Do you miss APS-C?

[gjones5252]

I have a 60d but I have an opportunity to upgrade it at a reasonable price and get a 5d Mark III. My only worry is that I will miss the extra reach I was getting with APS-C and the vari-angle screen(but thats more of a minor concern). I have a 5d Mark II and love the full frame but worried I am going to miss the reach.
I do weddings, portraits, concerts and videos of all sorts. I dont have any ef-s lenses.
Is the image quality worth the difference and loss in reach?

 

[Loswr]

Is the image quality worth the difference and loss in reach?

Yes.

BTW, depending on your use, it may not be a loss in reach. If you crop a 5DIII image to the FoV of APS-C, you'll have an 8.6 MP image that is at least of equivalent IQ to the 60D image. For most uses, 8.6 MP is sufficient (unless you're printing 12x18" or larger). If you crop less, IQ goes up.

I have a 7D. After getting the 5DII, the 7D was used mostly with the 100-400mm lens, but that was more for the AF performance needed for birds/wildlife. Now that I have the 1D X, the 7D just sits in the Storm case, keeping a few lenses company.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

Now that I have the 1D X, the 7D just sits in the Storm case, keeping a few lenses company.

At least the lenses have a buddy now, lol!. To the OP, wedding/portrait/event shooter here. I tried using both my 7d and the mk3 during wedding season. After the first one I did like that the 7d basically became a lens holder. With a 24-70 on the 7d and a 70-200 on the mk3, I had some overlap on the long end of the 24-70. The only time I really had enjoyment from the combo was outdoor ceremonies. For indoors (I try my best to not use flash for ceremonies), I found that the high ISO performance of the mk3 was a real game changer. On the mk3 I could really go as high as i wanted in ISO, where to have a similar IQ on the 7d I had to keep it around 1600 (odd, before I got the mk3 I would go up to 4000 for low light, but after seeing the difference --- 7d ISO 4000 to mk3 ISO 6400 and above I found that it wa a waste to even take the time to snag a shot with the 7d ---just stick with the lens i had on the mk3 or switch lenses. And at a reception, forget about it, 7d just sits in the bag there.

I thought I'd miss the "range" of the APS-C, but I don't really miss it at all. I have the non-IS 70-200 2.8 and on the 7d to keep the SS at at least 1/100th indoors with no flash I had to pump the ISO up to at least 3200 ---the IQ just didn't stack up. On the mk3, at 200mm, ISO 6400, and severely cropped --- the image was nice and sharp, where the uncropped 3200 on the 7d looked muddy (the noise made me think my lens needed focus adjustment, i often looked at high ISO 7d images and thought it had missed focus, where in fact it was in focus, just reaaaaaaaaaaallly noisey)

I just sold my 7d to help fund the purchase of a second ff (either 6d or a second mk3). So I say, don't look back, go FF! you will be pleased!

 

[cliffwang]

Is the image quality worth the difference and loss in reach?

Yes.

BTW, depending on your use, it may not be a loss in reach. If you crop a 5DIII image to the FoV of APS-C, you'll have an 8.6 MP image that is at least of equivalent IQ to the 60D image. For most uses, 8.6 MP is sufficient (unless you're printing 12x18" or larger). If you crop less, IQ goes up.

I have a 7D. After getting the 5DII, the 7D was used mostly with the 100-400mm lens, but that was more for the AF performance needed for birds/wildlife. Now that I have the 1D X, the 7D just sits in the Storm case, keeping a few lenses company.

+1
After I sold my 7D, I found 7D is very useful when the objects are over than 200mm. I really missed 7D.

 

[mrsfotografie]

Do you miss APS-C?

I did: traded my 40D for a 5DII and then bought a 7D as well to give me back what I missed (in a better way):

The extra reach without the loss of a stop of licht (use of APS-C as a kind of 1.6x TC). It is more cost efficient to get an extra body than uprate the tele-lens(es).

Also, the AF performance of the 5DII was insufficient for sports and trips to the zoo.

