different and not as long as it might be on my XT. I do have a telephoto but it's just a basic EFS 55-250 f/4 (I believe it's the EFS that will not work on the MarkII?) so nothing fancy.

I might have enough to get a nice flash (Speedlite 580EX II?) for indoor pics, although the ISO does perform well, I'd still like to have it.

Edit: Now that I'm looking and read a bit about the 24-70 f/2.8, I wonder if I would be happier with the quicker or longer range lens? :D
 
Last edited:
I'm personally not a big fan of the 24-70/2.8, or "the Brick" as it is affectionately known by some :p
While f/2.8 is very nice to have, you're already benefiting from shallower DoF because of the larger sensor on the 5D and already have good low-light performance. In this case, the 24-105 might be better, plus it has IS which also counteracts some of its slow aperture of f/4.

The other thing about the Brick is its weight, it is just a hair over 2lbs and almost 5X heavier than the standard 18-55mm IS kit lens on most Rebels.

You'll most definitely need to pick up an external flash anyway as the 5D2 doesn't have a popup one. A 430EX II should probably be enough unless you intend on getting multiple flashes and controlling them via the 580.

Your EFS lenses will definitely not work on the 5D, I'd consider selling them if you're not going to keep your XT and maybe picking up some flavor of the 70-200 series. The Canon EF 70-200 F/4 L IS is legendary for its sharpness and is pretty reasonably priced (for an L). You also can't really go wrong with the Sigma and Tamron variants of the 70-200s, though you'll miss out on the IS.
 
Okay I have had the 5D Mark II since the day it was released, and I also have the 5D.

These are the following lens that I have and can give you advise on.
24-105L f/4 IS
24-70L f/2.8
70-200L f/2.8 IS
35L f/1.4
135L f/2
17-40L f/4

It really depends on what you shoot. I like landscapes, general, travel so I will always goto my 24-105 or 35L (if I really want a fast lens).

I shoot with the 24-70 outdoors because the way the blades are designed, it produces better bokeh.

If I had to choose one lens to use forever it would be the 24-105 hands down. It's sharp, IS is awesome and lightweight. And it takes abuse like no other, mine has worked in pouring rain, high humidity, sandy areas, etc.

Also the 5D Mark II is a awesome camera. It IQ is awesome, lightweight (compared to the Mark III/IV), and it's low light capability is outstanding. Also I am finding myself using video more and more, there is somethings photos cannot capture that well but video can.
 
Going from an old Rebel to a 5D-II is a very big (and expensive) jump. Many responses to your question on dedicated photo forums would ask what it is specifically about the XT that you find limits your photography and how you think the 5D will overcome these limits. Insensitive implications aside, I do agree that it's an appropriate question. Canon has done a marvelous job marketing the allure of their full frame sensors, but the fact remains that a heavy and complex digital SLR will not make you a better photographer unless you are intimately familiar with how photography works and how your camera operates, as well as what you truly need to advance your results in the specific types of photography you shoot. Otherwise you're just spending upwards of $2700 for a heavier SLR that will only work with a few of your lenses.

First and foremost, what lenses do you currently have? The 5D-II will not work with Canon EF-S lenses, which are designed specifically for crop sensor cameras like your XT. Due to mounting differences, you won't be able to attach EF-S lenses to a 5D-II. Trying to jam them in there can break the mirror and/or the lens. If you have 3rd party lenses, you must also check to see if they are designed for crop cameras. Each lens manufacturer has a different label for this, but if you list your lenses, I can tell whether they will work. Note you may be able to mount your crop-sensor 3rd party lenses on your 5D-II, but since the image circle in these lenses will be smaller than your sensor, any images shot with these lenses will show heavy vignetting.

One of the major benefits of full frame is the absence of a crop factor -- i.e. a 24-70 2.8 L lens on the 5D-II will show a field of view equivalent to when the lens is mounted on a conventional 35mm film camera for which it was designed. Considering that dSLR photography still very much revolves around the 35mm standard, and considering that Canon's best glass is designed for the 35mm frame (despite the majority of dSLR cameras having smaller sensors,) it is a very nice convenience to use a camera that fits this standard like a glove. No more ackward focal length and DOF conversions and such. However, there are also practical implications to the absence of a crop factor. In short, each lens you mount on your 5D-II will show a wider FOV than when mounted on your XT. If you prefer wide angle photography, full frame provides a definite advantage. If you prefer telephoto shots, full frame takes away in equal measure. Consider this -- a $400 70-300 IS provides a maximum (effective) focal length of over 400mm on your XT. If this was a focal length you liked and used often, you would need to spring for a 400 F/5.6 or the 100-400 zoom to get something approximately equivalent. Both lenses are large, bulky, and cost over $1K.

