Original 5D vs new crop camera

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by charcoal_happy, Jan 12, 2012.

  1. What is the better deal: a used 5D classic or a new mid-range crop camera like 60D ?
    I'm not so much interested in speed. What counts for me is the optical quality, not so much the mechanics of the body.
     
  2. The better question is, "which format is better for me?"​
    Obviously, the bigger the better!
    I'm comparing two generation cameras of two different formats. Your tip doesn't really help much.
     
  3. 5D classic gives better DoF given the larger sensor size. It also gives a wider FoV given the larger sensor.
     
  4. I think the thing to consider is what your primary needs are. If you want low noise at high ISOs, the original 5D is not the camera for you; a 60D or 7D would do better. The 5D is usable up to ISO 1600, but I wouldn't push it to 3200. If you want fast burst mode shooting, the 5D is not what you want. On the other hand, if you want superb image quality mostly in the ISO 100 to 800 range, the 5D is still an excellent camera.
     
  5. I don't own the 60D, I do own a 30D, 7D and 5D. Comparing the 5D with the 30D is a no brainer. Comparing the 5D with the 7D becomes a little bit more difficult. The 7D has 18MG pixels(the same as the 60D) compared to the 12.8MG pixels of the 5D.
    As far as resolution is concerned, yes the 7D gives me better resolution than the 5D. However the 5D gives me a little bit more depth, I guess this is due to the Full Frame sensor. By depth I just don't mean DOF, but that the entire image takes on a more 3D type quality. The differences are real subtle and it depends allot on what your are shooting.
    The newer cameras(7D/60D) have allot more doo-dads, some which can be very beneficial to your style of shooting. The newer cameras also have a much better play-back screen than the one on the 5D, plus faster shutter speeds, better AF, Live View, Auto sensor cleaning etc.
    What I like about the 5D is its simplicity. Not allot of menus and buttons to get you confused. If you are the type of photographer who just likes to set the shutter speed and aperture, you will love the 5D.
     
  6. 5D classic gives better DoF given the larger sensor size.​
    For "better", read "shallower". It's only better if shallow DOF is what you want. For portraits this is often the case. For landscapes it usually isn't, and for macro work you often want as much DOF as you can get.
    It also gives a wider FoV given the larger sensor.​
    Yes, and this is good for ultra-wides, but not so good for super-telephotos. It all depends on one's needs. If I spent all my time shooting small birds with a 5D and a 600mm lens, I could definitely be tempted to switch to a 7D and a 400mm lens. The savings in money and weight would be well worthwhile. But I'm more interested in ultra-wides than super-telephotos, and the effect of a crop camera on a full-frame 15mm fisheye is truly depressing. That's one reason I prefer full-frame, but other people with different needs may reach different conclusions.
     
  7. Better deal? I'd go for the full frame 5D anytime. It may be old but still delivers excellent shots. And a used 5D isn't that expensive either!
     
  8. I have two old digital cameras- the 5D and a old 20D. Both are good in their own way. I use telephotos on the 20D and wide-angle and regular on the 5D - best of two worlds.
    Buy the 5D AND get an older APS-C camera (20D to 40D) too.
    I will say that the last time I looked, the 5Ds had maintained their value very well and you'd still pay what I paid a couple of years ago.
    Of course, if you need or want video, you have to get a newer 'crop' camera for your money.
     
  9. Obviously, the bigger the better!​
    Yes, obviously! That's why my truck is better than my sports car!
     
  10. Have you used both full-frame and 1.6-crop cameras? If not then borrow one or both to try them out. I find the larger viewfinder on a full frame camera makes taking pictures more enjoyable. That is entirely a personal preference so you should try for yourself.
    If you enjoy buying and using cheaper, older, second-hand lenses then there is certainly a bigger choice of wide-angle to normal perspectives for full frame. If you like to have new lenses then Canon is equally happy to take your money and sell you an excellent lens for either format.
     
  11. Obviously, the bigger the better!​
    If that's obvious to you, then I don't understand why you started this thread. Just buy the 5D and be done with it.
    Personally I have always prefered smaller, lighter cameras. For that reason alone, I can't see myself ever switching from APS-C to FF. But as Sarah pointed out, for most folks it's horses for causes.
     
