Conundrum Glass over body - always?

[henry_gonzalez2]

<p>Have been doing a great deal of portrait photography for several years using a 60D and an old but very faithful and consistent EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM (that I have been using since the old film days) and later added a Canon 70-200 f2.8L II USM. I have an old 30D as a back-up body a pair of 580 EXII flashes. <br>

<br>

Most of what I've been shooting has been individual and family portraits, senior portraits and a few weddings. I've been shooting so much that my little hobby has become consistent enough for to replace enough of my regular income for me to focus on my photography more seriously, and so plan on hanging my shingle out there as a pro photog.<br>

<br>

Here is my conundrum. I have about enough money to purchase either a 7D mkii and retire my 30D or purchase the 24-70 f2.8L II. I would almost always go with glass over a camera body, except both of my camera bodies are getting long in the tooth. On several occasions recently I wished I had a better quality lens in the shorter FL. My 28-105 is nice, but IQ pales in comparison to the L lens.</p>

<p>My thought is, if I purchased the 7D mk ii I could afford the 24-70 f4L within a fairly short amount of time. The plus here as I can see is that though I lose a stop of light on the lens, I gain at least a stop with the performance of the 7D2's sensor in low light/high iso. Also the f4 version of that has a built-in macro for detail shots of the ring, dress detail etc.. at a wedding.</p>

<p>Why the 7D2 specifically? Because the 5D mkIV isn't out yet, nor is the 6D mkII, I'm replacing old camera bodies, I don't want another old one, and the specs and IQ I've seen come out of the 7D2 is impressive, as is the AF - for weddings it could mean getting the shot versus missing it.</p>

<p>I am really struggling with this decision because I've always gone with glass first, and eventually I do want the 2.8, I'd like to hear from this community to find out what you all think? Is my reasoning sound or am I missing something. </p>

<p>Looking forward to your replies.</p>

[stephen t]

<p>Glass first.</p>

[henry_gonzalez2]

<p>That's what my gut says, but is the f4 enough glass? Will I hate myself for not getting the 2.8 later?</p>

[wgpinc]

<p>You're doing great. If me I'd get the very capable 70D to replace the 30D, handles like the 60D and so is seamless using the two cameras together. Lenses I'd buy the excellent Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 non VC and maybe the new 50mm 1.8 STM. With what you have you would be set with a few redundancies for back up. If you can stretch your budget a little maybe another speed light. This is stuff to make money with. You obviously don't need the latest and greatest with your skills and talent.</p>

[wgpinc]

<p>I just noticed that the very excellent Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 DC lens is just $20 more than the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 non VC because of a super instant rebate. More expensive, a little tougher build, and maybe slightly better image quality than the Tamron with image stabilization. In that case I'd probably buy the Sigma. I feel like I could make a good living shooting weddings and portraits with just two lenses; the 17-50/55mm 2.8 and the 85mm 1.8 Canon lens. I only use my 24-70mm 2.8 II on my 6D not my crop body. That you have the 70-200mm 2.8 to gives you more length already. Good luck!</p>

[savagesax]

I don't have any non Canon lenses, so any off brand lens opinions is useless!

 

The 5D mark 4, also better known as the 5Ds should ship in just a few days. I talked to Canon in California just

2 or 3 weeks ago. With the 50 megapixel sensor it's a pretty tempting camera to buy and Canon usually sells

the 5 series cameras often as kits, meaning that you will get the 24-105 lens with the body and as a kit you

should save a lot of money. I think the total cost as a 5Ds kit may be around $4500 or so.

 

I can say that the 5 series Canon cameras have had great success. Very few major problems have been

reported.

 

Whats surprising is the value of the 5D Mark 3 has gone way down. If you try to trade it in at places like KEH or

B&H in mint condition you will be lucky to get about $1400. So it may be a good time to pick up the 5D Mk3, in

mint, hardly ever used, condition. By the way the 5D Mk 3 has 2 card slots. So if you have card failure you still

have the second card.

 

I can't say enough good things about the 24-105 L IS Canon lens. For portrait work it can't be beat. Another

great prime lens is the 85mm 1.8. The cost for a great lens is very little.