Another consideration--one that applies specifically to the 5D-II--is that it is not a very well rounded camera, especially for the price. The 5D-II pairs an excellent sensor in what is subjectively a very average body with a downright basic auto-focus system. What this means is that the 5D-II excels in certain types of photography which play to the camera's strengths, and yet is equally frustrating to use in types of photography that demand performance from the camera's weaker aspects. In short, the 5D-II makes a great studio or landscape camera, as these scenarios can maximize the strengths of the 5D-II sensor without relying on drive speed, autofocus, or body ruggedness. For sports, wildlife, PJ or street work, and event / assignment photography, the 7D is likely to be a better choice due to its superior AF, metering system, and on-body features.

For weddings, the 5D-II is a very popular option due to the sensor and video capabilities (weddings often require shots in low-light, and the 5D-II is still Canon's best high-ISO model.) Keep in mind, though, that most serious wedding photographers bring multiple bodies to a shoot. Having a back-up is crucial because a wedding typically only has one paid photographer and it's not like the bride-and-groom will do a repeat. The 5D-II is indeed much better built than a Rebel, but for serious paid wedding work, I would be very uncomfortable bringing just one.

These are just a few things to think about. Indeed, the 5D-II is hugely popular for a reason -- it's a marvelous camera. But when stepping up from an old entry level model to a $2700 full frame brick, there are serious things to think about. Answer the question posed in the first paragraph and list your lenses, and you'll begin to have a better sense of whether this upgrade is the right move.
 
Last edited:
Great post by Markyip1

5Dii is best for portrait, high-ISO, and landscape. The 5Dii is a great camera, but I would suggest you think hard about the 7d or even 50d. (You could even get a 50D and a used 5D for about the same as a new 5Dii.) The 7D has a newer sensor (albeit APS-C) than the 5Dii and completely destroys it in AF and many other features.

I recently picked up a 5Dii to go with my 40D. Although the 5d is relatively light compared to a 1-series body, it is noticeably heavier than the 40D and tons heavier than a rebel body.

If you get one, I'm sure you're likely to love it, but the 7D is probably a better jack of all trades camera.
 
+1 for the 7D if you don't have a solid reason for needing a FF camera.
- faster/better AF
- compatible with your existing lenses
- good low-light/high ISO performance
- cheaper (means you can spend more on glass if you have the budget)

Quality lenses will have a much greater impact on your shots than any camera body. That being said, the 7D makes thing much easier.
 
I don't think there is anything wrong the 5dmarkII. Is expensive too. You will get blown away by the ISO1600 image quality. You probably couldn't tell if the shot was taken under ISO1600. Maybe a bit of noise at ISO3200. What this means? You can pay a visit to your local museum and not needing to use the flash at all. You will be fine as long as you don't intend to shoot any sports or wild life photography. 7D is a better camera for action shots because of higher burst rate and better AF tracking system. If you have the money, yeah, get a 5dmarkII....

24-70L versus 24-105L. I go for the 24-70L because is a fast glass. Need more reach??? Hmmmm......you can zoom with your feet. You shouldn't be concerning about reach if you are not planning to shoot sports or wild life. The zoom on both lenses only helps you with your framing and composition. They would not bring the actions or subjects to you any closer in a way that it can enhance more details and resolutions. Down the road you may get a 70-200L.
 
I currently have the kit EFS 18-55, EFS 10-22, EFS 55-250 and an EF 50mm. My plans are to keep the XT around for the EFS lenses, or mostly the wide because the other two EFS lenses don't get much use.

The biggest reason I was shooting for the Mark II was because of it's superior shooting with high ISO's. From what I've read and please, correct me if I'm wrong, this is what will help me the greatest in what applications I'll be using it in. ( Storm chasing, usually it gets dark when tornadoes are around and weddings also for dark rooms). I can obviously throw a flash at any of the cameras to help out but it's always nice not having to.

