Have Canon 60d and want advice on next upgrade for my needs

[KKCFamilyman]

Thanks for that perspective. I think the latter option with the ff will serve me as far as I need to go eventually ending up with the 5d3, 24-70 II, 70-200 mkII and 24-105 for walkaround. Also a nice prime when I get an idea what focal lengths I like with that body. I still have kids and a wife that cannot stand me switching things all the time and taking multiple shots because I did not like the first one or I take bursts so I will have at least one keeper. I do realize that lessons are needed here but wouldn't that be better with a camera set-up I am going to keep for a while? I mean everything does not translate over because they have improved performance, different ergonomics, new features and so on. I am pretty sure if I make a move it will be with the 5d3 just because having all those primes actually costs more since I cannot sell all my old gear to help cover some of the cost. Also I do not have the time to change that many lenses. I will however invest in one prime if I do get the 5d3. I also would not want to shoot at 1.4 or 1.2 or even 2.0 since the DOF is razor thin and I want to take pics of two kids and sometimes the wife also and someone would be blurred out. Actually I think instead of a prime I will try the 70-200 f4 for $700. I bet that would offer the DOF I am after and would give me cheap nice starter telephoto.

 

[Tijn]

70-200 f/4L will not produce immense amounts of background blur on your crop camera, except when you're in the tele range of that lens (which requires some distance to your subject). On a full-frame camera, that same lens will be a bit wider and blur the background a bit more, making it very useful for portraits. The 70-200 f/4L without IS is not quite as sharp as the IS version (which is twice as expensive), and not as sharp as the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, which is about 4 times as expensive. But being an L lens, it's still really sharp with nice and quiet autofocus too - a good value L lens. Since that lens zooms internally, it's physically long whether you have it zoomed in or not; but it will take a beating because there are no external moving parts (other than switches).

The third picture I posted earlier (the backlit boy), by the way, was in fact taken with my 60D and 70-200 f/4L IS lens (the IS version, but you can compare background blur nonetheless), at 200mm and f/4, giving a good example of its background blur in the tele end. The first (fox) picture was taken with the same camera and lens at 135mm and f/4, and you can see that the background is blurred a lot less, because of the distance and the not-quite-tele range of the lens.

 

[emag]

My $.02 - get some top quality glass (Fast Ls). Bump up the ISO. Shoot burst mode for more keepers. You're not shooting film, who cares if you lose 30% of your shots? If you really want that 5DIII......it's your money, no need to justify it to anyone who isn't paying for it. Buy lenses now; that 5DIII will still be around in two years, and cheaper. But then, maybe the 5DIV will be soooo much better..........

 

[KKCFamilyman]

I love that everyone says fast L glass. Unless I unload thousands of dollars on fast primes which would have to have a very shallow DOF then I will have the same low light problem. Just because I can take a pic at 1.2 (50L) vs my current 2.8 does not give me better low light. I actually shoot closer to f4-8 to bring more of my family in focus. That being said I need to be able to bump the iso from 800-3200 or even 6400 and still have a clean image. I realize that beyond that I will have to break out my speed lite but that is why I started looking at the FF 5d3.

 

[Tijn]

Then the 5D mk3 is what you want, and what I'd recommend. It seems you now know enough to know what you want.

The 24-105L kit lens on full-frame will give you approximately the same depth of field at f/4 as the 17-55 f/2.8 lens gave you at f/2.8 on your crop camera (at the same framing). It will zoom a bit wider, and a bit further than the 17-55 did. The body gives you 3 stops noise gain, f/4 is a one stop light loss, so effectively you can compare it to two stops increase with the same depth of field. If you're only shooting JPG without post-processing, you may even see up to 4 stops low-light gain compared to the in-camera JPG's of the 60D because the in-camera noise processing was said to be imroved as well (effectively 3 stops including the slower lens).

Fast glass would give you a 2-stop low-light increase but it would strongly reduce depth of field.

 

[KKCFamilyman]

Thanks again for everyone's input. I look forward to the FF world of photography. If not I can acheive the shots I want at the expense of PP, Noise and more lighting efforts (speedlites). I know a FF will not answer all my needs but I figure it should fix some of them. Now I just need a more portable bridge camera when I cannot bring my dslr. Anyone have any suggestions? I was thinking G1x or Sony nex5n but I am not sure of their quality. Is the S100 worth it?

 

[Tijn]

Now I just need a more portable bridge camera when I cannot bring my dslr. Anyone have any suggestions? I was thinking G1x or Sony nex5n but I am not sure of their quality. Is the S100 worth it?

Not very familiar in that market, but... Here's an entertaining review on the G1x:
World's First Canon Powershot G1 X Hands-on Review

Punchline was, if I remember it correctly: decent image quality, but a bit of a hassle to control and it doesn't quite "point and shoot". I think it's focused on people that want the controls to be there, rather than automation and ease of use.

 

[elflord]

Thanks again for everyone's input. I look forward to the FF world of photography. If not I can acheive the shots I want at the expense of PP, Noise and more lighting efforts (speedlites). I know a FF will not answer all my needs but I figure it should fix some of them. Now I just need a more portable bridge camera when I cannot bring my dslr. Anyone have any suggestions? I was thinking G1x or Sony nex5n but I am not sure of their quality. Is the S100 worth it?

Would recommend micro 4/3. This system has the most mature system of lenses, and because it's an older system, you can get previous generation bodies very cheap. For example, panasonic GF2 goes for about $250. The Sony has a great sensor, but the lens selection is really weak. Sony enthusiasts tend to adapt old manual focus lenses.

 

[KKCFamilyman]

I think I will go for a S100 for a small bridge at least it shoots raw and is pocketable.

 

[keithdog]

I am the grandfather of year-old twin boys who don't sit still and a 3-year-old. I have a Canon 60D and get excellent results. Autofocus is great. Grain is minimal, even going up to 6400 ISO. Heck. I've got to 12,800 and it isn't that bad. Shot some high school basketball for the newspaper I work for. Not normally on the photographic end. But I will say, keeping the shutter speed at 500th by adjusting ISO and aperture has made every picture I have taken come out sharp and in focus. Now maybe each picture wasn't framed perfectly, but that was my fault. Sometimes I would daydream and suddenly notice a good picture was coming at me. I would hoist camera to my face and shoot and if lucky had good results. Like I said, minimal grain and sharp every time. You are not a professional photographer. It isn't your livelihood. Maybe you have money to burn. But I wonder if you just need to hone your skills rather than looking for the answer with dollar bills. I've had other cameras but the 60D is by far the best. Maybe you should work with it a bit more before you spend thousands and get pretty much the same results.

 

[Marsu42]

Grain is minimal, even going up to 6400 ISO. Heck. I've got to 12,800 and it isn't that bad.

I'm happy that there's another happy 60d user around, welcome to the forum ... but at the same time I have to mention that high iso with the current 18mp sensor is only usable with heavy noise reduction, and the resulting sharpness decrease only allows for small print sizes like web or newspaper.

Maybe you should work with it a bit more before you spend thousands and get pretty much the same results.

... and thanks for pointing this out again: spending money does not replace knowledge of one's gear.