Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 12 Dec 2012 (Wednesday) 18:13
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Glass before body? Hmm...nah.

 
Christopherm
Senior Member
Avatar
268 posts
Gallery: 77 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 479
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Norman, OK
     
Dec 19, 2012 20:53 |  #76

archer1960 wrote in post #15387622 (external link)
No, that's not what they're saying. They're saying to make a big jump from your T3i to a 7D or a 5Dii or iii. I don't think anybody would argue that a T3i to a 60D would be enough of an improvement to be worth the money. Maybe a 7D, but not a 60D.

O.k. Then you're saying that I'd be better off selling my t3i, 70-200 f4, 55-250 & 50mm 1.8 lenses to purchase a 7d.

I still consider myself a noob, but I'm not sure I can be convinced that a 7d + 18-55 kit lens would be more productive than my current setup... But that is exactly what this thread is arguing.


Gear: A lot more than I deserve and a lot less than I want!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
drzenitram
Senior Member
824 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Dec 19, 2012 21:17 |  #77

Christopherm wrote in post #15387763 (external link)
O.k. Then you're saying that I'd be better off selling my t3i, 70-200 f4, 55-250 & 50mm 1.8 lenses to purchase a 7d.

I still consider myself a noob, but I'm not sure I can be convinced that a 7d + 18-55 kit lens would be more productive than my current setup... But that is exactly what this thread is arguing.

You're missing the point...

Say you have a 70-200 f4, 55-250 and a 50mm 1.8 and you're looking to spend another $300 on photography equipment.

If shooting sports is your forte, then rather than upgrading your 70-200 f4 to a 70-200 f4 IS, you could sell the redundant 55-250 and your t3i and buy a 7D with the extra $300 and get:

Weather sealing
Much better AF(19 cross type focus points vs 1)
2x+ faster shooting speed(8 fps vs 3.7)
Much better battery life(~800 shots vs ~450 shots)
Magnesium body(vs plastic)
Double shutter speed(1/8000 vs 1/4000)
Better viewfinder(100% vs 95% and pentaprism, also larger)


While if you spent your $300 on lenses you would have:

Image Stabilization


...which you don't need 90% of the time for shooting sports.

Or if you do portraits, you could sell the 55-250, t3i, and spend the extra $300 on a 5d classic and 85mm 1.8 lens and you would have:

Thinner depth of field for subject isolation
Better ISO performance
Better image quality
Double shutter speed
Better viewfinder
50mm becomes standard focal length walkaround lens
70-200 becomes much more useful focal length
85mm 1.8 becomes a much better portrait lens than the 50 1.8 ever was


| Bodies - 5D Mark II, T2i | Lenses - Helios 44-2, Sigma 35mm 1.4, Sigma 85 1.4, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, Tamron SP AF 1.4x TC | Lights - 430ex ii x2, Random 3rd party strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
17,826 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 1668
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Dec 19, 2012 21:29 |  #78

drzenitram wrote in post #15387822 (external link)
You're missing the point...

Say you have a 70-200 f4, 55-250 and a 50mm 1.8 and you're looking to spend another $300 on photography equipment.

If shooting sports is your forte, then rather than upgrading your 70-200 f4 to a 70-200 f4 IS, you could sell the redundant 55-250 and your t3i and buy a 7D with the extra $300 and get:

Weather sealing
Much better AF(19 cross type focus points vs 1)
2x+ faster shooting speed(8 fps vs 3.7)
Much better battery life(~800 shots vs ~450 shots)
Magnesium body(vs plastic)
Double shutter speed(1/8000 vs 1/4000)
Better viewfinder(100% vs 95% and pentaprism, also larger)


While if you spent your $300 on lenses you would have:

Image Stabilization


...which you don't need 90% of the time for shooting sports.

