Gear Talk > EOS Bodies - For Stills

Help me upgrade my 550d

<< < (2/6) > >>

JPAZ:
My 2 cents...Was shooting a 50d and was frustrated with high ISO noise.  Were that not an issue, I was otherwise happy.  A friend has a 7d.  While it is a step up from the 50d, the high ISO noise performance was not enough improved, IMHO, to justify moving to this body.  I did go with a 5D3 (long thoughts about the $) and wow, I can't believe the difference!  Then, add in the focus point improvements and I am really convinced I made the right move.

TriGGy:
If you can make it happen, go for the 5D3. You have to consider the possibility you might have wished that you did get the 5D3 months after you return to Europe and that would probably be stressful.

If budget is a problem, then yes, 7D may be good for you *for now*. You will have a camera with the same sensor and metering system but with more control and useful capabilities than you current body. Think of it as a 550D on steroids (except for the high ISO performance). With the 5D3 the ISO 12800 is usable except for pixel peepers. The new generation Digic 5+ processor makes a big difference. 

As all with "big ticket" purchases, there will always be some feeling of buyer's remorse at first but in my case, as cheapskate as I am who would more than likely return stuff for a refund, I never got to regret my 5D3 purchase - it's more than my 7D can do and I am very happy with it. The +$4000  I paid for the body with the battery grip is a distant memory now and I don't miss it anymore (and I only bought the 5D3 last August).

I wish you the best whatever choice you make.

biscuit:
Hi again, OP here:

Sincere thanks all for the advice.  I am of course convinced that the 5DIII is the better body, but I confess that I was a little surprised by the unanimity of opinion. 

I'm hesitating because with the 5DIII I would end up with just the 24-105 f4, 70-200 f4, and a 50mm prime.  With the 7D I could get the body and also a few primes (28 and 100 say), with cash to spare.  (Realistically I might buy even more lenses, leaving no cash to spare...)

Is the 5D option really so much better in low light that it offsets the slower f4 24-105, bearing in mind that much of my use would be indoors? 

neuroanatomist:

--- Quote from: biscuit on November 12, 2012, 03:04:29 PM ---I'm hesitating because with the 5DIII I would end up with just the 24-105 f4, 70-200 f4, and a 50mm prime.  With the 7D I could get the body and also a few primes (28 and 100 say), with cash to spare.  (Realistically I might buy even more lenses, leaving no cash to spare...)

Is the 5D option really so much better in low light that it offsets the slower f4 24-105, bearing in mind that much of my use would be indoors?

--- End quote ---
I think the 5DIII low light advantage definitely offsets the stop lost going from f/2.8 to f/4.  A larger issue is that for many ambient interior scenes, even f/2.8 is not enough - on a FF camera, let alone APS-C. 

As for primes, using them wide open in low light has it's disadvantages, too - thinner DoF being the main one.  But the great thing about a FF camera is that you have more choices - a thinner DoF for a given max aperture, plus the ability to shoot at higher shutter speeds with a slower lens or a stopped-down fast lens.

crasher8:
I went from a T2i to a 7D to a 5D3. Wish I would have skipped the 7D. I suggest sell all you have except the strobe and prime. Get a 5D3 and 24-105 f/4IS.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version