Ready to upgrade. 50D or 5D mk I?

<p>I've been using a rebel xti for about 3 years now and I'm ready to upgrade. This comes on the heels of a friend asking me to shoot his wedding ceremony this summer, but I don't really want to get into that. I've never done a wedding before, and not sure if I'll do more in the future. What I like doing most is small venue concerts (low light, mostly rock shows) and also landscapes/seascapes. I'm also going to try to get more into portraits this year (high school seniors, musician promos, families, etc). It's a pretty mixed bag, I know, and there's no one camera that's perfect for everything.<br>

I'm hoping to begin profiting more from my photography. I currently sell seascape prints in a local giftshop (5x7s, 8x10s, some larger canvas prints), but most other shoots have been done free for friends. I'm not a full time professional right now, more of a hobbyist trying to start a side career.<br>

For examples, you can see some of my work at www.albiesphotography.com. <br>

My current gear is as follows...</p>

<ul>

<li>canon ef 16-35mm 2.8 mk1</li>

<li>canon ef 50mm 1.8 mk1</li>

<li>canon ef 28mm 1.8</li>

<li>canon ef 85mm 1.8</li>

<li>canon ef-s 18-55 (kit)</li>

</ul>

<p>I've got almost all EF lenses, but I'm not sure about going FF. I'm trying to decide where to go from here. I've got a friend who buys/sells used gear, and he's got a 50D and a 5D mk1 for good prices ($625 and $995 respectively).<br>

I guess I'm just looking for advice/opinions on which to buy. Price isn't too much of an issue, but I don't want to spend a ton of money on gear when I'm not ready to go full-time.<br>

I'm leaning towards the 50D. Is that a worthwhile upgrade? Or would a 5D mkI make that much more of a difference having FF? Which will produce better images? Any other suggestions?<br>

All opinions are appreciated. Thank you.</p>

 

<p>When I upgraded from the XTi, it was directly into a 50D. Even though it blew away the XTi in nearly every respect, I found that the high ISO noise limited what I expected to be able to do with it. It's strengths were really it's speed, and control layout more than anything (over the rebel). Within a month I bought a 5D to go w/ it, and immediately preferred it in almost every respect to the 50D. Even though it is positively glacial compared to the 50D, it's IQ is vastly better, and if you plan on: <em>" small venue concerts (low light, mostly rock shows) and also landscapes/seascapes. I'm also going to try to get more into portraits this year (high school seniors, musician promos, families, etc).</em>" You'll see a tangible benefit in the 5D's performance immediately.</p>

<p>The bottom line is that the 5D is designed from the ground up to be the camera you use for exactly those circumstances, whereas the 50D is designed to be more of a 'jack of all trades', and is fast enough to be quite competent at many of them. Personally, I'd recommend skipping the 50D and going straight to a good condition 5D. Older? yes. Slower? yes. But far more capable of extremely high quality output. And frankly, you already have the glass you'll need which is really 2/3's of the battle when it comes to upgrading to FF.</p>

<p>I would add into the mix looking at a brand new T2i. I really love it's output and it's rear LCD is first class. Plus you can get a new camera with newer (generationally speaking) tech for about $550.</p>

<p>The 5D will blow the 50D away in low light.<br>

I have owned both at the same time and would never select the 50D over the 5D in low light situations.</p>

 

<p>Your lenses are oriented toward a crop sensor camera, so I'd suggest staying with a crop sensor until you're in a position to invest in lenses suited to a FF body.</p>

<p>As a seller of prints and licensing images, getting into larger file sizes will result in higher potential sales prices and royalties. You images are very nice, so you should start gathering as many quality pixels as possible in each image. Your shooting lends itself well to a 5D MkII where you jpeg file sizes would be up around 18 and 20MB. The value of a 20MB image is several times that of a 3MB image (really the minimum image size for commercial work). Given your budget right now, you're not ready for that step, but the quality of your images is such that you should start thinking about maximizing file size and image detail with whichever body that you move to.</p>

<p>Thank you guys very much for your thoughts.</p>

<p>Marcus, sounds like you were in my exact position, so your input is very valuable. Randy, I actually did consider a T3i, but I want to get away from the Rebel series for the controls and more durability. David, my lenses actually are oriented for a FF body (they are EF as opposed to EF-S). But your thoughts and advice sound right on.</p>

<p>I am now leaning towards the 5D. I think I would really like the low light performance, and I don't think I need much speed (FPS). Going to meet with the seller to check out both.</p>

<p>One last question... Seeing as the 5D is now 2 generations old, does its' FF sensor still outperform that of a newer 50D or even a 7D in terms of image quality? (which I could find used for about $200-$300 more).</p>

<p>Albie, I am in the exact same boat as you right now, Im waffling over a 5D or 50D. I have pretty much decided to go with the older 5D due to it having a better IQ and lower noise at higher ISO's. It sounds like the shooting you are planning to do will be better served by the 5D. If you dont mind me saying so, your friends prices are just a tad bit on the high side. Not by a lot mind you, but I have been cruising craigslist now for weeks looking at these two and you can generally find 50D's as low as $500 and 5D's as low as $700, some with (claimed) low shutter counts and accessories like battery grips. One thing you might look at on 5D's is the serial number. They should either start with a 0, 1, 2, or 3. Zeros are the oldest and the rest should tell you the year it was made, like this...</p>

