Would I see the difference?

Now I have the lenses...canon 17-40mm, sigma 50 1.4 and canon 135mm 2...all on a 7d.
I usually take portraits and some landscape...if I change my 7d with a 5d mkII I would see a great improvement or not...I mean 600 euros of difference are worth it?

Convince me ...

there would be a much smaller depth of field. IF you know what you are doing and do not need the auto focusing or 8fps then yes it would probably make a difference

Best to rent oen fo ra week or so and see for yourself .

Some people may like it, others don't.

Personally, I wouldn't like to be without a FF camera anymore....

Of course, as dslrs go, it doesn't really get better for portraits and landscapes .

Kind regards, Wim

The field of view changes with your existing lenses. The 17-40 goes from being a wide angle zoom to an ultra wide angle zoom. The 135L becomes shorter, but in my opinion becomes an excellent portrait lens. The way you would be able to use your 50 mm would also change drastically. It would be less of a traditional portrait lens, and more of an environmental portrait lens. Provided that you frame things the same, you will get less depth of field using the 5D, because you would be closer to the subject shooting a wider field. I would do it in a heartbeat if I were in your shoes. The strong points of the 7D, 8FPS and an advanced focus system for action would be mostly lost on portraits and landscape.

I can tell you that the quality of the look of the image would be worth it. But, I would say that is in addition to what you own, not instead of.

From everything I've seen the differences between I.Q. on a 22mm sensor (found on 7D) compared to a 35mm sensor (So called Full Frame on 5D), are decent.

The two big things people talk about.....
1. Approximately 1 stop better ISO
2. Better Image quality. This is a noticable difference on large prints (Posters) or 100% crops.
3. Smaller DOF. < Is this important to you? The DOF can be smaller because on 35mm one has to get closer to the subject to fill the frame thus elonging the distance between the subject and background.

Disadvantages
1. Be prepared to start cropping some of your photos. (I used to do this with 35mm all the time)
2. Vignetting can be a concern in certain shooting situations especially with certain lenses.
3. Image quality in the corners of the frame can be a concern is some situations.

I'm not going to list them all, but there are a lot of features you will give up going to the 5D from the 7D like auto-focus, FPS, metering etc... but you should look at those differences before you jump.

I hope I was able to point out a few things.

thanks all...i supposed it was better...just another question about the DOF...at f2 it wouldn't be too short?

It won't make you a better photographer, but it will make the photographs you take better... if that makes sense. The 5DII is simply an awesome camera, and I hope to own one some day soon.

The comment about "be prepared to crop your photos" is odd. There's no reason to crop your photographs any more on a FF than on a crop sensor, you just have to use different focal lengths. The only context in which that comment makes sense is if you're talking about reaching as far as is possible like with bird shooting.

Enrico81 wrote in post #13076970
thanks all...i supposed it was better...just another question about the DOF...at f2 it wouldn't be too short?

It depends on your subject and your working distance, but no, there are lots of circumstances where F2 shines. We can post examples if you wish.

Enrico81 wrote in post #13076970
thanks all...i supposed it was better...just another question about the DOF...at f2 it wouldn't be too short?

The f-stop isn't the only determinant - focal length and distance to subject also affect the DOF. Assuming you're shooting with your 135mm on a 5Dii with 10 feet distance to subject, you'd have .19 foot DOF, or just under 2 1/3 inches; at 15 feet shooting distance you'd have .44 foot DOF, or about 5.28 inches; at 20 feet, you'd have .79 foot DOF, or just under 9 1/2 inches DOF.

Enrico81 wrote in post #13076970
thanks all...i supposed it was better...just another question about the DOF...at f2 it wouldn't be too short?

The DOF would actually be the same it would just appear narrower because it takes up less of the frame.

DOF like focal length is a chatacteristic of the lens, no the sensor. If you take a 5D II image and crop it to the point you would on an APS-c sensor it would appear that you have a deeper DOF but the same stuff will be in focus.


Of course, this all changes if you move closer to the subject to get the same framing etc.

great thanks...

I'm so tempted to take one...but I don't know if would be better to wait a few months if the 5d III come out and the 5d II price will fall down ...

I'll give you the advice I see on here every day: buy the camera now if you want or need the camera now. If you want to speculate on prices and the value of investments, consider getting into futures :P

Just recently went with 5D Classic from 40D, And it does make a difference, the way you would use your lenses would be much different IMO. that 50mm will be a great walkaround lens where on the 7d it is a great portrait lens.

Some people like 7D, some 5DMKII.
But, IMO, 17-40F4, 50 F1.4 and 135F2 makes huge sence for landscapes and portraits on FF.