# How to spend money



## kyamon (Mar 27, 2013)

I know this question has been asked many times already, but I would like to hear a new answer 

I currently have a 7D and some (mostly L-) glass (8-15, 16-35, 50 f/1.4, 100 f/2.8 macro, 24-70, 70-200f/2.8 IS, 2xIII). I am a hobbyist with enough money to spare to get these lenses 2nd hand (I was very happy to see that this in the end almost comes cheaper than getting lower-quality lenses AND gives you higher satisfaction... If you have enough money on the side  ), and in some cases new. 
I mostly take pics of moving things (sports, children, animals - BIF in particular), but also portraits and stills at times. I sell nothing, but I obviously like the highest possible quality.

So here is my question: Assume I have up to 10k that are just sitting on the bank and I want to invest into photo gear, what would you do with it?

Basically I have two problems: 
I really want a 1DX. It is total overkill, and I would only use some of the features - I know that. But I really want the AF system (the 7D is somewhat limited for my use), I like the speed, the high ISO, FF, etc., etc.
And I had rented a 300 f/2.8 IS II a couple of times and was blown out of my pants by the IQ and focusing speed of this thing. I would never have expected a lens to be so good, and I finally understood why people are willing to pay that much for glass. And now I want one. 

The solutions would be
1. get a 1DX and be happy with it. That leaves money to either buy a used 300 f/2.8 IS Mark I, or to rent the Mark II for several weeks.
2. get the lens and be happy with the 7D.
3. get a 5Diii, admit that there is absolutely no need for 12 fps, and add a 300 f/4.0
4. save some more money and get a 400 f/2.8 IS II
5. keep the gear I have and get my wife a diamond ring (that she would hate, actually)

I look forward to your opinions.


----------



## Skirball (Mar 27, 2013)

6. Save your money instead of looking for ways to spend it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 27, 2013)

How about a 5DIII and a 300/2.8L IS II?


----------



## kyamon (Mar 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> How about a 5DIII and a 300/2.8L IS II?



I would have to wait for used 300/2.8 IS II's to pop up I am afraid... 

@Skirball that would be reasonable. I am all against that


----------



## Skirball (Mar 27, 2013)

kyamon said:


> @Skirball that would be reasonable. I am all against that



I can tell. Carry on, I'm sure you'll get a wealth of suggestions for which how to spend your money.


----------



## kyamon (Mar 27, 2013)

Skirball said:


> kyamon said:
> 
> 
> > @Skirball that would be reasonable. I am all against that
> ...



That is what I am looking for - I am interested in hearing arguments and priorities. Not for advice on where and how to invest my money...


----------



## Eli (Mar 27, 2013)

Upgrade your body, 5d mkiii will probably do. You'll have improved image quality, and you'll love the AF system.
Then you can just save the left over money for when a 300 2.8 IS II turns up.


----------



## crbeveri (Mar 27, 2013)

What about getting a used 1D4 and a used 400 2.8? I love my 1D4 and am actually saving up myself to hopefully find a 2nd with a low shutter count. 

The other thing I would do is pick up a 300 or 400 f/2.8 (used or new) and then save up and hope that Canon brings out the 7D2 soon. I am waiting to see what that will bring myself. I am very attached to the 1D bodies but didn't like the way the 1Dx felt in my hands. 

Glass will always last you longer than a body and wont become dated as quick.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 27, 2013)

kyamon said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > How about a 5DIII and a 300/2.8L IS II?
> ...



But...



kyamon said:


> Assume I have up to 10k that are just sitting on the bank



5DIII: $2,949 (current 'price in cart', B&H)
300/2.8L IS II: $6,799 (B&H)

My rudimentary math puts the total at $9,748 (with free shipping), and I do believe that $9,748 < $10K. So either my math is flawed, or you put forth a false assumption. Just sayin'.


