# How to proceed?



## criza (Jul 14, 2012)

I am very satisfied with my 60D, but I want to go full frame.

I want the (relative) best picture quality, and while my five lenses 15mm Fisheye, 24mm 1.4L, FD 55mm 1.2 converted to EF mount, 100L Macro and a 200 2.8L (with a 1.4 TC) can/could give me that quality, the 60D can't.

I am shooting a lot of people, as well as getting more and more into landscapes, I am discovering macro photography, doing a fair amount of street photography. Very rarely animals and where it's possible, architecture.

On my lens wishlist remains the 135mm 2L and probably also a Sigma 85mm 1.4. More forward in the future I would like to trade my old Canon Fisheye with the new one, get a TS-E 17mm, and if I feel I could need it, get the 70-200 2.8L II as well.

However, I make no money with my photography, so I have to think twice if I want to spend a bigger amount for a new camera. I was thinking a lot about getting the 5D Mark II used for 1500$, but I don't know if I would be satisfied with the camera. It's getting old and it's still expensive for my taste.

The 5D Mark III? Sure I could buy it, and I am sure I would love it, but 3300$ for a new camera? I don't know. For this I could get the two before mentioned wishlist lenses (~1600$) and as well trade the fisheye (~450$) and still have a spare 1300$ for, well, traveling ;-). The TS-E 17mm is only a option with a full frame camera. Although I would need higher ISO (a major thing I don't like about the 60D) for shooting f/4 with the 8-15mm Fisheye, as I prefer to shooting during the blue hour(s), and also at night. As well, what meaning has it to get a 8-15mm on a crop?

What did I forgot to mention? I like my gear light (but not all the time), sometimes just mounting one lens on the camera and use this combo all day/on a trip. If I feel like not carrying anything heavy with me, I take my Fuji X100 only.


Soo, If you read all above, you may think, WTF just go outside and shoot some pictures. That's what I am telling myself, and I know I thought a bit too much about my gear future, and anyway, my current path is to shoot the 60D to death and then I will have to get a new camera. 8)

But still, I am curious about your opinion! Am I in some dead end with my gear thoughts, and where is the way out? Or should I just get the 5DIII and enjoy my 5 prime lenses even more? What would you do? Thank you for your answer.


PS Some of you may think, this is a get a new camera or buy more lenses matter, but I would like to improve my photography on all levels, and currently I feel like my camera is the limiting factor (besides taking the time for photography at all).


----------



## Drizzt321 (Jul 14, 2012)

I'd say go for the 5d2. Pick one up new or lightly used and you'll love the quality. Sure, the AF system is pretty bad, but if you're shooting in decent lighting out on the street (or maybe even not so decent lighting) it'll still be pretty great. You have a nice set of lenses currently, and know what you want to get next. The 24mm will seem new to you, it's going to be a lot wider than you are used to, but it's great 

If you're really concerned about cost, go for the 5Dc. I haven't owned one, but everything I've heard about it says it's still a great camera. What about renting one for a weekend when you plan on shooting a bunch of different stuff? It'll prolly cost you $100-200, but it'll really help you make up your mind. LensRentals.com has a 5d2 for ~$140 with shipping for 5 days rental.


----------



## criza (Jul 14, 2012)

Drizzt321 said:


> I'd say go for the 5d2. Pick one up new or lightly used and you'll love the quality. Sure, the AF system is pretty bad, but if you're shooting in decent lighting out on the street (or maybe even not so decent lighting) it'll still be pretty great. You have a nice set of lenses currently, and know what you want to get next. The 24mm will seem new to you, it's going to be a lot wider than you are used to, but it's great
> 
> If you're really concerned about cost, go for the 5Dc. I haven't owned one, but everything I've heard about it says it's still a great camera. What about renting one for a weekend when you plan on shooting a bunch of different stuff? It'll prolly cost you $100-200, but it'll really help you make up your mind. LensRentals.com has a 5d2 for ~$140 with shipping for 5 days rental.



That's what I forgot to mention! I ruled out the 5Dc, because I would miss Magic Lantern, it's very handy...

The thing about the 5DII is, if I go full frame, why not spend 2000$ more for the 5DIII? It would last a lot of years anyway...

One more thing is holding me back, the (for me) unfortunate timed rumors about an entry full frame, although I start to disbelieve them...

