Own a 7D. Worth the upgrade to a 5D Mk III?

Jago-ViG · February 28, 2015

Hi everyone.

As the subject says I own a 7D Mk I. Recently I wanted to get a new lens that is quicker than my current 24-105. However, someone told me I might be better off getting the 5D rather than getting anymore lenses.

Wondered what your thoughts were and what would be the reasons to switch or not.

Thanks!

kdog · February 28, 2015

In order to give you any meaningful advice, you're going to have to give a whole lot more information about what you currently like to photograph, why you feel you need a faster lens, what other limitations you feel you have in your current setup, what are your future photographic plans and aspirations, and your budget.

ziggy53 · February 28, 2015

It's always a good idea to mention what type(s) of photography you do, or wish to do, and limitations of your current equipment. A stated working budget is also a benefit.

When you say,

Jago-ViG wrote: »

... I own a 7D Mk I. Recently I wanted to get a new lens that is quicker than my current 24-105. ...

... but you don't explain what you mean by "quicker".

If you mean a lens with a faster aperture, that is a worthy pursuit in and of itself. A lens with an f2.8 or faster maximum aperture will allow your existing Canon 7D body to activate the center AF region "high-precision" capability, with twice the AF precision of an f4 or slower aperture lens. It can also allow twice the light to enter the camera at f2.8, allowing either a lower ISO or faster shutter speed. A faster aperture lens also allows somewhat greater DOF control, and at maximum aperture tends to melt away background and foreground elements to help isolate your subject.

A FF body, like the Canon 5D Mark III, would allow your EF 24-105mm, f4L USM to act as a wider, standard zoom, and also give a bit more DOF control, compared to the 7D body. This would be at the expense of the longer end however, and the 105mm might not seem as long anymore. The 5D MKIII does have somewhat better noise signature at the same ISO setting, compared to the 7D.

Ideally, having both a FF body and an APS-C body can give you some extra capabilities, but more lenses overall is the real reason to have an interchangeable lens camera system.

Again, once we know better your needs and wishes, we can provide an more definitive recommendation.

Edit: ... And Kdog types faster than I type.

kdog · February 28, 2015

ziggy53 wrote: »

Edit: ... And Kdog types faster than I type.

Not faster, just less.

Jago-ViG · March 1, 2015

Thanks to both of you.

I shoot mostly scenic shots, landscapes or stuff around the city - I live in NYC so often find myself shooting there. I do very little portrait photography and almost no macro.

By faster, I did indeed meen the aperture. I love my 24-105 for landscapes in the daylight but it is not a good lens in poor light, even with 'bad' indoor lighting.

I used to shoot a lot more and be on here at alot more but with 2 kids, business school and work, photography took a backburner. However, I am back into it! So I was thinking about treating myself to some new gear too with the option below being what I was thinking:

- 35mm f1.4 lens (I own a 50mm f1.8 lens) - 24-70 f2.8 lens and sell my 24-105 f4 - New 5D III body and sell my 7D
I know that the prices above are very different but put that to the sidec for now

The 35mm would certainly help with the low light photos but is certainly not a very fleixble lens which is why I am consiering the 24-70. Then again the 24-70 doesn't have IS so might wait for the next version.

And then that is where I got to the body thing - at some point I wanted to move to a FF but wanted to get a better idea of the real advantages of it. The 7D is a great camera but, as I mentioned, a friend mentioned that the 5D will feel like something really different to the 7D once I try it - even with my current lenses.

Sorry for the long post but hopefully it gives you some insight into my thinking!

ziggy53 · March 1, 2015

Jago-ViG wrote: »

... I shoot mostly scenic shots, landscapes or stuff around the city - I live in NYC so often find myself shooting there. I do very little portrait photography and almost no macro.

... I was thinking about treating myself to some new gear too with the option below being what I was thinking:
- 35mm f1.4 lens (I own a 50mm f1.8 lens) - 24-70 f2.8 lens and sell my 24-105 f4 - New 5D III body and sell my 7D

... The 35mm would certainly help with the low light photos but is certainly not a very fleixble lens which is why I am consiering the 24-70. Then again the 24-70 doesn't have IS so might wait for the next version.

...

Sorry for the long post but hopefully it gives you some insight into my thinking!

Exactly what we need in order to make specific recommendations.

I suggest that the proposed plan for new lenses plus the 5D MKIII is valid, plus I would budget for a 70-200mm, f2.8 for the near future. A Canon version of that lens is usable for candid portraits and kid stuff, including sports when you need it.

Right now the Canon rebates are causing a price reduction in new 5D MKIII bodies, plus a reduction in used bodies, if you choose to go that route. (KEH, Adorama and B&H are all wonderful to get used equipment from.

)

kdog · March 1, 2015

Why a 5DMKIII, when you can buy a 6D for $1399 right now on B&H? I see nothing in the stated requirements that would require the 5DMKIII over the 6D. On the contrary, the 6D sensor is even a bit better.

Jago-ViG · March 1, 2015

Thanks again to both of you.

Firstly - kdog, I did take a look at the 6D but its poor AF and slower shutter speed are deal-breakers.

I am going to see what kind of deals I can get on a Canon 5D MkIII to start. Not sure about used cameras but will read up on it a bit. If not, I might just put up the money needed and go form there and be happy!

jmphotocraft · March 2, 2015

I went from a 7D and a 5D2 to a 5D3. I laughed out loud the first day I had it, at how much better the AF was than the 7D. However what you're doing doesn't sound like it depends much on AF? A 6D seems like it would be fine for you, no? Anyway, FF will beat smaller formats for the forseeable future, for everything where you are not focal length limited.

moose135 · March 2, 2015

Jago-ViG wrote: »

I am going to see what kind of deals I can get on a Canon 5D MkIII to start. Not sure about used cameras but will read up on it a bit. If not, I might just put up the money needed and go form there and be happy!

Check out the Canon Loyalty Program. I got a 5D3 through it about a year ago for a substantial discount.

Jago-ViG · March 3, 2015

Thanks again - will check out the loyalty program!

Tom Foster · March 5, 2015

Have you looked at the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8? That is stabilised and is am overall incredible lens. Dxomark ranks it as just as sharp if not sharper than the Nikon one (and I imagine therefore compares similarly to the Canon).

Brett1000 · March 7, 2015

Jago-ViG wrote: »

Thanks again to both of you.

Firstly - kdog, I did take a look at the 6D but its poor AF and slower shutter speed are deal-breakers.

I am going to see what kind of deals I can get on a Canon 5D MkIII to start. Not sure about used cameras but will read up on it a bit. If not, I might just put up the money needed and go form there and be happy!

you can look for 5D3 deals but don't be so quick to dismiss the 6D, I've seen great indoor and outdoor sports pics with the 6D

Own a 7D. Worth the upgrade to a 5D Mk III?

Comments