Camera upgrade: is it worth?

[Nicola]

dear members
in these days I'm going tired wasting my brain to decide what to do:
let me explain: I could have the possibility to sell my camera (Canon 50D bought exactly 1 year ago) and buy an used 5D mark II (bought in may 2010 and 7000 shots). The net price I have to pay is around 500 - 600 euro.
i said 'around' because it depends on my "market-ability" in these two transaction...
so comes the question. is it worth? the new 5D mark III seems to be close to debut,
so the price of a new 5D mark II will decrease soon... but how much?
I'm in the photography world only since october 2011...
what do you suggest me to do?
consider that I have 5 EF lenses: 17-40 L , 50 f/1.8, 100 f/2.8 macro, 70-300 IS USM, 28-90 f/4-5.6

many thanks!
have a nice day
Nicola

[Geoff F]

I suppose the obvious question is, exactly what do you wish to photograph?

For example, wide landscapes, portraits or wildlife (particularly close up shots of flying birds) would require slightly different cameras for best possible results.

[Nicola]

I suppose the obvious question is, exactly what do you wish to photograph?

For example, wide landscapes, portraits or wildlife (particularly close up shots of flying birds) would require slightly different cameras for best possible results.

thanks Geoff,
during the last year, I shoot most of the times on my travels and holidays, landscapes very often, some times portraits (just a wedding and a baptism, I haven't still got a flash, I used a borrowed one), wild life a bit more seldom (when I meet it )

[Kiwi Ric]

Hello Nicola,

I did the same thing awhile ago, just keep looking and find the price that is right for you, dont get caught up in the "New Model due to come out" as with that thought in might, you could be sitting on the fence for a long time.

Do some reading into what body suits your style etc looks like if you picked up the 7D you could also get a flash "Strobe" and still have change for other items as well. or just keep shooting with what you have and pick up more glass!

[Hansm]

Hi Nicola,

The 5D MKII is a very good camera. There are some rumours about the 5DMKIII but only Canon knows when they will launch it.
If the price of the MKII will drop much, I don't think so. The price of the 5D also did not drop that much when the MKII was close to it's launch date.
If you have the opportunity to upgrade to the 5D MKII I'm sure you will not have any regrets. Your EF lenses are all useable on the Full Frame body. Also your view finder will be much larger compared to the 50D, and you win more wide-angle. 17 mm is really wide!

[Colin Southern]

Hi Nicola,

It's up to you, but I don't think it will make a lot of difference to your photography. If anything, the loss of the crop-factor will probably make your wildlife shots worse.

I suspect you'd be far far far better off keeping the 50D and putting the $$$ into a good flash, like a 580EX II.

[Glenn NK]

Nicola:

I was faced with the same problem last year; my 30D served me well for macro work (I have a 100 mm macro lens), but wished to do more landscape photography.

In my case, I could afford to buy the 5DII and keep the 30D. Not everyone is able to do this. I'm glad I kept the 30D as it's a very good body, and particularly good for macro shots.

The problem with very close macro shots with the 5DII is that it requires the 180 macro lens - the 100 mm macro lens is too short (my opinion based on my experience.)

I was accustomed to the 100mm on the 30D (the equivalent focal length on the crop body being 288 mm), and found I couldn't get close enough with the 5DII + 100 macro to get "tight framing".

The 5DII is a superb landscape body, but not so great for macro with a 100 mm macro lens.

Glenn

[Colin Southern]

I was accustomed to the 100mm on the 30D (the equivalent focal length on the crop body being 288 mm),

Hi Glenn,

I'm guessing you mean 160mm (100 x 1.6x CF)?

[Glenn NK]

Hi Glenn,

I'm guessing you mean 160mm (100 x 1.6x CF)?

Yes - I was mixing up the two bodies. The 160 mm macro on a 1.6 crop body (30, 40, 50, 60D) is equivalent to a 288 mm lens on a FF sensor. Thanks for pointing out the error - don't want to mislead Nicola.

On the 30D/50D, the 100 mm macro lens is equivalent to a 160 mm lens on the 5D bodies.

So for me to obtain similar framing with my 5D, I would have to invest in the Canon 180 mm macro - the last time I checked, it cost considerably more than the 100 mm f/2.8.

Glenn

[Eric M]

Hi Nicola,

It's up to you, but I don't think it will make a lot of difference to your photography. If anything, the loss of the crop-factor will probably make your wildlife shots worse.

I suspect you'd be far far far better off keeping the 50D and putting the $$$ into a good flash, like a 580EX II.

Couldn't agree more. I would add that if you really want to have some fun with the 50D get an EF-S17-55 f/2.8 IS.

[arith]

I got £200 off the new price of a 50D and free 5 year warranty by recognising dealers were breaking up kits; by looking at sites like this;
http://www.canonrumors.com/

(I figured the price wasn't going any lower, and could go up)

but I was already looking for a camera a 5D MKI and noticed the 50D has the same resolution. It is really rather hit and miss, but I also got £200 off a Pixma printer.

You need to look around; Canon knock off money with cash back and some traders don't like old stock, but the printer was the new model. Still crap though.

[Alisa J]

I owned a Nikon D40x an I ugrade to the Nikon D7000 and I love it. I shoot my friend wedding and I use both cameras an the images came out wonderful. The thing about the cameras hitting together is I had one on my shoulder an one around my neck but the d7000 is so heavy you dont want to put around your neck. But the Nikon d7000 is the best way to go if you want to upgrade.