And yes, I can't wait to shoot the 24mm full frame!! Renting is as well a good idea, I could borrow a 5DIII from a friend, when he isn't using it, what's rare, but possible.


----------



## distant.star (Jul 14, 2012)

.
Given that you say you're doing a lot of street photography and night work, you may want to consider getting the 135L you mentioned. It's stunning, in my experience, on the streets at night. Screw that on, and I think you'll be pleasantly surprised at what your 60D shows you.

Just a thought.


----------



## Drizzt321 (Jul 14, 2012)

criza said:


> Drizzt321 said:
> 
> 
> > I'd say go for the 5d2. Pick one up new or lightly used and you'll love the quality. Sure, the AF system is pretty bad, but if you're shooting in decent lighting out on the street (or maybe even not so decent lighting) it'll still be pretty great. You have a nice set of lenses currently, and know what you want to get next. The 24mm will seem new to you, it's going to be a lot wider than you are used to, but it's great
> ...



Do you believe that the 5d2 might hold you back significantly? Owning both, I honestly can say that the AF system is the single biggest improvement, although there are lots of small tweaks that are nice, and I believe the ISO Noise is nicer and less than the 5d2. However, you would also be missing out on ML, at least for a while. That and it's also $2K, which you might be better served spending on a lens or two. 

As for the 135L? Awesome lens, I love it. Probably the only lens I would love more is the 200L f/2, but that's not gonna happen anytime soon for me. You should get it no matter what.


----------



## criza (Jul 14, 2012)

Drizzt321 said:


> criza said:
> 
> 
> > Drizzt321 said:
> ...



You may be right about the not to big difference of them two cameras, especially for a full frame novice, who's job doesn't depend on critical moments which are not to be missed.

As for the 135L, no question it's an awesome lens, everyone praises it! I had the opportunity to try it two times and I like it so far, only that the focal length is very similar to my 100L, so the 135L still can wait for me some bit more. I may even trade the 100L for the 135L, have thought about that as well :.


----------



## Drizzt321 (Jul 14, 2012)

Well, the 100mm you have is a Macro lens which the 135L is not. So if you want to continue doing your macro shooting, keep the 100mm Macro lens.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 14, 2012)

FF is the way to go.....THE END

My suggestion is 5D III. Why? 5D III has great 61points AF, excellent under low light and speed.

The pic below was taken at Discovery Science Center - California with 5D III + 16-35L II. The lighting was extremely low, similar to Small World at Disneyland. Pic came out ok.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 14, 2012)

That and with the 5D Mark III you can do full auto ISO in manual mode. This actually is a great benefit to novice photographers. Later, you can do in-camera HDR and Multi-Exposure. That and the advanced AF system this is worth the additional cost already.

However, regarding IQ, the 5D Mark II is great, so maybe that and expensive L lens would really be the way to go. I don't know.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 14, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> That and with the 5D Mark III you can do full auto ISO in manual mode. This actually is a great benefit to novice photographers. Later, you can do in-camera HDR and Multi-Exposure. That and the advanced AF system this is worth the additional cost already.
> 
> However, regarding IQ, the 5D Mark II is great, so maybe that and expensive L lens would really be the way to go. I don't know.



+1...in M mode, I like to set shutter speed + aperture. I let the camera chooses the best ISO for my setting. As long the ISO is below 6400 on my 5D III, I know I'm in good shape. ;D


----------



## param (Jul 15, 2012)

5D2 or 5D3? 5D3 certainly.
Will the 5D3 deliver better "picture quality" than the 60D? For the most part yes.
Will buying all this gear help put an end to obsessive day dreaming? No.


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Jul 15, 2012)

I went this same route when the 5d mkiii launched. I bought it and the 50mm 1.4. It's so much better but you have to take the time to work with it. A few weeks and it feels brand new for the first few shots. Great has certainly improved my images. Still the 60d is a great camera. I would definetly not by the 5d ii just because it's cheap because the af is bad. Not worth it. Just my 2centz.


----------



## scottkinfw (Jul 15, 2012)

Actually, I agree with at least some if not all of what is posted.

Hopefully I can add some insight. 

I remember waiting and waiting for the 5D3 which never seemed to come. I purchased a 5D2 which has great quality, but really poor AF in general. I found that the 5D2 was not at all good at tracking moving objects like wildlife, and in dim/dark light, obtaining focus lock could be dicey. The center focus point did the best in these situations.