I don't plan on shooting much action, although it's always nice but I see the light sensitivity as being more of a concern for me.The AF on the 7D sounds to be pretty nice compared to the Mark II which is a larger factor. Reading all of the input is great and is helping a lot.

Going from an old Rebel to a 5D-II is a very big (and expensive) jump. Many responses to your question on dedicated photo forums would ask what it is specifically about the XT that you find limits your photography and how you think the 5D will overcome these limits. Insensitive implications aside, I do agree that it's an appropriate question. Canon has done a marvelous job marketing the allure of their full frame sensors, but the fact remains that a heavy and complex digital SLR will not make you a better photographer unless you are intimately familiar with how photography works and how your camera operates, as well as what you truly need to advance your results in the specific types of photography you shoot. Otherwise you're just spending upwards of $2700 for a heavier SLR that will only work with a few of your lenses.

First and foremost, what lenses do you currently have? The 5D-II will not work with Canon EF-S lenses, which are designed specifically for crop sensor cameras like your XT. Due to mounting differences, you won't be able to attach EF-S lenses to a 5D-II. Trying to jam them in there can break the mirror and/or the lens. If you have 3rd party lenses, you must also check to see if they are designed for crop cameras. Each lens manufacturer has a different label for this, but if you list your lenses, I can tell whether they will work. Note you may be able to mount your crop-sensor 3rd party lenses on your 5D-II, but since the image circle in these lenses will be smaller than your sensor, any images shot with these lenses will show heavy vignetting.

One of the major benefits of full frame is the absence of a crop factor -- i.e. a 24-70 2.8 L lens on the 5D-II will show a field of view equivalent to when the lens is mounted on a conventional 35mm film camera for which it was designed. Considering that dSLR photography still very much revolves around the 35mm standard, and considering that Canon's best glass is designed for the 35mm frame (despite the majority of dSLR cameras having smaller sensors,) it is a very nice convenience to use a camera that fits this standard like a glove. No more ackward focal length and DOF conversions and such. However, there are also practical implications to the absence of a crop factor. In short, each lens you mount on your 5D-II will show a wider FOV than when mounted on your XT. If you prefer wide angle photography, full frame provides a definite advantage. If you prefer telephoto shots, full frame takes away in equal measure. Consider this -- a $400 70-300 IS provides a maximum (effective) focal length of over 400mm on your XT. If this was a focal length you liked and used often, you would need to spring for a 400 F/5.6 or the 100-400 zoom to get something approximately equivalent. Both lenses are large, bulky, and cost over $1K.

Another consideration--one that applies specifically to the 5D-II--is that it is not a very well rounded camera, especially for the price. The 5D-II pairs an excellent sensor in what is subjectively a very average body with a downright basic auto-focus system. What this means is that the 5D-II excels in certain types of photography which play to the camera's strengths, and yet is equally frustrating to use in types of photography that demand performance from the camera's weaker aspects. In short, the 5D-II makes a great studio or landscape camera, as these scenarios can maximize the strengths of the 5D-II sensor without relying on drive speed, autofocus, or body ruggedness. For sports, wildlife, PJ or street work, and event / assignment photography, the 7D is likely to be a better choice due to its superior AF, metering system, and on-body features.

For weddings, the 5D-II is a very popular option due to the sensor and video capabilities (weddings often require shots in low-light, and the 5D-II is still Canon's best high-ISO model.) Keep in mind, though, that most serious wedding photographers bring multiple bodies to a shoot. Having a back-up is crucial because a wedding typically only has one paid photographer and it's not like the bride-and-groom will do a repeat. The 5D-II is indeed much better built than a Rebel, but for serious paid wedding work, I would be very uncomfortable bringing just one.

These are just a few things to think about. Indeed, the 5D-II is hugely popular for a reason -- it's a marvelous camera. But when stepping up from an old entry level model to a $2700 full frame brick, there are serious things to think about. Answer the question posed in the first paragraph and list your lenses, and you'll begin to have a better sense of whether this upgrade is the right move.
 
