7d+17-55 and 5d+70-200: does-it make any sense ?

[kimloris]

Hi,

I have a 7d with several lenses including a 17-55mm 2.8 and a 70-200mm 2.8 II.
I pre-ordered the 5d3 but I will keep my 7d as a back-up.

I was thinking of having the FF with a standard zoom (24-70mm or 24-105mm) along with the crop 7d with the telephoto 70-200 for the extra reach.

With the "high" price of the 5D3, I ordered the body only instead of the kit.

Does-it make any sense to keep the 17-55mm on my 7d and put the 70-200 on the 5D3 ?
Or should I just wait and order the 5D3+24-105 kit when I can afford it?

EDIT: a third option would be to go with the 5D3 body only now and start saving for the 24-70mm 2.8 II

 

[distant.star]

Since I have no idea what kind of pictures you make, I can't offer any real advice.

What I would do is get a cheap 50mm f/1.8 to slap on the 5D3 and use either that or the 70-200 while keeping the 17-55 on the 7D most of the time.

That will give you time to decide/evaluate/save while you figure out the next move.

 

[ksuweh]

I would say that it doesn't make much sense to have two lenses that cover the same focal length. My suggestion would be to sell the 17-55 & buy the 5DIII kit or the body & the 24-70I or II.

I am basically in your shoes. I have a 7D, 17-55 & a 70-200 II. Eventually, I want a FF either a 5DIII or maybe even a 1DX. I have thought about keeping the trusty 7D as a backup body, but for me it doesn't make much sense to have two different sensor sizes. I don't want to have to have two sets of lenses to cover the same 35mm focal length equivalent.

Just my two cents.

 

[kimloris]

Thanks for the replies.

It is true that it does not make sense to cover the same focal range with two different sensor sizes. This is why I initially thought of buying a FF with 24-105 + keeping my 7d with 70-200mm (equivalent 112-320mm) and having and overall 24-320mm (with a gap 105-112mm) and not having to change lenses (takes some time and risk of having dust on sensor). I would sell my 17-55mm of course.

The price of the 5D3 suprised me and I just cannot afford the kit.
EDIT: I could buy the kit with my credit card and cancel the body only order BUT I would lose my pre-order position in the B&H waiting list and I am really impatient to test the new camera. END EDIT

Therefore I was wondering if it would be satisfying to have the 7d with 17-55mm (equivalent 27-88mm) and the 5D3 with 70-200mm which would be an overall 27-200mm covered (with no gap)

Besides the fact that the overall focal range is shorter with the last option, I read people saying that FF makes more sense for wide focal range but I also read that some people "rediscovered" their 70-200mm with FF.

I like distant.star's idea of buying a 50mm prime and see if I am happy with this setting.

I could also just wait and save to buy a 24-105 later but the kit allows to save almost $300.

 

[ksuweh]

It kinda sounds like you made up your mind already if you have the 5DIII on pre-order. Just keep your pre-order position. If you don't then I think you would beat yourself up about it.

Do you really need a backup body?? Would a 1.4x teleconverter work for you instead? It would be a cheaper option of getting the extra reach.

 

[MrBeavis5]

I'm kinda in the same boat as you, I have a 50D, 10-22, 17-55, 28-135 (50D kit lens), and 70-200, and I want to make the jump to FF with a 5DIII.

I thought about the same thing... using the 17-55 on the 50D and 70-200 on the 5DIII would be a cool dual-camera setup. But I also think that once I get used to the 5D autofocus and handling my 50D is just going to become an expensive paperweight. Thats where my boat is different from your boat. If my 50D was a 7D, I would be on the fence just like you. LOL.

If I got the 5DIII body only and wanted to use a lower focal length I would have to use the 28-135 kit lens that came with my 50D until I could afford to get a better lens. I have read many people say the 24-105 is a great walk-around lens for a FF camera, so I thought it was a no brainer to drop the extra $800 and get a brand new 24-105 at the same time.

 

[AJ]

Does-it make any sense to keep the 17-55mm on my 7d and put the 70-200 on the 5D3 ?

Yes it does. It would be a very good setup for events and weddings.

 

[kimloris]

It kinda sounds like you made up your mind already if you have the 5DIII on pre-order. Just keep your pre-order position. If you don't then I think you would beat yourself up about it.

