# Deciding on an upgrade



## mbhart19 (Jan 31, 2012)

Hello everyone, I currently have a Rebel XS that I've had since Nov 09. I have the kit lens (18-55) that came with it as well as the 50mm 1.8. The thing I dislike most about it is it's inability to AF in low light. I mainly shoot pics of my 3 & 4 year olds as well as random stuff for friends and family when they need it. I am considering upgrading to the 7d or the 5d m2 but I don't really know if the 5d is going to be more camera than I really need. I do shoot in manual mode and feel that I've outgrown the capabilities of my XS and crave a camera with better ISO features. Sorry if I sound ignorant but what are the most obvious things I will notice going from a crop sensor to full frame, should I choose to go with the 5d? Thanks! Mandy


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 31, 2012)

The best low light AF is on the 5DII.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 31, 2012)

You'll notice better ISO performance and better IQ. You'll also notice shallower depth of field with FF - for example, for the same framing, f/5.6 on FF is equivalent to f/9 on APS-C.


----------



## dstppy (Jan 31, 2012)

If you can get them to sit still, the 5DmkII is the way to go - like for portraits.

If you're talking about fun action shots with kids, I think the 7D would service you better if you're chasing those caffeinated squirrels around


----------



## gene_can_sing (Jan 31, 2012)

Yes, there is a major difference between Full frame (5D2) and cropped cameras like the T2i.

There is a 1.6x difference in the field of view. So that means your 50mm on the 5D will like like an 80mm on your Rebel. It's a huge difference.

The Full frames have better low light because the sensor is larger, although lenses tend to be sharper on Crop cameras because they use the "sweet spot" of the lens because of the crop.

I would just WAIT. The new Canon's are coming out soon and if you buy now, you are buying Digic 4 tech which dates back all the way to 2007! That was before Obama was the President, before the iPad was invented and the when the first iPhone came on the market. So yes, the current tech is very dated, especially if you want to do any video.

Personally, I would get a full frame, but I work in TV so I use it for work and it's a write off. If you're just taking pics of the kids, not sure if you want to spend that much more. With that said, you will get really nice pics of the kids with a new 5D III


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 31, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> I would just WAIT...you will get really nice pics of the kids with a new 5D III



Oddly enough, the pics I've taken so far with my new 1D X aren't very good. I'd venture to say they're no better than pictures taken by a thick stack of hundred-dollar bills. In my experience, unannounced/unavailable cameras don't take 'really nice pics'!


----------



## dstppy (Jan 31, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> gene_can_sing said:
> 
> 
> > I would just WAIT...you will get really nice pics of the kids with a new 5D III
> ...



We also don't know what they're going to do with the price point. I pulled the trigger on the mkII when it was at $2k and it was worth the price. They may pull a re-positioning on us on both new models that puts the 7D's replacement over $2k and the 5D's replacement over $3k . . . which makes it a deal breaker for a lot of people that hadn't budgeted for it.

We could also get another video camera next month


----------



## Tijn (Jan 31, 2012)

The 600d (Rebel T3i), 60d and 7d all share the same sensor. That means they all have the same maximum ISO capabilities, and also the same resolution. If that's all you need, a 7d might be overkill. I don't think a 7d is much better than a 60d for focussing in low light - might be wrong though, I know the 7d has great AF, just not sure about low-light. The AF of the 5d mk2 isn't really great (or so I hear - at least not compared to 7d, and especially so considering the premium paid on top of it for full-frame).

The 600d has 9 focus points of which one (the center one) is cross-type, the 60d has 9 focus points that are all cross-type, and the 7D has 19 focus points (all crosstype).

Cross-type means it's "extra sensitive". Probably useful for low light photgraphy.