I say the 24-105 with storm chasing. That way you can get both the wide and telephoto aspect without having to change lens. When I am using my 24-70, I usually miss the 70-105 range. I know most people say just change the lens, sometimes due to environment that is now always possible (beach with sand blowing, storm chasing with everything blowing, etc)

Well if you get the 24-70 "The Brick", you will not blow away :)
 
Ok. Based alone on the information you've given, I would say that no, getting a 5D-II would not be the best idea. Here's why:

First, while the 5D-II may be great for weddings, and while the video functionality may seem nice for storm chasing (I don't know if it's actually useful in that scenario or not,) I'd be very hesitant to use the 5D-II consistently in violent weather. For a $2700 camera, it has a fabulous sensor, but it's construction and weather sealing (IMHO) are lacking. I've worked with and around failing 5D-II's on several occasions (most recently, my friend and shooting partner's brand new 5D-II, after a soft fall, gave up on AF right in the middle of Fashion Week. If it wasn't for a back-up to a 1D-IV he was renting, he'd be screwed.) Not to say a Rebel is any better in build quality or sealing (it's not,) but I'd breathe easier knowing I was putting an $800 camera at risk and not a $2700 camera that wasn't built for rough conditions.

Second, the best investment you can make to improve your wedding and storm chasing image results is in fast glass--regardless of how good your sensor is. For serious wedding work, F/2.8 zooms and fast primes are bread-and-butter tools. Not only will fast 1.4 and 2.8 apertures allow you to shoot in darker conditions, you'll get superior subject isolation (very important for those bride glamor shots) and better bokeh rendering. There is a popular and age-old axiom that says the best investment you can make in improving your photography is to invest in glass, not cameras. This is still true today, even with high-ISO wonders like the 5D-II. Not only is fast glass the better option for improved wedding results, it'll help a great deal in storm chasing environments too. Fast glass will provide you with a brighter view finder and allow your camera to focus faster. On the higher end Canons, extra AF points become available when used with F 2.8 lenses. These points are particularly useful with servo mode AF, which I imagine would come in handy to track a tornado.

Third, you may find the AF lacking in the 5D-II for storm chasing, especially if you rely on servo mode. The only truly responsive focus point on the 5D-II is the center point. If you don't focus and recompose, you may find using the 5D-II in fast response situations to be a frustrating experience.

Fourth, out of the four lenses you have, only one can be used on the 5D-II. Considering you have over $1000 invested in lenses (including $700 at least with the 10-22,) this should be a significant factor in your decision to upgrade. Also keep in mind that you won't get any wider with a 5D-II than you can with your Rebel, unless you spring for a 14mm 2.8 L (another significant investment.) The 10mm on the wide side of your 10-22 translates to 16mm in full-frame land -- the widest equivalent full frame wide-angle zoom is the 16-35 F/2.8 L Mk II... Now if I was a serious storm chaser my self, I would be eying that lens very carefully. (But it's also $1600.)

*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***

So in any case, I think there are three better options than the 5D-II. Knowing your budget, you should be able to pair the options down.

Option 1 -- Get a 7D (and as much fast glass as you can afford afterward.) This is probably the most sensible choice, The 7D is, IMHO, a much more well rounded camera than the 5D-II. Compared to your Rebel, it will give you a significant boost in resolution (18MP vs 8MP) better high-ISO capabilities (although not as good as the 5D-II,) video that's just as good as the 5D-II, a very capable AF system that will work quite well in storms and weddings, and 8 FPS (with responsive operation.) The 7D is better suited to operation in adverse conditions than the 5D-II. It's buttons are larger to accommodate gloves, and it's build robustness and weather sealing is, I believe, a notch above. The 7D is also a much better all-round equipped camera than the 5D-II. It's the first Canon in many years to improve upon the metering system, it's the first Canon dSLR ever to control remote flash groups through its pop-up, and it's the first Canon to include useful extras such as built in levelers (of which Canon's competition has had for some time now.)

