# L lens vs Full Frame



## skozachuk (Apr 29, 2012)

Hello everyone,

Right now I have 50d + kit 18-55 (useless thing) + 50 1.4. 
I've got two ways now:

1. Sell 50d + kit and buy 5d mark ii 
2. Or to buy 35L or 24L or 50L (they almost the same budget) for my 50d

I'm confused, what is better way to go, good lens and crop or not so good lens and full frame?

Thank you,
Serhiy


----------



## Aaron78 (Apr 29, 2012)

You didn't post what lens you will be using on the 5DII. Will you keep the 50 1.4 and have that as your only lens?


----------



## skozachuk (Apr 29, 2012)

Aaron78 said:


> You didn't post what lens you will be using on the 5DII. Will you keep the 50 1.4 and have that as your only lens?


Yes, 50 1.4 will be the only one,
+ I will have money enough for someting like 35 f/2


----------



## Aaron78 (Apr 29, 2012)

I own a 7D, and just sold a 5DII. The 5DII blew the 7D away in IQ in my opinion. Going to a full frame body will make your 50 a bit wider than on your cropped body. It is tough to say, because both are a big step up in IQ (an L lens or a 5DII). Most will tell you to go with lenses, as they are a long term investment, but i think once you try a full frame body (the 5DII is an awesome camera and is priced right now that the 5DIII is out) you will love it. I'm going to go against the lens idea and recommend the 5DII to you. Get a good lens when you build up cash again and you will be amazed all over again, as an L lens on that body gives amazing IQ.


----------



## skozachuk (Apr 29, 2012)

Aaron78 said:


> I own a 7D, and just sold a 5DII. The 5DII blew the 7D away in IQ in my opinion. Going to a full frame body will make your 50 a bit wider than on your cropped body. It is tough to say, because both are a big step up in IQ (an L lens or a 5DII). Most will tell you to go with lenses, as they are a long term investment, but i think once you try a full frame body (the 5DII is an awesome camera and is priced right now that the 5DIII is out) you will love it. I'm going to go against the lens idea and recommend the 5DII to you. Get a good lens when you build up cash again and you will be amazed all over again, as an L lens on that body gives amazing IQ.


Thank you for your advise, I'll keep it in mind!


----------



## elflord (Apr 29, 2012)

skozachuk said:


> Hello everyone,
> 
> Right now I have 50d + kit 18-55 (useless thing) + 50 1.4.
> I've got two ways now:
> ...



The conventional wisdom is "glass first", but that's because of the tendency among beginners to the latest high end body (e.g. the 7D) and then cripple it with a mediocre kit zoom because they blew their budget on the body. The difference in image quality between high end / low end APS-C cameras (e.g. the 7D and the Rebel) or a new and old APS-C (e.g. 7D versus 40D) is tiny. Add to that the fact that bodies depreciate while glass generally doesn't.

Upgrading to full frame is a slightly different matter. Going full frame will have a big impact on image quality (both noise at high ISO and depth of field). Getting an older full frame model from a line that is on a longer product cycle means it doesn't lose its value quite as fast. 

Also, given the lenses you picked out -- you can get an f/1.4 aperture and (APS-C equivalent) 31mm fov on full frame with your 50mm f/1.4.

Either way is fine, it really depends on your preference. If you go full frame, you will have less of a variety of lenses. But I'd say given that you're leaning towards fast wide angle lenses, it makes sense to go full frame. If you were looking to get a telephoto lens I'd be more inclined to suggest glass first. I have taken the 5DII on a trip with just the 50mm f/1.4 and it is a very versatile combo if you like shooting with it.


----------



## Random Orbits (Apr 29, 2012)

If those are your only two options, I suggest the 24L or 35L. The 50L is an incremental upgrade of your 50 f/1.4 for a lot of money, but the 24L or 35L would give you a new perspective. There are already rumors of a new FF entry level camera, so the 5DII might become obsolete soon. Lenses typically hold much more of their value over the long term.

