Thinking of a new body, want your opinions

[pjn0629]

What's currently in my bag:

40D
24-70/2.8
70-200/2.8 IS
50/1.4
Sigma 30/1.4
Nikon 105/2.5 on an adapter ring (don't knock it, it's a great piece of glass)
430 EX
Fuji x100s

So, I'm starting to feel the age of my 40D ever since i got the fuji, IQ is so much better with the fuji, and it practically sees in the dark compared with my 40D, but when I have the light, or I'm shooting something that moves (ie. my 6 month old puppy, or bike racing) I bust out the 40D for the autofocus.

I've been watching the price of the 5Diii come down lately, and also been eyeing the 7Dii. The fuji gives me hope for a crop sensor to produce great results, but I also find that the crop makes me feel like my lenses are a bit long, especially when I shoot cyclocross and can get in close to the action anyway.

I guess i'm considering staying APS-C and getting a 7Dii and a ultrawide lens, or moving to full frame...

Should i get a 5Diii? wait for a mark iv? get a 7Dii and a super wide angle?

I know i won't get any resale out of the 40d, so i can always just keep it around, or sell it for $200 or whatever i'll get for it just to get it out of the house and keep my girlfriend from yelling at me about it.

pricewise - just try and keep me from getting yelled at by the gf

 

[candc]

considering that you have all full frame lenses you should get a full frame camera. the 5diii is at a decent price point nowadays.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

If you can afford 5D Mark iii now, there is no reason to wait.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I've had five or six 40D's and they were wonderful, but the 5D MK III is in a different class. As many complaints as I see about the 7D MK II, I'd suggest a 5D MK III.

 

[Jules]

Hi,
I guess it will depend on your type of photo ... Landscape or sports ...
Speaking of my own experience, just swapped from 40D (5 years) to 7DII end of last November, and i'm loving it (3k pics): coupled with 70-200 2.8 IS II, it makes a great combo ... I quite often shoot 800 and up to 3200 ISO (inside shots or for using the 2x extender) and results are quite good compared to the unusable soup of 40D at that level.

What i especially like on 7DII compared to 40D are the following:
- higher usable ISO and increased resolution
- 65 points with great user control to choose and compose in one touch (cf. below point, for sports but also macro with 100 2.8 L Macro and 24-70 4 L in its macro position)
- super high speed and silent speed all customizable
- customization (menus, lots of buttons can be customized, easy access to autofocus options and presets, focus points, ...); lever on back joystick is pretty convenient and also customizable (use it for ISO)
=> classic settings I am getting so used to is to be able to go with a push of thumb/finger from classical one shot to AI Servo and point extension/zone setting with focus avoiding obstacles for sport with high speed, or in some other cases to finetuned focus point composition with AI Servo for Macro jewelry/fine art macro, all while looking thru the viewfinder
A few reasons i didn't want to jump to 5DIII and FF (yet):
- reach (i got a 2x ext on the 70-200)
- speed (birds, sports ... and kids!)
- my 10-22 that i love
- price (preferred to upgrade glass)
- integrated flash for quick flash fill without bulky external flash to carry/install ...
- fancy gadgets on 7DII (gps, higher customization degree ...)

For UWA, you might try the 10-22 : have a look at the forum's images, it's a lovely lens, a few people deem it close to L quality (one that i didn't want to leave to my goddaughter if changing to FF!), you just have to be careful not to get your feet in the pics !
Regarding the 40D, why don't you try to give it to your gf ? Put the 50 1.4 on it, and you will be happy of the nice portraits she takes of you My ex had a 550D and she always wanted to get my 40D ... (now i'll give it as an upgrade to my goddaughter after she trained on my old 400D)

But on the other end if budget is not an issue with you, get 5DIII and one of the 16-35 ...

 

[pjn0629]

I've had five or six 40D's and they were wonderful, but the 5D MK III is in a different class. As many complaints as I see about the 7D MK II, I'd suggest a 5D MK III.

Honestly, I've never felt that the FPS on the 40D was limiting in any way shooting Bike racing (nor the autofocus for that matter) But given that the 5D iv is on the horizon, and supposedly going to be significantly faster, and i'm not in a rush, and could afford either.... on the UWA... 24mm is wide enough for a while, eventually maybe i'll go for something crazy wide, but not itching for crazy landscape shots.

 

[Zv]

5D3 is the most well rounded camera with excellent IQ and a decent frame rate. The only reason to go with the 7D2 is if you prioritize fps over IQ.

Don't wait for the 5D4 - Canon aren't in a rush to release this yet so you could be waiting a while. That could be a year or so worth of quality shots you could be taking with the 5D3 in the meantime.

 

[FTb-n]

I bought the 70-200 f2.8L IS II for my 60D, then migrated to the 7D, and ultimately the 5D3 (then a second 5D3 and 24-70 f2.8L II). Get the 5D3.