For all 3 of these cameras, _the center AF point is aditionally sensitive with lenses f/2.8 or faster_. This is nice to know. You could get a 600d (Rebel T3i) or a 60d, and spend a bit more money on a bigger aperture main zoom lens to always have that benefit. I would recommend the pretty expensive Canon EF-s 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM lens. This lens has f/2.8 aperture on its whole (equal to the kit lens) zoom range, meaning it lets in much more light (which is nice for low light photography), and on top of that it enables the additional center AF point accuracy. That lens is also the sharpest EF-s zoom lens there is, image quality is on par with L grade lenses. The only thing not "L" about it is the build quality (it's not metal, and not weather sealed like some L lenses are). However, if you ever go full-frame, this lens will not work on it because it's EF-s.

If you go full-frame, that's one of the things you'll notice: EF-s lenses do not work on the body. EF-s lenses only work on crop cameras, and EF lenses work on both. The same focal length EF lens will result in a different framing on crop and fullframe sensors. Literally, when you make a fullframe picture with an EF lens, you can crop that image into the framing that a crop camera would give you from the same lens and settings. This means that your lenses are effectively "shorter". There's also a much broader useful range for very good image quality lenses for full frame cameras, than for crop cameras. (All L lenses are EF lenses. And several good EF zoom lenses start at, for example, 24mm. On a crop camera, this would lack wide angles (15-24mm) to be completely general-purpose. On a fullframe camera however, 24 is as wide as a 15mm EF-s lens is on a crop.)
You'll also notice that fullframe is a (much) more expensive hobby. Great lenses are addictive, and expensive.
The other (already mentioned) thing is that fullframe sensors catch more light. With similar sensor builds the fullframe sensors should be capable of higher ISO speeds if the resolution (MPx) is around the same, and there will be less noise in fullframe cameras at the same ISO speeds than on crop. The 5D mkII goes one step higher with its ISO boost than the 600d-60d-7d cameras (256k vs 128k, i.e. one stop of light).

You could buy a 600d or 60d and a fast lens now. Or you could wait for a 650D or 70D, which probably have a significant sensor upgrade on top of the upgrade that a 600d or 60d would provide.

Personally, I was sort of in the same 'boat' as you were. I decided to just buy a 60d now (and I'll get that lens as well), it's a good upgrade against what I had - and if something newer comes out and the prices drop a bit, I'll then consider that upgrade if I decide I need that.

Another (cheaper) option than buying a whole new camera, would be to buy a flash that has an AF assist light on it (for example the Canon Speedlite 430EX II). You won't _have_ to turn on the flash, but can still benefit from the red focussing light for quick(er) focussing in low light. The other obvious advantage is that the flash heads of the bigger ones (like the 430EX II) also rotate, which allows for a lot of creative and good-looking (bounce) flashing options - which is yet another way of taking nice pictures at lower light. (I suggest you at least read up a little bit on flash photography if you think you just plainly dislike it - I didn't know what it was capable of, when I disliked it, but I only had experience with the pop-up. Using a big flash head is very different from the pop-up flash.) The only downside is that it's bulky.


----------



## mhvogel.de (Jan 31, 2012)

my recommendation maybe would be not to upgrade, but:
wait for the powershot G1x.
you can always carry it with you, what maybe in this case is the most important.
for me the G12 is the only camera i always have with me.
i'd expect the image-quality of the G1X t.b. much better then your current combination.
7D & 5D here in my eyes are quiet overdone.
safe the money & spend it for an aventure-trip with the kids.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 31, 2012)

mhvogel.de said:


> my recommendation maybe would be not to upgrade, but:
> wait for the powershot G1x.
> you can always carry it with you, what maybe in this case is the most important.
> i'd expect the image-quality of the G1X t.b. much better then your current combination.



What are the AF speed and shutter lag like on the G1X? I got a dSLR soon after having kids (as I think many parents do), and the reason was that by the time the point-and-shoot camera had achieved focus lock and started the image capture, the moment I was trying to capture was almost always over. The best IQ in the world isn't useful if the camera missed capturing the moment.

