Sell all my gear for 5D Mark II and 24-105 ?

You must take care in over-valuing your gear when it comes time to sell. Remember that the power is always in the buyers' hands.


Also you could skip the 24-105 and just keep the 50mm

this thread should be "Re: Sell all my gear for 5D Mark III and 24-105 ?"

$250 for a T1i with grip is super cheap!! I'd expect to pay at least (no joke) I browse craigslist daily and even the XS people still ask $350+ for just the body only.

The only thing I wanted FF for was to go wider. 10-22mm wouldn't have cut it for me only because it's not weather sealed. 17-40L on the 5D2 is one of my favoritest combos I have used since I started shooting in 2008. 24mm doesn't always cut it for me. 5D2 and 70-200 mkII is my other favorite. Just can't get past how amazing the lens is. Plus, the focal length is my walkaround FL. Honestly, If I were you, unless I had some more money to buy other lenses I wouldn't be happy with just the 24-105. I'd want wider, and longer. Overall, It would be good for 90% of the shots you'd be going for on a vacation or family shooting, but you'd still want something longer for kids sports or school functions.

lilchoi26 wrote in post #14270732
Hello all,

I have had the urge to go FF

DO - IT !
I plan same move till 15th of may (hope that 5d2 will still be available till then)

Nevertheless, 70-200 could be a keeper... depending on how much are you using those focals.

gotak wrote in post #14272529
I have never been able to justify a 5D2 over the 7D. Yes it's got better high ISO but it's at most 1 stop and until Tokina release the 24-70 VC there's no "standard" zoom with f2.8 and image stabilization for canon full frame cameras. The high ISO on the 5D2 or the 5D3 for that matters simply isn't good enough to compensate for 3 to 4 stops of IS lost for still subjects (e.g. when I travel and want to take photos of buildings without tripod in low light).

And if we are talking about image quality. Outside of pixel peeping there's not that much to be gained from full frame in a wide range of shooting conditions. There are some specific conditions that FF is better but it's never easy for a 3rd party to tell you if they apply to you.

What's more full frame lenses used on full frame bodies tends to show more weakness. Take the 17-40 for example on a crop on one's going to run into the extreme corners where it's basically useless. On a full frame you will see it, mind you it's really not a big factor as you'd rarely be interested in things that far in the corner. Still it's interesting that in general it seems the EF-S lenses are likely easier to design because there are quite a few very good ones where as EF sometimes makes me wonder a bit.

The real way to decide this is to somehow get rid of that gadget lust clouding your vision. The truth is most of us (guilty!) upgrade stuff because we are like little kids with the newest action figures. We want it not because it does something we really need but because it satisfy the 8 year old in us all.

For IQ, you will get better results from a FF. However, you get most of the IQ benefits from the lens itself.

FF is nice to use but as you said, expensive. if only EF-S lenses worked on it, would be a bit more justified as i reckon many would spend a bit extra on a mk2 compared to the 7d if they can still keep all there EF-S lenses and use them.

im personally waiting for 7d2 and mk3 to go down in price before i make the jump.

if i go FF, i'd need a new general purpose lens and im opting for a 35mmL.

Since shooting primes on my Canon A-1 film. i am in love with primes.

OP, ever considered using a prime instead of a 24-105?

primes are lighter and smaller to use whilst having better IQ and faster.

kcbrown wrote in post #14272614
The only way to reasonably answer your question is to ask why you have the urge to go full frame.

Do you have solid, articulable reasons for doing so? Or is it because of the overly-hyped "full frame blows crop image quality out of the water!" mantra that is commonly spouted here (as if saying it enough makes it true)?

If you really want to see what a full frame camera will do for you, rent a 5D2. You already have a couple of lenses you can use with it. If you can't afford to rent a 5D2 for a couple of days, you certainly can't really afford to upgrade to one.

You should also find a 7D and 60D in a camera store and play with each a bit, to see how you like them. You may find that either one of those is plenty of camera for your purposes, and the bonus there is that you get to keep your lens collection.

this+

well said, OP needs to try FF before making a judgement. btw mate i have bene shooting a FF film camera for the past few weeks and i am love with it mate. the viewfinder alone is 100x better then my 400d. its bigger, brighter and makes manual focus a doodle.

PLus the bokeh? wow.

jonneymendoza wrote in post #14273328
this+

well said, OP needs to try FF before making a judgement. btw mate i have bene shooting a FF film camera for the past few weeks and i am love with it mate. the viewfinder alone is 100x better then my 400d. its bigger, brighter and makes manual focus a doodle.

PLus the bokeh? wow.

