Two cameras??

[FTb-n]

Basketball, with poor lighting usually, the 7D2 has a 50 f/1.2 ...

I've long been intrigued by the 50 f1.2L, but I'm curious about the reports of slow focusing. What's it like shooting sports with this lens compared to the 70-200 f2.8 II? I don't mean the focal length, just the ability to get the shot and track moving subjects.

 

[Maleko]

I do weddings / portraits and have a 5DMK3 as primary body, and then a 5D (original) as a backup, alogn with my old trusty 50D as a backup backup.
When people are paying me to take photos of their big day in which they have spent so much time and money, I want to make sure I am covered! That also includes extra flashes, lens, lots of batteries etc.

 

[rpt]

I have both. In poor light I prefer the 5D3. When I want burst speed or auto focus on video I use the 7D2.

 

[midluk]

I have the 70D and I'm seriously thinking about going FF after the 5D4 (and preferably the 6D2, so I have four options 5D3, 6D2, 5D4 to choose from) is released.
I will keep the 70D as backup and for macro work (and to qualify for European CPS), but the choice of lenses will be a mess. The main reason for the desire for FF is that there are no convincing EF-S lenses. The build quality and IS of the 17-55 is not all that great and at least my copy also is not extremely convincing with regard to image quality and AF precision. And the 10-22 could definitely be improved CA-wise.
I will likely get a 16-35 f/4L IS and a 24-70 f/4L IS, sell my 17-55 and 10-22 and keep my 70-200 f4/L IS and 100 f/2.8L macro.
To have a broad FL coverage with both cameras the FF would get the 16-35 and the APS-C the 24-70, but that is rather a waste of money for situations where mainly the normal FL range is used with the ultra wide only for an occasional shot. But putting the 24-70 onto the FF body, leaves the APS-C without much use. and the ultra wide end uncovered.
For normal+tele FLs the combination would likely work better with the 24-70 on the FF and the 70-200 on the APS-C (with a 70-112 gap in coverage) which allows to go to greater focal lengths than with the FF alone.

In the end I will likely end up with two FF bodies if the money allows…

 

[darynthe]

The thing is that if you get a crop body if you want very good image quality and sharpness you will need to but new lenses created specifically for crop bodies, as it seems that even L lenses created for full frame bodies will underperform. seems there is a good technical reason for this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDbUIfB5YUc
In the end it is more expensive.

 

[slclick]

The thing is that if you get a crop body if you want very good image quality and sharpness you will need to but new lenses created specifically for crop bodies, as it seems that even L lenses created for full frame bodies will underperform. seems there is a good technical reason for this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDbUIfB5YUc
In the end it is more expensive.

DxO Mark reasoning. I sense there will be much consternation about this.

 

[pwp]

There is little advantage to having a crop camera as a 2nd camera, at least for me.

I would put my 24-70mm f/2.8L II on one FF Body and my 70-20070mm f/2.8L II on another FF body.

Putting one or the other on a crop camera messes up your coverage, if you put the 24-70 on crop, you lose wide, and if you put the 70-200 on the crop, you lost the very useful 71-111 mm range. Having both crop and FF lenses makes even less sense, since you cannot put the crop lens on your FF if the crop camera dies.

One other consideration is CF versus SD cards. CF cards are superior in terms of speed, and most crop bodies want SD. If you want to share a pool of CF cards, get cameras that both use CF cards, and the same batteries as well.

The OP is talking about a 7DII which has one CF slot & one SD slot.

Shooting sports, the OP will find a tangible boost in quality keepers with a 7DII over his 5DIII.

There's no set-piece ideal setup that will suit all photographers. Horses for courses, but I have always liked having a FF body and a crop body. Until a recent 7DII purchase the crop body has always been APS-H. FWIW the APS-C 7DII has exceeded my expectations as an action camera delivering a pleasingly higher rate of keepers vs my recently retired 1D MkIV. I had modest expectations of the 7DII but I'm really liking it.

Where finances allow, having two bodies can put you at a great advantage, always ready with an appropriate focal length, the extra reach, ability to keep shooting if a card fills at just the wrong time and so on. On industrial shoots I tend to have the 16-35 f/4is on the FF body and the 70-200 f/2.8isII on the crop body. My style rarely calls for the middle focal lengths, but the stellar 24-70 f/2.8II is always there in the bag.

There are no right's and wrongs, just what works for the individual.