I picked up the 5D3 and agree that the AF is way better and addresses my concerns listed above, so I am very happy. There are many different AI Servo modes etc. so I agree, must really work with it.

I also love the fact that mfa allows adjustment at both ends of focal range, way cool.

With my 50D I avoided like poison, going above ISO 400, way better with 2 & 3.

In the end, it would be a good idea to rent both and spend a weekend with them- side by side with same lenses would be best. Put them through their paces in all situations you expect to encounter.

If you are not in a rush, may be a good idea to see how the rumors for the new camera pan out.

Whatever you choose, you will see a great improvement in iq. Think of the camera as a long term investment so you will amortize it over many years.


----------



## Jotho (Jul 15, 2012)

Criza, I have just gone down the same route, upgrading from 60D. I went 5D MkIII and I am very happy with it. I am not a pro, but do sell some stuff with articles I write for fun. A photographer friend of mine recommended me to buy more glass instead of getting the new body. I am actually happy I ignored his advise. I am a bit short on lenses at the moment but I do have a couple of L's, I've just had to postpone getting more a while because of the investment in the body. The MkIII have really opened my eyes, taking good pictures is easier and even more fun than with (the great) 60D. If you can afford it now, get the 5DMkII. You won't regret it.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 15, 2012)

param said:


> 5D2 or 5D3? 5D3 certainly.
> Will the 5D3 deliver better "picture quality" than the 60D? For the most part yes.Will buying all this gear help put an end to obsessive day dreaming? No.



My 2cents.... *NOT* most part. 5D III is better than 60D in everything, from chassis, IQ, AF, speed etc.


----------



## archangelrichard (Jul 15, 2012)

GET OUT AND TAKE SOME PICTURES!!!!!

The worst picture is the one you never took. Seriously, you are not talking about that big a difference for snapshot sized prints, 300 dpi x 8 x 10 = 5.4 MP, video is worse (HD is 2 MP, computer screens are smaller) -- You Can't Even View Anything In 18MP!!!!! How Do You know what quality you have right now?

We used to have this problem in computers, people would constantly be waiting for the next big thing and not buying one yet -- not understanding that economic thing called "opportunity cost - what it costs you not to be taking pictures now.

Sure the 5D2 is better and the 5Diii even better and the 1DS IV even better and the 1DX even better and .....; this is called Grass is Greener syndrome -- you have nothing to judge by

And let me add this word of warning - never buy so much camera that you can't afford to replace it when broken / goes for a swim / gets stolen / migrates away for the winter (likely with a so-called friend). It sounds like a 5 D III is that kind of camera to you

My suggestion is to get good and used to the 60d's quality, look for rentals on a 5 D II (to use as a primary body keeping the 60d as a second body) and see if it is worth the money FOR YOUR USAGE! This is not anybody else's camera, it is yours. Many other people here are speaking to their usage, their needs (or worse, just plain snobbery) and don;'t know, can;'t know your needs and usage

I am confused about your need for higher ISO - there is no magic wand, the 5D III is better at noise reduction (making a higher USABLE ISO), but really significantly so? For your expressed need "for shooting f/4 with the 8-15mm Fisheye, as I prefer to shooting during the blue hour(s), and also at night. As well, what meaning has it to get a 8-15mm on a crop?" -- never heard of a tripod (remember the triangle ISO replaces Stutter speed replaces aperture replaces ISO .....)? Ever hear of Lightroom? Photoshop? ways to do this ... what have you tried?

When all has been tried (which you need to learn anyways if you are using a more expensive camera); then consider the new expensive rolls-royce priced camera

It's your money you are wasting


----------



## RC (Jul 15, 2012)

criza said:


> ...I was thinking a lot about getting the 5D Mark II used for 1500$, but I don't know if I would be satisfied with the camera. It's getting old and it's still expensive for my taste....



I think you have answered the question above. You seem like the type of person (and I'm one too) if you cut yourself short of what you truly want it will drive you crazy and you will eventually end up getting what you want later resulting in a waste of money. Spending $1500 on 5DII that you are not thrilled about seems like a waste. If you got the bucks, get the 5D3 now and enjoy--otherwise you'll always wish you had.


----------



## picturesbyme (Jul 15, 2012)

archangelrichard said:


> GET OUT AND TAKE SOME PICTURES!!!!!
> 
> The worst picture is the one you never took. Seriously, you are not talking about that big a difference for snapshot sized prints, 300 dpi x 8 x 10 = 5.4 MP, video is worse (HD is 2 MP, computer screens are smaller) -- You Can't Even View Anything In 18MP!!!!! How Do You know what quality you have right now?
> 
> ...



