Hello I am looking to upgrade from a 60d.

I have spoken to a few professional photographers I know and they have both advocated a full frame sensor.
I went to our local shop here in Nashville and I was steered to a 7D which is still cropped. I have looked at the 5Dii and the 5diii,the 6d seems like some odd hybrid, half the af points of 7d but not a 5dii either. I have a budget for 1-2 new L lenses and a body. I will have some great coaching as I step up to a higher performing camera.

My Subjects
I have a toddler who I will need speed for, some animal pictures, nature and outdoors, 40% of shooting will be indoors, most in lower light. I may shoot some birds, but not much, some abstract/ architectural type/ general purpose.baptisims and other church and social opportunities.

Lenses
I was thinking a 24-70 unless the kit lense 24-105 is better at my overall usage???

So having said all of that do I pony up more cash and get the 5d?
Is the 5dii fast enough? Is the 5diii overkill?

Looking to shoot RAW and run aperture or light room for my post editing.

On a side note I will be using the camera 60% of the time my wife will be learning and relying on the AF features initially.


Thank you all for your help and expertise.

Thank you

Mark

I am considering purchasing another canon body and I am interested in a full frame sensor. I see that the canon 1d mark iii 21.1 mp and the 5d mark ii come with a full frame sensors. However, there are some differences in their autofocus points, ISO range and frames per second. I currently own a canon 7d body and some sigma lens (24-70mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8 & 120-300mm f/2.8). I am leaning more toward the canon 1d mark iii but one of my concerns is the ISO range. The ISO range is lower than the 7d and 5d. Your suggestions and options would greatly be appreciated.

Hello I am looking to upgrade from a 60d.

I have spoken to a few professional photographers I know and they have both advocated a full frame sensor.
I went to our local shop here in Nashville and I was steered to a 7D which is still cropped. I have looked at the 5Dii and the 5diii,the 6d seems like some odd hybrid, half the af points of 7d but not a 5dii either. I have a budget for 1-2 new L lenses and a body. I will have some great coaching as I step up to a higher performing camera.

I have a toddler who I will need speed for, some animal pictures, nature and outdoors, 40% of shooting will be indoors, most in lower light. I may shoot some birds, but not much, some abstract/ architectural type/ general purpose. I was thinking 24-70 unless the kit lense 24-105 is better at my overall usage.

So having said all of that to I pony up more cash and get the 5d?
Is the 5dii fast enough? Is the 5diii overkill?

Looking to shoot RAW and run aperture or light room for my post.

On a side note I will be using the camera 60% of the time my wife will be learning and relying on the AF features initially.


Thank you all for your help and expertise.

Thank you

Mark

So instead of preordering the 6D, the recent 5D3 deal at $2500 was just so sweet (with or without warranty), I just grabbed it!

Since I'm not within the US, I have to have it shipped to me by my friend. So the question is... For the 5D3 owners out there, can anybody give me the dimensions of the camera box (not the shipping box... the one from Canon)? I can't seem to find that info on the web.

It's available!

http://www.canon.com.hk/en/product/catalog/productItemDetails.do?prrfnbr=200433

It also supports UHS-I standard SDHC/ SDXC memory card. What took them so long?!?!

With the 6D due to be launched in the coming weeks what does everyone think will happen to the 5D MK II? Will it disappear? Quickly, or be phased out gradually? Possibly a reduction in price for the MK II so that it is not too close to the 6D price and competing with it?

The 5D MKIII has been gradually dropping in price but must be about to reach a limit so that it doesn't compete with the 6D? Presumably this limit will need to hold for a good 6 months to allow the 6D to capitalise on profits from initial sales? i.e., no further price drops on the 5D MKIII for a while...

Is there a market that can support all 3 cameras? !

I recently spoke to a sales person at a camera event who suggested that there may be a market for all three cameras and that Canon had no plans to cease production of the 5D MKII. But at a relatively close price point to the 6D this surely cannot be good for sales of either camera?

Hi!
I was wondering with which lens (on FF/crop) one gets the largest object still isolated from the background.
It is probably safe to define "still isolated" as "if near focus is 0% and infinity is 100%, putting the focus to 80% (maybe 90% for macro lenses) still isolates an object at focal distance".

Of course in a single shot (no pano) with a canon camera and without any tilting, post-processing or other manipulations.

What I don't mean is the distance from the camera, but the size of object fitting the conditions above.

