To switch or not to switch?

[Madkrafter]

When I switched from film to digital in 2004, I bartered for a used D60 (6.2 MP). I've been shooting 1.6 crop since. IQ is with the photographer. I've done 20x30+" blowups from that 6.2 MP sensor. I bought a Tokina 12-24mm f/4 PRO DX lens to get my wide angle views for architectural and landscape shoots.

In 2008, I wanted to upgrade. My decision was between the 50D and the 5DmkII. I ultimately decided on the 50D because the batteries from my D60 and the Tokina lens would carry over. I also picked up a 70-200mm f/4 L IS with the 50D for a combined total of what the 5DmkII body alone would cost.

Here we are waiting, drooling, for the 5DmkIII and I just purchased a brand-new, 3-year-old 5DmkII for 2K on 12/14. Why? I purchased the Canon 17mm Tilt-Shift lens for architectural work last year for a business write-off. I was only able to use it for exteriors or spacious interiors because of its 27mm 1.6x view. A year later, another write-off, I pulled the trigger on the 5DmkII because I don't want to wait until Summer or Christmas to use my 17mm TS to its fullest. I'm loving the full-frame, my 24-70 is WIDE at 24! High-ISO looks good. And there's a back-focus button on the grip!! (it's the little things)

Crop-sensor cameras like the 7D are great cameras. I have made fantastic pictures with them for 7 years. Their extra reach with the crop factor can save you. It just depends on what you have in your equipment list. Do you have to sell and re-purchase lenses?

I'm not thinking twice about buying the 5DmkII. It will make a great backup camera next year! And I still have the 50D for the "reach"

 

[unfocused]

I have a 7D and doubt seriously if I will ever switch. Why not?

A combination of personal style and overall investment.

Switching to a 5D (or other full frame) involves not only switching the body, but also switching lenses. I would need to invest at least another $1,000 or so over and above the cost of the 5DII to get a wide angle zoom that covers the same range of lenses I already own for my 7D.

I don't do a lot of low-light photography. I don't usually shoot high ISO, and the image quality of the 7D is just fine at normal ISOs. Besides, I am certain that the next generation of 7D will have improved ISO performance anyway.

I print most of my images full-frame, and absent radical crops, the image quality of the 7D in print is flawless, even for relatively large print sizes.

I am spoiled by the extra reach of the 7D. I just bought a 100-400 zoom and I don't want to give up the 1.6 crop factor.

I've studied my own preferred style and composition. I'm not a romanticist, my style is more documentary and my compositions tend to emphasize a flat plane. Thus, I don't find as much need for shallow depth of field and in fact, prefer the greater apparent depth of field of the APS-C sensor.

I'm not prepared to say I will never switch to full frame and the low price of the 5D II is tempting, but for my personal style of photography, at this point I'm not seeing sufficient advantages to full frame.

 

[bobthebrick]

I have a 7D and doubt seriously if I will ever switch. Why not?

A combination of personal style and overall investment.

Switching to a 5D (or other full frame) involves not only switching the body, but also switching lenses. I would need to invest at least another $1,000 or so over and above the cost of the 5DII to get a wide angle zoom that covers the same range of lenses I already own for my 7D.

I don't do a lot of low-light photography. I don't usually shoot high ISO, and the image quality of the 7D is just fine at normal ISOs. Besides, I am certain that the next generation of 7D will have improved ISO performance anyway.

I print most of my images full-frame, and absent radical crops, the image quality of the 7D in print is flawless, even for relatively large print sizes.

I am spoiled by the extra reach of the 7D. I just bought a 100-400 zoom and I don't want to give up the 1.6 crop factor.

I've studied my own preferred style and composition. I'm not a romanticist, my style is more documentary and my compositions tend to emphasize a flat plane. Thus, I don't find as much need for shallow depth of field and in fact, prefer the greater apparent depth of field of the APS-C sensor.

I'm not prepared to say I will never switch to full frame and the low price of the 5D II is tempting, but for my personal style of photography, at this point I'm not seeing sufficient advantages to full frame.

Very well said, and restates the point that there is no "one is so much better and is the end-all". You need the right tools for the job, and sometimes an APS-C camera is the right tool. You need to determine exactly what your shooting and work out whether FF will be a massive help, or even a hindrance to your creativity. I'd wait for the 7d mk ii, or 70d, or whatever comes next, if you decide you want to stay APS-C. If you want to go FF, maybe look at a used 5d. A lot of the image quality for a fraction of the price. More money for lenses

Thomas.

 

[friedmud]

Here's an example of 7D AF and off-camera flash capability coming in handy for "family" photos.

My mother-in-law's dog will absolutely let you dress him up in _any_ way... and then will just sit there and pose for photos. It's pretty hilarious...

This was shot with a 7D, 17-55 f/2.8, 430 EX II as a remote (to the right and above the frame, pointed up with the diffuser on), ISO 400, Manual Mode

Yep, even with a flash it was still ISO 400... it was _very_ dark in the room... but the 7D was still able to lock on perfectly and control the remote flash to get a great exposure. Only slight modifications done in iPhoto (still traveling so no access to Lightroom right now).

There is a bit of noise in the OOF areas in the back (you probably won't be able to tell because CR limits the upload size so the photo is pretty small) but I'm sure I could get rid of it with Lightroom. There is a _ton_ of detail in this photo though. Zooming in I can see every hair on his face....

Just shot this tonight and thought it might add some cheer to the discussion ;-)

(EDIT: In case you're wondering those are _Doggles_ he has on ;-)

 

[hoousi]

I changed to FF for DoF on wide angle with a 16-35L now and a 24L next, also the nifty fifty gives a beautiful bokeh on 1.4 with FF compared to DX. Though I must ad that I finally came to a salary point where I can afford L-glass, a must when switching to FF. On DX there are many inexpensive lenses with good quality, FF is a huge plunge concerning glass, the body plays a very little role in the total price point.