50D vs 5D Mark II

I'm thinking of buying a new camera and although it would seem a no brainer to buy the 5D Mark II over the 50D I have questions as to which would be better. I do both landscape and wildlife photography which is why I'm torn the 5D would be better for landscape and macro work but the 50D for wildlife. I currently have a 30D and a 20D so I do have something with an APS-C sensor that would be useful for wildlife. Is it really worth the extra money to buy the 5D Mark II?

Don't rule out the 1DmkIII maybe? with that body you get a 1.3 crop sensor with pro autofocus as 10 fps which is great for wildlife stuff, but it is obviously very capable at taking landscapes too!

I think it depends what you are going to be doing more of...The 50D might be better for wildlife and landscape work - because it's got the speed and reach for wildlife work, and you can go wide with the right lenses too!

The 5DmkII however is an awesome camera in it's own right though, the IQ will certainly be superior to the 50D + the high iso performance should also be considerably better. It just can't shoot as fast - and the 21mp full frame sensor gives you effectively the same cropping power as an 8mp ap-c sensor like the 30D. Meaning you could crop the 21mp file down to 8mp and it would be zoomed in equally as a 30D.

I never understand why folks say that croppers are best for wildlife. I get the "perceived reach" thing, but all it is is a crop of the image that you would have captured with a full frame. If you're shooting action, I could understand the FPS, etc over the 5D, but for what you shoot, it sounds like a full frame would work nicely. You will just end up cropping a little more in post for the wildlife.

TaDa wrote in post #6743528
I never understand why folks say that croppers are best for wildlife. I get the "perceived reach" thing, but all it is is a crop of the image that you would have captured with a full frame. If you're shooting action, I could understand the FPS, etc over the 5D, but for what you shoot, it sounds like a full frame would work nicely. You will just end up cropping a little more in post for the wildlife.

Yes, and the 5D2 cropped to APS-C puts the same 8MP 'on target' as the birders say as the 30D does.

I don't recall 20D/30D shooters that lamented the lack of pixels with those bodies.

Hello IIah,
You say you have a 20D and 30D, if you have EF-S glass then try the 50D or the 40D.
If all your glass is FF then the 5D II is very nice, also as "naturalworldphotograp​her" has said "do not under estimate the 1DmkIII" with 1.3 factor for your wildlife masterpieces.
Regards.
Jim

Thanks everyone for the quick replies. I really don't want to spend the money for the 1DMarkIII its a beautiful camera but a bit out of my price range. My glass is a mixture of FF (100-400, 24-105) and EF-S (Tokina lenses not Canon) so I could really go either way. After reading what you all had to say and reading the other 5D MarkII VS 50D threads I think I'll go with the 5D. I still love my 30D (although I might upgrade it to a 40D when that gets discontinued) and so I can have my speed there, and like you all pointed out, cropped the still wildlife images would be about 8mp and I've had no issues with that with my 20D/30D bodies. Given the 50D noise isssues and the better IQ (as "Naturalworldphotograp​her" put it so succinctly) The 5DMII will be in my hands after Christmas (in the vain hope that they'll be some after christmas "sales"). Thanks again everyone for your input

Hali

1dmkIII suits your needs perfectly. in the UK the 1dmkIII and the 5dmkII cost the same, the only difference bing that the 1dmkIII is available now and you wont have to wait until easter to get it.