The 70-200 is a great lens on crop and a fantastic lens on full-frame. Images are sharper, DOF is thinner with great subject isolation, and the focal range is more useful for events and indoor sports (at least court-side). Plus color depth is deeper and it has higher useful ISO. I think you'll find that the IQ from your 24-70 will have more pop to it as well.

I would jump at the 5D3 at these prices. The 5D4 may be $500-1000 more and maybe 8 months away to availability -- or more. I can't say if the mystery specs of the 5D4 will be worth the wait. I would expect it to be a tempting upgrade. There's no point in introducing it if it isn't. But, I also think that there will be a market for 5D3 at $2000-2500 for some time to come.

My need is heavy on sports and in low light. I'm currently weighing the 1Dx with it's falling prices or waiting for the 5D4. I'm guessing that the 5D4 won't have the dual DIGIC's and a chip dedicated to focus tracking. While I think the 5D3 is underrated as a sports body, there are times when tracking a rapidly moving and spinning figure skater can challenge the AF system. I'm trying to figure out if the 1Dx's EOS iTR is noticeably better at tracking subjects and at doing so in low light (or under spotlights). The next questions is whether this will be in the 5D4. Logic suggests that a 5D4 would be somewhere between the 5D3 and the 1Dx for tracking sports. Don't know if any of this will affect your thought process, but I thought I'd toss it out there.

 

[rpt]

I have both. For low light the 5DIII is better. If you do not need the 10fps or the focus on video, 5DIII is the one for you. However if you can wait till the third or fourth quarter, it may make sense to look at what the 5DIV has to offer.

 

[chasinglight]

Over the past couple years I have bounced around through several bodies. The t2i, which is a great value for the money (or was) and was the camera that ushered me into photography. I then upgraded to the 7D, which was chocked full of great features and superior ergonomics and build quality, but while I loved the features and ergonomics I never really loved the image quality, I actually think the t2i had an edge on it. Additionally I was a victim of the hit or miss AF (though it certainly worked well for others). In bright situations with ETTR you could get some great results, but in more challenging situations the files required a lot of post processing.

Two years ago I picked up a refurb 6D at a great price. I was wary about "stepping down" in terms of features and build, but that camera really was a game changer. The IQ is fantastic and the weight savings is actually really nice (who knew).

Meanwhile I hung onto the 7D but never used it because the IQ just didn't come close to the 6D, even for air shows and the little bit of wildlife I shoot. So recently I sold it, but wanted to have a real go at having 2 bodies that I could use without feeling I was sacrificing IQ. I was attracted to the "mini 1dx" that is the 7d2, but from everything I have seen the IQ would still be closer to the original 7D than the 6d so I was considering another 6D, but ended up picking up a 5D3 during the price drops. Last weekend I shot 2 days at an air show, an atlas V rocket launch ( at night), and a few museums. The 5D3 definitey has an edge in AF tracking over the 6D. The IQ is largely the same as the 6D.

So my suggestion would be, pull the trigger on full frame whether it be the 6d or the 5d3. I don't have hands on experience with the 7d2, but everything I have seen leads me to believe that while it is a very capable camera it suffers from the same affliction the original 7d did; detailed images that require a lot of Post Processing to clean up.

 

[Tabor Warren Photography]

5D3 is the most well rounded camera with excellent IQ and a decent frame rate. The only reason to go with the 7D2 is if you prioritize fps over IQ.

Don't wait for the 5D4 - Canon aren't in a rush to release this yet so you could be waiting a while. That could be a year or so worth of quality shots you could be taking with the 5D3 in the meantime.

I can't quite think of anything more to add than what Zv said. I think you would benefit best from a 5Diii. I would not hesitate to buy from the grey market providers mentioned by Canon Rumors or Canonpricewatch.com, watch for a $1,999 deal and jump on it. All four of our 5Diii's were grey market, and I have zero complaints.

I hope this helps!
-Tabor

 

[NKPhoto]

I have a 7D MK II, a 6D and a 5D MK III. I shoot landscape, wildlife and a lot of indoor high school sports in low light. I have 12000 clicks on the 7D MK II, 9000 clicks on the 6D and 82000 clicks on the 5D MK III. If I could only have one camera, it would be the 5D MK III without question. It is sharper than the 1 DX (18 mp vs 24 mp), has a better focusing system than the 6D and much better noise performance than the 7D MK II. It is a hard combination to beat and definitely a workhorse all around great camera!

 

[Hjalmarg1]

I've had five or six 40D's and they were wonderful, but the 5D MK III is in a different class. As many complaints as I see about the 7D MK II, I'd suggest a 5D MK III.

Don't wait, get the 5D3. Nowdays the price is so attractive and you'll get full potential of your FF lenses.
I moved from the 60D to 7D to 5D3 and it has been a continuos improvement in IQ and ISO performance.

 

[lolo0476]

Hi, something i'm looking too is autofocus that is better in low light on 7DII.
It can focus with -3Il, -2 for 5D Mk3
7D2 can focus with f8 lens too. 5D3 tu f5.6 (correct me if i make a mistake).