Liked this the most. 


I might add.... If it's me (and I have a 60D and 5D2 so I'm in a similar situation) I would get the 5D2 which is still an awesome camera - especially for the price (not sure if I understood your comment on being expensive... expensive for what it is? Why? Is there a better and cheaper FF? Expensive overall? Than the 5D3 's going to be what?).
Next year we might have an entry FF body with a better AF. The 5D3's price could be a bit lower too.. But most importantly you'll know what you are missing - if there's anything - from the 5D2.
You need to decide if it's a tool to create photos and your sport photo delivery suffers from the 5D2's AF or it's a status symbol and just wanted some support and justification since you won't be happy until you get the 5D3..
In the latter case I'd say 5D3 all the way. (or 1Dx  )


----------



## lonelywhitelights (Jul 15, 2012)

Ignore the option of the 5D3

for the kind of photography you do the 5D2 is the perfect option and is in a reasonable price range.

I've used both in a studio situation and I can personally say that right now at this point in time I could never justify spending all that extra cash on a 5D3 when they perform identically (literally) in a studio setting. It's just not worth it when the 5D2 is still a bloody fantastic camera - sure the 5D2 is famous for its not-so-great AF system but for me that's not an issue since I manual focus 99% of the time.

Sure, you're not doing studio work but you are doing landscape and macro - neither of which you need an excellent AF system for and nor do you need it for architecture. People & Street - maybe, but still, the AF system is perfectly adequate for this kind of work and getting a 5D3 just for the better AF system isn't necessarily going to better your chances of getting "the shot" - that comes down to practice, practice, practice.

5D2 is the best option for you to go full frame, the cost is excellent for brand new bodies as used bodies are within a few hundred $$$ of that price anyway.

Don't get lured into the 5D3 by all these guys that have jumped the gun! (Most of them have been complaining about the camera in other threads anyway  )


----------



## Axilrod (Jul 15, 2012)

You mentioned the Sigma 85 1.4 and Canon 135 f/2, which are both excellent lenses. But you also mentioned getting a 70-200 f/2.8 II in addition to these two, and I have to say that would be unnecessary. The 70-200 II is arguably the best zoom in the world and about as sharp as the 135 f/2 and definitely sharper than your 200mm f/2.8, which says a lot. I think you would be plenty happy with just the 70-200, it's seriously a freak of a zoom and it'll save you quite a bit of money vs. buying all 3 of the mentioned lenses. Just a thought. 

You'll be very happy with the move to full frame, even the 5DII is a big upgrade from the 60D, but the 5DII's AF is the weak spot, the improvement is massive on the 5D3. 

As for your lenses, that's tough since they are all pretty good ones. The 24mm will be significantly wider on full frame, it'll be up to you to decide if it's wide enough for your liking. You could always get rid of the fisheye and the 200mm and buy a used 5DII and 70-200 f/2.8 II (for about the same price as a new 5DIII. Then you would have a 5DII, 24L, 55mm, 70-200, and the 100L. If you really wanted ultra-wide you could always get rid of the 24L and get a 16-35, which wouldnt be quite as sharp but more versatile for sure. Either way, the 5DII is still a great camera and will feel like a big improvement in IQ over the 60D, the difference in IQ between the 5D2 and 3 is negligible, but the AF is massively better on the 5D3 and the ISO performance is a decent bit better on the 5D3.


----------



## elflord (Jul 15, 2012)

> I was thinking a lot about getting the 5D Mark II used for 1500$, but I don't know if I would be satisfied with the camera. It's getting old and it's still expensive for my taste.



It's cheaper than the 5DIII. I don't really follow the part about it "getting old". It is an older release, but if you compare it with the 5DIII, in terms of both features and performance, the only thing that is showing its age is the AF system.

I already had a 5DII when the 5DIII was released, and I just couldn't get excited about the 5DIII largely because I didn't have any need for the new AF capabilities. 



criza said:


> That's what I forgot to mention! I ruled out the 5Dc, because I would miss Magic Lantern, it's very handy...
> 
> The thing about the 5DII is, if I go full frame, why not spend 2000$ more for the 5DIII?



Assuming that you don't have unlimited funds, the answer is "because you could buy the 135L AND the Sigma 85mm for the same amount of money".

