Good glass>difference between FF and crop?

So like a lot of folks I am in a pure hell trying to decide between a 7D and a FF 5D MKII. I have about 1,200 bucks coming in the next few days and I am upgrading from two Rebel bodies, 450D and 500D, and I do mainly portraits and scenerey, very rarely any action stuff.

So I know many will say for portraits and scenery stuff the 5D will be better, but looking at all the sample pics in the 7D and the MKII threads, it seems to me that the biggest difference I see is whether the shooter is using good glass or not and that this seems to me to make more of a difference than the difference between FF and crop. Am i correct in this assessment?

It seems that going through the 7D thread, I see absolutely stunning pictures and then when I look at the exif I consistently see L GLASS was used, or other very sharp lenses like the 60mm macro and the 85 1.8 and the 100 F2, Sigma 50 and 30 and basically, the best pics always seem to be using the best glass.

In comparing these shots, the ones with good glass on the 7D appear to be every bit as rich, detailed, smooth, clear, DEADLY IN FOCUS, and simply beautiful.

For instance, by random, look at this page from the 7D thread. Look at the concert pics, just rich and beautiful, now check the exif, yep, L glass.

https://photography-on-the.net …ad.php?t=115431​3&page=212

This goes on and on throughout that thread, and the more i look the more convinced I am that the glass easily makes a bigger difference than the difference between crop and FF. Look a couple pages forward and you see like an old flat bed truck on the street, yep, L glass again, and you also see a macro with the 60mm Macro, again, astounding clarity and richness.

Now, people who can afford a FF are naturally more apt to be able to afford great glass too, so I seem to be seeing that when I go in to a rebel thread, like one of mine the 450D and the 500D threads, I see a LOT FEWER pics using great L glass or other great lenses, which then give an overall lower feeling quality to the thread as a whole, and it makes sense because people who are using Rebels are less likely to be able to afford the great glass.

This is all important to me because I am going back and forth trying to decided between 2 grand for a new MKII or just over a grand for a 7D. If I go with the 7D I won't have to sell any of my lenses, so not a lot of Ebay crap with shipping stuff and all that. If I go MKII I will need to sell my Sigma 30, my 60 Macro just to help put toward the cost of the MKII being an extra thousand basically.

I have never gone through such an agonizing decision. If I go with a 7D I will only have to sell my 450D, and I would still have my 500D and it only has probably 800 or 900 shots on it, so I would have that and the 7D and a nice stable of lenses. I alos would be able to use the money from selling the 450D body and would be able to get a Sigma 10-20. So going 7D I would have:

new 7d
Basically a new 500D
Sigma 10-20'
Nifty 250
Sigma 30 1.4
EFS 60mm Macro
EF 100mm F2

That's five fairly sweet lenses and two new bodies.

That's a hard stable of equipment to pass up for the difference between crop and FF

Going MKII I would need to sell dam near everything else.

I could sell both rebel bodiues and just have one body, I could sell the Sigma 30 and the 60 Macro, and the Nifty 250, and simply have the EF 100 F2 and maybe be able to buy a Tamron 28-75 to go with the MKII

So I would have :

5D MKII
EF 100 F2
Tamron 28-75

See what hell I am going through?

And then I read and read till my eye balls feel like they are going to pop out, and I get differing opinions. Some say glass is more important than the FF-crop debate, and others say the FF for what I do would make it worth all the selling and Ebay crap I would have to go through to switch to FF lenses and come up with the extra money.

I am in hell and decide %D MKII one day, then start looking at the 7D thread and what the pics look like with the good glass, and switch back to the 7D and not having to sell my lenses and both bodies and such, which would just be a lot of hoops to jump through.

It seems like 80 percent or more of the pics in the 5D threads are using L glass, which makes sense, so are many people simply seeing better glass used more often by folks who can afford FF bodies and mistaking that for some huge difference over crop bodies?

I am ugrading mainly because my Rebel bodies do not have cross focus outer points and I have to focus a recompose a lot and this is causing a lot of misery when shooting wide with my good lenses.

So the 7D with it's accurate focusing and 19 cross type points should be a huge help in getting those eyes in sharp focus and not having to recompose so much. So in that way the quality of the 7D pics will actually be better because I believe if the focusing is more accurate and there is less need for recxompose that this equals better quality as if it had a much better sensor.

Please help as I am at the very purchase point and still don't know what to do.

Landscape + Portrait = 5D. Thats the normal math.
But you can do math anyway to support your bias.
The only real way to upgrade APS is FF and you should invest in glass not cameras.

Aside from owning a 5D2 & a while ago using a Sigma 10-20mm I have no real direct comments about your decision.

I will say though that the 7D option does look good 'available equipment' wise & should easily do what you want to shoot & more

you have alot of great lenses that will shine on the 7D. Grab some great glass to slap on it. Even tho I went from the 5DmkII to the 7D back to the 5DmkII then almost went back to the 7D... then decided it was the 17-55 I was missing from when I had the 7D, so I'll just buy a zoom slippery slope... LOL.