With the extra saved from not purchasing the 5D-II, you can purchase an EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS lens, which while not of L-class build quality, is probably the best lens you can get for bread-and-butter wedding shots and for storm chasing, given a crop sensor. An alternative is to purchase the full frame EF 16-35 2.8 L II zoom, which will also serve you well in weddings and in storm environments. Upgrading to a 7D allows you to keep using your wide angle 10-22, which is an excellent lens, and your telephoto, which isn't a slouch by any means. With a crop sensor, your 50 makes an excellent portrait lens -- important for weddings. For a similar perspective, you'd need to invest in the $300 85 1.8 or the $1800 85 1.2 L Mk II (a seriously expensive piece of glass, but a seriously beautiful one at that.)

Option 2 -- Invest in top-end glass. Better glass, not a better camera, is going to have the most pronounced effect on your photography. For weddings (and for the most flexible storm chasing shots,) consider one of Canon's "trinity" line-ups: the trinity zoom line-up -- the 16-35 F/2.8 L II, the 24-70 F/2.8 L, and the 70-200 F/2.8 L IS, or the trinity prime line-up -- the 35 F/1.4 L, the 85 F/1.2 L, and the 135 F/2 L. In my opinion, Canon's prime IQ are better than their zoom IQ, but the zooms will give you the most flexibility for wedding and storm chasing work. The downside to the 2.8 zooms, compared to the F/4 L line or consumer glass, is size, weight, and cost. However, for low light wedding work, and for storm chasing, the faster aperture gives you a definite advantage.

Option 3 -- The most nonsense option, but if money is no object and you absolutely must have full frame, consider switching to Nikon. You will have to replace your lens investment regardless if you stick with Canon or move to Nikon, and the Nikon D700 and D3/D3s are still the undisputed high-ISO champs. Compared to the 5D-II, the D700 gives up the extra resolution and video for better-than-7D auto-focus, metering, flash, and build quality / sealing. In the end, like the 7D, the Nikon D700 is a very well rounded camera. It's also, unlike anything in Canon's lineup, the closest thing you can get to a 1D level camera in build, IQ, and features without the size and weight and cost of a 1D level body with built-in vertical grip. (In Nikon parlance, the D700 is truly a grip-less D3 -- sharing the same exact sensor, meter, and AF system, giving up only a second card slot, drive speed, and a bit of view finder coverage.) Of course, let's not forget the glass. Nikon's lens line-up is currently more limited than Canon's (they're finally just starting out on their F/4 pro-build zoom line after many years of not having one, and they're only now updating their fast primes to modern ultra-sonic motor designs.) Nikon lenses are typically also more expensive than their Canon counterparts (but it does seem that Canon prices are rising now as well.) However, Nikon offers some real gems as far as lenses go. If you like wide-angle, their 14-24 F/2.8 is a modern legend, and their 24-70 f 2.8--a wedding staple--is considered one of the best standard zooms made. Their new 70-200 F.28 VR is much improved over their old model and is sharper than Canon's offering, but you'll pay over $2K for one. I say switching to Nikon is a nonsense option because to get the best out of a Nikon setup you'll want their fast, heavy lenses, and those aren't cheap (Canon's equivalents are cheaper and still excellent in the IQ department.) Yet if money is no object, and if you're really lusting after full frame, take a look.

Option one is probably your best bet, and is the one I would personally go with (not knowing more about your shooting conditions or abilities.) Fast glass matters most, but the Rebel XT is very long in the tooth, and if you are serious about doing weddings and storm work, a beefier body will go along way. With the extra money saved by not getting a 5D-II, you can pick up a 2.8 zoom which will significantly expand what you can do in both wedding and storm chasing environments.
 
Last edited:
I'd say go with a Canon 7D. It is a prosumer camera and honestly, getting a full frame MkII will be a waste of your current lenses. The 7D also has great ISO performance and a very high fps if you need it.
 
Ok. Based alone on the information you've given, I would say that no, getting a 5D-II would not be the best idea. Here's why:

First, while the 5D-II may be great for weddings, and while the video functionality may seem nice for storm chasing (I don't know if it's actually useful in that scenario or not,) I'd be very hesitant to use the 5D-II consistently in violent weather. For a $2700 camera, it has a fabulous sensor, but it's construction and weather sealing (IMHO) are lacking. I've worked with and around failing 5D-II's on several occasions (most recently, my friend and .

Great write up....there one problem sticking to 1.6x crop body for storm chasing shots....no EF-S lenses are ever weather sealed. The 7D is weather sealed better than the 5dmarkII but his EFS lenses are not weather sealed. He has to get some weather sealed L lens for his 7D. For a wide angle lens, it is either 17-40L or 16-35L.

