New camera for weddings

gonzogolf wrote in post #10236480
Why not get a second 5D, thats about in your price range?

I have to agree here, get another 5D, another full frame, it's not that expensive to replace the shutter if shutter actuations is a concern.

The 7D is a very very fast camera compared with the 5D, and I prefer the images from the 7D over the 5D by a good margin. I don't care what size my sensor is, that's about the least important thing to me about my equipment.

tim wrote in post #10245012
The 7D is a very very fast camera compared with the 5D, and I prefer the images from the 7D over the 5D by a good margin. I don't care what size my sensor is, that's about the least important thing to me about my equipment.

fast is one thing lots of people don't need when shooting weddings, I dont think a 7d will get better IQ over a 5D.

enrigonz wrote in post #10245428
fast is one thing lots of people don't need when shooting weddings, I dont think a 7d will get better IQ over a 5D.

I really don't like using the 5D, just because it feels so slow. The 5DII is faster than the 5DI, but it's still relatively slow. While you can get away with a slower camera at weddings I just don't like the speed or feel of the 5D series cameras.

Having used 40D, 5D I and II, 7D, 1D3, 1D4 (briefly) I can say I much prefer the images from the 7D over the 5D classic. It's maybe 5 years newer so that's no big surprise. The 5DII and 7D are from the same generation, so their images look similar, though the 5DII is full frame and has advantages from that.

Given that within reason budget isn't a consideration for me i've chosen the 7D over the 5DII. Canon doesn't make the ideal wedding camera for me, right now, which is why i'm considering the D3s or a D700.

Tim is bucking the trend again, preferring crops to full frame. I do agree about one thing: Canon currently does not make the ideal wedding camera for me either. I would much prefer it if the 5D II had an improved AF system and faster overall response. That said, for me those are the only two real weak points of the design (I might have preferred fewer megapixels too).

On a side note...you can buy a used 1Ds III for less than a new D3s. Great AF, ultra-fast camera, very good performance overall.

form wrote in post #10246276
Tim is bucking the trend again, preferring crops to full frame. I do agree about one thing: Canon currently does not make the ideal wedding camera for me either. I would much prefer it if the 5D II had an improved AF system and faster overall response. That said, for me those are the only two real weak points of the design (I might have preferred fewer megapixels too).

On a side note...you can buy a used 1Ds III for less than a new D3s. Great AF, ultra-fast camera, very good performance overall.

It's not that I prefer small sensors, it's that I really don't care what size the sensor is, within reason. I'm more interested in other features, like being able to focus accurately.

I had a 1D3 the other week, the focus was good, but the 7D bested it at the reception in low light. The 1D3 was bullet proof for formals, which is what my 7D fails at sometimes, but the 7D did fine there too. The 1Ds3 is still really expensive here.

I figured that since you were considering a D3s, the 1Ds III would be a cheaper alternative - both in body price and the cost of switching equipment.

It would be cheaper, but i'm mainly switching because of the trouble i've had with focusing.

I would take a 7D. It is taking me a lot of discipline to NOT buy a 7D. I also shoot with the 40D and really, it is quite amazing and performs exceptionally well for me at weddings. So I really cannot justify getting a 7D.

For me, I would definitely NOT want to lack a crop body for wedding shooting. If I wanted to shoot full frame only I'd probably be a single body shooter with a cheap backup in the trunk. Especially with the great high ISO performance of the 7D, the full frame argument is getting less and less valid in my opinion.

Unless your style revolves around blurring the living snot out of everything except one person, full frame isn't the holy grail of wedding photography.

I too feel that canon is lacking the perfect wedding camera. I mean, I absolutely love the 1Ds3... it performs as well and as accurately as I could ever ask for... but it's huge, heavy, and too many megapixels. Nikon comes close with the D700, but after experiencing numerous card failures, I would want my primary body to have dual card slots... like the D300s. I tried very hard to like the 5D series but I felt like it was always lagging a half step behind me; it was slow and frustrating as a result. If the 7D had dual cards it would be a no-brainer for me.

picturecrazy wrote in post #10251450
I too feel that canon is lacking the perfect wedding camera. I mean, I absolutely love the 1Ds3... it performs as well and as accurately as I could ever ask for... but it's huge, heavy, and too many megapixels. Nikon comes close with the D700, but after experiencing numerous card failures, I would want my primary body to have dual card slots... like the D300s. I tried very hard to like the 5D series but I felt like it was always lagging a half step behind me; it was slow and frustrating as a result. If the 7D had dual cards it would be a no-brainer for me.

It wouldn't be an unreasonable guess to think the D700s/D800 will have dual card slots, given the D300s has them. Unlike Canon, who seem to want very differentiated product lines so they can sell their expensive cameras, Nikon seems to be happy to move features between product lines. I guess that's because they're still the underdog, but not for long if they keep things up as they are now.

As usual, I'm late to the thread, but thought I'd chime in.

I work with a 5D2 and 50D and love them both for different reasons. I grew up with film and much prefer full frame; not only because it handles noise so much better but because it see's the scene the way I'm used to. But no doubt about it, it's slow to focus and can be very frustrating in low light situations. That's why I like having one of each. For things like the processional, I'm working with the 50D, during the ceremony, mostly the 5D2. I also like how having one of each doubles my lens collection. A 35 or 85 lens on my FF is a 35 and 85; put them on my 1.6 and I get (essentially) a 50 and a 135 for free!

Personally, I have no desire for the7D. I've been very happy with my 50D and, IMO, it is a comparative bargain. That said, if I were to add another body (which I'm thinking about, it would probably be another 5D2, though, because I love the IQ that much.

tim wrote in post #10251648
It wouldn't be an unreasonable guess to think the D700s/D800 will have dual card slots, given the D300s has them. Unlike Canon, who seem to want very differentiated product lines so they can sell their expensive cameras, Nikon seems to be happy to move features between product lines. I guess that's because they're still the underdog, but not for long if they keep things up as they are now.

If the D800/D700s is still 12MP but has dual card slots, Nikon would suddenly pique my interest a LOT more than it currently does.

Video is getting more and more interesting to me, but I'm a bit stunned as to why Nikon is lagging so far behind Canon on video capabilities. That and Nikon live view really really sucks. It's practically unusable to me. The two must be related somehow.

I never use live view, and only really use video for a laugh, so that wouldn't be a big deal for me. I plan on getting a D3s once the prices comes down a bit, though I might consider a D700s/D800 too. I wouldn't mind a hybrid sensor, 18MP with great high ISO, but 12MP is enough, even for my 36" album spreads - though a bit more might be nice.

I'd get a 5D Mk II

If you are willing to do a little work, you can get a 7D body for ~$1150 with Bing Cash back and selling the kit lens and printer.