5d Mark II vs. Mark I vs. 7D Please help!

<p>I am looking for some advice on an upgrade for wedding photography. I currently shoot with a 40D and have the 24-70 L f2.8 and the 70-200 L IS f 2.8 as my primary lenses. I have misc lesser quality zoom lenses in other focal ranges, but shoot very little with them since I love the L glass. I may get a 50mm 1.4 sometime soon. My backup died and with wedding season approaching I need to make a purchase. There are many forums and posts that discuss the three bodies I am considering, but I am looking for some advice for my particular setup. Also, I was excited about the 5D MarkII but have seen quite a few complaints about the AF system in the 5d Mark II and that has raised concerns for me. So, a little about my style: I love to shoot candids and my clients love them too, but I also want tack sharp details and portraits (I want to keep the flexibility of zooms for my work so given my resources I have yet to invest in L primes). I also shoot landscape/scenic shots for fun. So my questions are:</p>

<ol>

<li>I am thinking that having both a crop sensor and a FF would be a awesome for working a wedding. For those of you who shoot weddings do you feel like having both gives you a lot of flexibility? (I would keep the 40D as a backup to the 5D Mark II).</li>

<li>I feel like I am leaning towards FF and thus the 5d Mark II, but have heard and read concerns that it is not as much of an upgrade to the Mark I as some had hoped it would be, especially when considering things like AF. (Note, I do tend to use the center focus point primarily so would I really lose that much if the AF wasn't improved over the Mark I?) Any thoughts on issues raised by previous posters related to the MarkII?</li>

<li>So, to simplify my questions, which should I get? Save some money and get a 5D Mark I used? Or go for the Mark II? Or stick with the xD crop sensor series for now (i.e. buy a 7d or 50D since I need a backup and wait until a new 5D comes out to move to FF)? I cannot afford the 1D series yet. </li>

</ol>

<p>I have poured over the specs and the forums, and the microscopic differences don't worry me too much. I am more concerned with the ability to be creative, to not be limited by my equipment, and deliver great high quality images. I am not worried about the latest and greatest, but do want to spend my money wisely for the features I will use. Sorry to ramble, just thought the detail would help with the discussion. Any advice is greatly appreciated!</p>

<p>I would go for the 5D II. I can't imagine the autofocus is worst than the 5D and it may be sports shooters that are concerned about the AF being poor. I would check one out in a retail store, can't get much worst lighting than that. If autofocus is a concern you could also look at a used 1DsII. </p>

<p>Photography will always be a matter of compromise so get use to that! The 7D has Canon's newer & improved AF and metering (according to Canon) over that of the 5D series. Will that matter to you? Have you found the AF and metering to be preventing your creativity with the 40D? If not, the 5D series won't be any worse and probably a tad better than that of the 40D. The full frame will give you a new and improved FOV with your 24-70. The 24-70 on a cropped sensor is more like 38mm, not exactly wide. You will surprised at how much you have missed not having that wide end (or you could have been shooting with a 17-50 lens). Having siad that, here are my opinions:</p>

<p>1) I prefer cropped sensors for weddings. But then again, my lens selection is geared that way as well. I have the Tokina 11-16, the 17-55, the Sigma 50-150 and so on. Cropped sensors tend to be less expensive which when I look at a cost benefit analysis, I like. I also like the little extra DoF a cropped sensor provides for shooting weddings. If I was shooting only portraits, I would want the shallower DoF of a full frame camera.<br>

2) I don't use any of those cameras. But if you aren't unhappy with the 40D, I can't imagine why you would be unhappy with the 5D series.<br>

3) Personal choice. I prefer to buy my working equipment new. For me it's a matter of how much trust I put into my equipment and used cameras always make me wonder. Not that you can't get a good deal but for me the deal would never be good enough. I was actually wading out into a stream the other day and it really emphasized trusting your gear. I had boots on I trusted! If I didn't, I would have never waded into that stream! Perhaps a silly analogy, but I once I confirm my new gear is working, I trust the way I take care of my gear over buying used.</p>

<p>Another vote for the 5D mark II. It's a fine camera and it does have better ISO performance over the 7D BUT the 7D ISO performance is good. In my little test, it's a little better than the original 5D. The metering and AWB is dean on. I have the 7D and the original 5D. Before the next wedding season starts, you can bet I will have a 5D mk II. The AF performance of your 40D is a tad better than the original 5D. I decided to go with the 7D rather than the mark II because the speed I needed for aircraft shooting and also that I have the 5D still with me. Just to put your mind at ease I have no issues shooting at ISO 3200 with my 7D, provided you expose to the right a little. If I had one choice for a camera to shoot a wedding, it would have to be a FF mark II. Good luck v/r Buffdr </p>