  12. Also consider that a used 5D will have some amount of mileage on it while a new 60D will be under warranty. And also put some thought into what lenses you plan to mount on it. The format chosen can have a significant impact on not only budget but size/weight of your kit. The 60D will also have more features such as live view, video capture, and a built-in popup flash.
    Charcoal, in another thread you said "I do own a digital full frame body with some lovely L glass". Is your question whether to sell that body and trade for a smaller-sensored body?
     
  13. I'm sorry, but Sarah was right. You need to decide which format fits you best before we can answer which camera is "better."
    I own both a 5D2 and a 7D and use both A LOT (50,000 clicks on each). They're better at different things.
     
  14. I have a 5D and a 7D. If I had to give up one of them, the 5D would have to go
     
  15. I have a 5D and a 7D. If I had to give one up, the 7D would go.
     
  16. I have a 5D. I had a 60D. The 60D is gone.
     
  17. I have a 5D2, the 7D, and the 1D4. If one had to go, it would be the 5D2, even though I love the camera. For wildlife, whatever camera lets you fill the frame with your subject is the best, and it is tough filling the 5D2. However, if I shot mostly landscapes, the 7D would be the first to go. If I only got to keep one... I'd go with the 7D (as shocking as that sounds). As much as I love the 1D4, the APS-C sensor and the pixel density on the 7D is very, very hard to beat for wildlife work.
    In other words, this all depends on what glass you already have and what you are shooting. For landscape/portraits/still-lifes, the 5D is a no-brainer so long as long as you have the glass for it. However, for action/wildlife, the 60D wins in heartbeat. You probably shoot a mix, so picking between the two will be a bit difficult.
     
  18. I presume you mean the Canon 5D....I've never heard of a 5D Classic so I don't think there was a special release.
    It depends on what you're after. The 60D will provide higher resolution, pretty much equal dynamic range, better AF, higher frame rate, live view, HD Video, better LCD and allows access to a larger array of lenses.
    About the only advantage you'll get with the 5D is a shallower DOF, which can sometimes be useful in portraiture. If you're doing landscape work, then you can obtain higher resolution prints from the 60D. Despite what some people claim, the 60D / 7D provides higher resolution than the 5D regardless of the 5D having a FF sensor. The subject of resolution is not open to debate as tests prove the point. I've made large prints from both....no contest....the 60D wins.
    Finally, the 60D new, with warranty, will run you the same or less than that used 5D with some miles on the shutter.
     
  19. Sarah's original question is actually the right one.
    Generally full frame cameras are better suited for wideangle photography, like architecture and landscapes, and crop bodies are better suited for telephoto photography, like sports and wildlife.
    My preference is to have one of each which I did for four years. However, I just sold both bodies to get one 5D II. Full frame is more important to me and I could not pass on the price. It performs well enough to get me through a year of sports as well, until I can justify a used 50D or 7D to go with it.
    So, which end of the photographic spectrum is more important to you?
     
  20. The 7D looks like the superior camera to me. The 5D is ancient tech, even if the sensor is bigger.
     
  21. I sold my 40D, and bought a 5D. I do not regret the decision, because I am into landscapes and portrait work. I find I get better details with my 5D than I did with my 40D. Like most people are saying, it depends what you shoot. If you shoot wide you want to look at the 5D. If you shoot sports and nature stuff, you would want a 60D/ 7D. I cannot express how much I enjoy the shallow depth of field that you get with the 5D. If you are considering portraiture, then i would definitely get the 5D. As far as prices in Canada, I saw a used 5D in a local camera store with fairly low shutter actuations, and it was prices at $750. To me that is a great price. I have also heard that full frame cameras lend themselves better to long exposure work as well. I love shooting long exposures, and find they have been coming out better on my 5D than they did on my 40D. Good luck.
     
  22. The original 5D is a fine camera that can deliver superb results. Only downside is the rear screen kinda sucks. Especially compared to late model camera.
     
  23. What counts for me is the optical quality, not so much the mechanics of the body​
    Neither has any optics at all (except of course for the VF). In either case the optical quality of the lenses will matter, probably far more than the camera body.
    OTOH, perhaps you DO mean the VF, in that case, the 5D is the clearly superior choice ;-)
     
  24. I have a 7D. I wouldn't have a 5D if it was a gift.
     
  25. horses for causes.​
    "courses"
     
  26. 5D is a plastic camera inside so if you buy it used you never know
    when it is going to stop working.
     
  27. Either is capable of great IQ. The 5D doesn't do live view, auto iso, movies, or RAW+JPG. Its auto white balance sucks. For an old film guy like me, it's the perfect digital camera. For Today's Photographic Youth, I think it might be pretty frustrating.
     
