60D vs 7D with FF in the near future:

[Kuscali]

I recently parted with my Sony A700, I had enough of Sony and their pellicle mirror shenanigans (I know Canon made them too but there is a reason that is not the case anymore). My eventual goal is to get a Full Frame, as a matter of fact, I need a full frame for it's hi iso capabilities. Problem is though I cannot finance it before I go off to vacation, so a crop body will have to do, and will suffice as a backup in the future. I am facing 2 problems, I cannot make up my mind between the 60D and the 7D, and I do not know if the hi iso capabilities of theses cameras will impress me, and if I should just brown bag it more to get a 5D mark II/ (or Mark III, but almost surely going to be inflated early adopter price as well as no availability).

The lenses I plan to purchase are:
UWA:
Either the Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5 II (the new one that was released recently by Sigma) or the Samyang 14mm f/2.8
Fast standard prime:
50mm f/1.8 (tried and true)
Midrange zoom & portrait lens:
24-105mmL IS (will this be good for low light? 3 stops of shutter speed improvement vs f/2.8?)

Thoughts?

Thank You

 

[c-law]

Remember that the IS on the 24-105 will only help with stationary subjects. So if you are shooting portraits with that lens you are better off with the one stop faster 24-70 for subjects that can move + you'll get better subject isolation from the shallower DOF.

As for which camera to get, I'd go with the 7D myself but that is more my personal preference than an specific knowledge of the ISO comparison between that and the 60D.

Chris

 

[Admin US West]

Remember that the IS on the 24-105 will only help with stationary subjects. So if you are shooting portraits with that lens you are better off with the one stop faster 24-70 for subjects that can move + you'll get better subject isolation from the shallower DOF.

As for which camera to get, I'd go with the 7D myself but that is more my personal preference than an specific knowledge of the ISO comparison between that and the 60D.

Chris

I certainly would not want to hang a 24-70mm L on a 60D. It is so front heavy that it is difficult to hold still, and you need a high shutter speed, while with a 24-105 you can get away with slow shutter speeds. There is also the lottery that you go thru with the 24070. I had 5 of them, but sold all since they could not match my 24-105. Even if you get lucky and get one of the good ones, its still a mismatch.

The 17-55mm EF-s is a much better match for a 60D, even then, those used to the 18-55mm IS complain its heavy.

 

[amarlez]

A lot of people think simply being full-frame makes a camera leaps and bounds better than an APS-C or -H sensor, and the more I post on here, the more you'll hear me harp about how not true that technically is.

Here's my set up. All I need after this is a 70-200, a fast portrait prime and maybe a fast wide angle prime and I'm set.

Canon 7D
50mm 1.4
Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC (image stabilizer)

When it comes to the mid-range zoom, there's no reason to trade off f/2.8 for image stabilizer because Canon has an EF-S that covers what 24-70 would that has image stabilizer and is about the price of the 24-104. I got my Tamron with a nice rebate for about half that.

As far as which body, that depends on what you're planning to do with it. I bought the 7D before the 60D came out, so the choice was easy. After holding a 60D a few months ago in Best Buy, though, I can see they really "rebelized" the xxD line-up, starting with the plastic body.

My argument against the full-frames has always been that, yes, they're better in low light, but that bigger sensor requires a smaller aperture to focus on the same depth anyway, which essentially means you have to shoot at a slower shutter speed for the same depth of field. Comparison shots show all signs point to full-frame as the way to go, but in some practical settings (not all), APS-C cameras are a better bet. That and you can use all the lenses can offers. And you don't have to worry about vignetting as much (I always thought that should be left to something you add on photoshop).

And when you factor out the sensor, what does the 5DII have on the 7D? Not autofocus, frames per second, a leg up on video abilities or even shutter cycle life.

Everybody out there thinks they want a 5DII with better autofocus and maybe some other gadgets. What they actually want is a 7D... with a full-frame sensor.

 

[Orangutan]

I did quite a bit of research on the differences between the 60D and 7D before I bought my 60D in November. All of the "objective" and subjective tests and reviews concluded that the image quality, at all ISO's, is virtually indistinguishable. Some suggested that maybe the 60D had a slight edge, but you have to peep pixels for it even to become a legitimate question. The same can be said of the T2i: it's basically the same sensor.

Since you're considering a 5D2 (or future 5D3) and a bunch of lenses, I'll assume that <=$200 savings on a T2i (vs. a 60D) is not significant to you. My analysis goes like this:

Buy a 7D only if one of the following applies:

• You prefer heavier bodies
• You prefer the feel of the 7D over the 60D
• You will use the new body under really adverse conditions (the 60D is tough, but not as tough as the 7D)
• You need 8fps (vs 6.3fps)
• You plan to photograph fast-moving objects (birds, athletes, flying pigs, etc)
• You make real money on photography; i.e., it's a job, not a hobby that pays for itself.

