Switching back to Canon

2 years ago while in the midst of my first career after college, which involved constant travel and late nights with clients I decided to give up most of my Canon photography gear and downsize to something more portable and manageable for someone who takes photos maybe once a month. I gave up my 50D and 35L, 50 1.4, and 24-70L for a Nikon D7100 and 35mm 1.8. I didn't have a single complaint, the D7100 was perfect and the 35mm 1.8G sharp and versatile as can be. Especially paired with the 2x crop function. I took a lot of great photos with that combo. But even in 2 years, I put about 3500 clicks on that camera.

Well now my situation has changed, I've changed jobs, relocated back to my hometown, gotten married, have a puppy, and a new baby on the way. I've found myself slowly taking more and more photos. The more I think about it, the more I want my canon gear back. I've got a local guy pondering buying my setup as a step up from his D3100. Below is what I'm contemplating.

1) My initial reaction: Basically buy my old setup back with a less cash investment. Buy a 50D, 24-105 F4L, and a 50mm 1.8.
2) Save a bit, upgrade to something from what I had like a 60D with a 24-105 F4L and a 50mm 1.8
3) Pick up a 5D, and finally piddle in the world of full frame like I had always dreamed in college. Probably with just a 24-105 and 50mm 1.8

I could also
- Pick up a more expensive body more like my D7100 and get a 50mm 1.8. But I really miss having a versitle zoom like the 24-70 i used to have or even a 70-200.
- Pick up a cheaper body like a T3/4i and get a 24-70 2.8 and call it done.

I'll have about 1100 dollars to play with all in all. It's just a hobby. I shoot primarily cars, my dog, still life, and soon a baby and I don't want to miss a moment.

I vote for option 3 if you can deal with no live view and a less than stellar screen. The original 5D still takes some of the most magical pictures out there.

I don't get it.
Right now you have a Nikon D7100 and 35mm f1.8 lens, if I understand it right.
So where is your D7100 holding you back?
You could just get Nikon 35-70 f2.8D lens for about 300 or 400$ in very good condition second hand. It's very sharp and auto focus is fast (faster then new Tamron 24-70). I have it on my D7100 and I can shoot everything with it.

Regards

I agree with keeping the D7100. No reason to spend money going backwards technology wise unless the new setup will do something your old setup won't do. All three of the options you listed will have inferior autofocus, DR, and ISO handling to your current camera. You could upgrade or expand your lens lineup just as easily.

What is your budget like if you don't sell your current setup, and what are you wanting? More length? A fast zoom?

@ Jarvis Thank you for your input.

Keeping the D7100 isn't on the list of options, and Im not considering it at this time. Nikons G primes are about the only lens option i like with Nikon. Their zoom options have less than impressed me.

My budget is whatever I want it to be. We are by no means hard pressed for cash but I don't see the point in spending more. I can sell my current setup to fund an equally good setup with better lenses.

I'd skip all of the options you listed. The 5D classic is nice but you will be limited to its ISO capabilities (I remember I was scared touching ISO 1600 indoors).

If I were you, I would get a used 5D-II or a used 6D and a 50 1.8 to start with (maybe 1.4 if you can swing it). That way, you will have a pretty decent system to start off with and when money allows, you will be focusing on getting better glass rather than replacing all your system.

That's a good point. I guess the 50D was just such a great body to me I haven't really thought about anything else. Yes my D7100 is a stellar body. It's hard to explain, I drive performance cars at SCCA/HPDE racing events in my spare time. I love cars, of all kinds. But for me I started out racing when I was young in a Mustang and have driven Mustangs at the track ever since I'm just comfortable with them. I've driven other cars just fine but its not the same.

I enjoy shooting Canon more. I first learned on it, I'm familiar with all the settings. I'm more confident with the lenses. I understand my switch isn't the most economic and I really will be sacrificing some technology. But it is what it is. IMO the glass is a bigger factor in my images than the body. I'm not a professional and I don't get paid to do any work. I'm never in tough situations like football games or anything where I have tough lighting situations.

I put my camera on ISO 100 and wait for a bright day to shoot my car and then I go.

I would not get old cameras, it is literally like taking a step backwards. Wait and save up for a more modern body.

