Upgrade to full frame

whtrbt7 wrote in post #14573080
Hmmm, interesting dilemma...

I believe you that this works this way for you. I also agree that it's not a matter of going FF but a matter of taking photos in low light. However, it doesn't work that way for me and what I shoot. Like you, I can shoot at ISO 800 and 1/50. In some situation that is ok. Often enough I can't and this is not fast enough most of the time. I also sometimes get 1/50 or slower at ISO 1600. Most of the time I don't mind the noise of ISO 1600 on my camera (sometimes I do, depends on the photo).

Looking at some photos from a recent exhibition which had three performances (it was a performance exhibition), some I'm happy with and some I'm not, here are some examples of what I got from the EXIFs and photos.

1) 50mm, f/1.4, ISO 1600, -0.67EC, 1/25 and photo is ok (if not too big), not great. ISO 3200 would make this photo too noisy.
2) 50mm, f/1.4, ISO 1600, 1/200 and photo is good.
3) 50mm, f/1.4, ISO 1600, 1/80 and subject is slightly blurry even at relatively small size because it was too fast for 1/80.
4) 50mm, f/1.4, ISO 3200, 1/200 and photo is good because for this photos ISO 3200 noise is acceptable.
5) 50mm, f/1.4, ISO 3200, 1/40 and ok because subject moved slowly and it was light moving, plus noise is acceptable.
6) 50mm, f/1.4, ISO 1600, 1/160 and it's good though there is the slightest motion blur.

In those cases photos ISO 1600 still had some issues I took my chances with it because I already knew from experience with my camera that in this situation ISO 3200 would be too noisy. Some turned out usable for the size needed.

As far as lighting/flash, for various reasons I won't carry any lights and I won't use flash. Usually I can't use a flash but even when it's possible, it isn't really. I know because I'm sometimes one of the performaers in these situations and some use a flash and it's annoying. Carrying extra lights is crazy plus it's not possible to use because it will change the lighting specifically done for those events. If I don't think I have a chance to take the photo without flash I don't take it.

I'm now considering the option of getting a 5D2 and keeping my 550D, replacing all my EF-S lenses with just one 17-50 lens.

Thanks again!

You could always buy the 50L which is 1.2

Don't think I haven't considered that...

I hope it's ok to do this. I combined samples from DPReview, all reduced to the same 12MP then cropped and put them next to each other. Obvioulsy there are more issues than just the cameras making a difference and results vary a bit based on the subject but still interesting. First is RAW, second is JPG from camera. All are ISO 6400. First one (top left) is the 550D and the others are the cameras I'm considering (in no particular order).

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

clarnibass wrote in post #14572243
The thing with the 650D is that I really prefer to buy used and it has a bunch of features that I don't need (like the screen).

When I first bought my 550D it was mainly for photos of musical instruments for my website. For this it's still just fine. A lot changed since then and I never realized most of what I shoot would be all sorts of performances and exhibitions, often in very low light and sometimes with moving people. Since I use manual focus a lot the viewfinder will hopefully be much better.

If you think the 650D has a bunch of features that you don't need, then the 5D2 will have a cr*p ton of features you don't need. A new 650D will be much cheaper than even a used 5D2. Since you mentioned video, the 650D has the latest improvements for video in a DSLR. Also, it seems you are very interested in the low light performance of the camera. Well, I would recommend waiting to see how well the T4i does in low light. It may very well be better than the 5D2. The 5D2 uses the DIGIC 4 processor and the T4i uses the DIGIC 5 processor. The ISO improvements of the 5D3 which uses the DIGIC 5+ processor is amazing compared to the 5D2 which uses the DIGIC 4. Don't be so quick to blow off the T4i if low light is your primary reason for wanting to upgrade.

Thanks, I'm not ruling that out and will wait a while anyway.

tagnal wrote in post #14576762
If you think the 650D has a bunch of features that you don't need, then the 5D2 will have a cr*p ton of features you don't need. A new 650D will be much cheaper than even a used 5D2.

Re the features, I mostly meant the screen and the improved video, etc. I don't want to give up video, I prefer to have more than five minutes, but I don't need this improved video. The 5D2 actually doesn't seem to have many features I don't need and will be paying for. Keep in mind I have actually tried a couple of 5D2 cameras (though that couldn't tell me how much better they are at ISO). There are also other reasons I prefer a full frame camera.

Re the price, I see the supposed price in USA. This tells me the approx local price (always higher here) based on the difference of other models. This is only a little less than used 5D2.

It sounds to me like your decision is made really...

You want FF, and probably the 5d2, so you just need someone to push you over the edge... tell you what... buy it