-pw

 

[Deleted member 91053]

The thing is that if you get a crop body if you want very good image quality and sharpness you will need to but new lenses created specifically for crop bodies, as it seems that even L lenses created for full frame bodies will underperform. seems there is a good technical reason for this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDbUIfB5YUc
In the end it is more expensive.

Please tell me that you don't really believe that video. Whilst Tony N occasionally offers good advice he often produces twoddle! Additionally he is merely quoting figures from DXO - well we know what they are worth!
Certainly good FF lenses tend to be expensive, no argument there, but inferior to lenses designed for APSC?!? The briefest of side by side tests will dispel that myth.
To date none of the APSC lenses that I have yet tried have equaled top quality FF lenses on an APSC camera.
Where lenses designed for APSC cameras score is their combination of good IQ and low prices. Currently the highest quality (and most expensive) lenses for DSLR cameras cover the 35mm format - a smaller sensor doesn't make the lens any better or worse.
Try some out for yourself - I have.

 

[Pookie]

There is little advantage to having a crop camera as a 2nd camera, at least for me.

I would put my 24-70mm f/2.8L II on one FF Body and my 70-20070mm f/2.8L II on another FF body.

Putting one or the other on a crop camera messes up your coverage, if you put the 24-70 on crop, you lose wide, and if you put the 70-200 on the crop, you lost the very useful 71-111 mm range. Having both crop and FF lenses makes even less sense, since you cannot put the crop lens on your FF if the crop camera dies.

One other consideration is CF versus SD cards. CF cards are superior in terms of speed, and most crop bodies want SD. If you want to share a pool of CF cards, get cameras that both use CF cards, and the same batteries as well.

The OP is talking about a 7DII which has one CF slot & one SD slot.

Shooting sports, the OP will find a tangible boost in quality keepers with a 7DII over his 5DIII.

There's no set-piece ideal setup that will suit all photographers. Horses for courses, but I have always liked having a FF body and a crop body. Until a recent 7DII purchase the crop body has always been APS-H. FWIW the APS-C 7DII has exceeded my expectations as an action camera delivering a pleasingly higher rate of keepers vs my recently retired 1D MkIV. I had modest expectations of the 7DII but I'm really liking it.

Where finances allow, having two bodies can put you at a great advantage, always ready with an appropriate focal length, the extra reach, ability to keep shooting if a card fills at just the wrong time and so on. On industrial shoots I tend to have the 16-35 f/4is on the FF body and the 70-200 f/2.8isII on the crop body. My style rarely calls for the middle focal lengths, but the stellar 24-70 f/2.8II is always there in the bag.

There are no right's and wrongs, just what works for the individual.

-pw

Interesting... I disagree with "little advantage" to carrying the crop.

Often I shoot intramural sports and have a 1DX for those days but I'm starting to think the 7DII might be a welcome addition. On site for work I tend to carry 3-4 cameras as I never want to have to explain why "this ain't happening today" to a client.

My workhorses are the 5D3's... always carry those, then the 1DX is tucked into the back of the car JIC. I have two 7D's that haven't seen the light of day in years now but I did miss the lighter body compared to the 1DX. Especially when carrying 2 bodies. I carry a 24-70II for group, sideline shots on a 5D3. Typically I carry a 200 f/2, 300 f/2.8 or 70-200II on the second body that can be a major back breaker at the end of the day.

What is your take on the 7DII since you mentioned it PW? Do you own a 1DX or plan on the 1DXII?

 

[Spectrum]

"I've long been intrigued by the 50 f1.2L, but I'm curious about the reports of slow focusing. What's it like shooting sports with this lens compared to the 70-200 f2.8 II? I don't mean the focal length, just the ability to get the shot and track moving subjects."

I have found the 50 f/1.2 L to be rapid focusing on the 7D Mk II for basketball. I usually have it at f/1.6. I have the 85 f/1.2 L II also, but that is definitely slower than the 50.

 

[Zv]

I did the whole 2 body thing with a 5D2 and 7D. Was kinda useful I guess for the few times I actually used both bodies. One was at a wedding but I don't do those all that much so there was no point keeping 2.

I tend to use zooms a lot to avoid lens switching. On some occasions where I would potentially be switching a lot I just use the EOS M as a secondary body. It's my low priority body so whatever I shoot the least that day goes on there. This is only really good for static subjects though.

It really depends on how and what you shoot. Seems a bit overkill to buy a second FF just to not change lens all that much. Kinda defeats the purpose of an interchangeable lens camera if you just buy more cameras. What next? One for each lens?