  28. "I have a 7D. I wouldn't have a 5D if it was a gift."
    Really?
     
  29. The 5D is usable up to ISO 1600...​
    That's pretty high.
    The newer cameras also have a much better play-back screen than the one on the 5D, plus faster shutter speeds, better AF, Live View, Auto sensor cleaning etc.​
    All those things are mechanical, not optical. I'm more interested in dof control, low light capability, granulation, sharpness, color separation and dynamic range.
    If you want fast burst mode shooting, the 5D is not what you want.​
    Neither is a 60D or anything in the same or lower price range.
    On the other hand, if you want superb image quality mostly in the ISO 100 to 800 range...​

    Yes indeed!
    When shopping for a used camera, how do you check the shutter's lifespan? How much does it cost to replace a worn shutter?
     
  30. Charcoal, in another thread you said "I do own a digital full frame body with some lovely L glass". Is your question whether to sell that body and trade for a smaller-sensored body?​
    No, the question is whether a new generation crop camera outperforms an older generation full frame optically, not mechanically.
    Neither has any optics at all (except of course for the VF). In either case the optical quality of the lenses will matter, probably far more than the camera body.​
    Last time I tried some gear, the 50mm 1.8 on a full frame body outperformed an L lens on a crop body.
    Generally full frame cameras are better suited for wideangle photography, like architecture and landscapes, and crop bodies are better suited for telephoto photography, like sports and wildlife.​
    My photography is both wide and tele. Which body is better if you can only have one camera, a new 60D or a used 5D?
     
  31. This thread is getting sort of funny. OK, here you go, spoon-fed to you:
    DoF control: The 5D wins. Any full frame camera wins over any crop camera. It's explained in the useless article I wrote.
    Optics: Camera bodies do not have optics, other than the viewfinder. The 5D's viewfinder wins. This was explained in one of the responses you quote.
    Sharpness: Depends mostly on the lens. Explained in the useless article.
    Low light capability and dynamic range: Depends somewhat on generation, but also on photosite size and well depth. Explained in the usless article.
    Color separation: I have no idea what you mean by this.
    Granulation: (noise?) Read the useless article.
    Of course the 5D is also bigger in most respects, so that's obviously better, right?.
    FAIW, lots of claims are made about the image quality superiority of recent generations over earlier generations, but in practice, I haven't seen it. There is clearly advancement in low light capabilities, the user interfaces have improved, and processing has gotten faster. Other than that, the cameras seem much the same to me. Even my ancient 10D took a pretty nice image. The IQ differences, if any, are more related to noise reduction algorithms, which are somewhat irrelevant to photographers who work with raw images.
    My thoughts about specific models: The 5D is a VERY nice camera. I love mine. I have no desire to buy a 7D and am very happy with my 40D for my APS-C needs. I will probably be upgrading to a 5DII for its higher ISO capabilities in the intermediate future. (If Charcoal is smart, Charcoal might ask him/herself, "Hmmmm... Why does Sarah use both a full frame AND an APS-C camera... and also even a compact G11?" Anwers are in the useless article.)
    If you are particular about image quality, your best investment is in glass. If you want versatility, your best investment is in a larger format. If you want good pictures, start by educating yourself. Good photographs are only 10% about the equipment and 90% about knowing how to use it.
     
  32. As to your questions regarding shutter count, there are a couple of utilities out there to do so. All are provided by the user community and none are what I would call actively maintained, but some googling should get you what you need.
    As for how long a shutter should last, we really don't know. Canon publishes some figures, but as there are dozens of way to express expected failure time (and Canon's figures are all suspiciously round), we really don't know what they mean, much less if they are even real. Based on what I have seen, shutters either fail pretty early on in their lifetime or keep working for years. And if you have to get one replaced, depending on your body (and what else is wrong with your camera, as Canon and most reputable services places will only service your body if they can fix everything), you should budget $250ish.
     
  33. When it comes to using telephoto lens in focal length challenged situations (like wildlife) the 7D offers superior detail and high-ISO performance compared to the 5D, if that's the kind of answer you want. Matched with the right lenses, the 7D will be every bit as good as the 5D1 at scenics.
    You said:
    Last time I tried some gear, the 50mm 1.8 on a full frame body outperformed an L lens on a crop body.​
    Even today that's NOT TRUE in general. It could be true, but depending on the application. Even the 5D2 doesn't match the 7D's detail in focal length challenged situations. Once again, no one camera is "the best" at all applications. You have to decide how you're going to use your camera and then make a decision. There will likely be compromise with some issues that you deem less important for you.
     