<p>1= 2006<br /> 2=2007<br /> 3=2008</p>

<p>You can use this to get an idea of how old the body is. I have heard that some of the 2006 models had a lcd screen with a little bit of a green tint to it. Never really seen it myself, maybe some others here have actually experienced that. Anyway, good luck with whatever you go with. You might try checking out these flickr groups for some idea on what the cameras are capable of.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/5d/">http://www.flickr.com/groups/5d/</a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/canoneos50d/">http://www.flickr.com/groups/canoneos50d/</a></p>

<p>And here is a shot from the 5D group of an inside music venue that the exif data claims was shot at 3200 iso. If your not familiar with how to check exif info on flickr, just look up at the top right where it shows what camera was used to take the photo and click on the camera name. Not all photos have this listed, but most do.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/couttsphotog/6870256254/in/pool-944136@N25/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/couttsphotog/6870256254/in/pool-944136@N25/</a></p>

<blockquote>

<p>I would really like the low light performance</p>

</blockquote>

<p>With the 5D, you would really see luminance noise at ISO 1250 and up in low light captures. In low light, you may at times see the dreaded banding in the navy to black areas. All three of my 5D's exhibited the same issues. I've since sold them all. So, if you use f/1.8 lenses, you may not need to use ISO 1250 or higher in most concert and wedding situations.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>you can generally find 50D's as low as $500 and 5D's as low as $700, some with (claimed) low shutter counts and accessories like battery grips.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I've been shopping around for a while as well, but I haven't seen prices that low. What I've seen is on par with what my seller is offering. I did see a 5D with grip included for the same price, but I don't know the condition, and this seller is trustworthy.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Seeing as the 5D is now 2 generations old, does its' FF sensor still outperform that of a newer 50D or even a 7D in terms of image quality?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, if taken on a pixel by pixel basis. Take a look at 100% crops from a 5D next to a 50D or 7D and you'll see what I mean. But of course that's <strong>not</strong> the whole story. In practical use, in 'simple IQ' terms you likely won't see much difference, mostly because the crops make up for it by throwing LOTS of pixels at the problem - which increases the effectiveness of NR dramatically (of course that comes with a penalty in fine detail). Where you will see a HUGE difference is in things like portraiture, where you want both fine detail, and fine DOF control (both weak areas on the 50D and 7D), and when you want the flexibility to go wide (16mm ~ 26mm eff. FOV on the crop - def. NOT an UWA). I'm not saying the 50D and 7D aren't perfectly capable of fulfilling your requirements, but given what you say you like to (and aim to) shoot, the 5D is likely going to give you better results.</p>

<p>However, be careful what you buy. While neither of my 5Ds suffered from what Peter described (very underexposed areas came out quite well blended for me), there were several issues throughout the production period that cropped up, things like the mirror coming loose, dark/greenish LCD, etc. Like I said, both of mine never had a problem (other than the mirror of course), and went on to shoot many many weddings, even at ISO 1600 to 3200. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>My brother has a 50D, and I sold my 40D and bought a 5D. I am into landscape and portrait work and find the 5D to be a great FF camera for the money. I paid just over a grand for mine about 2 years ago, and have not had one issue with it yet. Having said this, I bought my 5D from a very reputable dealer in Eastern Canada, and it came with a warranty for 3 months. I don't think I will ever go back to a crop camera now that i have had a taste of FF. In terms of lenses, I have:<br>

70-200 f4 IS L, 85 1.8, 50 1.8 mk I, 100 macro USM, and 17-40L.<br>

So I have a number of lenses that you have, Albie, and they all perform magnificently on my 5D body. Get the 5D and don't look back. I shot a wedding using the 5D (as a second shooter), and the images I produced were as good as the Photographer I was working with, or better. The parents of the groom even made a comment along the lines of "Why did we hire the pro?" after they saw what I produced. Good luck.</p>

<p>With the lenses you have a full frame camera will offer angles of view not possible with a crop body and the same lenses. Namely, ultra-wide-angle from 16mm to roughly 24mm.</p>

<p>Go have a look at the just released <strong>Nikon D3200</strong> before making any firm decision. Unbelievable how the price of high megapixel sensors have come down for Nikon.</p>

<p>While your lenses are mostly EF and will work on the 5D their FOV will change and become more "wide angle". Your 16-35 is a normal zoom on the XTi but is a wide angle on on the 5D. However, I agree with the others - for low light work a 5D would be better - I have the Xti, 50D, 7D and 5DII. The 50D performs much better than the XTi but I wouldn't say the IQ is significantly better.</p>

<p>I like the 85mm f/1.8 a lot on the FF camera but it won't be as "long" as it is on your XTi. Perhaps a lightly used 5D with a 24-70 f/2.8 or 135 f/2?</p>

<p>Cheers, Bob</p>

<p>Thanks again for all of your thoughts. I went ahead and got the 5D. Excited to see what I can do with it. </p>