If one of the above does not apply, get a 60D and save a few hundred bucks towards a lens or better body.

As for low-light, I've been impressed: it's a very noticeable step-up from my 20D.

 

[c-law]

Remember that the IS on the 24-105 will only help with stationary subjects. So if you are shooting portraits with that lens you are better off with the one stop faster 24-70 for subjects that can move + you'll get better subject isolation from the shallower DOF.

As for which camera to get, I'd go with the 7D myself but that is more my personal preference than an specific knowledge of the ISO comparison between that and the 60D.

Chris

I certainly would not want to hang a 24-70mm L on a 60D. It is so front heavy that it is difficult to hold still, and you need a high shitter speed, while with a 24-105 you can get away with slow shutter speeds. There is also the lottery that you go thru with the 24070. I had 5 of them, but sold all since they could not match my 24-105. Even if you get lucky and get one of the good ones, its still a mismatch.

The 17-55mm EF-s is a much better match for a 60D, even then, those used to the 18-55mm IS complain its heavy.

I wouldn't want one on a 60D either. The 17-55 is a good recommendation. It just didn't occur to me as I was recommending the 7D and was thinking of something he could use on full frame when he gets it eventually.

I'm sorry to hear you have had such trouble with the 24-70. My only experience with it is my own copy and my friend's copy both of which are absolutely great copies of it. Other than those two I've never had experience with other people's experiences with it.

Chris

 

[djjohnr]

Option C - used 5D Mark 1. You can pick one up in great shape with low actuations for around $900.

 

[SportsPicGuy]

Save your money.

I have both a 7D and a 5D-mk2.

Get the 5D-mk2 kit with the 24-105 L lens.

I use the 5D-mk2 with a 24-105 L as my main go to camera for everything.
Day or night. Sports, vacation, nature, weddings, parties, holidays, everything.

I find that the 8 fps of the 7D didn't make me a better sports photographer, and sometimes
the shots are just too noisy for my taste.

That being said I am considering switching to a 7D with the new Tamron 18-270 PZD lens as a vaction camera just because it is a lot lighter than the 5D-mk2 with the L glass on it.

Plus I would hate to do something stupid on vacation and screw up my 5D-mk2, lose it, gets stolen, etc. I wouldn't feel quite as bad if I did that to my 7D.

 

[mogud]

I've read so many replies to the question you are asking about "which" lens that I had to reply. I agree that the 17-55mm is a fast and capable lens. I almost bought it last fall until I looked at what images the lens produces. To my eyes, the images are rather cold or bluish looking. There seems to be not enough contrast or color saturation for me. I'm sure these issues could be fixed in PP, but I come from the film era where that option was not available. On the other hand, the 24-105mm produces very good contrast and color saturation along with a sharp image. My other problem with the 17-55mm was the build quality and zoom action. At first check in the store, the zoom action was really stiff especially at the start of the zoom, around 20-24mm. Then the action was smoother. I rented the 17-55mm for a weekend and discovered that this zoom action was rather sloppy with significant lens creep on the rental copy. I opted for the 24-105mm and have been very pleased with the results. Right out of the box the build quality was excellent with very smooth focusing and zoom action. I use the lens on the 7D and 50D and have been very happy.

As far as the 24-70mm is concerned. it is a big heavy lens (950g vs. 650 for the 24-105) with a huge lens hood. The hood comes all the way down the lens when mounted in reverse. I store all my lenses in Lowepro lens cases when not in use and this lens stored in the 4S case was awkward to remove. The IQ is a little better than the 24-105mm. I didn't buy the 24-70mm, but may later once/if I go FF.

I own the 7D and it is quite the camera. I've picked up the 60D and it felt very comfortable in my hands without the grip. The 7D needs the grip. Without the grip, the camera feels bulky. The 7D requires a lot of manual reading time and complete understanding of it's AF system. Be prepared to spend some time. Get the PDF version of the manual and put it into a binder and read the thing from cover to cover.

As far as which lens to consider, other than the 24-105mm, read the following review from DP.com

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-15-85mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

The review is of the 15-85mm and the 17-55mm. The reviewer does a lens comparison test which is very well done and helped me to decide on the 15-85mm. The reviewer also owns the 15-85 and the 17-55. I have both the 24-105mm and the 15-85mm because my wife and I use the 7D/50D and she likes the 24-105 and the 15-85 is on the 7D. Hope this helps.