 

[Ozarker]

I don't make any money with photography. I did a total of one portrait shoot and one real estate shoot that I got paid for.

Lately I have only been doing events, and for free. Photography is absolutely a hobby for me and not a money maker.

I have a 5D III and a 70D. I have really thought about this for my uses and would rather have two FF bodies.

It will be a few years before I get another camera. To be honest, for me, saving for a 600mm f/4 II and whatever replaces the current 85L is more important. I've become more and more convinced that great glass means the most to me.

Two FF bodies would be my choice. If the new 5DX gets 10-12 fps... then I would have no reason to even look at a 7D Mark II crop (other than price and weight?). It may take an extra year or two of saving, but worth waiting for to me. I would not sell my 5D mark III to replace it. It would just move into backup position.

For events: 5D III with a 24-70L, and a 5D with a 70-200L.
For sports and birds: 5D III with a 70-200L and a 5D with a 400mm f/5.6L

That is what I would like. Honestly, I just don't use my 70D anymore. Not for anything.

I know the 7D Mark II is a great choice for some, but I have not missed the "extra reach" found with the crop cameras.

I'll wait 3 or 4 years and see if I can swing the 5DX when it is at the end of its production cycle.

The 5D III opened my eyes wide, like a puppy two weeks after birth.

 

[pwp]

What is your take on the 7DII since you mentioned it PW? Do you own a 1DX or plan on the 1DXII?

I bought the 7DII pretty much as a speculative exercise when my 1D MkIV was begging for retirement with several hundred thousand clicks to its name. 5DIII's are the main workhorses here too, with the 7DII and 1D MkIV for action, great AF and reach. A 1DX was definitely on the radar but the 7DII has exceeded expectations by a long shot. Obviously the 1DX/1DXII will smack the 7DII's backside in all sorts of performance parameters as well as longevity but in the meantime the gripped 7DII keeps a permanent place in my bag. FWIW the 1D MkIV does outperform the 7DII above 3200iso but the 7DII has a big AF advantage. And genuine 10 FPS.

-pw

 

[Pookie]

What is your take on the 7DII since you mentioned it PW? Do you own a 1DX or plan on the 1DXII?

I bought the 7DII pretty much as a speculative exercise when my 1D MkIV was begging for retirement with several hundred thousand clicks to its name. 5DIII's are the main workhorses here too, with the 7DII and 1D MkIV for action, great AF and reach. A 1DX was definitely on the radar but the 7DII has exceeded expectations by a long shot. Obviously the 1DX/1DXII will smack the 7DII's backside in all sorts of performance parameters as well as longevity but in the meantime the gripped 7DII keeps a permanent place in my bag. FWIW the 1D MkIV does outperform the 7DII above 3200iso but the 7DII has a big AF advantage. And genuine 10 FPS.

-pw

The ISO is what really turned me off to any more 7D's... as you prob know. I always cringed when I got near 800 as it turned south very quick. As much as I like the possibilities with the 1DX I find it to be overkill much of the time as I don't need the AF or speed (not shooting pro's, mainly HS or younger... sometimes the over 30 sports too). I rarely use the 1DX unless I feel I would "really, really" need it. That's where a nice lighter, higher FPS and action AF would step in with a weight saving.

I sense another test purchase coming on soon :-[ Thanks PW.

 

[JonAustin]

It really depends on how and what you shoot. Seems a bit overkill to buy a second FF just to not change lens all that much. Kinda defeats the purpose of an interchangeable lens camera if you just buy more cameras.

Your first statement in the above paragraph trumps the two that follow. Not only how and what you shoot, but also where and in what environmental circumstances. Try changing lenses in dusty or wet conditions, and the value of that other lens you want to shoot with already being mounted on its own body will become glaringly obvious. Not to mention the time required to change lenses possibly causing you to miss the shot.

 

[Pookie]

It really depends on how and what you shoot. Seems a bit overkill to buy a second FF just to not change lens all that much. Kinda defeats the purpose of an interchangeable lens camera if you just buy more cameras.

Your first statement in the above paragraph trumps the two that follow. Not only how and what you shoot, but also where and in what environmental circumstances. Try changing lenses in dusty or wet conditions, and the value of that other lens you want to shoot with already being mounted on its own body will become glaringly obvious. Not to mention the time required to change lenses possibly causing you to miss the shot.

+1

Wind + Dust/Sand... no bueno !!!! Probably the biggest reason why 2 bodies rule IMO. A little sand will ruin your day for sure. That and the inordinate amount of time to swap out a lens like a 70-200 II with a (?) when you're chasing a shot.