Just took a drive and was thinking that maybe the 7D is the way to go for another reason. I could get that and then if Canon comes out with this supposed FF affordable body for two grand a few months from now I could still get at least 800 back out of a fairly new 7D,sell the Sigma 30 and the 60 Macro for about another 800, and sell one of the rebels and pretty much have the money to get the new Canon FF. So maybe going with the 7D now will still leave me with options to go FF if Canon comes out with some sweet focusing 2000 dollar FF body.

So how about that plan? Hold off on buying a 10-20 Sigma and don't sell my 450D body, buy the 7D and if I know it will do and be everything I want it to be, then I can go ahead and sell the 450D body and pick up the 10-20 and be happy forever with five good lenses.?

hah, just looked on Ebay and saw several low shutter count 5d MKII's for around 1,700, damn, this is killing me. I could just sell two lenses and the 450D body and have enough for one of those and a Taron 28-75, back and forth I go.

EL_PIC wrote in post #14791211
Landscape + Portrait = 5D. Thats the normal math.
But you can do math anyway to support your bias.
The only real way to upgrade APS is FF and you should invest in glass not cameras.

Hmm, not sure I agree that you can't upgrade aps with another aps. If you get better, more accurate focusing with not as much recomposing, therefor more keepers and sharper pics because of that focusing, then isn't this the same as upgrading sensors? Isn't the end goal to get sharper and more accurate pics with more keepers when you ugrade?

So if the 19 cross type points means more eyes in focus and more keepers, how is this not an upgrade? When I try to use outer single type points on my Rebel bodies my keeper rate drops drastically, almost to zero really. So I am forced back to the single center point and recomposing, which again gives me trouble when my lenses happen to be fairly wide open.

I realize that the MKII doesn't have all cross type either, but with the wider fov I would be able to set my lenses a little tighter and recomposing shouldn't be as much trouble with the FF.

I have had full frame sense the first 5D came out. (bought mine in 06) last year I added a 7D to the bag. (picked up a good deal on Craig's List) Sense getting my 7D it has been in "MY Hand" about 70% of the time. I do find that it does require that I use GOOD Glass. If getting a 5D means that you have to sell both of your other bodies I would go with the 7D. I will NOT be with out a spare body as I have PAID that price for that twice in the past. In the old days My trusted A1 Died the very first day in Hawaii and then half way through shooting at a air show the mirror came loose in my 5D.

Also I do agree and support what you are saying about the good lenses being more important then the latest and greatest body. 6 years ago the changed between one body to the nest were huge but now that is just not the case. For now I am sitting on the Bodies that I have and not getting a MK3 to invest in lenses instead.

Same decision I'm torn with OP, except with the Mk3 vs. a 7D. Highly leaning towards the 7D at this point.

GuitarDTO wrote in post #14791886
Same decision I'm torn with OP, except with the Mk3 vs. a 7D. Highly leaning towards the 7D at this point.

Wow, and you even have "guitar" in your name as well, amazing.

If you are looking for an improvement in IQ, forget upgrading the bodies and get better glass. What is your reason for upgrading your body? Just to upgrade? What is your current bodies lacking? For me, it was the ergonomics and controls. The Rebel body was too small in my hand and after shooting for more than an hour, my hand would be sore and my fingers would be stiff. Plus, changing settings while looking through the viewfinder was a bit more difficult. I also shot a lot of things in dimly lit rooms, so ISO improvements were also important in my decision.

I would say, first, that looking at images on the web will not reveal the differences you're talking about comparing lenses. There are lots of other factors involved that get sullied in a web image.

The image quality differences show up primarily in cases where captured detail and tonality matter the most, which is when enlargement is ultra-extreme. In Canon's book, "extreme" is 11x14 and larger, so I'm talking about 16x20 and larger. You don't need "good glass" to begin to see the difference by the time you reach 16x20.

guitarjeff wrote in post #14791931
Wow, and you even have "guitar" in your name as well, amazing.

Lol! For what it's worth I just bought the 7D this evening ; )

I guess it's all mute now. I was on Ebay and darned if I didn't pull the trigger.

http://cgi.ebay.com …iewItem&item=15​0866867817

Man, this is scary but I couldn't pass that up considering a brand new shutter and servicing all to Canon spec, 1,650 bucks. She is bought. Now it's on to selling my Sigma 30 and 60 Macro and my 450D. I guess I'll be able to keep the 500D for a backup body along with my nifty 250 for trips to the zoo or whatever where I need a long reach.

Wow, I am pumped.

tagnal wrote in post #14792066
What is your reason for upgrading your body? Just to upgrade? What is your current bodies lacking?.

As I mentioned in my post, the rebels require that I focus and recompose because the outer points are fairly worthless for trying to use. Like you said, the size kind of cramps my big hands as well.

All done now, just bought a MKII on Ebay,, new shutter and all for 1,650 bucks.

Ahh, not sure how i missed that. Although, with the mk II, you are still going to be doing the focus-recompose thing. Congrats on your purchase! I'm sure you'll love it anyways.