60D/T2i to 5D Mk II-Worth the trade-up?

[WilsonFlyer]

OK folks. The question pretty much speaks for itself. WDWFigment really got me thinking after seeing the deal he found on his new Nikon D700.

There are some STEALS out there on the 5D Mk II since Canon has announced and shipped the 5D Mk III.

I am heavily invested in lenses for the Canon crop cameras. As a matter of fact, I don't own a non-crop lens.

Hence this question. Would YOU throw out the baby with the bathwater and go FF since you can do it for a steal right now. Would you be disappointed in "yesterday's technology" if you already owned a T2i and/or a 60D?

I've always dreamed of FF and this might be one of those rare affordable opportunities to jump in but there's a lot of gear to sell and replace too.

WWYD? I've got to believe that some of you guys have done this, are doing this, or are at least considering it.

 

[nvtsallo]

I am no pro. I would ask yourself are you seeing too much noise at iso 800-3200 in your photo's?

Do you have a need for a larger DOF?

Can you live with a center point auto focus?

If your answer is yes then I think I would get the 5d mark ii and then when the 5d mark iii comes down yours will still retain value since it is full frame. I think for disney it would be a great camera except if you were trying to grab focus on some passing on the dumbo ride. You would have to be very accurate there. I definetly know that there is not a whole lot of difference in IQ from the 5d mark ii to the 5d mark iii that would make a difference for vacations. I just needed the autofocus of the 5d mark iii since I have active twins. You do also lose that built in 1.6 teleconverter of a crop sensor so you will have to look at what focal lengths you shoot

 

[photo_chick]

IMO the 5DmkII is not an upgrade from the T2i/T3i/60D and definitely not from the 7D. All you really gain with the 5DmkII is a tiny bit better ISO performance and one stop. The 5DmkII was a great camera when it came out, but it's dated now. I shoot with a 50D right now and am getting a 5DkIII asap but I've got no desire to get the mkII. It's not worth the price for what little I'd gain. But that is subjective.

On depth of field... the actual depth of field when focal length (actual focal length measurement in the lens), distance to subject and aperture are the same on both cameras will be the same. The math does not change. You do not apply the crop factor to that formula. When it changes is when you want to frame the exact same shot with both cameras. You have to either change your distance to subject or your focal length to frame the same shot with both formats so that changes the math. You can always change the aperture to keep the same depth of field. Also, the perception of depth of field, or what is acceptably sharp, will change some depending on output method and size.

I think if a camera has a good resale value or not depends more on the demand of the camera and less on if it's full frame or not.

Edited to add... I've been able to play with the 5DmkII and mkIII side by side recently. In the world of low light and night photography the 5DmkIII most definitely is a big step up in ISO performance and consequently image quality over the 5DmkII and all of the current Canon crop cameras.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

"Is it worth it" questions are value judgments. The answer depends on many things that only you know.

I own a 7D, a 5DM2, and a 5DM3. The 5DM3 is so new that I can't really comment on it. Between the 7D and the 5DM2, there are lots of differences. The 7D has much better handling (better controls, better AF). The 5DM2 has much better image quality. Except in rare cases where I really need the extra "reach" of the cropped sensor or really need better AF, I always choose the 5DM2. I find the IQ to be significantly better, particularly as ISO increases.

 

[nvtsallo]

IMO the 5DmkII is not an upgrade from the T2i/T3i/60D and definitely not from the 7D. All you really gain with the 5DmkII is a tiny bit better ISO performance and one stop. The 5DmkII was a great camera when it came out, but it's dated now. I shoot with a 50D right now and am getting a 5DkIII asap but I've got no desire to get the mkII. It's not worth the price for what little I'd gain. But that is subjective.

On depth of field... the actual depth of field when focal length (actual focal length measurement in the lens), distance to subject and aperture are the same on both cameras will be the same. The math does not change. You do not apply the crop factor to that formula. When it changes is when you want to frame the exact same shot with both cameras. You have to either change your distance to subject or your focal length to frame the same shot with both formats so that changes the math. You can always change the aperture to keep the same depth of field. Also, the perception of depth of field, or what is acceptably sharp, will change some depending on output method and size.

I think if a camera has a good resale value or not depends more on the demand of the camera and less on if it's full frame or not.

Edited to add... I've been able to play with the 5DmkII and mkIII side by side recently. In the world of low light and night photography the 5DmkIII most definitely is a big step up in ISO performance and consequently image quality over the 5DmkII and all of the current Canon crop cameras.

Forget math. I was answer her question inmo. I currently have the 60d and the 5d mk iii. Like i said they were asking the current value in buying te 5d mk ii compared to the deal someone got on the nikon d700. I would think age is not the point here. When you climb past iso 800 on these apsc camera's there is much more noise than the ff sensors. Also if they are shooting with a current crop camera and get a similar focal length lens then they have to increase their fstop and iso sensitivity to acheive the same shutter speed. Like i said if they can live with the lower focusing system the shooting in lower light will give them at least a stop to a stop and a half cleaner iso performance. As for resale it will retain better than apsc since they are flooded with the ilc market. Ff does not have as fast of a rev cycle. Sorry i have no clue what i'm talking about.