----------



## pierceography (Mar 27, 2013)

Ha. When I read the topic (subject line) of this thread, my immediate response was, "Wait, you're into photography and this is a problem?" ;-)


----------



## drock1317 (Mar 27, 2013)

1DX would definitely be overkill unless you need it or you REALLLLLLLLLYYYY want it. I'd go with the 5DIII since you already have the 7D and a lovely set of lenses. The 300mm f/2.8 would be cool to have, but I'd probably hold off on that. I can't imagine the weight of your bag if you bring the 300 with the rest of your gear. I wouldn't be able to handle more than 2 bodies and 3-4 lenses, unless I had like a roller case. Maybe invest in a flash unit or two? You'll still have a handfull of money left over... enough for a vacation perhaps?


----------



## kyamon (Mar 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> kyamon said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Well spotted  I was wondering if someone would point that out. The key is the "up to", and that I am not in the US but in Switzerland where the 5d iii (plus BG) goes for around 3.2k, and the 300/2.8 for 7.5k. I guess I should just come to the US and get it there...


----------



## AudioGlenn (Mar 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> How about a 5DIII and a 300/2.8L IS II?



+1

sounds like you want to splurge a little on the 1DX (which I think is totally fine if you have the money for it). If you want an immediate upgrade, I think the mk3 would make you happy too....I'd get the mk3 and the 300 2.8 IS II and save up for a 1DX AS WELL! =) happy shopping.

btw, get the wife a little something that she _would_ like while you're at it.


----------



## kyamon (Mar 27, 2013)

drock1317 said:


> 1DX would definitely be overkill unless you need it or you REALLLLLLLLLYYYY want it. I'd go with the 5DIII since you already have the 7D and a lovely set of lenses. The 300mm f/2.8 would be cool to have, but I'd probably hold off on that. I can't imagine the weight of your bag if you bring the 300 with the rest of your gear. I wouldn't be able to handle more than 2 bodies and 3-4 lenses, unless I had like a roller case. Maybe invest in a flash unit or two? You'll still have a handfull of money left over... enough for a vacation perhaps?



I want the 1DX really baldy. But the same way I wanted a Tesla Roadster. I think you hit the nail on the head by saying that it would be cool to have - that holds for both the lens and the 1DX. But the lens would certainly be used considerably less than the camera (to complete that - I have taken 35k images on my 7D in the last 3 years - on any 1D body I would probably never get anywhere close to even warming the release mechanism...). 
I imagine that in 3-4 years the 1DX can still be sold for over 3k (similar to the 1DIV when the 1DX came on the market), while the 5DIII will be at 1k. If I look at it like that then I would have spent 2-3k in both cases.

The 300/2.8 is heavy, but I took it on a 10h hike in the Swiss alps last summer (albeit an easy one), and I survived. But I only took the extender, the 24-70, and the 300.
The old 400/2.8 would be too heavy, though - and I can barely hand-hold that one for more than a minute...


----------



## dstppy (Mar 27, 2013)

Unless there's something specific in the 1Dx, I'm another one for the 5DIII . . .

What are you running up against with the 7D AF that's problematic? I've had little trouble with sports/dance with the 60D/5DmkII for AF/FPS, but I try to bring my real shooting skills to that to 'ambush' my shot.

I hear you on high-iso, my mkII really took my fear of away; I want a mkIII, but after I got news that my baby needs a new transmission yesterday, I will NOT be pushing my luck this year :'(

I highly suspect the 7DII is going to be superior in some 'sports shooting' way the same way the 7D was over the 5DmkII/1Div . . . but you don't seem like you want to wait ;D


----------



## crbeveri (Mar 27, 2013)

I am having to agree with people here that the 5D3 would be a great body to get if you really feel you need a new body. Looking at what you shoot I still feel that you are lacking reach and although you can always rent the glass you need there's nothing like being able to pull out your own super telephoto to just play around with when bored (at least it's nice for me). I have heard some great things about the 5D3 from others that use it for BIF.



dstppy said:


> I highly suspect the 7DII is going to be superior in some 'sports shooting' way the same way the 7D was over the 5DmkII/1Div . . . but you don't seem like you want to wait ;D



I am sorry to get off topic here but in what way is the 7D more superior than the 1DIV?


----------



## emag (Mar 27, 2013)

Get the lens now. Wait and save for a while and then get your very understanding and patient wife the 1DX "she's always wanted".

You're welcome!