In addition I like the dual functionality that some of my (full frame) lenses now gained and I sometimes make use of that.

For ultimate quality though, FF rules (but the 7D isn't bad either).

 

[Axilrod]

I upgraded from a T2i to a 5D2 and then the 5D3. I don't think I've ever missed the reach, the advantages of full frame make it easy to forget. I think it may be worth keeping your 60D around though if you personally think you'll miss it, everyone is different. And it effectively doubles the number of lenses you have.

 

[Dylan777]

Is the image quality worth the difference and loss in reach?

Yes.

BTW, depending on your use, it may not be a loss in reach. If you crop a 5DIII image to the FoV of APS-C, you'll have an 8.6 MP image that is at least of equivalent IQ to the 60D image. For most uses, 8.6 MP is sufficient (unless you're printing 12x18" or larger). If you crop less, IQ goes up.

I have a 7D. After getting the 5DII, the 7D was used mostly with the 100-400mm lens, but that was more for the AF performance needed for birds/wildlife. Now that I have the 1D X, the 7D just sits in the Storm case, keeping a few lenses company.

+1 with Neuro on crop. I shoot raw with 5D III, cropping is my favorite thing in PP. At this time, I'm not sure if I ever want to go back to crop......

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I finally just sold my 7D after getting the 5D MK III. The 7D was really good with my 100L for Macros, but I did not use it that way enough to justify it.

 

[Policar]

I have a 60d but I have an opportunity to upgrade it at a reasonable price and get a 5d Mark III. My only worry is that I will miss the extra reach I was getting with APS-C and the vari-angle screen(but thats more of a minor concern). I have a 5d Mark II and love the full frame but worried I am going to miss the reach.
I do weddings, portraits, concerts and videos of all sorts. I dont have any ef-s lenses.
Is the image quality worth the difference and loss in reach?

You're asking for video specifically or for stills? Just wondering because of where you posted this.

Anyhow, you can always buy a longer, slower lens, but for concerts you'll lose something. The 5D has about a 1.6 stop edge in ISO for stills and a two or three stop edge for video and less skew. I thought the super shallow focus would bug me, but it doesn't. The Mark III is a good camera, underrated partially due to its versatility.

 

[Drizzt321]

I had an XSi for 1 1/2 years, worked well, but then when I upgraded to the 5d2 I promptly forgot all about the XSi. I never really went for any kind of telephoto either, so any 'reach' I lost I never really noticed. If I had been a serious 7D user, and then went to the 5d2, I might due to the 7D being a quite capable camera, while with the XSi I started outpacing it in certain situations (low light).

 

[Richard8971]

No, I get to use it every time I grab my 7D.

FF's have thier place and have drawbacks, like crop sensors have thier place and drawbacks.

I use FF for certain shootings and I use my crop for certain shootings. I love both my 7D (for speed) and I love my 5D2 (for image quality and low light use).

I shoot a lot of wildlife so the 7D is mainly what I use. It's a very fast camera with great image quality that I won't trade for anything. At even the "low" price of 3 grand, the 5D3 is still outside what I am willing to pay for another camera at this point. I am not even sure I would "upgrade" to the 7D2 if and when it comes out. (depending on price/options) I have been very happy with the two cameras and they provide everything I need for what I do.

D

 

[gjones5252]

So basically My 60d broke. They gave me 1299 to buy a new kit version. Any recommendations? The ISO of my 5d is good but not making it so I can avoid flash at night events. For video I also need higher clean ISo as I don't always have enough light. I have a wedding in beginning of January and can probably barrow a camera to be a my back up. So I guess waiting isn't an issue I am just impatient.
Should I wait for more concrete details on 7d ii? Get 5d iii in mid January? Seems like the only two really good options.
I do just about every type of photography, portraits landscapes travel wedding event and video for those too.