[Geoff F]

Considering what you mostly shoot, Nicola, the 5D should suit you fine.

I spend a lot of time with a 180 mm macro lens plus 1.4x converter on a crop body (40D) and still find that is too short, so it wouldn't suit me.

Prices don't usually fall much when a new lens is introduced; providing the previous model is a popular design and the new replacement is priced significantly higher. In fact when Canon introduced the 60D remaining stocks of the 50D actually tended to increase in price.

[Nicola]

Many thanks to all of you!!!
finally, Ikeep on shooting with my 50D.
when my skill will be grown, and I will feel limited by my camera, I will upgrade it with the one will match best my taste. If I will prefer landscapes, it will be a FF, if I will prefer wildlife or macro, it will be a crop camera...

[rpcrowe]

Nicola,

I have posted a version of this comment before on other threads so please bear with me if you have read something like this before.

The 5Dii is capable of some awesome imagery and is a terrific camera. However, full-frame cameras are not a panacea which will automatically turn mundane images into masterpieces. Your 50D is also an excellent camera. I would advise you to think about in which ways the 50D doesn't work for you and only then, if you know the full-frame camera will correct that dificiency, decide to switch to the 5Dii (or whatever full-frame camera is offered at that time).

I would also suggest that you get a top-quality mid-range zoom to use on your 50D. I shoot about 2/3 of my images with my mid-range zoom and want the best lens possible in this category. IMO, neither the older 28-90mm f/4-5.6 nor even the 17-40L (despite its L designation) are lenses which will get the greatest quality imagery and versatility from a 50D.

Unfortunately, the lenses which are really best for 1.6x cameras are EF-S lenses, starting with the very expensive Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS but, also indlucing Tamron and Sigma mid-range zoom lenses thathave a constant f/2.8 aperture and very-good to excellent image quality. Mid range EF lenses in this category can include the 24-70mm f/2.8L, the 24-105mm f/4L and the less expensive but very good, 28-75mm f/2.8 Tamron.

I shot with a 30D and a 40D camera (in tandem using 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and a 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses) for several years. I now have a 40D and a 7D as my main cameras. However, if my previous pair of cameras was the 40D and 50D, I don't think that I would have upgraded to the 7D. I would have been happy to shoot with the 40D and 50D.

Here are a couple of galleries of 30D and 40D landscape photography using top-line lenses...

http://rpcrowe.smugmug.com/Other/Yos...76105480_znpKf

http://rpcrowe.smugmug.com/Other/DES...64635870_T4zTh

And here are a couple of galleries of travel photography with those lenses...

http://rpcrowe.smugmug.com/Travel/Ch...81463783_tJXQ6

http://rpcrowe.smugmug.com/Other/Chi...81467299_MEpbD

[Nicola]

Richard
many thanks for your great explaination!!!

Your 50D is also an excellent camera. I would advise you to think about in which ways the 50D doesn't work for you and only then, if you know the full-frame camera will correct that dificiency, decide to switch to the 5Dii (or whatever full-frame camera is offered at that time).

up to now, I've never felt myself limited by my 50D, so (as I said in the previous post) I keep my 50D well safe in my hands
About the lenses, you are right, the 28-90mm is an hold cheap lens that I've used only once (it comes from my brother old eos 300N kit), anyway i don't feel the absence of these focal lenghts in my camera bag...

about the 17-40mm :
when I bought it I considered also the 17-55 f/2.8, but I preferred the 17-40 for its higher build quality. I was thinking that the 17-40mm must be "the lens for all the life", and I usually shoot in harsh conditions (frequently on the beach with wind and salt spray!) the tighter aperture and the little softer borders at f/4 than the 17-55 didn't impress me much. when I'm looking for a short DOF, as in portraits, I will use the 50 f/1.8...
I can be wrong, but I think that the 17-40mm can be a good landscape lens too
cheers
Nicola

[dpslbird]

Nicola i dont think i would go with the 5D i think the 60D would be th better one to buy and than get good lens get some f.2.8 lens the 50mmf/1.4 is a very nice lens it is berrer than the 1.8 and check out the 70-200mm 2.8 another very nice lens and also 300mm 400mm lens great lens for landscape and wildlife also the 85mm lens these are very good lens yes you will pay more but its worth every penny ya can pay top dollar for a camera but with out good glass you will not get as good photos haveing said that read the camera manual thats the bigest mistake people do learn your camera get good lens get a nice trypod and a good flash like the speedlight 430 or the 580 ALL are good equipement and a must evan if you have to get them one at a time like i said you will pay more money for the better equipement but its worth it.Go out and shoot and shoot dont let your camera sit on the shelf use it enjoy have fun.DonB Ozz.

[Bill Yeung]

Nicola:
if we keep on seeing reports and reviews on camera and lens, we will keep on troubling ourselves with change or not change, upgrade or not upgrade, how much loss.......
My experience is: I upgrade only when I cannot do something with my existing equipment.
I switch to 7D from 20D is because 7D offers me 8 frames per second for my daughter's skating.
I invest the 70-200 F 2.8L IS USM is because I need to reach further in the ice rink. ( and still not long enough)
so, i no longer compare how much I loss between 20D and 7D.
as I got a main goal - figure skating.
that's why many professional feedback here always ask the first question: what are you photography for? and the rest come under your main goal.

I still browsing around the reviews and product reports only to enjoy the fun in browsing the latest technology, new product, new features.

happy photography.