Yeah, the extra stop of depth of field latitude on the shallow end can really be noticeable. It's why I consider it the primary legitimate reason for going full frame to begin with. Sharpness, detail, color rendition, noise performance, etc., all improve with time and technology. Depth of field doesn't.


As for the viewfinder, it happens that the 5D3's viewfinder is at 0.71x magnification, while the 7D's is at 1.00. The end result is that the 5D3's viewfinder is about 13% larger. The bigger difference is that more light is being collected into the 5D3's viewfinder, so it will be brighter.

You've shot with a 7D, though, so you know what the viewfinder looks like. I think it's magnificent, myself. I'll have to peer through a 5D3 viewfinder sometime to see what that's like.

I went from a TI1 and 15mm-85mm lens to the 5d II and 24mm-105mm lens. Very much the same feel. I do not miss the wider at all. I also sold my 28mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8 because it just felt too overwhelming.

When I first got my kit earlier this year, someone said "leave the 24-105 on for a year and learn to shoot with it" - great advice. But I do use a flash indoors, mostly my 270ex with a bounce card attached. Works great.

The difference in the T1i and the 5D II is amazing.

I would try to upgrade. I did and love it. However, I would cosider keeping the 70-200 f4. It's a nice lens and becomes a better everyday lens on a full frame than it is on a crop body. Keep the 50 1.8. For what you'll get for it you're better off with it in your bag. A 50 1.8 on a 5DII is a very light set up, very compact.

The 50 on FF is excellent, if you've got a good one, and the 24-105 f4 is brilliant on a 5D2. It's a great length when you're coming from an 85 on a crop. When I got my 5D2 and 24-105 I used it most of the time. I've now got a 5D3 and the 24-105 is even better on that because of it's improved AF system.

kcbrown wrote in post #14273428
Yeah, the extra stop of depth of field latitude on the shallow end can really be noticeable. It's why I consider it the primary legitimate reason for going full frame to begin with. Sharpness, detail, color rendition, noise performance, etc., all improve with time and technology. Depth of field doesn't.


As for the viewfinder, it happens that the 5D3's viewfinder is at 0.71x magnification, while the 7D's is at 1.00. The end result is that the 5D3's viewfinder is about 13% larger. The bigger difference is that more light is being collected into the 5D3's viewfinder, so it will be brighter.

You've shot with a 7D, though, so you know what the viewfinder looks like. I think it's magnificent, myself. I'll have to peer through a 5D3 viewfinder sometime to see what that's like.

yea i wanna try the viewfinder on the 5d3 but no shop has a demo unit yet. also, when i tried the 7d a whiole back, that was before trying the canon a-1 so i only had my 400d to compare to. will try a 7d again to see who it fairs with the A-1.

having a good viewfinder is a very useful addition for me as i can manual focus more accurately

jonneymendoza wrote in post #14273599
yea i wanna try the viewfinder on the 5d3 but no shop has a demo unit yet. also, when i tried the 7d a whiole back, that was before trying the canon a-1 so i only had my 400d to compare to. will try a 7d again to see who it fairs with the A-1.

having a good viewfinder is a very useful addition for me as i can manual focus more accurately

I think you'll find that no DSLR compares with an old-style full frame film camera in terms of the viewfinder.

This message contains a chart that shows the viewfinder sizes. The A-1's is bigger than the 5D3's by about 13% on a side (the 5D3 retains the same magnification as the 5D2, but gives 100% coverage instead of 98%). Similarly, the 5D3's viewfinder is bigger than the 7D's by about 13% on a side.

quality. thanks. how come DSLR's cant produce same viewfinders has old slr film? they both have same sensors i.e FF 35mm sensors?

mwsilver wrote in post #14271798
Only problem is he'll need to sell his 70-200 to fund the purchase. People still take great photos with 30Ds-40Ds and Rebel Xti's. Its much less about the camera, and much more about the person behind the camera. By getting rid of his other lenses, he is significantly limiting his compositional flexibility. For his specific photography, what will he really gain?

I Believe the person behind the camera can produce better photos with better equipment. As he mentioned, he is a casual photographer and 5d 2 with 24-105 will serve him very well.

michgirl wrote in post #14273487
I went from a TI1 and 15mm-85mm lens to the 5d II and 24mm-105mm lens. Very much the same feel. I do not miss the wider at all. I also sold my 28mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8 because it just felt too overwhelming.

When I first got my kit earlier this year, someone said "leave the 24-105 on for a year and learn to shoot with it" - great advice. But I do use a flash indoors, mostly my 270ex with a bounce card attached. Works great.

The difference in the T1i and the 5D II is amazing.

"I do not miss the wider at all. " You didn't miss the "wider" because 15mm on a 1.6 crop camera will give you the same angle of view as 24mm on a FF.