Any recommendations for my first full frame Canon?

[Black Pearl]

In response to Black Pearl

Well, my lenses are:

EFS: 18-55 f/3.5-5.6
EFS: 55-250 f4-5.6
EFS: 10-22 f/3.5-4.5

EF: 50 f/1.4
EF: 35 f2

So I would probably need a wider EF (24mm?) lens for landscape, although I am not keen on images where the sky is obviously taken through a very wide angle. I am not sure about a dedicated Macro lens yet - it's probably not a priority and would be a budget buster.

I have Photoshop CS6 and will eventually consider consider moving to CC partly because it comes with Lightroom which seems a bit more intuitive, and it is the only way to get updates.

Despite my limited ability, I enter competitions locally at a club for hobbyists like me. So I will be printing images at A4 on my Canon Pixma iP4700 and maybe A3 through a contact I have as well as competing in Projected Digital Image (PDI).

In response to everyone so far - thank you for some very interesting and helpful comments which I need to digest.

I don't see that moving to a FF camera will do you any good - in fact I feel it would be poor choice.

You will be going from a wide range of focus lengths to two lenses, neither of which are particularly inspiring as landscape tools. You may - that is a very large and very vague may by the way - get an improvement in finite pixel level image quality but you will give up a vast array of shots you can take with your current lenses. Creating a great photograph isn't all about pixels, it isn't all about sensor size, it isn't all about on-paper technicalities it is about seeing the shot, being able to frame the shot and being able to turn the pixels you have into a final image. Changing your camera body won't do that - well, it might if you also invest in a 16-35mm f2.8 L lens and a 24-70mm f2.8 l lens and a 70-200mm f2.8 L lens so that the new body has a fighting chance of producing sharper, clearer images than you can now but it ain't going to do it on its own. I understand the desire to go full frame, I have no wish to do so but I get that others do, but its not a case of buying a body and finding your Shangri-La you have to invest in a full system.
Personally I'd start with getting some good lenses - then - getting a better body to put them on. Your 18-55mm is grim, the 55-250mm is reasonable at best though the 10-22mm is a fine bit of glass. Invest in some good L Series zooms, et to know them, get to understand how vastly better they are and then buy a body to match - unless your budget stretches to everything at once then go shopping mad.

[Donald]

You need FF for landscape if you are going to get at all serious about it. Don't even think about upgrading to another cropped camera as the noise in low light is never going to match that of a FF camera. Shooting landscapes you will be shooting low light and somtimes you won't be able to use a tripod.

I'm sorry, but I have to totally disagree with that statement.

In terms of the question of noise, I would suggest that the 7DMkII will whip the pants off almost any camera that's out there and will certainly stand alongside most of the full-frame cameras you could buy (I suspect the newly announced 80D will be the same). And with respect, far better than a 5D2.

And if you are at all serious about landscape photography, you would never be shooting in low light without a tripod.

[Tronhard]

I think we need to ask precisely WHAT is wrong with the images Rufus is getting before we start recommending gear to him As I understand it he is producing fairly modest-size prints, so the gear he has should be able to handle the images. I would like him to post some of his problematic images on with the EXIF data.

I am really interested in what ISOs are being used, and if the images are under or over exposed.

Technique is much cheaper and much more effective to improve than just technology...

[SuffolkGal]

I'm sorry, but I have to totally disagree with that statement.

In terms of the question of noise, I would suggest that the 7DMkII will whip the pants off almost any camera that's out there and will certainly stand alongside most of the full-frame cameras you could buy (I suspect the newly announced 80D will be the same). And with respect, far better than a 5D2.

And if you are at all serious about landscape photography, you would never be shooting in low light without a tripod.

I have seen 100% raw files from the 7d2, I'm not impressed

[Donald]

I have seen 100% raw files from the 7d2, I'm not impressed

In that case, someone was using it wrongly or badly.

I'll happily share raw files from a 7DMkII that will show a very different picture.

[Tronhard]

Question to Jenny and Donald:

With the GREATEST respect. Is this really helping Rufus?

[SuffolkGal]

I have seen 100% raw files from the 7d2, I'm not impressed

Sometimes it's hard to bring a tripod to the exact spot.

1,6 on a 17mm lens is undesirable.

[Donald]

Question to Jenny and Donald:

With the GREATEST respect. Is this really helping Rufus?

I think Rufus needs the opportunity to make decisions based on accurate information.

[Tronhard]

I think he needs to find out what is wrong with his images and since that information has been fairly Spartan - apart from the gear he already had we have little idea how he has used it since he has not shown us any samples. Look I love my Canons: ALL of them but I don't believe we have established that buying new gear will sort out his issue.