  34. >>> I have a 5D and a 7D. If I had to give one up, the 7D would go.

    I have a 5DII and iPhone 4s. If I had one to give up, the 7D would go.
     
  35. ^^^ some nice results from that little 4s! :)
     
  36. No, the question is whether a new generation crop camera outperforms an older generation full frame optically, not mechanically.
    Canon's 18 MP APS-C sensor is superior to their 12 MP FF sensor. This is a fact, not an opinion, proven by tests which can be replicated and were performed by reputable sites such as DPReview and Imaging Resource.
    That said the two sensors are fairly close, and differences in print will only be noticed under certain combinations of subject matter and print size. Printing 24" landscapes? The 18 MP sensor is noticeably better. Printing 10" portraits? You will never see a difference.
    I'm more interested in dof control, low light capability, granulation, sharpness, color separation and dynamic range.
    The FF sensor will give you more shallow DoF with current lenses. The 18 MP sensor has superior low light capability. When viewed appropriately (i.e. both scaled to 12 MP or to 18 MP) the 18 MP sensor has superior noise characteristics. Sharpening is a variable heavily influenced by camera settings and/or post work. But even if we assume the same level of sharpening the 18 MP sensor will generally yield greater sharpness due to the resolution advantage. (When resolution is the same or close a FF sensor yields greater sharpness, but the difference in either case is within the range of software to eliminate.) The 18 MP sensor has slightly better DR. And regardless of what anyone claims, there are simply no human observable differences in color. Camera settings, post processing, lens biases, source light, printing technology, and even choice of paper all exceed sensor color differences by one or more orders of magnitude.
     
  37. Sharpness: Depends mostly on the lens. Explained in the useless article.​
    Depends also on photosite size imo.
    Color separation: I have no idea what you mean by this.​
    Ouch, you don't know what it is. A better terms is color differentiation.
    I googled it for you. Scroll down here.
    Good photographs are only 10% about the equipment and 90% about knowing how to use it.​
    Then you are not a very good photographer because you participate in an equipment discussion. You must also be thinking we should all use eos 1000D !
    Even today that's NOT TRUE in general.​
    My eyes tell otherwise.
    I took the time to read the article posted above. Take a look under You Can Use Cheap Lenses!
    I think a sensible conclusion is this: the image quality is dependent on the lowest common denominator, whether this is the camera or the lens. I don't believe great class on small sized sensors makes up for the camera's limitations. I've seen it with my own eyes and there's definitely less sharpness, less oomph. Otoh, cheap lenses on full frame bodies don't take advantage of the camera's full potential. So it comes down to which lenses I want to screw on: quality glass for the 5D and budget lenses for 60D and lower.
     
  38. Ah, you're a Ken Rockwell disciple! [lightbulb goes off over head] This thread has now gotten even funnier.
     
  39. Maybe this will help anonymous decide:
    A match "made in heaven" = the 7D and the 85/1.8 lens. No doubt.
    The 7D is 5 years newer tech than the original 5D. Again, no doubt who wins here.
     
  40. Charcoal, as it appears you have all the answers and know everything already.....maybe you could spare us your wit and avoid posting topics in which you apparently already have all the answers. It'll save us the time replying to someone who is looking more and more like a troll every minute.
     
  41. A real name would be nice too. :)
     
  42. Well Charcoal, you've gotten about all the useful advice you're going to get. What have you decided?
     
  43. "Otoh, cheap lenses on full frame bodies don't take advantage of the camera's full potential."
    Debatable. As a Nikon guy I'll tell you the once respected 24mm 2.8 D was considered a bit of a flop on crop sensors. D700 and D3 folks are talking it up again. Seems it likes those large 12mp, full frame pixels. And for cheap I picked up a Vivitar 28 2.8. An obscure lens that is absolutely blowing me away on my D200. Just a bit of color fringing at 2.8 and fine after. Corners from F4 on are great. What a little gem. My point is money isn't everything. Unfortunately for Canon folks it was made in an FD mount only.
     
  44. I have a 60d and a 5d classic. iq of th 5d is x2 better, like putting 2 aps-c sensors together :)

    For mere fps the 60 is better and it has video....
     
  45. Ae, can you post a comparison image from both the 60D and 5D (I've never heard of a 5D "Classic"...was it a special release?) and show us how the 5D is better?
    Thanks.
     