 

[gjones5252]

So I did get rid of my 60d. I won't miss the ISo but I will miss that screen.
So now I have about 3000 to spend. Obvious is the 5d 3 but I cannot decide if I should wait. Ill just have to wait and see what is announced here soon.

 

[roadrunner]

I think you will h ave a very long wait for new bodies. If you have $3000 you are willing to spend on a body, you can't go wrong with the 5DIII. If you don't want to spend that much and you don't need the insanely awesome AF features, the 5DII is a bargain right now, especially used.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

I have a 60d but I have an opportunity to upgrade it at a reasonable price and get a 5d Mark III. My only worry is that I will miss the extra reach I was getting with APS-C and the vari-angle screen(but thats more of a minor concern). I have a 5d Mark II and love the full frame but worried I am going to miss the reach.
I do weddings, portraits, concerts and videos of all sorts. I dont have any ef-s lenses.
Is the image quality worth the difference and loss in reach?

A few months ago I had 7D & 60D ... but I sold the 7D to fund 5D MK III for the following reasons:
1. I wanted to keep the crop factor for my Sigma 150-500mm OS lens for bird & wildlife photography
2. I wanted vari-angle screen for macro photography, and taking top angle videos of safety briefing sessions of rig personnel.
The image quality difference between 5D MK III and 60D is huge ... obviously in favor of full frame.
But when it comes to cropping (to the same field of view as crop sensor), the image from 22MP, 5D MK III becomes around 9MP ... whereas the 60D image is 18MP ... so when I need range and difficult angles to shoot, I use 60D.
I will continue to keep the 60D until it is replaced with 70D (or if the 7DII comes with a vari-angle)

 

[Autocall]

Do you miss APS-C?

Nope...

 

[pwp]

Right now I work with FF 5D3 & APS-H 1D4 and can say with certainty that I'll pick up the 7D2 when it ships. I like all the formats for the unique qualities that each one brings to the table. If I need MF for a project I'll rent it, and some projects are happily shot on the G15.

If I had a bigger garage & suitable disposable income I'd have a kitted out Toyota Landcruiser, a fuel efficient Japanese station wagon and a Vespa motor scooter. And then drive the right one for the job at hand. That's a slightly extravagant fleet, but returning APS-C to my current format mix is an easy, inexpensive expansion.

-PW

 

[RustyTheGeek]

I think it boils down to whether you prefer to have more equipment to choose from (and manage) or less equipment. I like having both formats but it does create more agonizing choices before a shoot about which lenses on which body, how will I shoot this or that, etc when you have two different bodies.

Here is my opinion... I own the 60D and I use it because it has a faster fps for sporty stuff. It has the same sensor as the 7D but the 7D has even faster frame rate. For the price however, the 60D works fine for my needs since sports isn't my primary thing. I use my FF 5D and now my 5D3 (and soon my 6D) for just about everything else. Even compared to the older 5D the 60D IQ doesn't compare. And when I shoot anything else "important" going forward requiring me to carry two cameras, those two cameras will now be FF without a doubt and that will require a bit less thought.

 

[RLPhoto]

I only miss the reach from APS-c but nothing else.

 

[Bob Howland]

i own and use both a 5D3 and 7D. This pairing replaced a 5D and 40D. The 7D is used principally with my 100-400 and 300 f/2.8 (with and without TCs) for sports photography. Very often, the 100-400 will be on the 7D and a 70-200 on the 5D3. With the focusing improvement, the 5D3 is a passable sports camera, something the 5D never was.

However, I have also used a (1) 17-35 on the 5D/5D3 and 24-70 on the 40D/7D, (2) 24-70 on the 40D/7D and 100-400 on the 5D3 and (3) 17-50 on the 40D/7D and 70-200 on the 5D/5D3.

Having said that, if I were regularly shooting events and/or weddings, I would certainly buy another 5D3 and relegate the 7D to backup status.

Regarding the mythical 7D2, I want improvements in DR and high ISO image quality over the 7D, not more pixels. That's what I said about the 5D3 over the 5D2 and that's what Canon delivered.