Given what I've seen from the G1X specs, I don't think I'd say the G1X IQ will be 'much better' than a Rebel with kit lens. 'On par' or 'a little better' is probably closer - which is quite a feat for a P&S.


----------



## pranav (Jan 31, 2012)

I have been reading these endless debates about upgrades. Surprise, surprise.... everyone is right. If you are professional and make money with your equipment, you wouldn't be asking for advice on these forums. If you are in all other categories:
1) If you have plenty of money flying around, it always better to buy whatever you can get now and start shooting. Sell and upgrade if and when new model comes.
2) If you are not into buying new expensive camera every 1-2 yrs, 5D Mk II would be 6-8 yrs old by the time you buy the next one. So its better to get 60D and get 5D Mk III later. 60D in my opinion very capable camera with few compromises that could be worked around with skill and patience. It wouldn't hurt much to keep it or sell it later.
I don't want to rake old fire but technical obsession and ownership of $20-30 K of equipment and good photography are not synonymous (and I am not talking about professionals where even minor competitive edge is worth the price).


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 31, 2012)

mbhart19 said:


> Hello everyone, I currently have a Rebel XS that I've had since Nov 09. I have the kit lens (18-55) that came with it as well as the 50mm 1.8. The thing I dislike most about it is it's inability to AF in low light. I mainly shoot pics of my 3 & 4 year olds as well as random stuff for friends and family when they need it. I am considering upgrading to the 7d or the 5d m2 but I don't really know if the 5d is going to be more camera than I really need. I do shoot in manual mode and feel that I've outgrown the capabilities of my XS and crave a camera with better ISO features. Sorry if I sound ignorant but what are the most obvious things I will notice going from a crop sensor to full frame, should I choose to go with the 5d? Thanks! Mandy



Your lens may be limiting you in low light more than anything else. Don't expect a big difference unless you upgrade your lenses along with body, and then you are into $$$$.

A 5D MK II with wide prime lenses is pretty good at focusing in low light. Even a 50mm f/1.8 will AF in near darkness on mine. I took 2500 images over three nights with my 5D MK II and my pardner using a 7D. I had few if any missed focus shots, but the 7D had maybe 10%.

Here are some from last week with my 5D MK II in near darkness. All were at ISO 3200 or higher. Extreme low light and fast motion make for a really difficult capture. I generally used my 135mm L or my 85mm f/1.8 wide open, but I set my ISO to 3200 and shutter to a minimum of 1/125 sec, and let the aperture vary. The lighting changed from second to second, so manual settings would have been difficult. Shallow depth of field at full apertures can be a issue as well, you will see that only a portion of the images is in sharp focus.


----------



## wrack_of_lamb (Jan 31, 2012)

I started reading your post and for a second almost thought that I wrote it. I am in the exact same situation except that I acquired my Rebel Xs in January '09, only have one little kid running around, and also have the cheap Canon 70-300 zoom (it was $30 extra when I bought the Xs because of rebates). I also feel that I am limited by the Xs for shots of my child, so I've been looking at the same two models you are describing.

I plan on keeping my next DSLR for at least 4 years, barring breakage. My big concern is that both models are getting old. They'll still take great photos in years to come, but if Canon announces a new DSLR in a week, that could change the game slightly for me. It's psychological, but I can't shake it; I like to think my money was well spent. But that's me.

Many of my thoughts and observations have been captured by others, so I'll only add commentary I haven't seen presented yet.

Do you feel like the 3.7 fps on the Xs is too slow? The 5DII won't be much faster. Advantage: 7D. Also, the 7D has a newer autofocus system with more points and crosstype sensors. I would love to hear from someone who has used both cameras to shoot action in low light as to whether there is a difference.

Also, if you like the range of the kit lens and go with the 5DII, your 18-55 won't work so you'll need to find something in the ~28-90 range to be equivalent, which doesn't exist. But there is the 24-105, 24-70, and if you can find one the 28-80. Either way, it will cost quite a bit, even if you go with third party manufacturers.