You need to weigh what you would get for that $2000 with what you could do with the money otherwise. The most compelling enhancement on the 5DIII is the AF system. However, the "bad AF" on the 5DII is actually quite good unless you make heavy use of servo mode (e.g. birds in flight, sports). It was and still is the camera of choice for many wedding photographers who need AF to work in demanding conditions (the key is that they are conditions where servo mode is not required or even optimal)


----------



## funkboy (Jul 16, 2012)

I agree with Archangelrichard.


Stick with your current camera. The 60D is really nice. That fold-out screen counts for a lot. It's unlikely that the camera is holding you back.
Sink the money into lenses. Make sure any lenses that you put any real money into can be used on FF.
Review decision in a year when you're a better photographer and 5DIII is cheaper


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 16, 2012)

lonelywhitelights said:


> Ignore the option of the 5D3
> 
> for the kind of photography you do the 5D2 is the perfect option and is in a reasonable price range.
> 
> ...



This is where the 5D III is shine: indoor and outdoor & day or night & still or fast shooting.

I had 5D II for 3-4 months. I couldn't stand the AF system and fixed 400 Auto ISO in M mode.


----------



## Tcapp (Jul 16, 2012)

param said:


> Will buying all this gear help put an end to obsessive day dreaming? No.



Haha. +1. Very true. I love my 5d3, and i wouldn't ever want to shoot a wedding with a D800, but I still wouldnt mind having a d800. It would be fun to play with.


----------



## criza (Oct 6, 2012)

Alright, I think I owe an update to all answerer to my post. I even almost stopped my "obsessive day dreaming" 8).

In the mean time I bought a 5Dc, shot 1500 pictures in 4 weeks, and sold it with a nice profit last week. I was more than heavily excited by the pictures the 5Dc offered me. I F______ loved it! I even didn't miss the AutoISO of my 60D at all..

What's next? I will buy an used 5DII, because I don't want to use my 60D any more, after seeing what the 5Dc is able to produce. The shallower depth of field of my first full frame was enough to let me think no more about what kind of camera I want to shoot with. A FF camera comes very handy, as I own only primes, and none has a higher aperture number than 2.8. I also own two manual focus lenses, and only because of that I give a S___ about the antique AF system of the 5DII.

Maybe somebody is wondering why I didn't keep the 5Dc instead of getting a 5DII? Good question, I think it was because I want to shoot video occasionally as well, and the back screen of the 5Dc was just horrible. Also I couldn't hold myself back to sell the 5Dc with profit. Not to forget the lack of AFMA on the 5Dc (still the auto focus of my 5Dc was surprisingly accurate on all of my lenses..)

And yes, I got me a 135mm f/2 lens I was talking about. But not the "modern" EF one, but the old nFD, and already converted it to EF with the kit of Edmika. This happened this week, so I only had the time to go outside with it once (and only using it on the 60D) and honestly speaking, I am somehow surprised by the fair amount of CA. Accurate focusing with it is a another story. And there comes the second thing I liked most about the 5Dc, the large viewfinder! Every time I look through the viewfinder of my 60D now, I am just terribly disappointed. I am looking forward to use the 5DII (after I found one for a fair price) with my new 135mm f/2 lens! The converted lens has AF confirmation, but after my shooting I found out that it's not really reliable, a lot of shots where the AF point was blinking on the non moving subject turned out to be not sharp (at all). On my other converted lens the AF confirmation is much more reliable, and I am not sure why. I also tried the to use the manual focus lens with the ML focus trap feature, and it worked quite good, but it's not really helpful when shooting moving subjects (at least not for my shooting situations), and for non moving ones you mostly have enough time to focus.

One thing I am (or was) still wondering about, how much influence the pixel size has to the IQ of a camera? I know the 5Dc has the highest of all canon cameras! But after looking it up on the inter web, I guess everything above 4, or maybe 5µm makes no difference any more... 

Thanks for reading, every further comment is appreciated!


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Oct 13, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> param said:
> 
> 
> > 5D2 or 5D3? 5D3 certainly.
> ...



Yes I had the 60d with 17-55 2.8 and now I have the 5d3 with 24-70 ii and its better in everyway. Never regretted my decision. I do not shoot professionally so I could have considered the soon to be released 6d which may be an option for you but the 5d iii is just a great body like dual cards af system etc. great iso performance.


----------