[SuffolkGal]

In that case, someone was using it wrongly or badly.

I'll happily share raw files from a 7DMkII that will show a very different picture.

Good for you, perfectly entitled to your opinion.

I would really like a cropped sensor camera for my stage work, but shooting in low light is essential and I personally would not give my customers images from the 7d2. The extra reach from the 1,6 would be very nice to have.

[SuffolkGal]

Question to Jenny and Donald:

With the GREATEST respect. Is this really helping Rufus?

Yes, I believe it is.

[Tronhard]

Rather than buy a body, maybe he should rent one or two bodies (APS-C and FF) and use them with his own and other rented lenses suitable for his purposes. It is a cheap way of establishing if technology will resolve his issue. If it doesn't then it's probably technique...

[Tony M]

Rufus,

You're at the same cross-roads that I was, as I mentioned in a previous post. You asked the question:

... which model in the Canon range is best suited to landscape, architecture and some studio and macro work with occasional action shots?

Well, as you will have seen from the responses so far, the answer is "None" or "All". There are trade-offs with both the APS-C and FF sensors in terms of noise, size, weight and cost of lenses; the APS-C's magnification factor is both a benefit and a disadvantage.

You know you'll need to replace lenses when moving to FF; alternatively you may choose to replace some if staying with APS-C. The latter choice allows you to improve your kit gradually, whereas the former doesn't.

How about putting forward two proposals for kit upgrade: one for FF and another for APS-C? I'd be interested to know what your choices would be.

Personally, I wouldn't consider noise to be a deciding factor for landscape. You will rarely photograph landscape with an ISO that would produce unacceptable noise with either the FF (6D, 5D MkXXX) or the APS-C (70D, 7D MkII, 80D).

I am sometimes envious of my photographer friends who have APS-C sensors when hauling kit in backpacks over the mountains. One of them is a professional editorial photographer and he doesn't have FF!

Tony

[Tony M]

I still have this topic on my mind...

Have you thought about mirrorless? It might be worth waiting for Canon's forthcoming new model which is rumoured. My values has changed since upgrading to FF: I'd like a lighter kit that travels more easily. And mirrorless with EVF offers more than size and weight advantages.

[DanK]

I think we need to ask precisely WHAT is wrong with the images Rufus is getting before we start recommending gear to him As I understand it he is producing fairly modest-size prints, so the gear he has should be able to handle the images. I would like him to post some of his problematic images on with the EXIF data.

I am really interested in what ISOs are being used, and if the images are under or over exposed.

Technique is much cheaper and much more effective to improve than just technology...

I agree. Technique (both in capturing the image and in postprocessing) comes first. A very distant second is lens quality. A very distant third is the body, particularly given recent advances in technology.

And I very much agree that the best way to help would be to focus on what specific goals Rufus has in thinking about upgrading.

I think there is a lot of useful information in this thread, but unfortunately, a few postings veered too far into absolutes. One of the few absolute rules about photography that I think holds water is that most absolute rules about photography don't. And while I don't know anything about Rufus's level of expertise, absolute statements only cloud things for people with insufficient knowledge to see them for what they are.

[Black Pearl]

Good for you, perfectly entitled to your opinion.

I would really like a cropped sensor camera for my stage work, but shooting in low light is essential and I personally would not give my customers images from the 7d2. The extra reach from the 1,6 would be very nice to have.

What camera are you using?

[Rufus]

I am very grateful for all the replies to my OP and the discussion that has followed. I have carefully considered all the great advice and opinions which has clarified my thinking.

I apologise to those who suggest I post examples of what I would like to improve, but I have no concrete thoughts on that as yet. I just know that they are not very inspiring. So I must conclude that my main problem is technique and seeing the picture in the first place, which a new camera body will not solve although my club membership will certainly help me with that. So I think I should stick with my present kit and improve the lenses.

I may add a 20mm f2.8 prime lens so that I have 20, 35 and 50mm primes (equivalent to 32,56 and 80mm). These would provide a reasonable range of fast lenses.

My 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM is, I gather, quite acceptable quality (and equivalent to 16-35mm) and I could add a 24-70 mm f4 L (equivalent to 38 -112). These would give me a good range, of quality wide and telephoto zoom, in a single lens change. And my EFS 55-250mm (equivalent to 88 -400) would provide longer telephoto capability when necessary (clearly not landscapes!).

I could then retire my 18-55mm kit lens.