If you go to Flickr you can download full res photos of any camera body and lens combo you want.* Pixel peep, print them out, and judge for yourself the IQ at various ISOs. Obviously this is dependent on the skill of the photographer and subject matter, but if you priorize the best images you can see what a body and lens are capable of.

I also analyzed the metadata of all my keeper photos over the years to see how often I use which lenses, at which apertures, shutter speeds, and ISOs rather than just what I think I use the most. It made me realize that I use the 18-55 a lot more than I thought (and almost evenly throughout the full range), I shoot at ISO 800+ than I thought, and it confirmed my suspicion that I almost always shoot wide open. Consider doing this if you can; it took me about 40 minutes to find and download a program, import all the data into Excel, and run the analysis. It was worth it.

You can sell the Xs on eBay for more than $300 with kit lens. That could be >75% of what you paid for it, which would put your cost of ownership at less than $2 per month. I'd say that's worth it. You can also put that money towards a new body or lens.

Lastly, and I may get flamed for this, you could easily switch to another camera manufacturer. You have little money invested in your system and can easily recoup most of the cost, as I mentioned. I have been looking at another manufacturer, which complicates the problem for me, so maybe you should stick with Canon. 

Best of luck with whatever decision you make, and I hope these thoughts help more than hinder your decision.


*There might be an easier way, or a better site for this, but at Flickr I search for a group named after the lens I am interested in, then search within that group for photos shot with the camera I am interested in. It takes a bit of browsing to find members who post full res images, but it's possible to find photos shot with almost any body + lens combo.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 31, 2012)

wrack_of_lamb said:


> *There might be an easier way, or a better site for this, but at Flickr I search for a group named after the lens I am interested in, then search within that group for photos shot with the camera I am interested in. It takes a bit of browsing to find members who post full res images, but it's possible to find photos shot with almost any body + lens combo.



Try here...you can search by camera, lens, aperture, ISO, etc.


----------



## Tijn (Jan 31, 2012)

wrack_of_lamb said:


> I plan on keeping my next DSLR for at least 4 years, barring breakage. My big concern is that both models are getting old.


This will always be somewhat of a problem though, but it's bigger now whichever way you go. If you buy a 60D or a 7D now, there will probably be a rebel with better ISO capability in a year. If you buy a 5d mk2, there will probably be a mk3 that performs significantly better within a year. If you want a 70d, you're in for a wait until it's available. Then, you'll either buy it overpriced or have to wait a couple more months. By then, it'll be about two years until a rebel with a significantly better sensor than yours pops back up.

Though I agree that it's appealing to wait a while for another one or two extra stops of iso capability. I decided that going from 1600 to 12800 ISO (60d boost), or 3 stops difference, was well worth it for now though.



> Do you feel like the 3.7 fps on the Xs is too slow? The 5DII won't be much faster. Advantage: 7D.


I went from 2.7 to 5.3 and can almost not keep up with it (i.e. it takes getting used to, I'm still taking 2 shots instead of 1 sometimes). 8 fps is a LOT if you're coming from a rebel. I think serious sports photography would be a job better suited to such functionality than 'snapping shots of your kids'.  



> I also analyzed the metadata of all my keeper photos over the years to see how often I use which lenses, at which apertures, shutter speeds, and ISOs rather than just what I think I use the most. It made me realize that I use the 18-55 a lot more than I thought (and almost evenly throughout the full range), I shoot at ISO 800+ than I thought, and it confirmed my suspicion that I almost always shoot wide open. Consider doing this if you can; it took me about 40 minutes to find and download a program, import all the data into Excel, and run the analysis. It was worth it.


