1D or 5D - looking for full frame..

Hi,

I'm thinking about getting a full frame but know very little about them, so don't really know the difference.

The main things I shoot are birds in flight and my daughter rushing about so need something quick.

I do have the 7D which is pretty good at these anyway, but I'm also thinking about informal portraits as she's getting to an age where she's more agreeable, also I have a baby boy and would like to get some nice shots of him too.

Anyway pre-amble over I'm no looking to get anything too low res as if I do get a stunner I would want a nice big wall mount.

Also coin is a problem and would probably want to swap my Sigma 150-500 that I have for it maybe plus a little cash if needed.

So what would you guys suggest, plus what prices should I be looking for in trade?

I'm based in the UK if that makes a difference.

Thanks for any help on this as I really am a littler lost.

Cheers,

John.

1D aren't FF, they are APS-H which is a 1.3 crop, 1Ds are FF. You'd need to replace your 17-70 and your 10-20 to use on either. If you like to shoot birds I wouldn't go FF as the lenses needed for equivalent reach become that much longer and "pixels on target" often the name of the game, 7D would be better (unless I misunderstood and you plan to keep it too). I'd spend money on glass if I were you, get a 17-55 2.8 IS or a 15-85 IS plus a fast prime like 30 1.4 or 28 1.8. If on budget consider Tamron 17-50 2.8. FF advantage of less DOF and 1 stop better high ISO noise (versus similar vintage cameras) really don't seem huge for what you want to do and your budget/lenses. Save for a better telephoto too, maybe the new Sigma 120-300 2.8 OS or a 70-200 for pics of your daughter.

Thank you, especially the 1D being a 1.3 - I didn't realise that at all!

Yeah, I would be keeping the 7D either way, great camera and the 1.6 gives great reach. I used to have the 70-200 but reach was an issue as I imagine it would be with the 120-300 and I've just noticed my 100-400 isn't in my signature!!

Are the 17-55, 15-85 or Tamron 17-50 much better than my Sigma 17-70?

I can't say personally but yes I think those are better lenses. The 15-85 has latest IS and great sharpness and range, the other two have 2.8 aperture for low light and the 17-55 has IS (there is a stabilized 17-50 now as well). Optically I don't think they are dramatically better than 17-50 but the IS and/or 2.8 makes a big difference. A fast quality prime or two would be another option....85 1.8, 50 1.4 and/or one of the 28 1.8/30 1.4. The longer lenses good for indoor sports (or similar activities) and fast focus outdoor close situations, the wide ones good all purpose.

Cheers Mark, as it happens I've a 85mm 1.8 on route which I think will be great for faces etc. even on my crop.

Also on loan to a friend I've the 50mm 1.8 so I'll have to get that back and play, as well as try out the AF speed on my Sigma 10-20 and see how that fares.

Thanks again, I've a terrible feeling I've more of a buying bug than an actual need, perhaps I should be busy using the stuff I own

John_N wrote in post #12364003
I should be busy using the stuff I own

There's my advice. The 7D is a fantastic camera. Learn to use what you have to its fullest potential. And yes, the 17-55 is a better lens than your Sigma. The 17-55 is an amazing lens and very useful focal length and would match your needs as to most of what you said you'd use the camera for.

Thank you Peter, the 17-55 has been mentioned alot and looks to be a good lens from what I've seen and I hear the AF is very fast, but it doesn't look like you own one - did you have it and sell?

When I upgraded to a 5D, I had the 17-55 on my 40D and then needed something for my 5D. Bought a 24-70 and just couldn't justify keeping both. The 17-55 is one of the best zooms that I've used, and there are so many times that I'm tempted to pick one up again for the crops, but when I shoot on the wide end, my go to camera is my 5D2.

So to answer your question, yes, I owned one for a good amount of time. Was an incredible piece of glass. Also, it's made of very high end materials that are usually only found in Canon's L lenses.