I have been using an old SD950 IS for my pocketable camera. It produces very nice photos, but could use an upgrade. The only camera that has really interested me thus far is the Sony RX100. Unfortunately, $650 is a bit steep for a camera which won't get that much use, and where the tech is evolving so quickly. Since my only real requirements for the replacement are manual controls and the ability to shoot in RAW, should I pick one of these up for $229 from Amazon, or should I wait for a superior camera (faster lens, higher MP) to be released (for much more money, sometime in the future)? Any opinions from S100 owners would be appreciated.

Hey this is probably a dumb question, but here goes...

I want to go FF, but loosing the length i get from a cropped body worries me. But I had a thought...

I am using a 450D (12MP) and am thinking of getting me a 5D MKIII (22MP)... If i were to crop the FF image to 12MP, what is the crop factor? 1.8 (22/12)??? If this is the case, with a 5D MKIII image cropped, i will actually be getting more magnification than i would with my 450D... and a lot better quality (i would hope)...

Am I barking up the wrong tree here? Am I being dumb (i'm not renown for my maths skills)?

Dear Canon friends,

I'm doing a short fiction film next Tuesday, using the 5D mIII for the first time.

Need some quick help here: what are the best setting for the 5D mIII shooting video (short film)?

What about Cinestyle from Technicolor? How does that work? Is it a post color correction thing or in camera? Good option?

Thanks, and have a nice day.

When i first got the 5dmkiii it seemed to take wonderfull pictures but now it seems the picture i take is not as sharp as the image i see in the lense. I took some video and the video images are much sharper then still shots of the same subject mater and light conditions. Can you help me with this.I am sure its the settings. Thanks for any advise.
Rod

1DX pricing has started to drop in Australia

I'am buying one next year just waiting for New Year sales before buying it and I rather get in the new year (like buying a car if you buy it in December it is already a year old in January)

Have been watching the price slowly come down in Australia over the last few weeks

Grey market is anywhere between $6199 to $6969

Canon dealers are between $7199 $7215 $7297 $7599

I was in Japan earlier this month the 1DX is going for 648.000 yen works out to about $7623 Aus dollars

So at the moment it is cheaper to buy it in Aus either way

thanks

I stopped by my favourite hang out, my local camera store, the other day. I perhaps spend a little too much time there since I appear to be on a first name basis with literally every employee there... but I digress.

While chatting to the people to whom I like to give lots of money in exchange for fancy photographic toys, I asked them how the 5D mk III was doing against the D800. The answer actually surprised me, given the doomsday prophecies you hear around here. Apparently, they've had more returns for the D800, and the D4 and D600 to a lesser extent, than any other camera. I know the left-focusing problem on the D800 was one of the big ones, as was the dust in the D600, but apparently lots of little things have been going wrong, too. It would appear that Nikon's quality control might be in need of a shakeup.

My purpose here isn't to light a Nikon flag on fire and piss boiling oil into its eyes. I actually have an enormous respect for Nikon and have long maintained that the photographer makes the camera, not the other way around. Hell, I've seen some pretty jaw-droppingly amazing stuff come out of the Pentax K series that makes anything I've ever shot with my 5D mk III look like a pile of crap. My point, rather, is to express a thought I've held for some time now: balance. It seems to me that there's been a balance between Nikon and Canon for a while now. There always seems to be some kind of equalising factor that restores this balance so that, in the end, neither has such a huge advantage that tips the balance too far to one side.

Anyway, given some of the posts I've read about how Canon is dying and Nikon is the glorious saviour that will lead us all to the promised land, I thought that a bit of a reality check might be in order.

Hello,

Is the 200mm F2.8 II a good portrait lens?

Hi think I may go the lens route, but thought I'd check what you guys would do

Currently have 5D3, 8-15L, 35L, 50L 100L 70-200L II I have a couple of EX 600’s and the radio trigger.

I want to keep the FE although I don't use it much I love what it can create, colours, sharpness everything.

35L I'm not loving it, I like it, but don't love it, but since getting the 50L I'm using it way less, and i love the 50, keeping the 100L macro, much the same as the 8-15L it's Greta when I need it, and the 70-200 is a keeper too.

So do I get the 1Dx? Had a shot and love it, but it only has for me a few nice to have advantages, mainly better AF and FP/s better spot metering, all of which I would like, but can live without.

I have the budget to get this if I sell the 5D3.

Or 3 lenses.

24L love the look of the images I'm seeing from this lens, especially for environmental portraits, and the odd landscape.