 

[photo_chick]

Forget math. I was answer her question inmo. I currently have the 60d and the 5d mk iii. Like i said they were asking the current value in buying te 5d mk ii compared to the deal someone got on the nikon d700. I would think age is not the point here. When you climb past iso 800 on these apsc camera's there is much more noise than the ff sensors. Also if they are shooting with a current crop camera and get a similar focal length lens then they have to increase their fstop and iso sensitivity to acheive the same shutter speed. Like i said if they can live with the lower focusing system the shooting in lower light will give them at least a stop to a stop and a half cleaner iso performance. As for resale it will retain better than apsc since they are flooded with the ilc market. Ff does not have as fast of a rev cycle. Sorry i have no clue what i'm talking about.

Have you shot with a 5DmkII?

And some of the things you're saying don't make sense. I've used crop and full frame... thanks to freinds all the cameras in question actually, and yeah, some of what you're saying makes it seem like you have some misconceptions.

 

[nvtsallo]

Have you shot with a 5DmkII?

And some of the things you're saying don't make sense. I've used crop and full frame... thanks to freinds all the cameras in question actually, and yeah, some of what you're saying makes it seem like you have some misconceptions.

I have since a friend has one and i liked it less the ergonomics and the focus/metering. Either way you could have just answered the threads question with your opinion and leave insulting my skill or knowledge out. If your to say the 60d and t2i performance is better then your getting more out of an aps sensor than any of us.

 

[traylorc]

I have since a friend has one and i liked it less the ergonomics and the focus/metering. Either way you could have just answered the threads question with your opinion and leave insulting my skill or knowledge out. If your to say the 60d and t2i performance is better then your getting more out of an aps sensor than any of us.

Personally I don't think Photochick was insulting your skill or knowledge...you made the comment in your prior post "sorry I have no clue what I'm talking about". IMHO that comment seemed to imply that you were not talking from an informed perspective. And to be honest, I was little confused after reading that exact same post.

 

[photo_chick]

I have since a friend has one and i liked it less the ergonomics and the focus/metering. Either way you could have just answered the threads question with your opinion and leave insulting my skill or knowledge out. If your to say the 60d and t2i performance is better then your getting more out of an aps sensor than any of us.

I wasn't meaning to insult but what you said wasn't accurate. It was relative to the discussion at hand and your opinions do not exist in a vacuum when you post them on a message board.

I never said the sensor performance was better on the 60D or T2i than the 5DmkII, go back and reread that. And there is more that affects the quality of the image you get out of a camera than just the sensor. 90% of a great shot is the photographer and not the camera. What you use isn't nearly as important as how you use it.

It's all subjective anyway. What I think isn't a big leap up someone else might think is a necessity.

 

[nvtsallo]

Either way maybe it was misinterpreted on my questions in the earlier post but I just went thru the same struggle and feel my next trip to wdw will be better with a ff camera and if the budget is only for the 5d mark ii then that would be my recommendation. It is a personal choice and i understand that but i think that a personal message for clarification would have been more respectful and left the comments on topic. I was just stating that i felt like I started off with a much shallower dof with thr 60d and now I am finding out in need a little more reach with my 5d3.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

I kinda stayed out of this thread because of some of the discussions that ensued that were off on a tangent somewhat.

I did want to do those that offered advice the courtesy of letting them know that I did actively monitor the thread for information and in my final decision (much to the credit of those that shared willingly and openly here) was to "go big or go home."

I'm sticking with my 60D for now and saving up my quarters for a MkIII. A man's gotta have a dream, right? LOL It's only a hobby to me ant that's likely all it will ever be. As my DD7 ages and gets more into soccer and tennis, I will re-evaluate my needs as technology changes.

Thanks for your help!

 

[bob100]

I'm sticking with my 60D for now and saving up my quarters for a MkIII. A man's gotta have a dream, right? LOL It's only a hobby to me ant that's likely all it will ever be. As my DD7 ages and gets more into soccer and tennis, I will re-evaluate my needs as technology changes.

Thanks for your help!

nothing wrong with playing it safe

I get great soccer pics from my much older Canon Rebel XSi /450D

 

[mom2rtk]

Great shot Bob!

Isn't shooting sports a lot of fun? I've been shooting tennis this spring..... you know..... through a fence. Yuck.

Congrats on your decision WilsonFlyer. I like the "go big or go home" style. Of course, this from the person who upgraded from Xsi to T2i 2 years ago. Although for me the added ISO was HUGE. Since you have that already, I'd hold off too.

 

[KCmike]

WilsonFlyer I just caught up with you on the 60d. My next move will be for better glass.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

WilsonFlyer I just caught up with you on the 60d. My next move will be for better glass.

Yep. That was part of the challenge. I have already built up a decent collection of glass since I've had Rebels since their inception, and a LOT of them are EF-S. Good for APS-C. BAD for full frame. At the end of the day, I just couldn't wrap my arms around selling all my glass for significantly less than I Gave for most of it and opting to buy new on FF lenses or chance buying used. Too many variables I can't control. Besides, I LOVE my 60D. I don't really have any complaints, other than it doesn't have micro lens tuning. I still can't figure out why they left that out.

I have another issue that's personal with me. I don't like Compact Flash. Never have. Never will. Not readily available anymore. Too spendy for the same reason. Plus, I just dont' like'em. Been there. Done that. Yesterday's technology as far as I'm concerned. I know the pros still swear by it but I still contend that it's mostly because that's what their cameras have always used and they don't know any better. I've never seen a legitimate and substantiated profile showing where CF was more reliable than SDHC. I like the little ones. Easier to lose!

Thanks everybody. Maybe I'll take the quarters I've already put away for the MkII upgrade and splurge on the 70-100 IS 2.8 I've been dreaming about. Makes a lovely gift for my upcoming June trip.