Lightroom does a great job as well. It's an exceptional tool for developing your images, allowing you to constantly tweak them without altering the originals (so you can come back to them and fiddle a bit more). Also, its navigation functionality allows for a vast amount of "smart collections" or filters, if you will, that will allow you to show - for example - all pictures that you shot between apertures 2,8 and 4, at focal lengths between 17 and 55, between 2006 and 2007. It will spit all of them right out. Very recommended!


----------



## mbhart19 (Jan 31, 2012)

Thank you all for the very informative responses. I do feel that the 7d would probably be more than adequate for what I do with photography. I most likely won't be taking many dark theatrical photos, well except for those of my 4 year olds dance recital but I guess I can't justify spending the additional $800-1000 on the 5d for that. It sucks knowing that there will be new cameras coming out soon, leaving me with the issue of whether to buy the 7d now or wait a while for the next great thing and not knowing the price increase. I don't see myself buying any other brand besides Canon (yes I've looked at others).

As far as lenses go, I do plan to upgrade that supply as well. I rarely use my kit 18-55 lens because it is so slow to focus, it drives me crazy.  I've rented the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 which I actually like and the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 (which is obviously great) but it is a bit heavy for me to use as an every day lens, imo. 

Looks like I still have some things to figure out.


----------



## thepancakeman (Jan 31, 2012)

mbhart19 said:


> As far as lenses go, I do plan to upgrade that supply as well. I rarely use my kit 18-55 lens because it is so slow to focus, it drives me crazy. I've rented the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 which I actually like and the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 (which is obviously great) but it is a bit heavy for me to use as an every day lens, imo.



Since you are planning to upgrade both bodies and lenses, might I suggest that the budget go to lens(es) first? A good lens never goes out of style or usefulness, and it has been mentioned elsewhere that they can actually provide a better investment than the stock market. Then by the time you've saved up the next chunk of money the new bodies may be out and you can decide then whether they are worth the expense.

FWIW, I find my 7D to be adequate, but not great. The AF (which IS great) is the primary reason that I have it, but in pure IQ terms I actually prefer my (wife's) 40D. I knew that I had "issues" with the 7D before I bought it, but its good enough for the moment and my plan is to shift it to my backup camera once the new options come out.


----------



## wrack_of_lamb (Feb 1, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Try here...you can search by camera, lens, aperture, ISO, etc.



Thanks!


----------



## wickidwombat (Feb 2, 2012)

with people mentioning the G1x i would look at the fuji x10 i'll try ost up some shots on the weekend extreme low light high iso its f2 -f2.8 lens 28-112mm is really quite good and image quality is pretty darn nice, like i said i'll try get some shots uploaded on the weekend. it might work out well as a low budget todler chaser with good quality and extreme portability


----------



## pakosouthpark (Feb 2, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Try here...you can search by camera, lens, aperture, ISO, etc.



interesting website, thanks for sharing!


----------



## elflord (Feb 2, 2012)

mbhart19 said:


> Hello everyone, I currently have a Rebel XS that I've had since Nov 09. I have the kit lens (18-55) that came with it as well as the 50mm 1.8. The thing I dislike most about it is it's inability to AF in low light. I mainly shoot pics of my 3 & 4 year olds as well as random stuff for friends and family when they need it. I am considering upgrading to the 7d or the 5d m2 but I don't really know if the 5d is going to be more camera than I really need. I do shoot in manual mode and feel that I've outgrown the capabilities of my XS and crave a camera with better ISO features. Sorry if I sound ignorant but what are the most obvious things I will notice going from a crop sensor to full frame, should I choose to go with the 5d? Thanks! Mandy



You won't get a big jump in ISO performance by switching to a different crop body, so full frame is your best choice for a body upgrade (especially for what you're shooting). Sensor technology doesn't move that fast (esp ISO performance).

As other no doubt will suggest, upgrading your lenses will help you produce good results. 

If you wanted a cheaper option than the 5DII, there's also the 5D classic. Either of those cameras will produce excellent results (but not with your current lenses. Upgrade those first.)


----------