If weather sealing is an important feature for the OP (he could put a rain sleeves on the 5dmarkII), the OP should consider a refurb or used 1dmarkIII. About $2000. Is cheaper now since mark4 is already out.
 
If it were me, I'd sell the 10-22 and 18-55, then pick up the following:
- 7D Body + Battery Grip
- Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8
- Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS
- Canon Speedlite 430EX II

That would be an epic low-light, wide zoom kit. If you find that you use a specific focal length a lot and want even more light gathering ability, then there's always fast primes like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4

Down the road if you decide you need a better telephoto I'd pick up a 70-200 of some sort. In the meantime the 55-250 IS is very capable.
 
Thanks for putting me back to square 1 where I was awhile back :p

That post really got me thinking harder like I should have been about this whole thing. I think option 1 would be my best option. I have been saving for awhile and if I go with the 7D with the 17-55 2.8 lens, I will still have money for a flash, grip, filters etc.

There is no way I'd want to give up my 10-22 because it is amazing. The 50mm is also very nice, especially since I got it for $49 :D Sticking with the 7D and the EFS series will help a lot.

Now say I was looking at the 7D kit that comes with the 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens, would that be a complete waste on top of the 17-55?

Thanks for the responses everyone, you all have been a tremendous help.


Ok. Based alone on the information you've given, I would say that no, getting a 5D-II would not be the best idea. Here's why:....
 
Thanks for putting me back to square 1 where I was awhile back :p

That post really got me thinking harder like I should have been about this whole thing. I think option 1 would be my best option. I have been saving for awhile and if I go with the 7D with the 17-55 2.8 lens, I will still have money for a flash, grip, filters etc.

There is no way I'd want to give up my 10-22 because it is amazing. The 50mm is also very nice, especially since I got it for $49 :D Sticking with the 7D and the EFS series will help a lot.

Now say I was looking at the 7D kit that comes with the 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens, would that be a complete waste on top of the 17-55?

Thanks for the responses everyone, you all have been a tremendous help.

The 28-135 is an average lens. The IS is very outdated. The image quality is OK at best. It was my first kit lens though...:)
 
Thanks for putting me back to square 1 where I was awhile back :p

That post really got me thinking harder like I should have been about this whole thing. I think option 1 would be my best option. I have been saving for awhile and if I go with the 7D with the 17-55 2.8 lens, I will still have money for a flash, grip, filters etc.

There is no way I'd want to give up my 10-22 because it is amazing. The 50mm is also very nice, especially since I got it for $49 :D Sticking with the 7D and the EFS series will help a lot.

Now say I was looking at the 7D kit that comes with the 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens, would that be a complete waste on top of the 17-55?

Thanks for the responses everyone, you all have been a tremendous help.

The 28-135 will duplicate a range you already have covered by your existing lens, and as mentioned above, it's an older consumer lens with average IQ. I would avoid the kit and save for the 17-55.
 
Thought so, just wanted to make sure it wasn't an excellent lens of any sort.

I'm looking at flashes now, currently looking at the 430EX II, it seems like it gives better movement options than the 220 and I haven't seen enough on the 580 to make me want to spend the extra there. Does anyone have any extra advise on flashes for me? :cool:
 
Thought so, just wanted to make sure it wasn't an excellent lens of any sort.

I'm looking at flashes now, currently looking at the 430EX II, it seems like it gives better movement options than the 220 and I haven't seen enough on the 580 to make me want to spend the extra there. Does anyone have any extra advise on flashes for me? :cool:


The 430 is great. I use it for bird photography and indoor portraits. When not using at full power, I can fire off 4 shots (flash) continuously. The 580 has a faster recycle time, weather sealed, and greater flash power and range. Better ergonomic (has a dial for selecting your power output versus the 430 which as recess buttons).
 
The other main advantage of the 580 is that it can act as a master for other flashes, letting you control multiple strobes from one device. The 7D does this already though, so that expensive feature is redundant.
 
I think I'm going to go with the 7D, EF-S 17-55 2.8 & 430 for the flash. I've gone over everything and it seems that the 7D will have almost all of what I want/need along with some nice glass (plus what I already have).

