Not sure what the budget is, but ideally id suggest the 5d3, 24-70 2.8 II and 70-200 2.8 IS. Not much you cant do with that setup. The 7d with 24-70 can be a bit long for indoor shots. And at 2.8 your iso will be higher than what the 7d can handle...the 5d3 with any fast lenses would be my suggestion. Fps are plenty for kids and whatnot....

woollybear said:

Aw..come on Neuro...that's a little harsh isn't it? I learn a lot here from reading opinions of opinions of opinions....

Click to expand...

LOL. Fair enough...

[quote author=Pocket-lint]
We'll be updating this list as we get each new DSLR into our review labs. When we find one that becomes the king of its particular category, we'll be inking the necessary alterations. So, rest assured that whatever you're reading here, whenever you're reading it, is the very best DSLR cameras of the few we've tested
[/quote]

I added that bit at the end. I wonder if they've tested a 5DIII?

If you shoot a digital camera, Its possible through this mans research. Its very sad but his legacy lives on in all our cameras.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/11/21/former-kodak-scientist-bayer-filter-inventor-bryce-bayer-dies-aged-83

as others have mentioned good current photos of the gear helps (make sure everything has been cleaned), take the caps off of the lenses and give the buyer a good idea what sort of shape the glass is in. An honest description of the condition of the gear goes a long way. see what the going rate is on ebay and amazon for the used parts and then decide where you want to post it. If you want it to sell fast just take the average price and discount it 5-10%. Also check who else is selling the same stuff where ever you post it and consider undercutting their price by a few points. Craigslist is good, I always leave my phone number for folks to call me and tell them text messages and emails will be ignored. Your more likely to get a serious buyer if they contact you via phone. Of course the usual CL cautions, no shipping, cash only, meet at a public location (local starbucks etc). Other places are fredmiranda.com (there is a one time buy and sell fee), photography on the net (no fee, but must be a 30 day member and have a certain number of posts), and of course ebay.

brianleighty said:

the 90mm macro seems interesting. If they could price it somewhere around $500-$600 then I'd be interested. I'm just about confident that they'll try to price it closer to the Canon 100L IS though which is funny to me that they seem to price their macros so close to Canon's which at that point it doesn't make any sense to go away from something you know will work to something you're taking more risk on.

Click to expand...

Not really, it looks like the macro will be (much) more expensive which is rather disappointing. These are prices from two dutch webshops:

Tamron 90mm F2.8 AF Di VC USD Macro:
999 Euro (this must be the recommended retail price as it is not yet available).

Canon EF 100mm F/2.8 L USM iS:
717 Euro after cashback (cashback is 70 Euro)

I'd get the 5D MK II or MK III.
For low light use, unless the subjects are very still, f/2.8 is only fast enough for slow shutter speeds, and f/4 won't do it.
You might be better off with some low cost prime lenses for the low light work than a expensive zoom.
A 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 is like 30mm on your crop.
A 85mm f/1.8 is a very good value, and a wide angle lens like a 28mm f/1.8 would handle much of your needs. The 85 is good for portraits and sports. A alternate to the 85 might be a 100mm f/2.
For outdoor use with reasonably good light, its hard to beat the kit deal with the 24-105mmL.
Watch for daily deals on ebay and jump immediately. 500 5D MK II's were blown out this morning for $2599.

There are several advantages to FF and Crop formats. Pixel density and MP are only one part of why to have each body. I agree that in post processing, cropping a FF image to a similar Crop size is a wash in terms of IQ. On the other end of the process however (clicking the shutter), where the camera matters, there is a difference. A crop body will give you more reach and allow you to compose/frame the way you wish. Cropping images after the fact can be a chore and takes quite a bit of time if you are shooting sports sequentially, etc. Depending on the crop body, it may give you superior frame rates not available in FF. My 60D has an articulating sensor that I use occasionally. The crop body may give you a better lens selection depending on your equipment. And crop bodies are less expensive than FF. If I could only have one body, it would be FF. However, I often carry two bodies and switch back and forth to have either better reach/frame rate or better width.

All I'm saying is that there is more to consider when comparing crop vs. FF besides megapixels and crop factor.

littlepilotdude said:

neuroanatomist said:

For example, the 600/4L IS II

Click to expand...

If I were just starting out, and being on a budget, would this be a good lens?

Click to expand...

Thats just Neuro struggling to find anyway to bring up he finally got a 600 f/4.

+1000 for the 135 and also using a 1.4x, this combo takes very little of a hit due to the extender.

Brad-man, thank you for saving me $70!!! B&H had just dropped the price to $299, but then I saw your post...

Neuro, thank you for the tip on the Lowepro Apex 20 AW. I'll have to check that one out.