Do you really need a backup body?? Would a 1.4x teleconverter work for you instead? It would be a cheaper option of getting the extra reach.

I really wanted the kit and hoped untill the last minutes of the announcement that it would be in the $3600-$3800 range. It ended up to be more expensive than that and my available funds only enabled me to order the camera only.
I order within the first 2 hours of the announcement and you are damn right, I would beat myself up if I canceled my preorder to order the kit and only receive the kit in several months from now.

The back-up body is something that I need because I am a "maniac". The idea of having dust on my sensor is just killing me (as well as dead pixels, and tiny microscopique dings in my windshield). It just drives me crazy (I am probably crazy). Several times, I prefered not changing a lens and miss the picture that I wanted to take because it was too dusty or windy with sand. Having 2 weather sealed bodies, however heavy it can be, it is just peace of mind for me.

 

[kimloris]

If my 50D was a 7D, I would be on the fence just like you. LOL.

The nice thing with having a cropped back-up camera is the extra reach with the 70-200mm zoom lens.

 

[gn100]

A full frame camera offers more advantages at the wide angle end of the scale. That said, you really want the 5DIII to be the "go-to" camera, so if the majority of your shooting is on the 70-200, then attaching it to the 5DIII makes sense

I would have thought that the second hand price of the 17-55 would have matched the difference between the 5DIII body and the 5DIII kit. If not waiting a couple of months will probably see the 5D prices fall

 

[wickidwombat]

I think it makes alot of sense
7D +17-55 f2.8 covers wide to standard
5D3 + 70-200 f2.8 covers standard to tele

no worry about changing lenses
they use the same batteries
as long as you are cool with carrying 2 bodies its actually a very nice way to shoot
I prefer to shoot with 2 bodies

 

[tomscott]

I think it makes more sense the other way round.

Crop for extra reach, full frame for the added quality.

I have a 40D and desperate to upgrade it, I also have the 17-55mm but my 70-200mm 2.8 gets more reach so it makes sense to sell the 17-55mm and get the 24-105 kit lens on the 5D with the extra 3 stops over my 40D you can use the 24-105mm in the same way as a 24-70mm on the 5D (obviously you won't get the same DOF) but its a much better length. 70-200 works out at 112-320mm on a crop camera so your only loosing 7mm instead of 42mm on the 24-70.

Means you cover 24-320mm then chuck a 1.4 or 2x extender and your covering up to 640mm

I don't know about you but I much prefer to use two camera bodies a crop with the 70-200mm with an extender if needed and a grip and a full frame camera with a standard lens. Perfect wedding kit, also events! I shot last years British Touring Car Championship with this set up and it worked fantastic. A 5D taking pics in the pits and of cars being sorted pre race with drivers and spectators etc then crop with the 70-200 for the action.

With this respect you may not need to go the full hog and get a 5D MKIII and get a MKII instead. It would save around £1500. This also means you are ready to upgrade the camera when the 5D MKIII comes down in price and the 5D MKII price will stay strong in the second hand market place like the original 5D.

I know the 9 point system is not perfect but using a standard lens doesn't need a huge amount of AF points usually I just use the centre. I wouldn't be chasing subjects with it, more still objects whereas on a crop with a tele I would be shooting moving objects like cars etc and the AF on the 7D is more than adequate with its group AF selection and the IQ is also the best on a crop camera atm.

Just my two pence. ;D

 

[kimloris]

I think it makes more sense the other way round.

This is what I thought too. I really like distant.star' suggestion of taking a prime 35mm 2.0 or 50mm 1.4 and see if I like it that way.

One thing that gn100 said and makes a lot of sense too is that the new 5D3 would be my "go-to" camera and since I take more photos with the 17-55 than the 70-200mm, it would be sad to keep shooting 80% of my pics with my "old" 7d+17-55 and only 20% with the 5d3+70-200 combo

 

[tomscott]

I think it makes more sense the other way round.

This is what I thought too. I really like distant.star' suggestion of taking a prime 35mm 2.0 or 50mm 1.4 and see if I like it that way.

One thing that gn100 said and makes a lot of sense too is that the new 5D3 would be my "go-to" camera and since I take more photos with the 17-55 than the 70-200mm, it would be sad to keep shooting 80% of my pics with my "old" 7d+17-55 and only 20% with the 5d3+70-200 combo

Well ye exactly and your crop would be a back up.

