Yet Another 5DII/5DIII Dilemma

[MacroBug]

I am a long time lurker and first time poster. I have been shooting with a 7D for the last 2 years, always with plans to upgrade to FF. I am an enthusiast who shoots all types of photography; macro, landscape, wildlife, sports and family. I don't shoot much video. I currently only have 1 EF-S lens (17-55) and a number of L zooms and primes. Now that the 5DIII is shipping, I am unsure if the additional cost is worth it to me. I feel I have 2 options:

1. Keep my 7D and buy a Mark II kit (7D primarily for wildlife/sports and Mark II for family, landscape & macro)
2. Sell my 7D and 17-55 lens and buy a Mark III kit (will sarifice wildlife reach)

I realize the Mark II has autofocus limitations and the Mark III is a superior camera. As I'm an enthusiast, I don't really need a back-up body. I'm having  difficulty pulling the trigger on the Mark III and am hoping some objective feedback will assist me in making the decision (I'm actually leaning towards the Mark II). Thanks!

[Axilrod]

That's a tough choice, but I think you would be better off with the Mark II and the 7D.  It's nice to have a crop sensor since it kinda doubles the number of focal lengths you have available.  The 5DII is still a great camera and will be for a long time.  I think you'll be happy either way, but since you shoot birds and wildlife I think hanging onto the 7D would be a good idea.  Good luck either way!

[takoman46]

I think that's a decision only you can make for yourself. I've been hearing a lot of people believe that the extra reach of the crop sensor on the 7D is very important for wildlife shooting.  I don't shoot wildlife professionally, but snap a few wildlife shots from time to time when traveling. So in any case, I really don't miss the extra reach of a crop sensor and would much rather have the benefits of a FF sensor in terms of image quality and ISO performance. The 7D is too noisy for my work and just doesn't make the cut in IQ compared to my 5DmkII and hopefully tomorrow my mkIII  .

Anyway, my 2 cents given your two options is to sell your 7D and 17-55 and buy a mkIII. I think all other benefits of doing so will outweigh the crop reach factor. 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

If you can get in on some of the low price 5D MK II deals mentioned in the forum, you will not lose any$$ if you upgrade in a year, so I'd get a mark II.  Its going to be popular for a long time.
 
I sold my 5D MK II this week, and am going to the MK III, but I have lenses, batteries, flashes, all the extras which will work with my MK III, so the price difference for the new body is my only cost.

[te4o]

There are hundreds like you MacroBug. If not thousands. I am one too. We need more information, more RealLife comparisons, more than are available now. I started asking for direct comparisons 2vs3 some days ago but it is still early, too early. Give it another month, don't rush now for a decision. This is my advice. I am waiting another three four weeks before I decide. There is a lot to be learnt about the new 5D and I hope the users in this forum will be our helpers as usual.
In reality paying 1800 dollars more is not a catastrophe if you use the cam for many years to come the difference will be just a painful memory four years from now. But it is sick that Canon doesn't make it easy: four years ago as the MkII appeared it was a lot easier - almost no competition. Now even the MkII is good competition for the MkIII in terms of IQ not to speak of other options.
So, we need more info to decide. I won't spend the money just for the fun of it.

[MacroBug]

te4o I agree with you 100%. I would definitely not make a Mark III purchase until I have seen a number of reviews, hear first-hand user feedback and see some comparisons. I've waited this long... However, if the Mark III lives up to the specs it's going to be a tough decision and would require a big gulp prior to writing that check...