----------



## docsmith (Mar 27, 2013)

Just moved from the 7D to the 5DIII myself. The difference is noticable. Actually, I just got back from a trip where I used both bodies and my wife noticed the difference in the images. I believe her comment was "the 5 camera does a lot better in low light, doesn't it?"

AF of the 5DIII is significantly better than the 7D. After several days of shooting, it was actually a little painful to go back to the 7D. 

So, my advice, get 5DIII and either put the rest aside to save for a lens/tripod or buy something nice for your wife. If she let you get your current gear, my guess is that she is a keeper.


----------



## Drum (Mar 27, 2013)

with the lenses that you have, its surprising you haven't gone full frame already. I suppose the real question is do YOU feel the 1Dx is overkill for an amateur? Obviously the best camera in the Canon range, so would you be able to make do with the 5D mk3 instead?..... there are a lot of people who would love to have this dilemma!!!!


----------



## dstppy (Mar 27, 2013)

crbeveri said:


> dstppy said:
> 
> 
> > I highly suspect the 7DII is going to be superior in some 'sports shooting' way the same way the 7D was over the 5DmkII/1Div . . . but you don't seem like you want to wait ;D
> ...



I'm trying to find some information on it (thought I read it somewhere); this was the best that I could find quickly:
"With these densely-packed AF points, new features have become a reality. In many ways, this is the most sophisticated AF system ever in an EOS digital SLR, in some ways surpassing the flexibility of Canon’s top-of-the-line EOS-1D and EOS-1Ds series cameras."

From here:
http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2011/whats_news_eos7d_article.shtml
(click on show-all for page number)

Other pages I found said that the 1d4 was better . . . so I could very well be mistaken.


----------



## kyamon (Mar 27, 2013)

Drum said:


> with the lenses that you have, its surprising you haven't gone full frame already. I suppose the real question is do YOU feel the 1Dx is overkill for an amateur? Obviously the best camera in the Canon range, so would you be able to make do with the 5D mk3 instead?..... there are a lot of people who would love to have this dilemma!!!!



I specifically did not buy any EF-S lenses because I knew I wanted to go FF some day. And because I realized that L-lenses are a better deal in the end. And of course now (with the fisheye and the 16-35) I am frustrated with the crop sensor.
And yes, I am fully aware that I am spoiled to have this dilemma... 

@docsmith & emag: Of course my wife is a keeper... And she also knows that she needs to let me get a new toy occasionally  But I have already bought so many things that she absolutely needed that she figured it out by now. Now she only laughs at me when I mention a big lens...

@dstppy: yes, high-ISO on the 7D really is terrible (as has been mentioned often enough). I had AF problems when shooting BIF and kite-surfers on a lake with a forest behind them - I was quite surprised, but for some reason the system did not manage to follow. Granted, kite-surfers in air are so slow that you can pick a single AF point and follow by hand, but I wanted to test the camera and it failed (this was with a rented 300/2.8, btw). With the birds it was similar - when the focus was on the bird it was really on it, and the image was sharp. But with the fast motion the bird was lost all to often. I don't know if others have made similar experiences or if I did something wrong there, but it was quite frustrating.

In any case, thanks all for your answers. The underlying issue is, of course, that I am a sucker for tech-stuff. And the 1DX just fascinates me. Mostly the super-high ISO, the low-light focusing ability, and the high frame-rate. I am never really in a situation where I would absolutely need 12 fps, let alone 14 - after all, I don't sell the photos anyway, so if I miss THE moment it is never all that much of a problem. Usually my anticipation is enough to get a shot that I am somewhat happy with. For everything else I guess the 5Diii is on par with the 1DX (OK, I also don't need the better water-resistance and added ruggedness).
Another advantage of the 5Diii would of course be that I could then afford to keep the 7D and have both FF and crop. If I would get the 1DX I would probably sell the 7D. I have also been considering getting the 300/2.8, selling the 7D and buying a used 350D instead


----------



## azezal (Mar 27, 2013)

go medium format just need some more money for that but I believe you gonna love it
phase one 645d


----------



## kyamon (Mar 27, 2013)

azezal said:


> go medium format just need some more money for that but I believe you gonna love it
> phase one 645d



Thanks for the tip - I had actually bought a (2nd hand, of course) Mamiya RB67 at some point around 15 years ago, but never really had the time to learn how to properly use it... Not the camera for me (for the same reason I don't do much landscape photography. I am not all that patient  ) Beautiful device, though!