I shoot a lot of advertising photography, Motorsport, automotive, landscape, street and flora and fauna. The 5D MKIII is my perfect camera but the price puts me off, also the main reason for me to have a fast camera is to stick a telephoto on it, not really going to get close to anything that moves quick with a standard lens (birds etc). So in that respect getting more reach out of lenses is great with a crop with fast FPS is perfect. The 5D MKIII you have to spend much more to get the same focal length...

Using two cameras means you don't have to switch lenses as much and you get the best of both worlds. Which is why I think for the moment the 5D MKII and an Crop like a 7D is a great combo. Two MKIIIs would be great but at huge cost, and also again buying more reach... more money

 

[epsiloneri]

As usual, it depends on what you're shooting... You would get longer range with the 70-200 on the 7D, sure, but do you want it? I think many "re-discover" the 70-200 on FF because the focal length range becomes perfect for portraiture, while the 1.6x APS-C equivalent is a bit awkward in that respect.

I think the 7D+17-55/2.8 and 5D+70-200/2.8 is a very nice combination, also because by putting your FF on the longer lens you're balancing your light sensitivities better so that you can use your two bodies under similar lighting.

Of course, if you're out shooting wildlife... well, then you might prefer more "reach".

(yes, I've used this combination myself sometimes, though with 5D2 not 5D3 )

 

[jm345]

7D+17-55/2.8IS and 5D+70-200/2.8IS II is an excellent combo which I use alot, especially indoors. When I am outside and need more range I put the 7D on a 100-400IS. Two cameras and three lenses get you 27-640mm with fantastic quality and minor lens swapping.

 

[Haydn1971]

It makes perfect sense until such time you have several months under your belt with the 7D & 5D to establish what you are missing in your photography - any half decent crop kit will have a great crop lens and a longer 70-x00/100-400mm zoom, I'm currently buying new lens at about a average rate of 1 per year, I'm currently short on really wide and pondering the 10-22 & 8-15, the latter doesn't make as much sense now, but may do in a few years should I go full frame, the former makes sense now, but what if my crop body breaks tommorrow, would I buy crop or full frame, I couldn't possibly answer that right now.

Photography is a hobby that many of us build upon over the years, it's nice to have a perfect kit, but it's nicer to ensure the bills are paid and you have a roof over your head. Don't let folks on here tell you what you MUST have, just take the advice and work out what suits you for today.

 

[unkbob]

You say you have "several lenses" for your 7D. Are they all crop-only or will they work on the 5D3? You really don't want to buy a nice new FF camera and only have the option of using the 70-200 on it. I would sell the 17-55 and consider the current 24-70 L. It's a great lens, even if it's not as good as the very expensive new version, and you can use it on either camera. A 24-70 + 70-200 on 7D / 5D3 gives you a nice selection of focal lengths. It would be a real shame not to have something wide / medium for the 5D3, which is where FF really shines. A cheaper alternative to the 24-70 and still an indispensable asset in low light would be a 50 1.4. I prefer the Sigma to the Canon but either one is very handy and won't break the bank.

 

[ronderick]

Interesting.... I happen to know someone who simply refuses to change lens because of dust fear ;D

Anyways, If you are going to buy the 5D3, I think the move to FF would be inevitable sooner or later. I'd say by the time you get the 5D3, you should be looking at the following setup:
1. 7D + 17-55
2. 5D3 + 70-200

Next, you should save up cash for either the 24-70 II or (possibly) a newer version of the 24-105. Once you get it, you'll have:
1. 7D + 70-200
2. 5D3 + 24-70 II or 24-105 (or newer version)

You can sell your 17-55 once you get the FF standard zoom.

 

[kimloris]

You say you have "several lenses" for your 7D. Are they all crop-only or will they work on the 5D3?

I have the 100L macro and the 70-200 4L IS (I know it is redundant with the 70-200 2.8L IS but I could not convince myself to sell it when I upgraded to the 70-200 2.8L: it is razor sharp and its light weight makes it a really nice lens for sunny day hikes)

I do really need a wider lens in my kit : maybe the 30 1.4 sigma + 50 1.4 : not too much money to put on the table once my 17-55 is sold.