 

[87vr6]

Option C - used 5D Mark 1. You can pick one up in great shape with low actuations for around $900.

This is what I would do if you want/need to get into FF cheaply.

Check here often, they're slowly selling off their 5D's, and last one I saw was rated 8.5/10 and was selling for 9ish

http://www.lensrentals.com/buy

Also, check up on Adorama and B&H photo in the used sections as they sell them too, though they do not have any currently.

 

[87vr6]

and you need a high shitter speed

lolz

 

[tombo]

Lots of fiber in my diet, but don't know about speed. Seriously, am very happy with both my 10-22 and 17-55. Both used to reside on my T1i, while my 70-200 graced my Xsi. With the receipt of my 7d, the wide zooms will go to the 7d, and the 70-200 on the t1i. Can't compare to something I've never used, but the 11-55 gave me good color, and fast focus out of the box. Can't wait to put it to work on the 7d. The better focusing, will eliminate my need to do center spot focus, and recompose. Crop frame forever!!! Ol 6x7 guy.

 

[unruled]

just a note: investing in EF-S glass doesnt make much sense if he will go fullframe within the foreseable future

 

[Kuscali]

Thanks for all of your replies, unfortunately the EF-S 17-55mm is not an option, as I am going to go to Full Frame December of this year/ or when the 5D mark III comes out in 2012. I found a 28-75mm Tamron for sale at a good price and I plan to get that. Also planning on getting the Tokina 11-16m, which apparently works on full frame at 16mm, Canon 50mm f/1.8, and maybe (big maybe a 55-250 Ef-s, I rarely use telephoto but might need it).

How does this arrangement look to you guys?

 

[S P]

Get the 5D-mk2 kit with the 24-105 L lens.

I use the 5D-mk2 with a 24-105 L as my main go to camera for everything.
Day or night. Sports, vacation, nature, weddings, parties, holidays, everything.

I find that the 8 fps of the 7D didn't make me a better sports photographer, and sometimes
the shots are just too noisy for my taste.

That being said I am considering switching to a 7D with the new Tamron 18-270 PZD lens as a vaction camera just because it is a lot lighter than the 5D-mk2 with the L glass on it.

Plus I would hate to do something stupid on vacation and screw up my 5D-mk2, lose it, gets stolen, etc. I wouldn't feel quite as bad if I did that to my 7D.

+1 on the 5D2 and 24-105L combo, but on equipment loss that's what insurance is for. 8) I'm looking forward to taking my 5D2 and 24-105L combo to Hawaii in just under two months. Will be taking the 70-200/4L and the 17-40L as well. No kids, just the wife and I for a week, so a little extra weight will be manageable.

I love the 5D2 and 24-105L. If I knew how much I was going to like it I would have bought the 24-105L in a kit with the 5D2, but instead I bought it separately later. I too have found that the 5D2 body has been more than up to the task for anything I've thrown at it, including sports and action. For as much criticism as the 5D2 gets for its AF system, I've yet to have any real complaints with it aside from it simply quitting in lower light a bit sooner than some other bodies, and most of my Nikons. Really though, that's not a big deal. I'm rarely shooting in nearly pitch black conditions.

For the OP: If a full-frame is what you want then just save up a little more and get it now. Don't buy a 60D or a 7D if you know you're eventually going to want a 5D anyways. Plus I think the 5D3 when it comes out is not only going to be hard to get, but also priced at over $3000 USD body only. If you can't quite swing a 5D2 yet but need something to "take pictures" in the meantime, I'd be looking at maybe the new Rebel T3 or T3i that came out, or possibly a used 50D or Rebel T2i. Get a cheaper or used body for now to save $$$, while sinking the bulk of it into the FF glass you want in the meantime.

 

[S P]

Thanks for all of your replies, unfortunately the EF-S 17-55mm is not an option, as I am going to go to Full Frame December of this year/ or when the 5D mark III comes out in 2012. I found a 28-75mm Tamron for sale at a good price and I plan to get that. Also planning on getting the Tokina 11-16m, which apparently works on full frame at 16mm, Canon 50mm f/1.8, and maybe (big maybe a 55-250 Ef-s, I rarely use telephoto but might need it).

How does this arrangement look to you guys?

I owned the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 on Nikon mount and can vouch that it does indeed cover full-frame at 15-16mm. However I ended up not caring for the lens too much because I didn't like the narrow range. In ultra-wides I prefer the ability to get out to the "almost normal" range which on a crop is the xx-24mm lenses. Personally I'd skip the 55-250 and get an EF 70-200/4L non-IS instead, but if you rarely use telephoto maybe just skip it for now. The Tamron 28-75/2.8 is supposed to be quite a good lens if you get a good copy. Paired with an ultra-wide of some sort that's a pretty nice setup to have on a crop body.