----------



## tomscott (Mar 27, 2013)

The 5DMKIII is also much lighter and compact in comparison and has 90% of the features you would actually use. With big whites tripods or monopods are pretty much a must so its not like the 1DX feels more balanced with it.

Carrying a massive camera, lens and tripod all the time takes its toll. Maybe a personal trainer  haha or hiring someone to carry your kit


----------



## kyamon (Mar 27, 2013)

tomscott said:


> Carrying a massive camera, lens and tripod all the time takes its toll. Maybe a personal trainer  haha or hiring someone to carry your kit



Are you looking for a job? ;D


----------



## unfocused (Mar 27, 2013)

To each his own. Obviously you know you are lucky to have this problem and not snooty about it.

If it were me, I'd keep the 7D, buy a 5DIII and a 100-400 zoom, then pick out a great location to take my wife, where I could also use the cameras and lenses. Travel is ALWAYS a good investment in my book.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Mar 27, 2013)

dstppy said:


> crbeveri said:
> 
> 
> > dstppy said:
> ...



You are incredibly, incredibly mistaken if you think that the 7D is superior, in ANY way, to the 1D Mark IV.


----------



## tomscott (Mar 27, 2013)

No your ok I have a pretty good job doing what I love 

I would agree with the above.

Travel is the only thing you can do that makes you richer. The camera you have with you is always the best camera.

In this case I would be against the 1Dx and the 300/400mm because they are both niche products and a pain in the ass to carry around. 5DMKIII and the 100-400 would make a better option but still a pain for traveling.

Really the usability of 300/400mm lenses are best suited for sports and birding/wildlife. If thats your main use then ye.

I think a good compromise is the 70-200mm F2.8 MKII With a 2x extender if you are traveling around. Thats what I use but the MKI non IS lens. IQ is not stellar but more than useable on my 5DMKIII

You would have a lot of money left over and still an incredible kit.

Apart from my Camera equipment my other passion is cars and BMW M cars are my poison otherwise I would have many more exotic lenses


----------



## RC (Mar 27, 2013)

- 5D3
- Buy your wife something nice that she would actually like and enjoy (I'm sure you will get some payback out of it )
- then work on that 300 2.8 II


----------



## kyamon (Mar 27, 2013)

tomscott said:


> No your ok I have a pretty good job doing what I love
> 
> I would agree with the above.
> 
> ...





I guess more importantly the camera is always only as good as the person behind it... (and I am not a 1DX  )
But I actually found that the 300/2.8 is an incredible lens also for "macro" type photography (wild flowers, and bugs, mostly). Nevertheless, it certainly is not suitable as an always-on... 
I must say that since I have used the 300 I am always a bit disappointed when taking a picture with the 70-200 (IS, mark I). I guess I have tasted the honey and can not let go anymore... The funny thing is that when I first rented it my reasoning was simply to see what justifies that kind of price. I believed that it is sufficiently expensive (and expected a difference sufficiently small) to never really make me consider buying it... boy was I wrong!! Most people here probably know this, but I felt like the photos from the zoom lens were taken with an iPhone (well, not quite... but almost).

I can see how BMW M are poison (that tastes good)... In that respect I am happy since cars I would be passionate about (basically Mercedes from the early 70s and before, or electric sports cars...) are so totally out of range for me that I just stick with my 15 year old volvo


----------



## kyamon (Mar 27, 2013)

RC said:


> - 5D3
> - Buy your wife something nice that she would actually like and enjoy (I'm sure you will get some payback out of it )
> - then work on that 300 2.8 II



I think this is pretty much what I will do - rationally I knew that this is the thing to do, but I needed someone to tell me 

Thanks everyone.
(luckily my wife and I are not yet at the point where we have to pay for each other  )


----------



## robbymack (Mar 27, 2013)

I'd be in for a 5diii and then a nice vacation preferably to a place with those little umbrellas in the drinks.


