DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Thinking of move from 5D2 to 7D, talk me out it?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 19 of 19, (reverse)
AuthorThread
03/14/2011 05:10:41 PM · #1
I'm shooting mostly portrait work with some weddings tossed in.
My most enjoyable (and creative) kit has been 40D with 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8
I upgraded to a 5D2 for better low light and shallow depth of field for portraits. I also added a 70-200 for more speed/flexibility when shooting weddings.

The problem... I'm constantly switching between the 70-200 and one of my wider lenses.. and that 70-200 is a pain when it's off the camera. I'm a fairly big guy and can handle the weight, but I've noticed that I'm moving less with the bulky kit and that translates to fewer interesting images. A 7D with a 24-70 would hit right in the sweet spot for portraits and weddings and the 70-200 could probably go away. Is it possible for a camera to be better but simply not work as well for the way I want to shoot? Or maybe drop the 70-200 in favor of a 135mm prime and just shoot three primes like I used to. I feel like the weight, and cost, is just slowing me down.

I'm sure this sounds a little silly to some, but where else am I going to find people willing to talk about such things...
03/14/2011 05:17:57 PM · #2
PM ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Magnumphotography. Ryan is a Canon fiend and would never trade his 5D MkII for a 7D. I'll let him tell you why!!

Message edited by author 2011-03-14 17:18:28.
03/14/2011 05:19:39 PM · #3
I was going to suggest the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8, but it looks like it's been recently discontinued. Maybe a stabilized version is coming?
03/14/2011 05:28:48 PM · #4
I sold my 7D and don't regret it with the 5D around my neck. Have you thought about picking up a used 50D with a 24-70 and use both cameras at the shoots? I wouldn't think you would want the 7D over the 5D especially for wedding work.
03/14/2011 05:32:32 PM · #5
I have both the 7D and the 5D MKII. The 7D is hardly used for a reason. When it comes to image quality, the 5D MKII is miles ahead. Images from my 7D look crude by comparison. I find it handles highlights really poorly too.

I suspect that if you move you'll see the sort of difference you notice more on the way down than on the way up.

I hear what you say about the lenses but if you can't live with the f/4 of the 24-105 then a 24-70 with a bit more walking around?? Perhaps that plays right into that mobility issue.....

I think 7D should be considered as a last resort.

Message edited by author 2011-03-14 17:33:14.
03/14/2011 05:34:31 PM · #6
You'd be out of your mind to give up that buttery-smooth tonality if your bread & butter is weddings and portraits. Just do it the old-fashioned way and start shooting primes, if you're so concerned with the weight of the 70-200 2.8, would be my advice.

R.
03/14/2011 05:38:28 PM · #7
Originally posted by paulbtlw:

I have both the 7D and the 5D MKII. The 7D is hardly used for a reason. When it comes to image quality, the 5D MKII is miles ahead. Images from my 7D look crude by comparison. I find it handles highlights really poorly too.

I suspect that if you move you'll see the sort of difference you notice more on the way down than on the way up.

I hear what you say about the lenses but if you can't live with the f/4 of the 24-105 then a 24-70 with a bit more walking around?? Perhaps that plays right into that mobility issue.....

I think 7D should be considered as a last resort.


Sad to say, but I didn't even realize the 24-105 was available. I'm probably still stuck in the days of film when when f/2.8 seemed a little slow at times. But... the 24-105 backed up by a handful of faster primes might be doable. Thanks
03/14/2011 05:40:20 PM · #8
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

You'd be out of your mind to give up that buttery-smooth tonality if your bread & butter is weddings and portraits. Just do it the old-fashioned way and start shooting primes, if you're so concerned with the weight of the 70-200 2.8, would be my advice.

R.

I could shoot portraits with primes all day and it wouldn't bother me a bit. I think I convinced myself that I needed zooms for weddings so I didn't miss anything. Would I be nuts to shoot a wedding with a handful of nice fast and lightweight primes?
03/14/2011 05:41:09 PM · #9
Originally posted by Nusbaum:

Sad to say, but I didn't even realize the 24-105 was available. I'm probably still stuck in the days of film when when f/2.8 seemed a little slow at times. But... the 24-105 backed up by a handful of faster primes might be doable. Thanks

That's one of the lenses Canon bundles as a "kit" with the 5DII.
03/14/2011 05:44:57 PM · #10
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Nusbaum:

Sad to say, but I didn't even realize the 24-105 was available. I'm probably still stuck in the days of film when when f/2.8 seemed a little slow at times. But... the 24-105 backed up by a handful of faster primes might be doable. Thanks

That's one of the lenses Canon bundles as a "kit" with the 5DII.