<p>When I decided to do dual format, I chose to to sell a 50, and buy a refurbed 5D. I don't regret it at all. I've used the 5D/II extensively, and frankly wasn't to impressed when compared with the orig.... still a great camera, no doubt, but not significantly better than the 5D. (unless you gimp a lot, or shoot vid. Cause the LCD screen is GORGEOUS compared to the 5D/1 's) In the end, the choice also netted me a 24/1.4 out of the difference between the mk1 & mk2</p>

<p>As far as shooting dual format now? I love the flexibility using a FF and an APS-C format. It allowed me to re introduce myself to what I've been missing since I put my 35mms down for the last time! but I had to give a lot of thought about how it affected my lens choices. I used to carry a 10-22 EFS, 16-35 2.8, 24-70 2.8, and 70-200 2.8, plus 4 -5 primes.<br>

For example, I don't use any EF-S lenses in the field any longer. the closest is the Tammy 10-24, which works great on my 5 and 50, and who's images look better than the 10-22's did (though at less than 15mm on the 5D hard vignetting kicks in)</p>

<p>Now I <em>carry</em> the 24-70, 70-200, 10-24, a 24/1.4, 50 1.4, and 135/2... I can cover the whole range from ~15mm-320mm in zooms, and the eff. capabilities of my primes are 24/1.4, 38/1.4, 50/1.4, 80/1.4, 135/2, & 216/2. That mix might change some, but for now, I'm happy with it. More importantly, I'm <em>comfortable</em> with the system, and it's output. It's become like reaching for the right paintbrush... 'yes, that one will do nicely'</p>

<p>I've got to say though, the biggest single reason I'm considering upgrading the 50 to a 7 is the new AF system, I'll never go back to solely APS-C, and I don't ever see going all FF, the compromises of either choice just aren't currently worth it IMHO.</p>

 

<p>I vote for the 5D MkII and keep your 40D to go dual format. Your lenses will be fantastic with the 5D2, but I suspect you'll want the crop-sensor pretty often. Keep the widest lenses on the 5D2.</p>

<p>A season or two down the road you can replace the 40D with the all new 7D MkII and have the best of all worlds. ;-)</p>

<p><em>"... have seen quite a few complaints about the AF system in the 5d Mark II"</em></p>

<p>The complaints you are reading about typically relate to focus speed for sports and not to wedding photography. There is absolutely, positively nothing wrong the the AF system in the Mark II for ANY type of photography including sports. There are numerous photos posted on this site proving this. Getting great AF out of any camera has a lot to do with technique. I own a body that has 'better' AF performance than the Mark II yet I happily shoot sports with the Mark II and rarely miss a shot due to AF.</p>

<p>There is no doubt that if you have the money you should go with the Mark II over the Mark I (for the purposes of event photography) - the superb monitor is worth the additional cost alone especially if you are getting paid for your photos.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I think the real issue is whether you can deal with dual format and the extra stress of having your backup body being different from your main body. The 5D2 will give you a lot more on the wide end of your zoom and much shallower depth of field for otherwise equivalent shots. Also, you probably can skip the hassle of the 50/1.4 with the 5D2, although it really is a terrific little lens. I think that AF performance and image quality will be fine either way, but extreme conditions and print sizes/crops will tend to favor the 7D and 5D2 respectively.</p>

"I have poured over the specs and the forums, and the microscopic differences don't worry me too much. I am more concerned with the ability to be creative, to not be limited by my equipment, and deliver great high quality images. " - Kaila

<p>In that case, I would certainly go for the 5D2. The 5D1 is a solid performer, but in your case, you will have more longevity going for the Mark II. It might have been a different case if you already had a 5D1 and was considering a 5D2. I have the Mark II and I also use a crop body(400D/XTi). They are miles apart in terms of user interface, but I like the leverage a dual-format kit gives me with my lens cache. Your two primary lenses would definitely stand to benefit from this. 24 is truly wide on a 5D/2, and 200 is truly long on a 40D :)

<p>Don't believe all the hype about AF speed issues. Granted it's not 1D3 fast, or even 7D fast, but more than sufficient for wedding work. It certainly is not slow! High ISO performance is simply stunning.

<p>5D1 or 5D2 will be good enough. I had both and kept the 5D1 for photography purposes only. 5D2 has video and a great screen and some other features. 5D1 is old but kicks crop size for me.<br>

Best, <br /> Diego.</p>

<p>What about a used 5d mk1 or even 1ds MK2 (much better AF and film-like quality at iso 50). I would not give up the second body, having two bodies with different lenses can help alot you work, candid portraits and wide scenes without the need to change. If I understand your needs I don't think you need all the features of the 5d MK2 since what is missing in MK1 is probably the liveview (very usefull for macro and still-life)...well many other features but not so important. And of course Mk2 can reach higher iso than mk1 but I would not pay so much more only for1-2 stops of light. And your lenses are quite luminous. And I dont think 12 MP resolution is an issue for wedding photography...A yes...movie. Do you have a videocamera for that? If not, the mk2 can be worth the money, suited for the short movies of weddings...no one would ever watch a 3 hour movie of his/her friend wedding without at least thinking of suicide berfore!</p>