5dII with lens or 5DIII/D800

[rcal]

Hi All,
I'm starting to get into photography and I have been shooting for about 6 months with handy me down gear from my older brother. Right now I shoot with a Canon 20d while using a couple non L-series and a couple sigma lenses. 4 out of 5 are EF mounts. With the new 5DIII and the D800 out in a couple weeks, I was wondering should I upgrade to them or buy a 5DII with kit or without and buy a nice lens (24-70 L-series). I will be using it mostly for still photography. I like nature pics with lots of landscapes and some animals. I want to get into portraits of people as well. My 20d seems nice but I think I have already started to outgrow it. I am not interested in canon's rebel series. Thanks!

 

[Random Orbits]

If you don't need fast AF for sports or action, then the 5DII is a good choice. The image quality that you can get with the 5DII and the 24-70L or 24-105L should be better than the the 5DIII and the non-L lenses you have a lot of the time.

 

[riverach27]

Ok, you are looking to photo shoot nature and outdoor things. All cameras can take awesome photos, one better then the other mmm i don't think so it all depends on how your are going to use the camera and what lens you have. For the situation that you planning to put the cameras in, all three would do great. It all depends on how much money you have. Now if you put kit lens on these cameras your photos will not come out that great, the lens make the picture!
If you are saying that you can get the 5DII with the 24-70mm F/2.8 L lens then get that, if your other options leave with out the $$ to buy a L lens. According to what you are planning to do with the camera the 5DII is still the best option for the cost.

 

[vuilang]

5d2+24-70 or 35L........

 

[wickidwombat]

I would say if you are budget limited go for a 5Dmk2 kit with the 24-105 f4L IS and get yourself a 50mm f1.4
for animals you are going to need to go long so down the track look at a 100-400 or 70-300
but bear in mind the 5dmk2 AF is very limited but can still get good shots as long as you work within its limits
if you tell us the budget it will make it easier to recomend stuff

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

If you don't need fast AF for sports or action, then the 5DII is a good choice. The image quality that you can get with the 5DII and the 24-70L or 24-105L should be better than the the 5DIII and the non-L lenses you have a lot of the time.

Most definitely.

 

[mauro.canon]

5d mark II ....?

http://500px.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=5D+MARK+ii&type=tags&page=1&order=popularity

5D MARK iii..dynamic range=5d mark II

all with 5d mark II:
http://www.difrusciaphotography.com/main.php

 

[sweetcancer]

Another vote for 5D II + either 24-70L or 24-105L. (I bought EF 50mm 1.4 and 24-105L. I would go that route again any day.) And i must say, the AF in 5D II doesn't suck as much as the internet claims. It's certainly a step up from 20D.

I would guess that for landscapes and people portraits there hardly is any difference in the image quality between 5d mk II and 5D mk III.

 

[anim8r79]

Wow! Those pics on 500px.com are amazing. I, too, am on the fence between the 5D MkII and the MkIII. I always forget the amazing pictures that have been captured with the 5D MkII. I guess the newest thing isn't always the best. One thing is true - the camera is just a tool. The best photography comes from within the photographer.

Can anyone put an argument in for the 5D MkIII, besides the better AF and frames per second? The HDR thing seems like a gimmick. The expanded ISO is nice, as is the built-in electronic level. But worth an extra $1500?