 

[Random Orbits]

Hi, something i'm looking too is autofocus that is better in low light on 7DII.
It can focus with -3Il, -2 for 5D Mk3
7D2 can focus with f8 lens too. 5D3 tu f5.6 (correct me if i make a mistake).

5DIII autofocuses with f/8 as well.

 

[pjn0629]

I have a 7D MK II, a 6D and a 5D MK III. I shoot landscape, wildlife and a lot of indoor high school sports in low light. I have 12000 clicks on the 7D MK II, 9000 clicks on the 6D and 82000 clicks on the 5D MK III. If I could only have one camera, it would be the 5D MK III without question. It is sharper than the 1 DX (18 mp vs 24 mp), has a better focusing system than the 6D and much better noise performance than the 7D MK II. It is a hard combination to beat and definitely a workhorse all around great camera!

I guess I am looking for an all-around workhorse... I can't really say that I do any one type of photography more than another, except that maybe landscape is lowest on my priority list (as i'm most likely to cram my x100 in a jersey pocket on my bike to get to where i'd want to take any real landscape shots) And given my purchase history... I bought the 40D in 2007 I don't think i'd be selling the 5d iii for a 5d iv, i kind of like to have one camera, and really get to know it inside and out. the 6.5 fps on my 40d is plenty fast for bike racing, although 10 would be nice, frankly that's a lot more data and throwaways to deal with than at 6.

Also, I think I need to continually remind myself that I don't do this for a living, and I don't necessarily need the latest toys. Only thing I'll mention is, I took a behind the scenes shot at a race last year, of one of my girlfriend's teammates setting up her bike, and their sponsor asked for a higher quality version for their product catalog, and my shot didn't make it due to lack of resolution/noise... which was kind of a bummer

 

[Dylan777]

considering that you have all full frame lenses you should get a full frame camera. the 5diii is at a decent price point nowadays.

+1...BIG improvement in IQ

 

[ksgal]

Either the 7DII or the 5DIII will be a substantial upgrade in image quality.

Me, I like the extra FPS in a burst (7DII) for over fences and I'll take that over a a bit of improvement in image quality. But if you are very rarely using the fps - Id also vote for a 5DIII - but either will make you very happy.

The 70D uses almost the same sensor as the 7DII, and is 500-700 cheaper. Could buy that and the ultra wide suggested. But the 5DIII is a stunning camera for the price right now.

 

[pjn0629]

Either the 7DII or the 5DIII will be a substantial upgrade in image quality.

Me, I like the extra FPS in a burst (7DII) for over fences and I'll take that over a a bit of improvement in image quality. But if you are very rarely using the fps - Id also vote for a 5DIII - but either will make you very happy.

The 70D uses almost the same sensor as the 7DII, and is 500-700 cheaper. Could buy that and the ultra wide suggested. But the 5DIII is a stunning camera for the price right now.

I like the idea of 10fps, but I haven't felt that I've ever really needed it. the 6.5 with my 40D has gotten me the shot i'm looking for ~85% of the time, which is plenty considering that I'm not getting paid for this... they're about the same size/weight/price... low light on the 5D is better but 7D is faster... as i've said 40D isn't too slow to do what I want, so it's kind of a tough decision... also going back to normal focal lengths would be nice too

 

[Geek]

I'm kind of like you! I have a 40D that I purchased back in 2007 and have bought some decent glass along the way, 24-105 F4 L and the 70-200 F2.8 L II. I'm very eclectic in my photography, landscapes, portraits, vacations, etc. The 40D is a great work horse and I've taken and still take a lot of great pictures with it. I take the 40D out riding ATV's when I don't want to risk taking the new camera and and better lenses with me.

Late last year, I finally decided to upgrade. I considered the 6D and the 5D mark III, but finally chose to stick with the APS C sensor and purchased the 7D mark II. Got one of those deals from B&H where I got a CamRanger to go with it for free when I purchased the 7D mark II and EF-S 18-135 STM lens kit. The 18-135 STM is the only EF-S lens that I own so I was not influenced by my lens collection.

For me, since I was used to the framing that I got from my lenses on an APS C sensor and knew that I would spend less money by sticking with the crop sensor. I seem to use the longer end of my lenses more often than the shorter and realized that I would have to buy longer lenses to achieve the same framing on a full frame camera.

I have been amazed at the low light and IQ improvement of the 7D II over my older 40D. Before the full frame "purists" dutifully flame me and put me in my place, I don't believe that it is as good as the full frame alternatives. But for me with my budget and style, I believe that upgrading to the 7D II was the best choice. I am still overwhelmed by the 7D II autofocus system, but am learning as I go and smiling all of the way.

While the 7D II is billed as an action and wildlife camera, it does make a good general purpose camera too.

It's not an easy choice! Just wanted to share a little from someone that didn't choose to go full frame and a little of my fuzzy logic that influenced my decision.