If you were able to stretch the budget slightly to get the 5DII with the 24-105mm kit, then I would suggest getting that combination. You could then use the 24-105 as your general purpose lens and use the 50 f/1.4 for portraits and low light situations. Or you could get the 5DII with the 85mm f/1.8, which would keep your current effective focal length and give you something wider (with your current 50 f/1.4).


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 29, 2012)

Get glas first. Bodies second and you might be able to get a used 35L and a 5Dc for the price of the MKII FYI. Just another option


----------



## EOBeav (Apr 29, 2012)

Yeah, normally, I'd say upgrade your glass first, then worry about your camera body. However, a 50mm on a 5DmkII is a beautiful thing. You'll never go back to a cropped sensor. Honestly, though, this is a tough decision. 

One more thought: Going from a 50mm f/1.4 to a 50mm f/1.2 is a marginal upgrade, at best, in terms of IQ.


----------



## tron (Apr 29, 2012)

Get rid of the 50D+kit lens and get the 5DII. You will not regret it. You will enjoy a much better IQ. Plus, you seem to be interested in Wide Angle lenses. So you can also get the 35mm f/2 or save for a 35mm f/1.4L.


----------



## 7enderbender (Apr 29, 2012)

As always: it all depends. My first DSLR was (and is) the 5DII. And here is why: for my taste crop cameras are a waste but they were all I would have been able to afford for years. That's why I stuck to film and my FD system instead of jumping on the next best DSRL kit deal at Costco.
I understand the sentiment that lenses are the most important thing to invest in. But full frame to me is the bare minimum starting point. The 5DII with the 50 1.4 is a killer combo. But then again: it all depends on your preferences. But I'd even recommend it as a learning opportunity. I can think of worse things than being "stuck" with a very good full frame DSLR and a very decent 50 mm lens. I personally would chose that any day over any crop sensor combo you can dream up. Not that I'm already "that good" but I still appreciate the fact that when I first started out 25 years ago all I had available was my dad's A1, a 50 1.4 (same lens design as today's EF version) and the FD 135 2.5. It took over a decade into the digital revolution before that very same combo was available again at a more or less reasonable price point and, give or take, the same kind of image quality.


----------



## keithinmelbourne (Apr 30, 2012)

It depends what type of photography you are going to do. Cropped sensors are not bad to work with, and nor is the 50D. I'm not sure that your zoom will work on a 5D. Personally, I would choose a good lens or maybe 2. You might think about the 100 f2.8 macro and the Sigma 30 f1.4. Both are very good and seem to suit what you take now. The Canon 85 f1.8 is also a bargain and worth considering.


----------



## epsiloneri (Apr 30, 2012)

For the wide to normal range you seem interested in, non-L glass on FF gives you more artistic freedom than L-glass on APS-C. E.g., your 50/1.4 on FF would be like a 31/0.9 on APS-C, and conversely, the 50/1.4 on APS-C would be like a 80/2.2 on FF. I'd suggest going FF + consider the superb 85/1.8 or 100/2.8 non-L macro, and a wider non-L prime of your choice. I would hesitate to only get the 24-105/4L kit for the FF since the EF-S 17-55/2.8 would serve you almost as well on the 50D.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 30, 2012)

The "L" lenses are overkill for a 50D, but a FF body with just a 50mm f/1.4 is going to be disappointing. Save up until you can buy a camera with lenses.


----------



## Neeneko (Apr 30, 2012)

I will buck the trend a little here and suggest upgrading the body.

The 50D is an excellent if a little dated body. The 50mm 1.4 however, assuming it meets your needs, is a very good lens that will serve you well for many bodies to come.

You will probably get more out of a 5D2+50mm 1.4 then a 50D+Lsomething. While people tend to fetishize the L glass, it generally represents a fairly incremental upgrade, and the lower fstop of the 1.2 L lenses might not even impact your camera (there are debates regarding if the sensors actually get any additional light from faster lenses or if the geometery doesn't work)... but moving to a full frame will get a lot more out of your existing glass.