85L had it before, but it was frustrating on the 5D2 I've heard it's much better on the 5D3 I'd mostly use it f/2 or wider. When I look back at the keepers I have with this lens that I love the images, but it was too inconsistent on the 5d2.

135L again I've had this before, on a 30D but it wasn't great, but I love the look on FF and I'm better fotog now that's I was then.

If I go for the lens option it means selling my 35L

What would you guys do?

Here is an example of my personal pics http://500px.com/AfterImagePhotography I get paid for a little work, but less than 1000gbp per year, so mainly for hobby stuff. I prefer to do most of my images in camera, I can PP and do it well, but I prefer not to, I'm more of an overall image guy than a pixel peeper

Thanks

all new DSLR´s have issues so what will it be?

Whilst the Lomo isn't news to many of us, it appears worthy of a short BBC news article.

Though most of us would run screaming from its "charming rustic virtues", I must admit to rather liking some if the results you can get - hands up all those who have applied cross-processing or vignetting to some of our own images in post?

However I suppose it's a double-edged sword in that, if it gets more people interested in photography, then good, but if it makes every idiot think they are a photographer, then oh dear... Rather like the advent of cheap home recording gear making talentless morons think they are the next Rolling Zeppelin or Elton Wonder.

Still wouldn't buy one though - what? wait a week or two to see the results? That's crazy!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20434270

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-20442725

Hi guys,

I know this topic probably came up a bunch of times...I'm looking for a 70-200 F2.8 lens.
I've looked at the tamron, sigma and the canon mark i and mark ii...but I cant decide which one!
Anyone have experience with the Sigma and the Canon 70-200 mark i and mark ii that can compare the quality and image quality?!?

Thanks!

BTW I'm shooting with the 5D mark III

I'm thinking about buying a used WA lens. In your opinion, for almost the same price would you take the 17-40 F/4 L or the 16-35 F/2.8 L I. The 5D mark III would be the body to go with...

So my friend told me that it is better to use ISOs that are multiples of 160 since that is the camera's native ISO levels and the ISOs between those are just "pushed or pulled" digitally. Is this true? Is there any real world difference in the native vs non native ISOs. I've tried doing some research on it and have found conflicting information. I'm just trying to figure out if there are certain ISOs that I should use or avoid. -Thanks

Looking at getting a Vello Shutterboss while they're on sale, for my 5DIII. Which version is better, the 3-pin connection or the sub-mini connection? (/which one will work)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/749827-REG/Vello_RC_C2_ShutterBoss_Timed_Remote_for.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/749826-REG/Vello_RC_C1_ShutterBoss_Timed_Remote_for.html

I'm looking at either the 1.4X III or the 2X III from Canon. I'll be using them on a 5DIII primarily with a 70-200 2.8 II. It's for the times I'm shooting wildlife, which isn't often, but I do have a trip coming up in December.

How mushy are pics with the 2X? Is the little extra reach on the 1.4 worth adding? Or am I just as well off to crop a sharp image?

Thanks in advance.

As usual I took my tripod, gimbal 1D4extenders etc. After setting up the Red Kites arrived and I thought I'd try a few handheld. Well it didn't take to long to figure out the new lens can be handheld all day doing wildlife. New needed to use the tripod. Could never do that with the old one. Pics are sharp even at 500mm and 500th sec. This is worth every penny. Im no body builder either.

Hi All,

Well i've been thinking about this dilemma for a few days and have narrowed it to 3 choices. Which one would you choose below?

1. Buy the 70-200mm IS MK II for about $2099 new

2. Buy the 135L used at about $800 in craigslist + a 70-200mm 2.8 non-IS $1299 new

3. Buy the 135L used at about $800 in craigslist + a 70-200mm f/4 IS $1099 new

4. Any other suggestions based on my use below?

Im new to paid photography though been a hobbyist for years. Recently upgraded to 5D MK III which makes me think that i dont need the 2.8 with IS since i can always bump up the ISO to compensate and i don't do sports photography.. Also interested with the 135L since i have never seen a bad review on it. I am and will be shooting 80% indoor/outdoor portraits for babies, engagement shoots and fitness models. I do predict that about 20-30% of my business will be weddings in 2013. As of now only have 1 wedding book and another on the way for 2013 so mostly portraits/engagement shoots at the moment.

anyways let me know what you think..

Current equipment: 5D MK III, 24-105 f/4 L, 50mm f/1.2 L, 28-75mm f/2.8 Tamron