Or if you do portraits, you could sell the 55-250, t3i, and spend the extra $300 on a 5d classic and 85mm 1.8 lens and you would have:

Thinner depth of field for subject isolation
Better ISO performance
Better image quality
Double shutter speed
Better viewfinder
50mm becomes standard focal length walkaround lens
70-200 becomes much more useful focal length
85mm 1.8 becomes a much better portrait lens than the 50 1.8 ever was

the problem is those situations would be good if that's the only thing he shoots. what if he shoots sports, and portraits...and landscapes, and does video with his t3i...he's better off spending money on lenses than switching bodies...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drzenitram
Senior Member
824 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Dec 19, 2012 21:47 |  #79

DreDaze wrote in post #15387863 (external link)
the problem is those situations would be good if that's the only thing he shoots. what if he shoots sports, and portraits...and landscapes, and does video with his t3i...he's better off spending money on lenses than switching bodies...

What if he has a 35mm f2, 70-200 f4, and an 85 1.8 with his t3i?

He would already have portraits covered(85), indoor sports(85), outdoor sports(70-200), and the 35 would do well, buuut he would probably need a wider lens...

So he could buy a wide zoom for landscapes, which would cost $400-1000(17-50 or 17-55).

Then he would have a decent kit for all of those things.

Or... with that $400-1000 he could sell his t3i($350-400) and buy a 5d classic or even a 5d mark ii.

Then his 35 would become a great landscape lens, his 85 would become a much more usable portrait lens, still useful for indoor sports, and his 70-200 would become useful as a portrait lens as well as for sports.


| Bodies - 5D Mark II, T2i | Lenses - Helios 44-2, Sigma 35mm 1.4, Sigma 85 1.4, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, Tamron SP AF 1.4x TC | Lights - 430ex ii x2, Random 3rd party strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
17,826 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 1668
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Dec 19, 2012 21:55 |  #80

drzenitram wrote in post #15387905 (external link)
What if he has a 35mm f2, 70-200 f4, and an 85 1.8 with his t3i?

He would already have portraits covered(85), indoor sports(85), outdoor sports(70-200), and the 35 would do well, buuut he would probably need a wider lens...

So he could buy a wide zoom for landscapes, which would cost $400-1000(17-50 or 17-55).

Then he would have a decent kit for all of those things.

Or... with that $400-1000 he could sell his t3i($350-400) and buy a 5d classic or even a 5d mark ii.

Then his 35 would become a great landscape lens, his 85 would become a much more usable portrait lens, still useful for indoor sports, and his 70-200 would become useful as a portrait lens as well as for sports.

well a 5D classic doesn't do video...so that'd be out...he could get a 5DII...but for that kind of money he could go for a 70-200f2.8(sell the f4), and an UWA to cover the landscapes...

i mean it all depends on a case by case basis...i think you'd find a lot of people wouldn't want to sell their newer camera for a 5D classic...also a lot of peoples end goals aren't FF cameras...I'm thinking of down the road getting a 5D classic, but first i'd upgrade my crop body...

i'm finally at the point where i'm wanting to upgrade my body...and i'm about to go on 5 years of having it...which is crazy to some...but having a smaller budget means i got more bang for my buck noticeable differences by buying lenses these last few years


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Christopherm
Senior Member
Avatar
268 posts
Gallery: 77 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 479
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Norman, OK
     
Dec 19, 2012 22:49 |  #81

drzenitram wrote in post #15387822 (external link)
You're missing the point...

Say you have a 70-200 f4, 55-250 and a 50mm 1.8 and you're looking to spend another $300 on photography equipment.

If shooting sports is your forte, then rather than upgrading your 70-200 f4 to a 70-200 f4 IS, you could sell the redundant 55-250 and your t3i and buy a 7D with the extra $300 and get:

I guess I'm missing the point that $300 magically appears in my wallet?

I'm not upgrading to a 70-200 f4 IS. Heck, I've only had the 70-200 non IS for 24 hours.

I do now have the 70-200 f4, 55-250 and a 50mm 1.8, but I sure as heck don't have another $300 to spend.

Yes, instead of just purchasing the 70-200 lens, I could've liquidated everything I have and upgraded my body to a 7d.
That leaves me where I was a year ago. A body and a kit lens. Yes, it's a nicer body with weather sealing, etc... (not that I have a weather sealed lens)
No 50mm, no 55-250 and certainly no 70-200mm.