----------



## epsiloneri (Apr 30, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The "L" lenses are overkill for a 50D, but a FF body with just a 50mm f/1.4 is going to be disappointing.


Depends on expectations of course, but I think 50/1.4 on FF coming from APS-C will be anything but disappointing.

Perhaps you mean that a single prime will be a bit limiting? I agree, a wide and a short tele would be the perfect addition. That said, some photographers swear by the 50...


----------



## EOBeav (Apr 30, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The "L" lenses are overkill for a 50D, but a FF body with just a 50mm f/1.4 is going to be disappointing. Save up until you can buy a camera with lenses.



Disagree on both accounts. An L lens is just going to make any of the Canon bodies that much better, clear on down to the Rebels. And if I could only have one lens for my 5DmkII, it'd have to be my 50mm f/1.4. The benefits of that lens are well documented on here.


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 30, 2012)

epsiloneri said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > The "L" lenses are overkill for a 50D, but a FF body with just a 50mm f/1.4 is going to be disappointing.
> ...



My 2cents....50mm f1.4 + FF are great match. So buy 5d II NOW and save your money for new 24-70 II. Keep in mind, the AF on 5D II is NOT that great. It's great camera for landscape and still shooting. NOT FOR FAST SHOOTING.


----------



## Penn Jennings (Apr 30, 2012)

In general, i do agree that good glass should have a slightly higher priority than bodies. However, in this case I don't think that guideline applies since you are going from crop to full frame. This is not just a case of "better" images, it's also a case of "different" images.

I would suggest going with the 5DII unless you shoot a lot of action. The focusing on the 5DII could be better. however, I think that you will enjoy shooting with it much more than your old body with a new lens. I also think that you results will probably be better with a 5D II compared to a new lens.


----------



## adebrophy (Apr 30, 2012)

This is a fun - if somewhat extreme example of this question:
http://www.digitalrev.com/article/pro-dslr-cheapo-lens-vs/Njk0Mw_A_A

I'd say ultimately, as you already have a great prime lens start there, go 5D, and build up your glass later over time. I just went from a 40D to the 5Dmkii and the files and quality of the fullframe body plus the ability to get lovely limited DOF is something that better glass won't get you as easily - it just adds a new dimension to your photography and makes your fast primes shine. Crops are excellent for reach, but you don't seem to worry about the longer end of things so the value of that seems limited for you.


----------



## ecka (Apr 30, 2012)

skozachuk said:


> Hello everyone,
> 
> Right now I have 50d + kit 18-55 (useless thing) + 50 1.4.
> I've got two ways now:
> ...



Using L primes on crop bodies is a waste, crop sensor uses less than half of that precious glass and that's where the quality comes from (size matters). Those are made for FF ;D. My advice - go for 5D2. I'd choose 5D2+50/1.8II over 50D+35L or 5D2+85/1.8USM over 50D+50L (or 5D2+135L over 50D+85LII) any day.



> + I will have money enough for someting like 35 f/2



50/1.4USM is a very nice lens on FF, but I don't recommend the 35/2. IMHO it's pretty bad on FF at f/2-2.8 (too soft + vignetting) and at 2.8+ it's barely better than a zoom lens. I'm going to try the Samyang 35/1.4UMC, that is a beautiful piece of glass (fully manual though).
...and EF 28-135 IS USM is a decent budget zoom for FF, if you need one.


----------



## Ew (Apr 30, 2012)

28/1.8 is often overlooked - had it for years with crops.. Still love it with 5d2.


----------



## TotoEC (Apr 30, 2012)

Here's something for you to ponder:

1. Crappy camera body (FF or crop sensor) + crappy lens = crappy picture
2. Crappy camera body + L lens = beautiful picture
3. Best camera body + L lens = stunning picture


----------



## sjp010 (Apr 30, 2012)

TotoEC said:


> Here's something for you to ponder:
> 
> 1. Crappy camera body (FF or crop sensor) + crappy lens = crappy picture
> 2. Crappy camera body + L lens = beautiful picture
> 3. Best camera body + L lens = stunning picture



4. Best camera body + crappy lens = .......?


----------



## ecka (Apr 30, 2012)

sjp010 said:


> TotoEC said:
> 
> 
> > Here's something for you to ponder:
> ...