If I find become more satisfied with my ability to see images and increase my post processing skills then I would consider upgrading to another cropped frame to gain more pixels (so I can crop them out in Photoshop to improve composition and still print in A4 or A3 at an acceptable quality!).

But at present I have concluded that spending the same amount on lenses is a better investment than a new body.

Again, thank you for all your help thus far. What a fantastic forum this is.

[Polar01]

Rufus good thinking best work what is behind the camera first before any purchases. Remember that the camera and the lenses are only a tool for you to use, and that it is you who is the stone that sharpens those tools. You have a good range of lenses you do not need anymore at this time, what you need to do it push yourself to get the most out of what you have, and then and only then get the needed tool. If I had to get something than it would be something with a newer sensor, only after I found out that what I had could not be pushed any farther.
Now your line"And my EFS 55-250mm (equivalent to 88 -400) would provide longer telephoto capability when necessary (clearly not landscapes!).", what do you mean clearly not landscapes have you tried it? Nikon D7000 with 70-300 (105-450 FF) 6 shots across by 4 rows =24 shot pan, looks great.
I am going to suggest a link to a British landscape photographer you can down load the articles for free, good reading and information.
http://www.leefrost.co.uk/articles.asp

Cheers: Allan

[Tronhard]

... I must conclude that my main problem is technique and seeing the picture in the first place, which a new camera body will not solve although my club membership will certainly help me with that. So I think I should stick with my present kit and improve the lenses.

If I find become more satisfied with my ability to see images and increase my post processing skills then I would consider upgrading to another cropped frame to gain more pixels (so I can crop them out in Photoshop to improve composition and still print in A4 or A3 at an acceptable quality!).

But at present I have concluded that spending the same amount on lenses is a better investment than a new body.

Again, thank you for all your help thus far. What a fantastic forum this is.

Rufus this is what CIC is all about I believe. Supporting our members and helping them find their way.

I fully support Dan's comments that we will get the most out of a new technology upgrade when we have mastered what we have - an issue I think we all struggle with when we see the latest cool tool on the web! Not only is a skills-first focus more cost-effective, but it makes us better photographers, not lesser ones with really great gear.

You will always get advice to choose a particular lens, body and make - such advice is made with genuine enthusiasm by those who have found that they get great results from them. People will quote technological statistics to confirm their choices, and I have found people who are fanatical about one brand and scorn others. In the end all of these brands work - otherwise they would not have a market. Professional photographers get free access to the latest gear because their skill makes the gear look good - not necessarily the other way round. Some of my favourite and most successful images have been made with fairly modest equipment.

Camera bodies change with monotonous regularity, but the lenses change far less often - they are thus an investment you need to take with great care as they will last you perhaps decades. So you need to focus (excuse the pun) on that. I chose one brand because of a specific lens and I have not been disappointed, but I will never recommend my choice of vendor over others. For whatever brand you choose, then go to sites that evaluate the lenses and check out their reviews to build a suite of ranges for your purpose, and be prepared to rent a lens or body to check out the gear for yourself without committing to buy.

I have made these comments before but I shall list briefly questions you need to ask:
How much do you want to spend?.................. Have a budget and stick to it.
What kind of photographer will you be?.......... You suggest some types of photography that interest you, but how specialized do you want to be?
What kind of output do you want? ................. Large-format prints, smaller prints (like A4), digital etc. have an impact on gear choices
What are you prepared to carry? ................... There is no point having a ton of gear that sits at home - often less is more.

Michael Langford and his wife Kathy Rankin are elite Canon photographers from NZ with a impressive resumes - I have had the pleasure of meeting them and I would recommend their site (http://www.qccp.co.nz/)as a great source. They used to have a downloadable PDF book on Creative Landscape Photography, which cost something like $10, but even their hardcopy books, while a bit more expensive are a brilliant investment because of their extremely simple and logical approach to landscape photography - they also have one on photographing wildlife.

Their downloadable books plus many other PDF books at cheap prices can be found here: http://www.cameralabs.com/photograph...hy_books.shtml

In the end joining, and engaging with a good club is one of the best things you can do. You will get the chance to see a wide range of gear used in many ways and be part of many presentations and discussions on technique. One of the best benefits of a club is the ability to go shooting with photographic enthusiasts who will usually be happy to offer constructive suggestions to improve your images. You may want to engage in competition: done properly it provides a constructive critique. In the end you need to develop a photographic philosophy and style of your own, but it take some time and a lot of images to get you there!

[SuffolkGal]

What camera are you using?

A couple of 5d2's and an old 40d, which is still pretty ok in good light.