Thanks all, this is very useful for me too!

if you're going to buy used, why not buy a new one on ebay for 2500 bucks. not sure if the warranty is valid, but heck, that's gotta be cheaper than most used ones.... and no light leak!

Perhaps it's down to video being lower resolution to photo and appearing sharper to the eye. Also, I'm not sure if the noise reduction filter is active with video. This is well known make still images look soft from Canon cameras.


Shoot raw, then sharpen using he unsharp mask in Photoshop.

Nice work Ryan

70-200 since you have a 50 1.2 already

Looks like you are about to save some dineros. Are you still going to buy in January despite not knowing what Canon may announce with regards to the new 7D II and possible high MP camera?

I would rather have to sacrifice some noise to keep the pixel density of the 7D image. A bird photo that doesn't resolve any details isn't much good even if it's free of noise.

I think the 7D replacement should help these concerns to a large extent.

pwp said:

verysimplejason said:

I am thinking it will be prudent for me to wait for the next G*

Click to expand...

Hah! I think that elusive, perfect NextG is always somewhere over the rainbow. I've been putting it off with each new G-Series release since my very brief, underwhelming ownership of a G3. "I'll just see what the next one is like..." I've never really minded taking my FF with me.

But you know what? The G15 might be the one to tempt me...the bright lens, quicker AF and the strong high iso performance and small size. It's certainly worth a test drive.

-PW

Click to expand...

G11 did it for me at least at that time, a lot better than the previous G series and almost as good as G12. G15 is good enough to be a successor if only they retained the swivel screen and the extra wheel. They should have replaced it with a button just like DSLRs if they really can't add a wheel. Without the swivel screen, this G15 can be replaced with an S110 if you don't use the tunnel viewfinder that much.

Dylan777 said:

verysimplejason said:

dolina said:

Sony's A-mount SLT is 'technically' a mirrorless. Demount the lens from the body and you will see the A99's full frame immediately.

I was looking at the Leica M but since getting the 40/2.8 Pancake of Canon the requirement waned.

I wish Canon's EOS M was the first sub-$3000 FF mirrorless but I guess Canon was trying to improve profit margins with their APS-C sensors.

Click to expand...

+1. Sony has already the first full frame mirrorless Camera with AF and interchangeable lenses. The only thing missing I think is the typical mirrorless form factor. A99 even have a great AF and a very good viewfinder already. Counting the available Zeiss lenses, the realization of a full-frame with great AF, great lenses, small form factor and mirrorless isn't that far off with Sony. Sony, please make your A99 smaller...

Click to expand...

I don't see how you can put that Sony FF mirrorless in pocket ??? Unless, you carry a purse with you ;D

Click to expand...

It's not pocketable that's why I have also highlighted that fact. However, we've seen already what Sony can do with RX1. Putting the interchangeable lenses on its body will require it to bulge a little bit more. I doubt that it will be pocketable unless they create a new mount and an adapter much like what EOS-M had done.

neuroanatomist said:

verysimplejason said:

It's not how many AF points you put but how sensitive they are. As only the center one is a cross-point, I can only hope for the better for the other AF points.

Click to expand...

Actually, for tracking moving subjects, a lot of it is how many there are, and the more of them, the more densely spaced, the better.

Click to expand...

Correct but I'm just hoping for a few very good points in 6D since it's already advertised that it'll only have that many AF points. That said, I'd rather have few good points than many but isn't sensitive enough.

Maybe for 2013 with the 7D mark II ;D

Random Orbits said:

The 50 f/1.2 is not focus-by-wire.

Click to expand...

Whoops, learned something new today, it's apparently only the 85L which has that.

Random Orbits said:

It's only disadvantage compared to the 300L is losing a stop at 300mm, which isn't too bad if you're outside.

Click to expand...

It's not only the 1 stop more light (= lower iso), but imho f5.6 is the absolute minimum @300mm most of the time to have even a small object in focus unless it's in a right angle to the lens. Actually I'd like to shoot @f8 more often, but am limited by the mediocre iso capability of the 18mp sensor - the bokeh is still beautiful and pretty blurred.

So to me the disadvantage of the 70-300L is that focusing gets harder @f5.6, and even more so with a tc @f8 - and of course it's less sharp than a tele prime which is to be expected.

You all rock. I lean toward the 2X after seeing Neuro's shots. I think 95% of the time, it'll be on the 70-200 2.8 II.

haha thanks

Dylan777 said:

Sell your 5D(I or II), 7D and all crop lenses. Use that money for 1D X or 5D III.

Click to expand...

Are you referring to the OP? I don't think he has any of those bodies. Or did you mean in general? I have thought about it and I'd rather have two cameras bodies - one crop and one FF - than have just one FF body. I like the flexibility of having both.