4. Best camera body + crappy lens = best camera body on a craigslist ;D
5. Good FF camera + decent non-L lens + great photographer = stunning picture


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 30, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The "L" lenses are overkill for a 50D, but a FF body with just a 50mm f/1.4 is going to be disappointing. Save up until you can buy a camera with lenses.



I disagree. It's a great combo. Henry cartier bresson, Ralph Gibson, and even ansel Adams used 50mms quite a bit on their leicas. 

The 50mm is at its prime on a full frame camera.


----------



## expatinasia (Apr 30, 2012)

I have read through most of the replies and it seems like everyone is telling you to get a new body. I however suggest the opposite.

I would recommend you to get the L lens of your choice, and then save to get a new FF body. The 5D Mark III has only just come out, the 1D X will be out soon(ish) and the price of existing cameras such as the 5D Mark II and 7d I can only see dropping further.

Plus as more people get their hands on brand new gear there will be a lot more available on the second hand market, bringing prices down even further.

The lens on the other hand won't move too much in terms of price, unless you are lucky enough to catch one of the sales like was just announced for B&H.


----------



## 7enderbender (Apr 30, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> , but a FF body with just a 50mm f/1.4 is going to be disappointing. [...]



And why is that? As I've said before I'm biased towards that combo for a number of reasons and it may not be everyone's cup of tea. But disappointing?


----------



## dnnphotography (Apr 30, 2012)

My gf and 2nd shooter was just faced this same problem recently. She had the 24-105f4L, the 10-22, and the 50 1.4 on a T2i, she also uses my 24-70f2.8L and 70-200f2.8ISL from time to time on the body, but recently she used my 5D2 with just her 50f1.4 and was ready to trade in her T2i and lenses to upgrade to the 5d2 and JUST the 50. The image difference is night and day. I would not upgrade to junk lens but the 50 1.4 is a beauty of a budget lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 30, 2012)

Neeneko said:


> You will probably get more out of a 5D2+50mm 1.4 then a 50D+Lsomething. While people tend to fetishize the L glass, it generally represents a fairly incremental upgrade, and the lower fstop of the 1.2 L lenses might not even impact your camera (there are debates regarding if the sensors actually get any additional light from faster lenses or if the geometery doesn't work)... but moving to a full frame will get a lot more out of your existing glass.



I don't know that many people would advocate buying the f/1.2L over the f/1.4 just for the half-stop of light (and as you state, some tests have shown that that half-stop isn't effective with dSLR sensors, and the camera just surreptitiously increases the ISO to compensate). But, I wouldn't call it an incremental upgrade, either - in the case of the 50L, it's just that the 'upgrade' you're getting isn't something that is readily measured in a test and plotted on a graph, you're paying for the smooth, creamy bokeh that the 50/1.4 just cannot deliver.


----------



## IIIHobbs (Apr 30, 2012)

I agree, buy the best lens first (lenses stay, bodies change). If your 50D is working fine, stick with that, and add the 50L, it will be a very nice addition to your 50D. It provides a 80mm focal length on a crop body and the images are wonderful. I used a 50L for my 40D for shooting Basketball in place of my 70-200 f2.8 for low lighting situations and it performed very well.


----------



## EOBeav (Apr 30, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> But, I wouldn't call it an incremental upgrade, either - in the case of the 50L, it's just that the 'upgrade' you're getting isn't something that is readily measured in a test and plotted on a graph, you're paying for the smooth, creamy bokeh that the 50/1.4 just cannot deliver.



I suppose if you make your living shooting wide open, and you need that creamy bokeh, then it probably makes sense to go with the 50mm f/1.2 at 3x the price of the 50mm f/1.4. But for the rest of us, that extra money could be better used elsewhere. By all accounts, the 50mm f/1.4 is actually the sharper lens after about f/2.8. If that's where you shoot, and don't go for the wide open apertures, well it's your money.