Well; D7100 has 24mp sensor without high pass filter so it will show all lens flaws. It was not made for cheap zoom lenses for sure.
On the other hand Canon 50D is 15mp camera so any lens will perform good on that old body.
If you'll buy Canon with high mp sensor you will see that not all Canon lenses are so gooood.
But it's your decision. What ever maks you happy is fine by me.
If you only shoot your car on a bright days then perhaps would be wise to save the money and get a point and shoot camera or a brigde camera.

I shoot more than that. But its an example that I find good light and then take photos. I don't expect my camera to perform in less than ideal situations. If I was getting paid to do this, as a large number on this site do, and was forced to be taking photos in dim lit basketball courts, night football games, and other low light situations I can see the need to have a high performing ISO body. I'm just a little taken back by these responses. When I first started on this forum the advice that I got and stuck to over the years was that a camera body will last a long time, and that I'd see more of a improvement in my image quality by upgrading to better lenses.

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com​/photos/taylorhockman

Based on the advice so far I need to buy a 5DIII and 7DII and put a 50mm 1.8 on it. I can't hardly believe that a 15.1mp 50D and L glass or prime wouldn't meet my needs. I don't use but half of the features on my D7100. I honestly believe its overkill for me.

There's no way I'd be happy with a point and shoot. Even a G series.

If you want Canon, go for it. If you were happy with what you got from the 50d, than you would probably like the 60d, although you lose MFA. For that you need to step up to the 70d.

If you are going full frame and typically don't tax the autofocus system, get the 6d.

If you are only shooting at ISO 100 outdoors on sunny days, get any rebel model you find cheap. You aren't going to get much difference image wise from any crop sensor at ISO 100 from the last ten years.

Rebel T1i vs 7d mkii @ ISO 100
http://www.sensorgen.i​nfo/CanonEOS-500D.html
http://www.sensorgen.i​nfo/CanonEOS-7D-Mark-II.html

You mentioned that you haven't been impressed by Nikon's zoom lenses. Have you tried their 17-55 f/2.8G AF-S? It's widely regarded as one of the sharpest zoom lenses available for a crop-sensor camera, and you can find them used for ~$600.

The move back to Canon makes sense if you were so bothered by Nikon's ergonomics that it was negatively impacting your photos. However, if that's not the case, you might want to think a bit more about sticking with what you've got and investing some more into good Nikon lenses. With the excellent 24MP sensor in the D7100 and the lack of an AA filter, you really do need good lenses to take advantage of what the camera is capable of.

Another thing to keep in mind is that the D7100 you own has a really good 51-point AF system with 15 cross-type points. Going down to a 50D is a big step down (9 point cross-type AF vs. 50 points), and going to a 5D1/2 is an even bigger step down (9 point AF with only 1 cross-type point). If you want AF performance that is in the same league as your D7100, you'd have to be looking at the more expensive Canons like the 70D, 7D, or 5D3.

As a side note, I had a Canon 5D Classic for several years and it truly was a great camera. Shot many events/weddings on it and clients were always pleased with the results. However, I now own a Nikon setup and I will say that the 5D's image quality is not even close to a Nikon D7100 (or even D7000). Once you've shot with one of the newer Nikons with Sony sensors, you can almost immediately notice the lack of dynamic range in Canon's DSLR offerings.

I'de get option 3, the 5D one. 5D + 24-105 + 50 = poor man's kit.

As I read through this thread. I Wanted to update that I've also considered a 5D2 and 50mm.

I could just save for a 24-105 later

Taylor02GT wrote in post #17419127
As I read through this thread. I Wanted to update that I've also considered a 5D2 and 50mm.

I could just save for a 24-105 later

If you were really set on going back to Canon, that's the route I'd take. However, I'd still recommend for you to take a hard look at Nikon's lens line-up (especially at lenses like the 17-55 f/2.8) before ditching the D7100. It just might save you all the hassle of switching brands again.

With regard to the 5D2, I think it's the best option because the image quality is way ahead of a 50D, and it has at least some of the modern features that you might be used to coming from a new camera like the D7100. There are simply too many sacrifices associated with going back to a decade-old 5D1 from your D7100. The 5D2 has features like AF microadjust which I consider essential (especially if you plan to buy used lenses).