A kit lens... I probably assumed it was inferior. Guess shouldn't jump to conclusions. Is it a good lens minus that fact that it's two stops slower than what I would like?
03/14/2011 05:47:20 PM · #11
Good lens - L glass and as you say two stops slower, though it does have decent IS. Not much it in price-wise between the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 24-105 f/4
03/14/2011 05:55:03 PM · #12
Originally posted by paulbtlw:

Good lens - L glass and as you say two stops slower, though it does have decent IS. Not much it in price-wise between the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 24-105 f/4

It's not so much the price (don't tell my wife, she would disagree), but for both weddings and full body/environment poses I'm constantly dropping below the 70 on the 70-200. I can switch primes with one hand, so that's not too big a deal, but switching out the 70-200 usually requires some fancy juggling. And then turning to quick with a 70-200 in a pouch... I can take somebody out pretty quickly. It's taking some of the fun, and spontaneity, out of shooting. I always wanted to be a 'pro' and have all those fancy lenses. Now I still want to be a 'pro' someday, but I have no desire for so much baggage.

Message edited by author 2011-03-15 09:19:12.
03/14/2011 06:19:50 PM · #13
I use the 24-105 a lot. It's L glass.
03/14/2011 06:56:43 PM · #14
I do a fair few weddings and the 24-105 F4 and 70-200 F2.8 are my main lenses.
Great combo. But saying that I use two bodies so no swapping around.

Message edited by author 2011-03-14 18:57:10.
03/15/2011 11:53:23 AM · #15
Thanks for all of the advice. I think the group has succeeding in convincing me to keep the 5D2 and I will look at adjusting my kit to better suite the way I want to shoot. I think either the 24-105 backed up by my favorite primes or a 135mm prime to fill the gap created by the move to full frame.
03/15/2011 06:37:50 PM · #16
Originally posted by Nusbaum:

I could shoot portraits with primes all day and it wouldn't bother me a bit. I think I convinced myself that I needed zooms for weddings so I didn't miss anything. Would I be nuts to shoot a wedding with a handful of nice fast and lightweight primes?


No, that's the way it USED to be done before shooters got lazy. Your feet are as good a zoom as you need in a wedding, except maybe for the 70-200mm f/2.8 that'll let you shoot from far away during the ceremony and doing candids at the reception and all. But why would you NEED a wider zoom for the setups and stuff? I don't get it, actually.

Shooting my landscapes, I need wide zoom a lot, because I get to places where I don't have options for moving further or closer, but you have a lot more control when you're working with wedding parties on formal shots.

R.
03/15/2011 07:18:15 PM · #17
' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Nusbaum, it is unbelievable you don't have any ribbons yet. Too many good photos!
03/16/2011 01:12:58 AM · #18
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Nusbaum:

I could shoot portraits with primes all day and it wouldn't bother me a bit. I think I convinced myself that I needed zooms for weddings so I didn't miss anything. Would I be nuts to shoot a wedding with a handful of nice fast and lightweight primes?


No, that's the way it USED to be done before shooters got lazy. Your feet are as good a zoom as you need in a wedding, except maybe for the 70-200mm f/2.8 that'll let you shoot from far away during the ceremony and doing candids at the reception and all. But why would you NEED a wider zoom for the setups and stuff? I don't get it, actually.

Shooting my landscapes, I need wide zoom a lot, because I get to places where I don't have options for moving further or closer, but you have a lot more control when you're working with wedding parties on formal shots.

R.

This could be as much as mental problem as anything else, but I'll try to explain what triggered this. I was shooting in my studio the other day with my 5Dmkii and a 70-200 2.8. It was going ok, but I decided to grab my 50mm prime for some full body shots. All of a sudden I realized that I was moving more... I'm dropping down close to the ground, stepping in close, shooting different angles and interacting more with the client. When I sat down to think about this I also realized that there are also times when I don't switch out the 70-200 because the weight and size of the lens make it a bit of a hassle to deal with. So, I started looking for a lighter and wider zoom that would allow more freedom as I was shooting and for some reason the 24-70 on a crop body popped into my head as a pretty much the sweet spot for what I like to shoot. For some reason I didn't even think about going back to my primes... and I used the be all over the forums here saying that 3 primes was enough for most purposes while being lighter and less expensive than L glass. Fortunately for me, I took a minute to check my sanity here. I've clearly gotten caught up in what I thought I should be shooting with rather than thinking through what works for me.
03/16/2011 01:15:33 AM · #19
Originally posted by FocusPoint:

' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Nusbaum, it is unbelievable you don't have any ribbons yet. Too many good photos!

Thanks! My timing has always been a little poor, but I think it time to start putting some more effort into the challenges again.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/09/2020 02:44:55 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 04/09/2020 02:44:55 PM EDT.