----------



## ecka (Apr 30, 2012)

EOBeav said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > But, I wouldn't call it an incremental upgrade, either - in the case of the 50L, it's just that the 'upgrade' you're getting isn't something that is readily measured in a test and plotted on a graph, you're paying for the smooth, creamy bokeh that the 50/1.4 just cannot deliver.
> ...



And if you don't make your living shooting wide open, but you still need/want that creamy bokeh, then it makes more sense to go with the Sigma 50/1.4. I tried comparing some images from the 7D+Sigma50/1.4 (that I used to have) and 5D2+85/1.8 and I can't decide which combo produces cremier background blur ... probably Sigma, but 85/1.8 is sharper .


----------



## bycostello (Apr 30, 2012)

glass every time....


----------



## EOBeav (Apr 30, 2012)

ecka said:


> And if you don't make your living shooting wide open, but you still need/want that creamy bokeh, then it makes more sense to go with the Sigma 50/1.4. I tried comparing some images from the 7D+Sigma50/1.4 (that I used to have) and 5D2+85/1.8 and I can't decide which combo produces cremier background blur ... probably Sigma, but 85/1.8 is sharper .



I guess I'd need to see the difference between the Sigma 50/1.4 and the Canon 40/1.4 to make that call. I seem to spend a lot of time defending the 50/1.4. It's a great lens!


----------



## skozachuk (May 1, 2012)

Thank you everyone for your help, seems like both ways are ok, so I'll try to make decision that fits best for me 

Thanks again! You're great!


----------



## TexPhoto (May 1, 2012)

I'd say 5DII, and then try to pick up a 24-105 when you can.


----------



## Neeneko (May 2, 2012)

EOBeav said:


> I guess I'd need to see the difference between the Sigma 50/1.4 and the Canon 40/1.4 to make that call. I seem to spend a lot of time defending the 50/1.4. It's a great lens!



Yeah, but it is inexpensive and is missing that red ring, so it gets bashed a lot, thus it is worth defending. For every photographer that is actually using the improved capabilities of the f1.2, there are probably at least a dozen who buy it more for social or image reasons.


----------



## EOBeav (May 2, 2012)

Neeneko said:


> Yeah, but it is inexpensive and is missing that red ring, so it gets bashed a lot, thus it is worth defending. For every photographer that is actually using the improved capabilities of the f1.2, there are probably at least a dozen who buy it more for social or image reasons.



+1

Or, who like to talk about how great their gear is, instead of just getting out and shooting.


----------



## dericcainphoto (May 2, 2012)

Go FF! I went from a 50D to a 7D and now the 5D Mark III and I will never go back crop. The image quality is a huge difference and I love my 50mm 1.4 on the 5D. It is very sharp! Go FF, you won't regret it!


----------



## cezargalang (May 2, 2012)

Hi there! Just to share my thoughts: 

I had a 500D a few years back(About 2009?), Went through a 7D(My sister's) and just bought a 5d2. On the time i was with a crop, i only had Non L Lenses to work with, 18-55,55-250, and a 50, then upgraded to a 70-200L II, then had the 7D. I was deciding on this also because i think that the 7D really suited the part of me that wanted to get fast action. But my heart still was on landscaping. 

So i bought a 5d2 + a 17-40L( So now i have a 5D2, 17-40L, 50 1.8, and a 70-200L II, and a 7D that i can burrow anytime.) As a Amateur switching from crop to FF, I was shocked out of the very first snap i took out of the 5d2 with a 50mm 1.8, and i was at a loss for words. After that I've only been shooting with my 50 and 17-40 for landscapes. My 70-200 was ignored for a while. I love the 50 on the 5D. I've learned to love the nifty fifty more now than when i had a crop body. I haven't tried a 50 1.4 (But im very excited to, alot of people are defending it), but the 50 1.8 is just splendid.

Just experience from an amateur  hope i helped. Good luck on your purchase!


----------