Gear: A lot more than I deserve and a lot less than I want!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Dec 19, 2012 23:00 |  #82
bannedPermanent ban

Christopherm wrote in post #15388081 (external link)
This thread is till arguing that I would be better off trading in my 70-200, 55-250 and 50mm 1.8 along with my t3i so that I can use my 18-55 kit lens with a 7D.

You are still missing the point.

People say that 7D is an upgrade ONLY IF you shoot sports. IQ wise it isn't an upgrade as the sensor is exactly the same in your t3i vs 7D.

Upgrade can mean a lot of things. It can be focal length, aperture, IQ, build, AF speed/accuracy, higher burst etc etc.

I've said it and I'll say it again. The key of 'glass before body' is the word BEFORE, meaning that glass first, followed by body upgrade.


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drzenitram
Senior Member
824 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Dec 19, 2012 23:06 |  #83

Christopherm wrote in post #15388081 (external link)
I guess I'm missing the point that $300 magically appears in my wallet?

I'm not upgrading to a 70-200 f4 IS. Heck, I've only had the 70-200 non IS for 24 hours.

I do now have the 70-200 f4, 55-250 and a 50mm 1.8, but I sure as heck don't have another $300 to spend.

Yes, instead of just purchasing the 70-200 lens, I could've liquidated everything I have and upgraded my body to a 7d.
That leaves me where I was a year ago. A body and a kit lens. Yes, it's a nicer body with weather sealing, etc... (not that I have a weather sealed lens)
No 50mm, no 55-250 and certainly no 70-200mm.

If you don't have any extra money to spend then it doesn't really matter, does it? You won't be buying a lens OR a body. But once again, you're missing the point made here. As kin2son just said, the point made here is that if you already have decent glass in the focal lengths you NEED, then there are times that a body upgrade will have better results than a lens upgrade.


| Bodies - 5D Mark II, T2i | Lenses - Helios 44-2, Sigma 35mm 1.4, Sigma 85 1.4, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, Tamron SP AF 1.4x TC | Lights - 430ex ii x2, Random 3rd party strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Christopherm
Senior Member
Avatar
268 posts
Gallery: 77 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 479
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Norman, OK
     
Dec 19, 2012 23:15 |  #84

kin2son wrote in post #15388107 (external link)
You are still missing the point.

I think we're making the same point. We're just coming at it from different sides.

I'm buying glass before body, because that's where I will get the most benefit for the dollar.

There's a reason for the "glass before body" mantra. It's because it makes sense for the vast majority of camera owners.


I think that a 1DX owner who can only afford a nifty fifty, would be as silly as a t3 owner with a 600mm f4.


Gear: A lot more than I deserve and a lot less than I want!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
17,826 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 1668
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Dec 19, 2012 23:19 |  #85

drzenitram wrote in post #15388131 (external link)
If you don't have any extra money to spend then it doesn't really matter, does it? You won't be buying a lens OR a body. But once again, you're missing the point made here. As kin2son just said, the point made here is that if you already have decent glass in the focal lengths you NEED, then there are times that a body upgrade will have better results than a lens upgrade.

it's not if you already have focal lengths covered then go to a new body...that makes perfect sense...

i think you're the one missing the point...

glass before body is what people always say to newbies coming in...when they're looking to improve on their photos...it's recommended that they get better glass before looking at a new body...

so yes Chris is right on when he's comparing his current set up to that of a better camera with a crappier lens...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drzenitram
Senior Member
824 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Dec 19, 2012 23:20 |  #86

Christopherm wrote in post #15388149 (external link)
I think we're making the same point. We're just coming at it from different sides.

I'm buying glass before body, because that's where I will get the most benefit for the dollar.

There's a reason for the "glass before body" mantra. It's because it makes sense for the vast majority of camera owners.


I think that a 1DX owner who can only afford a nifty fifty, would be as silly as a t3 owner with a 600mm f4.

What we've been saying is that it depends upon your situation. It depends what you have already, it depends what you take pictures of, and it depends what's on the market.