 

[Maui5150]

It can be a dilemma.

I am currently 3 bodies (5D MK III / 5D MK II / 7D MK II)

I got the Mk III shortly after my 5DMKII and that is my main backup body.
The 7D MK II I just picked up recently, because for sports while the 5D MK III is adequate, the 7D MK II is just more geared to it, and the reach does not hurt. High Iso could be better, but some noise creeping in is a lot better than OOF or missed shots

Definitely weighting the 5Dx / 5DMKIV or what ever it will be and be selling my 5DMKII. Body wise that should keep me covered for awhile and next purchase after that will likely be a 2nd 70-200 F/2.8 IS II. I do like having two lensed bodies available and not having to swap lenses when shooting events. At the same time, the combo of 7D MKII with the 70 -200 is a fab set up and really equivalent to 112 - 320. While I can use my 24-70 on the 5D MK III, I find for sports just limited. I could survive with 24-105 F/4 IS L, but like faster glass.

Other option I like better is maybe getting the Sigma 120-300 F/2.8. That would give me 70 - 200 on the MK III and 192 - 480 on the 7D MK II all at 2.8

Even finding a cherry used Sigma, still 50% higher in cost than a 2nd 70-200.

I also can see that since the 70-200 is really one of my main lenses, a second backup might not be a bad idea.

I rarely use my 24-105 but to me it is a backup lens so in case I have issues with my 24 - 70 or 70 - 200, I at least have an o.k. zoom on hand

 

[jeffa4444]

I had the Canon 7D followed by the Canon 6D. The 6D gave such superior results that I stopped using the 7D and replaced it with a 5DS which has 1.3 & 1.6 crop modes (you still get the full frame image). Higher MP allows tighter cropping whilst retaining FF so best of both world in my book will not be purchasing crop bodies again and have sold all my EF-S glass.

 

[Cheekysascha]

I shoot with two bodies sometimes 3, and as I do mostly landscape/adventure photography I really don't see much of a reason for the extra reach of a crop sensor also shooting with a 1DX and a 5D3 with a 24-70 2,8 ii and a 70-200 2.8 ii and primes from 24 - 50mm I end up switching lenses a lot as I always prefer using the 1DX for it's better high iso, weather sealing as i'm always in rain or snow here in Norway or Iceland and the 12fps when doing action, so because of I'd honestly recommend having two of the same body, even if having two different set ups can be nice sometimes

 

[ksgal]

I currently have a 5D Mark III. I shoot mostly kids activities/sports and landscapes. For those of you who shoot with two bodies, do you see significant advantages to having a crop sensor camera like the 7D Mark II as a second camera? I miss the focal length difference but are there any additional benefits?

Everyone's needs are different. Crop bodies all have plus or minus's depending on the body.
I have a 7D2 and a 5D2, I choose the camera based on the need.

Here are reasons I choose the 7D2 many times over the 5D2:
1. flash sync speed - balancing ambient and flash is easier, and also as I like to use longer focal lengths for portraits, I hate the 1/160 on the 5D2 - I end up with more blurr from my bad technique and getting to 1/250 seems to be my sweet spot.

2. same f stop, more depth of field - this is a bonus for me when taking portraits of horses. For people, I tend to reach for the 5D2 in this situation in studio, or when Im doing natural light only... for a more shallow dof.

3. fps - when shooting horses over jumps, I don't do 10 fps, but my 3 pic burst lets me do entry/over/exit on one fence, really cool when I hit that right. 3 keepers from one fence!

4. reach - the 70-200 f2.8 lets me cover an arena from one corner about perfect.

5. anti flicker - indoor and outdoor at night, particularly in mixed crappy lighting.. boy it is soo handy.

6. built like a tank/great weather sealing.. because.. well, I'm clumsy.

7. leave more money to invest in that next lens I need

8. the ergonomics mean switching between the two pretty seemless.

My next body will probably be the 5dx or a 5D3, and I'll be pretty happy. I need more from my 5D2 outer points than it can deliver. But you'll pry the 7D2 out of my cold dead hands. The only thing that will upgrade that camera is a better sensor (and I'm pretty happy with the one in there now) For my specific needs, the crop 7D2 does just fine. Other crops may or may not fit the bill, depending on your needs. the 80D will probably be pretty nice, but I want to easily go between bodies, and I like what I've got now. JMHO - YMMV.