The camera seems to be the same pretty much everywhere, I've mainly been looking at BHPhoto for everything, does anyone have a suggestion against that or a better location?
 
If you can find a better deal local I'd suggest it... if not BHPhoto or adorama, both are reputable company's. I have no experience with them, but I've read many good things about both. You should have no issues, but don't take my word for it. :) Make sure if you do buy online that its not gray market.

Last week I picked up a D7 kit with Canon Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS and then later picked up a Canon EF-S 10-22/3.5-4.5 USM lens as well. So far I'm EXTREMELY happy that I choose the 7D. I also wanted the 5D Mark2, but I didn't want to spend the money on body +lens. A FF is awesome, but if you don't need it then why spend the cash. :)
 
If you can find a better deal local I'd suggest it... if not BHPhoto or adorama, both are reputable company's. I have no experience with them, but I've read many good things about both. You should have no issues, but don't take my word for it. :) Make sure if you do buy online that its not gray market.

Last week I picked up a D7 kit with Canon Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS and then later picked up a Canon EF-S 10-22/3.5-4.5 USM lens as well. So far I'm EXTREMELY happy that I choose the 7D. I also wanted the 5D Mark2, but I didn't want to spend the money on body +lens. A FF is awesome, but if you don't need it then why spend the cash. :)

I bought my Camera, flash, grip, extra batteries, UV lens (mainly for glass protection) and a hood from BHPhoto and the lens from Adorama since BHPhoto was out. My experiance with Adorama was horrible and I have canceled my order and now I'm waiting for a refund so I can purchase my lens elsewhere.
 
Reading this thread really has kind of made me think as well in getting the Rebel T2i. Maybe I should look at the 7D instead.hmmmmmm
 
I think I'm going to go with the 7D, EF-S 17-55 2.8 & 430 for the flash.

I think you're going to be spectacularly happy with that combination. I have an extensive collection of lenses, mostly L-series glass, and the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens still spends more time on the front of my 7D than any other lens (though the 50mm f/1.2 L is getting up there now).

Unless I need weather sealing my 17-40mm only gets used on my non-crop bodies. The 17-55, even wide open, easily out-performs the 17-40mm L. Even when shot at f/2.8 the 17-55 is amazing. Canon really need to weather seal some of their EF-S lenses, there are now several that are EASILY worthy of the "L" designation from an image quality perspective.

Very smart choice on the 430EX II too! Until the 7D it was the best place to start for a first flash anyway, unless you needed the extra capabilities of the 580 EX II. If you didn't need the extra fluidity of the interface on the 580 or the extra power, it was always a better SECOND flash purchase, since it's slave-control features are wasted if it is the only flash you have!

Incidentally, I went through a similar evaluation prior to purchasing my 7D. The 5D-Mk2 has slightly better image quality, and a stop(ish) of better high-iso performance, but the 7D is just a vastly better handling camera. It's absolutely the closest thing to a 1-series that Canon offers (already have one, so that is based on experience).

Congratulations on your new setup! :)
 
I can't give all the information that the other posters posted so I'll just say this.

Instead of buying the 5Dii buy me the D700 and I'll trade you with my D50?
 
I skimmed the thread, but can say I am jealous, the 5D II is an awesome camera. Would love to own one some day. But congrats on the 7D, another very nice setup.

I shoot with a 30D and 24-105 and can say that the 24-105 is a awesome lens. And yes, I like the 24-105 on a crop body...works great for what I shoot and pairs extremely well with the 10-22. I find the 17-55 limiting in range even though it is a very good lens too.
 
I bought my Camera, flash, grip, extra batteries, UV lens (mainly for glass protection) and a hood from BHPhoto and the lens from Adorama since BHPhoto was out. My experiance with Adorama was horrible and I have canceled my order and now I'm waiting for a refund so I can purchase my lens elsewhere.

What was wrong with your Adorama experience? I have spent thousands at BHPhoto and Adorama and found them both to be very good (though BH is king).
 
When I purchased the lens from Adorama, I got a call the next day telling me that my card was invalid and that they had called the bank to tell me it did not exist. HOWEVER a pre-auth had already happened on my paypal account for that transaction. Although I'm not racist, the gentleman on the other end of the phone made me very weary about the entire transaction so it was canceled.