  46. Dave - I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for Ae to respond ;-)
     
  47. >>> I've never heard of a 5D "Classic"...was it a special release?

    I think most people understand that he is speaking of the original 5D, rather than the 5DII.
     
  48. "I've never heard of a 5D "Classic"
    It's often referred to as that.
     
  49. Why refer to it as "Classic?".
    There was no such model.
    There's no 1Ds Classic, or 1D
    Classic. Why change the name of
    the camera?

    Regardless, I'd like to see the
    comparison shots.
     
  50. I agree with Sarah. This post is getting funnier as it goes on and on. I also agree with Dave that Charcoal might as well not have put this post on this site as he or she seems to have all the answers already. I don't get people like that. I think we would have spent our time better in other ways than on this post. The only thing that happened on this post was the APS-C and full frame debate. Maybe Charcoal is just a bit lazy, or they like getting people stirred up. Enough said.
     
  51. "Why refer to it as "Classic?"
    Dude I didn't name it just sayin" I've seen it referred as such more than once. The original 5D has a bit of a cult (don't take me too seriously now) following.
    Why don't we all just go out and take some photos? I agree with Sara. Old cameras work just as well as the new for the most part.
     
  52. Sorry, but sample crops given by Mr. Rockwell taken with D200 in his article are total junk. Visit photozone.de and see what this good camera is capable of, when they were testing primes, for example, the Nikkor 85/1.8D.
    Even with Olympus (+ 50mm Zeiss or Nikkor 50/1.4 AI-s, I easily take much sharper pictures then Mr Rockwell with D200).
    Funny thread.
     
  53. A Happy decision with reasons would be a nice conclusion of this thread, after many useful comments (like others threads, with a few clueless and even wrong ones, like "5D doesn't have raw-jpg and auto white-balance").
    If a decision hasn't been made, you may research Sony NEX 7.
    BTW I love my 5D and didn't even jump on a deal of new 5DII for $1400 a few days ago.
     
  54. Debatable. As a Nikon guy I'll tell you the once respected 24mm 2.8 D was considered a bit of a flop on crop sensors. D700 and D3 folks are talking it up again. Seems it likes those large 12mp, full frame pixels.​
    Interesting.
    I have a 60d and a 5d classic. iq of th 5d is x2 better, like putting 2 aps-c sensors together :)
    Interesting as well. A picture wouldn't hurt :)
    A Happy decision with reasons would be a nice conclusion of this thread, after many useful comments.​
    Well, I think the 5D is more versatile than any crop camera, unless shooting sports, which I don't.
    My impression is that new bodies are filled with all manner of debatable gadgets. Some are useful but many don't really improve IQ. For the best IQ, I always grab for the largest format and fastest, sharpest lenses. This has been so for decades.
     
  55. Well, Ms. or Mr. Happy, it looks like you're going to buy a 5D. Since you don't shoot sports or wildlife, then you should be very happy with it.
    If you could save up to buy a 5D MkII, perhaps reconditioned, I think that you would find its improved high-ISO performance and higher detail resolution very useful for whatever in your photography. The extra, high quality pixels is equivalent to getting a larger format film camera.
     
  56. Reading this thread for the first time. . . I *really* like Sarah's responses.
    My current dSLR is a 40D. If I had a few K to blow on photography. . .the money would go to glass. The 100-400L would get the nod, based on the rest of my kit (although the 24/1.4L has certain appeal). I have an iPhone. . I have a P&S. If I had to buy a camera body tomorrow. . it would be a S100 (my current P&S is old, and I would LOVE to buy a modern P&S with RAW that fits in a pocket!). If I had to buy a dSLR -> it would be a 7D. For *ME* , I have more issues with getting an image in $*&## focus correct with F1.8 lenses than optimizing the color balance and DOF.
     
  57. They are two different tools entirely. I suggest buying both, use them both and decide which you prefer and if you must, sell one off.
    7D (60 D close second) state of the art, fast focusing, crop sensor more reach with telephoto (mmx1.6), lots of resolution for cropping and detail. Hi usable ISO. Great sports and wild life camera. It can do HD Movies should you ever want to.
    5D Great portrait and wide shots, lens mm perform as marked (mmx1) so not as much reach. Great resolution, great ISO. Maybe not as fast focusing but the camera will give you great images.
    Lenses behave differently on Crops Sensor compared to Full Frame Sensor bodies. There is no which is better, it should be which is better for which type of shooting. Keep in mind you can use either camera for sports, wild life, portraits and wide angle landscape. The camera police will not give you a ticket for taking a portrait with a 7D.
    Try them both and see what you prefer, really no catastrophic bad choices here. To avoid the "I wonder what I am missing with the other camera", try them both out.
     