 

[Kuscali]

Thanks for all of your replies, unfortunately the EF-S 17-55mm is not an option, as I am going to go to Full Frame December of this year/ or when the 5D mark III comes out in 2012. I found a 28-75mm Tamron for sale at a good price and I plan to get that. Also planning on getting the Tokina 11-16m, which apparently works on full frame at 16mm, Canon 50mm f/1.8, and maybe (big maybe a 55-250 Ef-s, I rarely use telephoto but might need it).

How does this arrangement look to you guys?

I owned the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 on Nikon mount and can vouch that it does indeed cover full-frame at 15-16mm. However I ended up not caring for the lens too much because I didn't like the narrow range. In ultra-wides I prefer the ability to get out to the "almost normal" range which on a crop is the xx-24mm lenses. Personally I'd skip the 55-250 and get an EF 70-200/4L non-IS instead, but if you rarely use telephoto maybe just skip it for now. The Tamron 28-75/2.8 is supposed to be quite a good lens if you get a good copy. Paired with an ultra-wide of some sort that's a pretty nice setup to have on a crop body.

I was thinking about getting the 70-200mmL f/4 is when I got full frame, for the 1% of the time I use telephoto. I too would love to have a Wide angle zoom with a bit more range, but the Tokina is the fastest, widest, sharpest thing around. How sharp was the Tokina in the corners on full frame?

 

[S P]

I was thinking about getting the 70-200mmL f/4 is when I got full frame, for the 1% of the time I use telephoto. I too would love to have a Wide angle zoom with a bit more range, but the Tokina is the fastest, widest, sharpest thing around. How sharp was the Tokina in the corners on full frame?

It's actually better at 16mm on full-frame than my 17-40L is at the wide end, which considering the Tokina is an APS-C lens is pretty incredible.

The 2.8 was indeed a selling point for me, however for a lot of the landscape shots I did in lower light I noticed what I thought might be some focus field curvature at 2.8 that went away at f/4, so I actually got better results at f/4 than 2.8 and preferred to shoot it there. That sorta defeated the purpose of the lens since I also preferred the wider range of the xx-24 lenses. On Canon I think the EF-S 10-22 and I would get along quite nicely. I also disliked the long .30m close focus distance on the Tokina. I also like to use ultra-wide lenses to get right on top of something an exaggerate perspective, and it's just not possible to do that with a .30m MFD. You really need something around 0.25m or better yet down to 0.20m like some of the primes do. I had a Nikon 14mm f/2.8D lens which would focus down to 0.20m (subject practically touching the front element) and it was fantastic for that.

So while the Tokina 11-16 is an excellent lens, for me it was better on paper than it was in the real-world.

 

[Kuscali]

Ok so now I got the lenses down, only now to decided on the body. I like them both, I prefer the 7D a little more, probably the one I am going to get after the rebates roll in. I heard great things about it's AF, especially in low light. Maybe I should download the manual and get a head start, so when it comes I know what to do. Just a question, I never tried this with my A700 (12mp, I could lower it but no point at 6mp), but if I was to lower the MP's (if possible on the 7D, in the menu), to lets say 12mp from 18mp, I should get better hi ISO performance correct?

 

[Rocky]

Ok so now I got the lenses down, only now to decided on the body. I like them both, I prefer the 7D a little more, probably the one I am going to get after the rebates roll in. I heard great things about it's AF, especially in low light. Maybe I should download the manual and get a head start, so when it comes I know what to do. Just a question, I never tried this with my A700 (12mp, I could lower it but no point at 6mp), but if I was to lower the MP's (if possible on the 7D, in the menu), to lets say 12mp from 18mp, I should get better hi ISO performance correct?

I got a feeling that you are looking for a "Transitional camera" that you will be moving into FF in December. I have a suggestion that is a little bit crazy and It may work for you. Spend $450 for a used 40D and $700 for a 17-40mm F4 L lens. This is an excellent lens for APS-C sensor (I am speaking from my own experience). It should take care of most of you need (27mm to 66mm equilvalent)except when you need the telephoto usage. The lens is a true FFlens. So you will have an utawide to normal zoom lens for your FF. As for the 40D, at ISO 1600 its noise level is more that acceptable. At ISO 3200, you will see some noise.You can sell your 40D later and get most of your money back.
Do not let the metal body to be your determioning factor of choosing between 7D and 60D. The shutter release switch may fail before the rest of the camera body. Please see other posts in this forum.