L lens vs Full Frame

[ecka]

Hello everyone,

Right now I have 50d + kit 18-55 (useless thing) + 50 1.4.
I've got two ways now:

1. Sell 50d + kit and buy 5d mark ii
2. Or to buy 35L or 24L or 50L (they almost the same budget) for my 50d

I'm confused, what is better way to go, good lens and crop or not so good lens and full frame?

Thank you,
Serhiy

Using L primes on crop bodies is a waste, crop sensor uses less than half of that precious glass and that's where the quality comes from (size matters). Those are made for FF ;D. My advice - go for 5D2. I'd choose 5D2+50/1.8II over 50D+35L or 5D2+85/1.8USM over 50D+50L (or 5D2+135L over 50D+85LII) any day.

+ I will have money enough for someting like 35 f/2

50/1.4USM is a very nice lens on FF, but I don't recommend the 35/2. IMHO it's pretty bad on FF at f/2-2.8 (too soft + vignetting) and at 2.8+ it's barely better than a zoom lens. I'm going to try the Samyang 35/1.4UMC, that is a beautiful piece of glass (fully manual though).
...and EF 28-135 IS USM is a decent budget zoom for FF, if you need one.

 

[Ew]

28/1.8 is often overlooked - had it for years with crops.. Still love it with 5d2.

 

[TotoEC]

Here's something for you to ponder:

1. Crappy camera body (FF or crop sensor) + crappy lens = crappy picture
2. Crappy camera body + L lens = beautiful picture
3. Best camera body + L lens = stunning picture

 

[sjp010]

Here's something for you to ponder:

1. Crappy camera body (FF or crop sensor) + crappy lens = crappy picture
2. Crappy camera body + L lens = beautiful picture
3. Best camera body + L lens = stunning picture

4. Best camera body + crappy lens = .......?

 

[ecka]

Here's something for you to ponder:

1. Crappy camera body (FF or crop sensor) + crappy lens = crappy picture
2. Crappy camera body + L lens = beautiful picture
3. Best camera body + L lens = stunning picture

4. Best camera body + crappy lens = .......?

4. Best camera body + crappy lens = best camera body on a craigslist ;D
5. Good FF camera + decent non-L lens + great photographer = stunning picture

 

[RLPhoto]

The "L" lenses are overkill for a 50D, but a FF body with just a 50mm f/1.4 is going to be disappointing. Save up until you can buy a camera with lenses.

I disagree. It's a great combo. Henry cartier bresson, Ralph Gibson, and even ansel Adams used 50mms quite a bit on their leicas.

The 50mm is at its prime on a full frame camera.

 

[expatinasia]

I have read through most of the replies and it seems like everyone is telling you to get a new body. I however suggest the opposite.

I would recommend you to get the L lens of your choice, and then save to get a new FF body. The 5D Mark III has only just come out, the 1D X will be out soon(ish) and the price of existing cameras such as the 5D Mark II and 7d I can only see dropping further.

Plus as more people get their hands on brand new gear there will be a lot more available on the second hand market, bringing prices down even further.

The lens on the other hand won't move too much in terms of price, unless you are lucky enough to catch one of the sales like was just announced for B&H.

 

[7enderbender]

, but a FF body with just a 50mm f/1.4 is going to be disappointing. [...]

And why is that? As I've said before I'm biased towards that combo for a number of reasons and it may not be everyone's cup of tea. But disappointing?

 

[dnnphotography]

My gf and 2nd shooter was just faced this same problem recently. She had the 24-105f4L, the 10-22, and the 50 1.4 on a T2i, she also uses my 24-70f2.8L and 70-200f2.8ISL from time to time on the body, but recently she used my 5D2 with just her 50f1.4 and was ready to trade in her T2i and lenses to upgrade to the 5d2 and JUST the 50. The image difference is night and day. I would not upgrade to junk lens but the 50 1.4 is a beauty of a budget lens.

 

[Loswr]

You will probably get more out of a 5D2+50mm 1.4 then a 50D+Lsomething. While people tend to fetishize the L glass, it generally represents a fairly incremental upgrade, and the lower fstop of the 1.2 L lenses might not even impact your camera (there are debates regarding if the sensors actually get any additional light from faster lenses or if the geometery doesn't work)... but moving to a full frame will get a lot more out of your existing glass.

