who actually needs new bodies?

[martti]

Well I fell in the ocean waves with my 5DIII and the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8. I consider them lost.

Then what happened I read Ken Rockwell's thing about "how to win on eBay" and what do you know, I won the EF 24-70 f/2.8 II at 1300 dollars. I congratulated myself until I realized that the way they handle the costs in international affairs in eBay does not necessarily take into account what little buyers in remote places are entitled to.

llcould

Then on my second attempt, I managed to find a 5DIII at 1500 euros...the seller did not know the shutter count.
I met him (without any cash in my pocket) and ran the tests, 34080 shutter releases. No scratches. Nothing wrong so it seemed and the seller was a retired photographer specialized in child photography.

I got the cash from an ATM, paid him, got the original documents and took the camera home. Upgraded the firmware, changed the names and finally got the serial number visible and identical to the one on the camera body.

I washed the camera a couple of times. It still smells!


But then the lens I had bought on eBay arrived.
This was the first time I had tried the EF 24-70 f/2.8 II.

Those who have been in this situation, understand what I am talking about.
The Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC is a very nice lens. But this is totally another story.
The Canon lens actually hits the focus every time. Of course, you can goof your shots using unrealistic shutter time. Of course. There is no VC or IS to help you out.
Tonight I used this lens the second time in my life.
My message is: Do not waste your time with anything lesser. This is The Mother of Middle Range Zooms!
Accorrding to Cicala this is the best-built optique on the market.

 

[AlanF]

I could do with a new body, preferably about 50 years younger.

 

[lion rock]

I can use one about 30 years old, too.
-r

 

[ishdakuteb]

I would go ahead and take a guess that most of us do if we had ton of money to spare. However, will buying new camera bodies help to take photography to another level? It might still be true in some degree (very small), but is mostly false since everything having many ways to workaround with, IMO. These two following daily/and test images, I do not really think that I can deliver way better, in term of, quality with my Canon 5D Mark III or my Canon 7D.

Both captured images of my two daughters were shot with Canon 30D | 50mm f/1.4 | ISO 800 | Canon 600EX (Noise was de-noise and added back to my taste).

Again, do I want to buy new camera? YESSSSS if and only if I am allowed to do so... LOL...

 

[wsmith96]

I can use one about 30 years old, too.
-r

I'm only 42 and could use a new body. Isn't that sad....

 

[rpt]

I can use one about 30 years old, too.
-r

I'm only 42 and could use a new body. Isn't that sad....

Damn! This thread is about camera bodies! It is sad.

 

[pwp]

Shrewd photographers who have the smarts, time & patience can pick up great deals on the secondhand market. I'm happy getting pre-owned glass, but always opt for brand new bodies.

Well almost always...There are a lot of very good 1DX bodies coming onto the market. It's occurred to me I can get a very low mileage 1DX and a brand new 5D Mk IV for less than a new 1DX MkII. Tempting!

-pw

 

[eosuser1234]

I buy used from Japanese used retailers who offer 6 month warranty, and Canon service center is 15 minutes away from my house.

Never had a problem with anything used from a legitimate seller.

Would never buy used if I could not visually inspect and try the equipment first.

 

[Ozarker]

I could do with a new body, preferably about 50 years younger.

I could too, but I'd settle for the wife getting one.

 

[jd7]

This was the first time I had tried the EF 24-70 f/2.8 II.

Those who have been in this situation, understand what I am talking about.
The Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC is a very nice lens. But this is totally another story.
The Canon lens actually hits the focus every time. Of course, you can goof your shots using unrealistic shutter time. Of course. There is no VC or IS to help you out.
Tonight I used this lens the second time in my life.
My message is: Do not waste your time with anything lesser. This is The Mother of Middle Range Zooms!
Accorrding to Cicala this is the best-built optique on the market.

Interesting you're so impressed with the 24-70 2.8L II after owning the Tamron 24-70 VC. I've been thinking about whether to go with a 24-70 2.8 of some sort, or add another prime in that range (I have a 35/1.4 already). I've been leaning towards adding the Sigma 50 Art as I'm just not convinced 2.8 is enough aperture at that sort of focal length for my liking for loose/environmental portraits and low light and shallow DoF shots, and my 24-70/4L IS covers the smaller apertures just fine (for things like landscapes). But then I see so many people rave about the 24-70 2.8L II I start to wonder ...

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The 24-70 f/2.8 MK II out performs many prime lenses, and is a workhorse. There are some good deals on it, I'm in the US, so I buy new from a dealer, refurbished from Canon, or locally from someone selling on Craigslist.

Check the front element very carefully, some have had the coating peel off, or start to peel at the edges.

 

[martti]

This was the first time I had tried the EF 24-70 f/2.8 II.

Those who have been in this situation, understand what I am talking about.
The Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC is a very nice lens. But this is totally another story.
The Canon lens actually hits the focus every time. Of course, you can goof your shots using unrealistic shutter time. Of course. There is no VC or IS to help you out.
Tonight I used this lens the second time in my life.
My message is: Do not waste your time with anything lesser. This is The Mother of Middle Range Zooms!
Accorrding to Cicala this is the best-built optique on the market.

Interesting you're so impressed with the 24-70 2.8L II after owning the Tamron 24-70 VC. I've been thinking about whether to go with a 24-70 2.8 of some sort, or add another prime in that range (I have a 35/1.4 already). I've been leaning towards adding the Sigma 50 Art as I'm just not convinced 2.8 is enough aperture at that sort of focal length for my liking for loose/environmental portraits and low light and shallow DoF shots, and my 24-70/4L IS covers the smaller apertures just fine (for things like landscapes). But then I see so many people rave about the 24-70 2.8L II I start to wonder ...

The picture quality of the Tamron is excellent. There is vignetting, sure, but easy to fix.
This sounds stupid but already the feel of the lens is different. It zooms the right direction unlike the Tamron.
It feel solild and it drops into focus at low light even when the off center measuring points are used.
Yet another point: My Tamron lost autofocus after a totally insignificant bump. Tony and Chelsea Northrup tell on thei videos that they have multiple items break. Whereas Roger Cicala from Lens Rentals took apart the Canon lens and concluded it was the most serious construction he had ever seen.
In the unlikely situation that you do not like it, it actually can be sold. the soundest advice I In this case, "get the best" is the soundest advice I can give.

 

[H. Jones]

Shrewd photographers who have the smarts, time & patience can pick up great deals on the secondhand market. I'm happy getting pre-owned glass, but always opt for brand new bodies.

Well almost always...There are a lot of very good 1DX bodies coming onto the market. It's occurred to me I can get a very low mileage 1DX and a brand new 5D Mk IV for less than a new 1DX MkII. Tempting!

-pw

The 1DX mark II is a monster. Once you get your hands on it and shoot 200 raw images continuously at 14 FPS without hitting the buffer, you're never gonna wanna look back, even to a 1DX. It's ridiculous, my 5D Mark III can only shoot about 24 raw images before the buffer hits.But with the 1DX mark II I can see a play happening in a football game and capture 140 frames in 10 seconds of play without stopping, it feels like cheating-- it's too easy to get the shot my editors need!

New camera bodies are super important for working photojournalists for that sorta reason. That said, I'm not sure what Canon could really improve on for the next 1DX, because at this point we really do have an unlimited buffer with 14 fps, and all of my images get downsized to 2 megapixels for the newspaper anyway.

Also, I can confirm the 24-70mm f/2.8L II is a tank. I've dropped mine so many times.. Only damage was one time when the zoom ring got dented into the barrel which stopped it from zooming, but I put a flathead under the dent and bent it back out and kept shooting, so there's that.