  58. Why refer to it as "Classic?​
    Dave, it's like classic cars, Classic Coke and classic rock. A classic way of saying old.
    Why not, it makes some of us holding on to these great older cameras feel good. I still have my classic 40D. Eventually it will reach an age to be called a vintage camera, sounds like a real collector piece saying this is my vintage 40D, these were a real work horse for news photographers around the turn of the century and then it will reach status of antique camera, one may sit in the Smithsonian and we may see Pickers digging one out of a garage. Archaeologists may dig one up one day scratching their head. probably around the time our decendants will see 100 terapixel photos and people will be complaining the atoms in their photo don't look sharp enough and the strawberries in the photo don't smell strawberry enough.
     
  59. I advise you to go with Original 5D because the chance to get one become more limited with time, where you always have a chance to get the other cropped option.
     
  60. I just went through the decision-making process of a used 5D or a new 60D. I thought the 5D would be good for international street scenes, landscapes, archaeological sites, etc. However, I also like sports and wildlife photography. I was leaning towards the new camera until I handled the used 5D and it was in excellent shape and relatively easy to use. So I went with the 5D and picked up a 17-40 L. I had turned off the beep and the first time I used the set-up I wasn't sure if it was working because it focused so quickly and silently. I think the old school camera has motivated me to develop my manual setting and general photography skills. Off to Mexico in a few weeks and Vietnam in a few months so I should know soon enough if I made the right choice.
    00ZtXZ-435011584.jpg
     
  61. oh and Dr. Path stated that:
    "The 5D doesn't do live view, auto iso, movies, or RAW+JPG."
    It does shoot RAW+jpg in any other setting besides full auto.
     
  62. Greg, looks like your dog doesn't appreciate dog modeling. I'm quite sure mine thought I was abusing him ... as soon as I turned a camera on him, I got the emotionally hurt dog look.
     
  63. Although the consensus seems to be that this thread has gone on long enough, and that the question has been answered, I wanted to throw in a suggestion based on my experiences with both the 5D MkI and the 60D.
    I've had the 5D since I bought it new in 2007, and it has never let me down mechanically, or optically, when used with good lenses. I bought the 60D recently to replace an aging 30D that still preformed very well, but the resolution was lacking for my needs, and the features of the 60D (larger, articulated LCD, Live View, grid display, leveling dispaly, etc, etc.) were very attractive, not to mention the 18MP vs 8MP sensor.
    Over the course of my experience with both full frame and crop frame cameras, I have become addicted to both for most of the reasons already stated, e.g FF makes better use of wide angle lenses and has better control of DOF; CF give you more reach with telephotos, generally higher frame rates, and the newer CF sensors rival the older FF for resolution and high ISO capabilities. Since I shoot a mix of photo genres (portraits, landscapes, virtual tours, macro, wildlife), I have resigned myself to always needing one of each type of camera.
    This brings me (finally:) to my suggestion, which is to point out that the combined cost for a used 5D MkI plus a new 60D would be about the same, or slightly more, than a new 7D. If you can afford it, why not buy one of each? Then you would have the opportunity to get some real experience with both cameras, and can decide for yourself if you really need or want both FF and CF formats. If you find you are always using one more than the other, you can sell the less used camera, and buy another lens, or something.
    With all that said, if and when I decide to replace my 5D, I may very well get another CF camera, such as the 7D. So, why would I change my opinion that I already stated above? I purchased a Tamron 10-24, f3.5-4.5 to use with my 60D that gives me about the same FOV that I have on the 5D with my Canon 17-40 f4L, and I can see very little difference in the images I get with either lens. I'm sure that in-depth IQ and resolution tests will show measureable differences, but to the eye at normal viewing sizes, especially with lens corrections applied, I just can't see a significant difference. Even the color is closer to L-glass than Canon's own consumer grade lenses.
    So my secondary suggestion would be, if you can really only afford one camera at the 60D price level, then I would definitely go with the 60D, plus a good quality wide angle lens designed for a crop frame camera. Whatever you get for your standard or "normal" zoom is up to you, and any discussions on that can certainly be found in other threads.
     

Share This Page