----------



## azezal (Mar 28, 2013)

kyamon said:


> azezal said:
> 
> 
> > go medium format just need some more money for that but I believe you gonna love it
> ...



buy me medium format and I will be more supportive than your wife whenever you buy new gear


----------



## tomscott (Mar 28, 2013)

kyamon said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > No your ok I have a pretty good job doing what I love
> ...



Ye but you give a pro a 300D and he will make incredible pictures with it. What I meant was the best camera is the one you have with you as in being comfortable carrying and using it. Getting the shot is more important IMO. everything is a compromise and just because you can afford to doesn't necessarily make it a good value purchase for you. But then again life is short so do it while you can on the flip side.

Many pros work in this way, unless you are a sports or wildlife shooter it is cheaper to rent for when you need. I understand that shooting with the white primes is better but comparing the zooms to point and shoots just isnt correct. Although the MKI 70-200mm IS is the least sharp of the 2.8 70-200mm zooms its still a quality piece of glass. But the 24-70 MKII and the 70-200 MKII have many a time been comparable or better than their prime equivalents. 

Again same with the 1DX it is more than twice the price of the 5DMKIII but the 5DMKIII is 90% of the camera. 6fps is nothing to be sniffed at either, 14 is incredible but in most situations overkill. As a gear head and lover of new tech I completely understand the want but what about the need? IMO the 5DMKIII is the best all round camera ever made and it surprises me everyday. Again it is a lot more useable and easier to travel with than the beast 1DX.

As a pro weight is a huge concern, with having two bodies and lenses that cover a broad range lugging it around can juts be inconvenient. But that is my personal preference.

If the best is all you can have then go for it, but there are other options that will create a similar result but cost a weigh a lot less.


----------



## kyamon (Mar 28, 2013)

tomscott said:


> Ye but you give a pro a 300D and he will make incredible pictures with it. What I meant was the best camera is the one you have with you as in being comfortable carrying and using it. Getting the shot is more important IMO. everything is a compromise and just because you can afford to doesn't necessarily make it a good value purchase for you. But then again life is short so do it while you can on the flip side.
> 
> Many pros work in this way, unless you are a sports or wildlife shooter it is cheaper to rent for when you need. I understand that shooting with the white primes is better but comparing the zooms to point and shoots just isnt correct. Although the MKI 70-200mm IS is the least sharp of the 2.8 70-200mm zooms its still a quality piece of glass. But the 24-70 MKII and the 70-200 MKII have many a time been comparable or better than their prime equivalents.
> 
> ...




Yes, that is what I meant - I am fully aware that me with a 1DX would never shoot pictures as amazing as some pros do with much less sophisticated equipment. And it is certainly also true that not everything I could afford would make a value for me.

I guess my comparison with the iPhone was a bit silly - but I was trying to avoid the classic "VW vs. Ferrari"... But you get what I mean; when I first used the 300/2.8 (being the first time I was using one of the white primes) I really did feel that everything I had been using until then was cheap. But of course, "cheap" is at a very high level here. I started buying L-glass after having used a Tamron 28-300 (I think) on a 500D for a while and always being frustrated because the pictures never seemed focused. This is when I got the 24-70, and then also the 7D. While of course my qualities as a photographer did not change at all, it gave me way more pleasure looking at these pics than the one with the old combo. And then, when I mounted the 300/2.8 I had the impression that the difference in terms of sharpness and colors was again the same as with the first switch. That is basically what I meant when I mentioned the iPhone. 

What you say about the 1DX and my lust for it is precisely it. I realize that the 5Diii delivers everything I need and then some, and the 10% extra from the 1DX would just be because it is cool. No, I don't need it. But then again, since I am not a pro I would not need any camera at all. I also still have a Canon F1 in a cabinet somewhere that I could use, and maybe the pictures would come out the same as with the 5Diii (even though I would have a hard time getting the pics developed, or taking any at ISO51k...  ). And for the same reason - pro vs. amateur - I can to some extent adjust what I take pictures of to the amount of gear that I want to lug around, rather than the other way around.

Anyway, these are just some of my thoughts/reasonings. I will get a 5Diii now and keep on renting the 300/2.8.
And maybe donate some to charity - after all, my wife also has all she needs


----------

