mjmackinnon wrote in post #14171847
because I bought into the hype. I had a 50D, then got a used 100-400L. The 70-200 was just too good an offer to pass up. ($400).
I promised myself that I wanted a full frame camera, and the focus system on the 50D was just too limiting for shooting my daughter dancing, and her sports. So I bought the 5D3 kit. But then I have the money and I don't need to ask for justification to buy it.
I am curious. Do you also recommend spending the $100 for a SanDisk 90mb/s CF card, or would you say buy a $25 no name? Where do you draw the line on spending the money? What is the use of having great glass if you loose your photo's?? But what is the likelihood of that? What about the guy who spent a week on an exotic island and shot 1000 photo's on his sandisk card, and accidentally dropped it on the dock getting into the float plane.
The best camera is the one that you own. You can forever keep up with the Jones. If it's not a new lens, then your computer is too slow for the latest version of Photoshop with plug ins from every company out there promising they can improve your photo's and make you look like a super star.
I have two 32gb Transcend 400x CF cards. I decided to buy Transcend because I previously owned a 16gb 100x card and that never failed on me. I don't remember how much I paid for it but I think it was in the neighborhood of $50-ish for the 32gb cards. Works great.
As the OP specifically asked to go with the 5D3 or 7D, which gives the approximate budget of $3500 (for body alone), $4300 for kit lens, it's pretty clear that he's considering between 5D3 or 7D for camera body. So it's not incorrect for many to suggest going with a less-stellar camera body, but better lens(es), versus using that same budget and having the "newest" camera body, but so-so/bad lenses.
Because while the camera body will be changed roughly every 3 years, assuming additional features and advances in AF/iso... the lenses retain their resale value for much, MUCH longer. In 3 years, that moderately used 5D3 (originally $3500) will likely be sold on the used market for probably $2500. In 3 years, that 70-200/2.8ii (originally $2499) will sell used for $2000-$2100. In 6 years, the 5D3 will sell for ~$1500. That 6 year old 70-200/2.8ii (will likely sell used for... $2000-$2100).
Expensive/good Lenses are rarely sold, but that's because their quality hold up over time regardless of what body you mount to. Camera bodies are replaced (either due to gear lust or by need), and their value continue to depreciate.
Which is why the old adage of "glass before camera" has been hammered home over and over again on POTN and probably every other photography public forum. In this scenario, we would not be recommending the best camera body, we're recommending a better lens. But it all depends on the OP and his budget and existing lens line-up. If he's already got great lenses, then the choice is rather obvious to go with the 5D3. But I'm assuming if that was true... then the OP wouldn't really be asking the question.