Thanks to everyone for their help and getting me my new rig setup. Hopefully I will come back with some good pictures from vacation. :)
 
The pop-up flash is already having issues on my new camera. It is having issues releasing to allow it to pop-up a majority of the time. :rolleyes: I rarely or almost never use it but I don't want it being broke, it's a month old.
 
The pop-up flash is already having issues on my new camera. It is having issues releasing to allow it to pop-up a majority of the time. :rolleyes: I rarely or almost never use it but I don't want it being broke, it's a month old.

I had that issue with my T1i, if you go to the flash control menu, does it say that an external flash is attached even when there isn't?

If so, the fix is simple, there's a little pressure sensitive switch under the left-side "rail" of the hotshoe mount. You can jiggle it with a small screwdriver or pocket knife and it should work again. It may have dust or some other sort of grime in it.

This happened to me twice, then I sent it back to Canon and they replaced the top of the camera and hotshoe mount for free - haven't had an issue since.

I think the culprit in my case was my wireless flash trigger, it has the old screw-type hotshoe lock, rather than the newer quick-release style; I may have tightened it too much and damaged the small switch. :eek:
 
the 5dmark 2 is an amazing camera, and the 7d is amazing too, but youd be crazy to go the 7D unless you needed the faster fps, or the higher AF points/time, which if everyone is honest with themself, most people dont, inface, i cant remember the last time i used AF :S, if its sports you want, get the 7d, if its IQ and a wider angle get the 5Dmark2, oh and they just updated 5dmk2's firmware, so now it can do all the cool video fps etc. I shoot with the 580ex2 and its an awesome flash, but i came from a cheap crap one.
 
the 5dmark 2 is an amazing camera, and the 7d is amazing too, but youd be crazy to go the 7D unless you needed the faster fps, or the higher AF points/time, which if everyone is honest with themself, most people dont, inface, i cant remember the last time i used AF :S, if its sports you want, get the 7d, if its IQ and a wider angle get the 5Dmark2, oh and they just updated 5dmk2's firmware, so now it can do all the cool video fps etc. I shoot with the 580ex2 and its an awesome flash, but i came from a cheap crap one.

Or if budget is an issue... the 7D is a lot cheaper than the 5D MKII.
 
the 5dmark 2 is an amazing camera, and the 7d is amazing too, but youd be crazy to go the 7D unless you needed the faster fps, or the higher AF points/time, which if everyone is honest with themself, most people dont, inface, i cant remember the last time i used AF :S, if its sports you want, get the 7d, if its IQ and a wider angle get the 5Dmark2, oh and they just updated 5dmk2's firmware, so now it can do all the cool video fps etc. I shoot with the 580ex2 and its an awesome flash, but i came from a cheap crap one.

Ok, so much to refute here. Anyone who is serious enough about photography to consider spending a lot of cash on a 7D or even more on a 5D-II should know that different types of photography take advantage of camera features in different ways and to different degrees.

You may value a full frame sensor over superior drive speed, AF, and metering, but there are many serious photographic applications where the 7D could justifiably be the better choice -- sports being just one of them. A crop sensor is beneficial for wildlife and birding, and the 18MP crop of the 7D sensor will pull in significantly more detail at the center at base ISO than a 5D-II. I'd choose a 7D over a 5D-II for children, pet, or macro photography any day as well -- a working servo is a must for energetic children and pets on the go, and the smaller sensor lends itself to greater DoF at larger aperture -- something which can be very handy for macro photography. Flash photography is another area where the 7D has an advantage -- having a pop-up flash that can control other flashes wirelessly -- something Nikon's higher end cameras have had for years -- can be a real boon in flexibility and creativity.

Both the 5D-II and 7D are very capable cameras, but to say one is better than the other shows, IMHO, a degree of ignorance about how these tools are most aptly used. At the high end, Canon is well known for segmenting their lineup based on purpose-of-use. At the xD level, there really is no all round better or best -- basically, you have to choose a camera that emphasizes action applications (i.e. sports or wildlife / 7D, 1D-IV) over still applications (i.e. studio or landscape / 5D-II, 1Ds-III.)
 
Back
Top