How to proceed?

[archangelrichard]

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]

...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]

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

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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 )

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]

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]

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

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]

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.

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.