I don't know that many people would advocate buying the f/1.2L over the f/1.4 just for the half-stop of light (and as you state, some tests have shown that that half-stop isn't effective with dSLR sensors, and the camera just surreptitiously increases the ISO to compensate). But, I wouldn't call it an incremental upgrade, either - in the case of the 50L, it's just that the 'upgrade' you're getting isn't something that is readily measured in a test and plotted on a graph, you're paying for the smooth, creamy bokeh that the 50/1.4 just cannot deliver.

 

[IIIHobbs]

I agree, buy the best lens first (lenses stay, bodies change). If your 50D is working fine, stick with that, and add the 50L, it will be a very nice addition to your 50D. It provides a 80mm focal length on a crop body and the images are wonderful. I used a 50L for my 40D for shooting Basketball in place of my 70-200 f2.8 for low lighting situations and it performed very well.

 

[EOBeav]

But, I wouldn't call it an incremental upgrade, either - in the case of the 50L, it's just that the 'upgrade' you're getting isn't something that is readily measured in a test and plotted on a graph, you're paying for the smooth, creamy bokeh that the 50/1.4 just cannot deliver.

I suppose if you make your living shooting wide open, and you need that creamy bokeh, then it probably makes sense to go with the 50mm f/1.2 at 3x the price of the 50mm f/1.4. But for the rest of us, that extra money could be better used elsewhere. By all accounts, the 50mm f/1.4 is actually the sharper lens after about f/2.8. If that's where you shoot, and don't go for the wide open apertures, well it's your money.

 

[ecka]

But, I wouldn't call it an incremental upgrade, either - in the case of the 50L, it's just that the 'upgrade' you're getting isn't something that is readily measured in a test and plotted on a graph, you're paying for the smooth, creamy bokeh that the 50/1.4 just cannot deliver.

I suppose if you make your living shooting wide open, and you need that creamy bokeh, then it probably makes sense to go with the 50mm f/1.2 at 3x the price of the 50mm f/1.4. But for the rest of us, that extra money could be better used elsewhere. By all accounts, the 50mm f/1.4 is actually the sharper lens after about f/2.8. If that's where you shoot, and don't go for the wide open apertures, well it's your money.

And if you don't make your living shooting wide open, but you still need/want that creamy bokeh, then it makes more sense to go with the Sigma 50/1.4. I tried comparing some images from the 7D+Sigma50/1.4 (that I used to have) and 5D2+85/1.8 and I can't decide which combo produces cremier background blur ... probably Sigma, but 85/1.8 is sharper .

 

[bycostello]

glass every time....

 

[EOBeav]

And if you don't make your living shooting wide open, but you still need/want that creamy bokeh, then it makes more sense to go with the Sigma 50/1.4. I tried comparing some images from the 7D+Sigma50/1.4 (that I used to have) and 5D2+85/1.8 and I can't decide which combo produces cremier background blur ... probably Sigma, but 85/1.8 is sharper .

I guess I'd need to see the difference between the Sigma 50/1.4 and the Canon 40/1.4 to make that call. I seem to spend a lot of time defending the 50/1.4. It's a great lens!

 

[skozachuk]

Thank you everyone for your help, seems like both ways are ok, so I'll try to make decision that fits best for me

Thanks again! You're great!

 

[TexPhoto]

I'd say 5DII, and then try to pick up a 24-105 when you can.

 

[Neeneko]

I guess I'd need to see the difference between the Sigma 50/1.4 and the Canon 40/1.4 to make that call. I seem to spend a lot of time defending the 50/1.4. It's a great lens!

Yeah, but it is inexpensive and is missing that red ring, so it gets bashed a lot, thus it is worth defending. For every photographer that is actually using the improved capabilities of the f1.2, there are probably at least a dozen who buy it more for social or image reasons.

 

[EOBeav]

Yeah, but it is inexpensive and is missing that red ring, so it gets bashed a lot, thus it is worth defending. For every photographer that is actually using the improved capabilities of the f1.2, there are probably at least a dozen who buy it more for social or image reasons.

+1

Or, who like to talk about how great their gear is, instead of just getting out and shooting.

 

[dericcainphoto]

Go FF! I went from a 50D to a 7D and now the 5D Mark III and I will never go back crop. The image quality is a huge difference and I love my 50mm 1.4 on the 5D. It is very sharp! Go FF, you won't regret it!