Upgrade 7D+17-55 to 5D Mark III+24-105

Hi guy

I currently am thinking about upgrading my gear. Main reason to do this, is because I do a lot of indoor photography (kids etc) and the 7D sometimes does not perform as well with high ISO as I would like, and I also feel that dynamic range could be better with a fullframe (it's even better on my NEX6 compared to the 7D...).

I currently own this :
7D
17-55 IS
70-300L
100mm L macro

I would sell some stuff and end up with this :
5D Mark III
24-105
100mm L macro

So I would sell the EF-S lens, the 70-300L (which I bought for a safari, but won't be used much anyway) and maybe the body (might keep it).

Would this be a good upgrade for me? Would cost me about 1.500 euro considering I do not sell the 7D body.

You could use flash to eliminate high ISO indoor shots as an alternative. Your Flickr account has no shots of the extra 'reach' of the crop, that would benefit you so why not go FF.

I have a 430EX flash, but to be honest I hate using flash. Also, I do some paid photowork in churches from time to time where flash is definitely not wanted. The crop of my 7D only benefits me on vacations like the one I took just last week to South Africe, but this comes once in about five years.

for the kids shots indoor
you need the 50 1.4 with FF
and you need the 24-70 2.8 in churches with FF
i think you can do this now with your 7D and the 17-55 2.8 for indoors shots

Isn't it so that F4 on FF = F2.8 on crop? Roughly so of course. So a 24-105/F4 on FF should perform about as equal as a 17-55/F2.8 on a 7D ? I will not buy the 50mm/F1.4 (again) because of a bad experience, but might get a 85mm of a Sigma for that.

i will go to FF bodies like the 6D or the 5D2 or 5D3 whatever
because i sold all my EF-S lenses
But now im saving for the right time

I'm in the process of doing that right now. Selling my EF-S, and possibly my 70-300L (only used once). Seems a bit difficult getting my 7D body sold (even though it's in perfect condition).

Yes the sigma is a good choice

lapino wrote in post #15818849
Isn't it so that F4 on FF = F2.8 on crop? Roughly so of course. So a 24-105/F4 on FF should perform about as equal as a 17-55/F2.8 on a 7D ? I will not buy the 50mm/F1.4 (again) because of a bad experience, but might get a 85mm of a Sigma for that.

I am not sure where you got the idea that f/4 on FF is the same as f/2.8 on crop. F/4 is f/4 regardless of your camera or crop.

drive_75 wrote in post #15818906
I am not sure where you got the idea that f/4 on FF is the same as f/2.8 on crop. F/4 is f/4 regardless of your camera or crop.

From a DOF perspective, he is right - f/4 is the same DOF on FF as 2.8 on crop. IF you can afford it the 5d3 will give better IQ and ISO, but for shooting kids indoors there is nothing wrong with flash assuming you use it well.

The 5D3 has better noise handling than the 7D, which will cancel out the one-stop aperture loss of light in switching lenses.

If you can afford the switch, there's no reason not to switch.

I have a 5D3 with a 24-105 and it's really great, but if I shot a lot of indoor stuff I would want faster glass. Like others said, you might want to consider the 24-70.

As for a flash, it will improve your portrait work. When I look at the Strobist, I am constantly amazed at what they can do with a few strobes.

I just upgraded from the 7D to the 5D3 and have been playing with different lenses this week. In my opinion, the 24-105 does a pretty good job indoors without a flash if the lighting is fairly decent. The higher ISO capabilities help alot. The F2.8 lenses I have been playing with and the faster primes are, in my opinion, worth looking at as you will get a better product out of them in a lower light situation.

My disclaimer here is that I am not a professional, and I have only had the 5D3 since Monday, but I have to say, so far I have been extremely impressed with the output of the 5D3.

Indoor stuff no way. 24-105mm f4 nice but sloooow lens IMHO. You need some fast primes even with 5dmk3. Even then using some bounced flash helps a lot. You could do same with 24-105mm but then lot more DOF to show all the inside house clutter.

I am not sure what 17-5mmf 2.8 IS is not doing for you. May be post some shots.

It's not that the 17-55 is not performing, it's just that I'm thinking about going FF because I can definitely use a better high ISO performance and bigger DR. Is upgrading to 5DIII such a stupid thing then?