If a camera body comes out that shoots ISO 102400 cleaner than a 5dmk2 shoots ISO 800, has 45mp, shoots at 15fps, has 50 AF points, I think that upgrading to that body would do more for a lot of people than glass would.

It all depends on the situation.


| Bodies - 5D Mark II, T2i | Lenses - Helios 44-2, Sigma 35mm 1.4, Sigma 85 1.4, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, Tamron SP AF 1.4x TC | Lights - 430ex ii x2, Random 3rd party strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Christopherm
Senior Member
Avatar
268 posts
Gallery: 77 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 479
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Norman, OK
     
Dec 19, 2012 23:28 |  #87

drzenitram wrote in post #15388162 (external link)
What we've been saying is that it depends upon your situation. It depends what you have already, it depends what you take pictures of, and it depends what's on the market.

If a camera body comes out that shoots ISO 102400 cleaner than a 5dmk2 shoots ISO 800, has 45mp, shoots at 15fps, has 50 AF points, I think that upgrading to that body would do more for a lot of people than glass would.

It all depends on the situation.


For the record, when I can get such a camera with a t3i and $300, I'm all over it.


Gear: A lot more than I deserve and a lot less than I want!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drzenitram
Senior Member
824 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Dec 19, 2012 23:30 |  #88

Christopherm wrote in post #15388183 (external link)
For the record, when I can get such a camera with a t3i and $300, I'm all over it.

Alright, you're just being snarky.

If you don't want to get the point, you're not gonna get the point.

DreDaze wrote in post #15388160 (external link)
it's not if you already have focal lengths covered then go to a new body...that makes perfect sense...

i think you're the one missing the point...

glass before body is what people always say to newbies coming in...when they're looking to improve on their photos...it's recommended that they get better glass before looking at a new body...

so yes Chris is right on when he's comparing his current set up to that of a better camera with a crappier lens...

Go back and read my other posts. I said that it depends. I have agreed that for some people it's better to buy a lens, but for others it's better to buy a body. Read the thread before you try to throw stones.

drzenitram wrote in post #15359795 (external link)
I think it all depends on what you need. If I have a 200 2.8 L and a 20D for shooting football I would certainly benefit more from a 7D over buying a 300 f4 is.

If I have a 5D classic and a 50mm 1.8 I would certainly see more benefit from buying a 50L instead of buying a 5d mark ii for portraits.

It all depends on your needs.

tkbslc wrote in post #15360258 (external link)
Here's the problem. Say you are starting out. You have $3000 to spend. Do you get a 5Dmk3 and a 28-135mm or would you get a 60D, a 15-85, a 70-200 F4 IS and a 430 EX? If you blow it all on the body, you don't end up with a better kit.

Once you have a half decent kit, then the waters get a little murky. Do you trade your 60D and 35L for a 5Dmk2 and a 50mm f1.4? I don't know.

drzenitram wrote in post #15360297 (external link)
For portraits? 5d2 and sigma 35/85.

For wildlife? 7D and 100-400L with a nice tripod

Sports? 7D and 85 1.8/300 f4is


| Bodies - 5D Mark II, T2i | Lenses - Helios 44-2, Sigma 35mm 1.4, Sigma 85 1.4, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, Tamron SP AF 1.4x TC | Lights - 430ex ii x2, Random 3rd party strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Christopherm
Senior Member
Avatar
268 posts
Gallery: 77 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 479
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Norman, OK
     
Dec 19, 2012 23:39 |  #89

drzenitram wrote in post #15388189 (external link)
Alright, you're just being snarky.

If you don't want to get the point, you're not gonna get the point.


It was only a little snarky! :)

I think we're just looking at it from different angles if not different planes.


Gear: A lot more than I deserve and a lot less than I want!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nonick
Goldmember
1,587 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: NYC
     
Dec 19, 2012 23:39 |  #90

Honestly I dont care about body first or glasses first rule.. I buy what I want and what I need when i can afford.


Gear|Searching for 7DII, Buying 5DIII 35L II, 24-70 2.8L IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

13,160 views & 0 likes for this thread
Glass before body? Hmm...nah.
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is aperture20
822 guests, 371 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.