Dilemma - Buy a 5d Mark iii or upgrade to 24-70L ii

[david_botly]

Currently shoot weddings and portraits on a 5d Mark ii and a 50d.

 

I use two lenses - 24-70L i and 70-200L ii

 

I am upgrading my 50d to another 5D but my dilemma is - do I upgrade to another 5d mark ii - saving myself £1000 over the mark iii and

use the money saved to upgrade my old 24-70 lens to the new 24-70 mark ii? Or would I notice more of a difference in quality by

upgrading to the 5d mark iii and keeping my old 24-70 lens - which I have never had any complaints with.

 

Any advice from people that have upgraded to the new 5d mark iii or the new 24-70 ii would be gratefully appreciated.

 

Thanks

[John Crowe]

<p>Neither option is a significant upgrade. The 5D III is not much of an improvement over the 5D II, and the 24-70 II is not much of an improvement over the I, especially considering the costs.</p>

<p>Some complain about the AF of the 5D II, do you find the autofocus of the 5D II questionable? Personally I've never had a problem even with race cars with my 300/4 L. I'm not sure that the 5D III is the best alternative, make sure to check out used 1D/1Ds series as well.</p>

<p>In your situation I'd be looking for an 85/1.2 L or 135/2 L which I have found invaluable for capturing those very special portraits.</p>

 

[philip_wilson]

I would agree with John that for the subjects you shoot neither will make a big difference. Of the two the better AF and

slight improvement in higher ISO erformance of the 5DIII may be worth it. In reality I suggest you either save your money

or buy a different lens to augment what you have.

[david_botly]

<p>Thank you very much both of you for the advice.<br>

Tough decisions to make - the biggest one being whether or not to upgrade to the new 24-70 but I think for the £2000 price tag the amount of improvement it offers doesn't outweigh it.<br>

I definitely need to get rid of the 50d as I'm finding it quite slow in comparison with the 5d and obviously it's not a full-frame. I like to have up to date kit so may well go for the 5D3 but very much appreciate your advice on the prime lenses and will certainly give that some thought.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p><em>" definitely need to get rid of the 50d as I'm finding it quite slow in comparison with the 5d</em>"<br>

<br />The 50D rates at 6.3 fps, while the 5D II is 3.9 fps so I'm not sure what you mean by slow ? The 5D III is not much faster than the 50D so there is no gain there. I haven't upgraded to anything yet, I still use the old version of the 24-70mm for weddings with the 5Dc and 7D camera combination, but if it was up to me I would save my money and opt for the 135mm f.2 or another high rated prime.</p>

<p>My last resort would be to trade the 24-70mm vs. I, for the 24-70mm vs. II because my bad knees cannot support the weight of the old lens anymore. Allot of people like the FF and cropped camera combination, but during a busy wedding it get's kind of confusing when you are changing lenses. I gets even more confusing during post processing...</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>The starting point for questions like this is often best one that asks: "What problem are you having with your current setup that you are trying to solve?" </p>

<p>If your current gear is actually producing great quality in the work you do, perhaps you don't need to upgrade at all?</p>

<p> </p>

[stp]

<p>I agree with John -- neither is a significant upgrade, and that's before cost is even considered. I returned my 24-70 II after testing it; I may purchase it when the price comes down to a "reasonable" level. I also agree with John in that you might think how you could expand your present capabilities with a version of something you don't currently own at all. The ability to make better portraits (in the technical sense) seems like a worthy consideration.</p>

[ruben leal]

David, you may also need to consider a 1.4x extender to compensate the lose of the 1.6 crop, but you also need to

consider if it fits on your current lenses.

[peter_j2]

<p>If you are shooting weddings with available light at high ISO's (i.e. 25,600), then the 5D3 is the camera to buy. H1 and especially H2 begin to look muddy, however.</p>

<p>There is nothing wrong with your 24-70. It's a good piece of glass. I have used version 2 and it is indeed sharper, but not worth selling your version 1 used and then pumping over a grand for version 2.</p>

[tom_elessar]

<p>The 24-70 ii has <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/09/canon-24-70-f2-8-ii-resolution-tests">significantly higher, measurable resolution</a>. But it's also likely that <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/08/autofocus-reality-part-3b-canon-cameras">Canon's newest lenses and the 5D iii</a> will, when paired, provide improved autofocus. Read more about both issues at the link<br>

<br />All else being equal I'd probably want the body first, mostly for AF, then the lens, but there are perfectly good reasons to prefer the opposite. </p>

[jeremy jackson]

<p>For what it's worth David, my wife, who uses the 5D mk 3 and mk2 for wedding photography (and in my obviously unbiased opinion is very good with both), feels that the mk 3 is a significant improvement over the mk 2. I agree with her. I would much rather have a mk 3 than the new 24-70 for wedding photography. For landscape work the mk 2 and mk 3 are too close to make much of a difference I think. For landscape photography I may go for the new 24-70 instead of the mk 3. Best, JJ</p>

[david_botly]

Thanks everyone so much for your really helpful advice and comments.

 

I think on this occasion I am probably set on improving the camera body to a 5D3.

 

I will feel then I have moved on a step at the same time as not dramatically changing my lens setup which on the whole I am very pleased

with. I know I really do need to think about getting some primes but I find at the moment that the zooms provide the quality and reliability I

need.

 

Thanks once again for all help

[peter_j2]

<blockquote>

<p>I know I really do need to think about getting some primes but I find at the moment that the zooms provide the quality and reliability I need.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>For portraits and weddings, the 70-200 II is all that you really would need. Unless you like bokeh-licious results, then get the 85/1.2 II used. The lens is usually babied by most of the sellers. Usually <strong>:)</strong>. I own those two lenses and may require that they be buried with me.</p>

<p> </p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>I've had a 24-70/2.8 L II for a few weeks, and must say that I'm impressed with its performance. It has prime-level resolution and contrast. I have had both the original 24-70 and the 24-105, and was not enthralled with either.</p>

<p>As for bodies, I'm very happy with my 5DII/50D combination, and have no interest in "upgrading" to the 5DIII, with its mere 1 MP gain in resolution. However, if I shot sports or other fast-moving subjects, the improved AF system of the newer body would make it more attractive to me.</p>

<p>So, I'd say that if it's the AF of your 5DII that's holding you back, then by all means pick up the newer body; otherwise, if you feel compelled to spend money, get the newer zoom. It's a real gem.</p>

[nathangardner]

<p>The 5D3 will make a more noticeable difference. The AF system is more reliable and the ISO performance is superb. I've used wedding images at ISO 6400 and even 12,800 without hesitation on the 5D3. </p>

[Brad_]

>>> Neither option is a significant upgrade.

 

Agree. Your eye and imagination will have a far greater impact on getting better results.

 

As an aside, if it were me, had the extra cash and were contemplating that upgrade today (I have a 5DII and 24-70), I'd pass on the

purchase and instead donate some percentage of the $$$ represented by the new cam/lens to the Red Cross to

help Sandy victims, and then revisit the idea a year later.

[chris_clarke3]

<p>I just got the 5D3 after having the 5D2 for 4 years.<br>

Even though it's early days I have to say the difference from Mk2 to Mk3 is very significant to me. I've been test shooting with the 50L. A huge difference in accuracy. The AF is a quantum leap. It reminds me of the differences I experienced from the 20D to 5D2. This is the camera I wanted 4 years ago. It will make you love your existing glass.</p>