 

Here's the bad news with the new cameras coming out or that are already out. Adobe doesn't support some of

these newer brands with programs such as Photoshop CS4 and earlier versions. So you have to rent their

yearly versions called Photoshop CS6 Cloud. I'm annoyed by this, but there's nothing we can do. So the 5D

Mk3 versions won't work in RAW using PS CS4. I'm not sure about the latest Photoshop Lightroom programs.

 

So you are kind of in a hard position. With a new camera body you most likely will have to use Photoshop

Cloud, which is another yearly expense.

 

It it were me, I'd go with a great used 1Ds Mark 3 pro camera, with a low shutter count. I have a few and they

are tanks. You can still use Photoshop CS4 in RAW. I've made huge enlargements up to 40X60 inches, using

the 24-105 lens. Not a single 1Ds Mark 3 camera has failed me. Unless you are into video I'd skip the latest

Canon models and buy a 1Ds or the 1D Mark 3 often for under $2500. If you don't need video think about buying a really great still, non video camera.

 

Don't get me wrong here. The new 5Ds is sure a tempting camera to buy. Without the lens it's priced around

$3700 or so. There isn't a medium format camera that can come close to this super large Canon medium format

camera sensor. A 39 megapixel Hasselblad camera back will cost you about $8000, plus you still have to buy

the body and a few lenses. The new Pentax 50 megapixel system will cost over $8000. Again you have to get

some lenses for it so you are looking at about $12,000.

 

The true question here is how large do you want to make your portrait images? I haven't sold 40X60

enlargements in about 6 months or so, however I do sell several 16X20 and a lot of the 11X14 prints. You

surely don't need a super megapixel new Canon or medium format camera to handle portraits. Back in the film

days you needed a medium format camera. Times have changed a lot. Those days of huge enlargements are

pretty much gone.

 

So I'd go with the lenses and save a lot of money on those cool high tech bodies! Sorry to go into such long

details, but I wanted to get into your final finished product for your client. Are you giving them jpegs, smaller

proof size 4X6 prints, a CD, or are you selling huge 40X60 inch framed, textured, sprayed, canvas mounted,

prints in TIFF format, not jpegs.?

 

If not buy lenses!

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>What Gil said. Balance the budget; the 70D sounds like a smart option, or a second 60D (it's not very outdated, and can be found at nice prices); add a 17-50 f/2.8 lens (Tamron, Sigma - good lenses for a lot less money). 2 flashes; the Chinese flashes (i.e. Yongnuo, I am seriously surprised at how sturdy those feel considering their price) can save a lot of money.<br>

If you're going to use it professional, think redunancy. Not only a backup camera, but pretty much everything backed up one way or another. The 28-105 can cover a lot as backup lens for both zooms, but ultimately some small, light primes at the right focal lengths for your style can both add creative potential and give you that needed backup. Everything can break, not only the body.<br>

If you're thinking weddings and events, having only 24mm as the widest on APS-C cameras is a bit too limited; I know a lot of people do not like buying APS-C only lenses in case they ever side-grade to full frame, but limiting yourself now for something that maybe will happen some future day makes little sense; and if you've got paying customers, you just need the gear to get the job done. 17-50 on APS-C is a lot more versatile than 24-70.</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>I consider a 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8 two of my essential lenses. You already have the 70-200, so get the 24-70. Get the 2.8 -- not only is it faster for low light and a wider aperture for better "bokeh' but it also autofocuses faster. if you're doing this as a business now, you owe it to yourself and your clients to have the best tools you can get.<br /><br />As for the lens vs the body, the 24-70 is a bread and butter lens you will use for the rest of your career. Whatever body you buy will be obsolete by the time you get it broken in.<br /><br />On the glass v body issue I agree that 90 percent of the time glass wins. The exception being are situations where the body actually makes it possible to shoot pictures you couldn't shoot otherwise rather than just having a few more pixels or a new feature or two. For example, I was shooting with only a D200 for a while and it really couldn't go above ISO 1600 without excessive digital noise (and even 1600 was only good for news and sports, not portraits etc.) I added a D7000 because it could shoot in much lower light and there were jobs where I needed that. But even then I had gotten my 24-70, 70-200 (and 12-24) before I went for the new body.</p>

[henry_gonzalez2]

<p>This is why I love photo.net so much. Just about everywhere I've asked this question, the answer I've gotten was, "yeah man your plan sounds about right." In my gut though, I knew something was not quite right. I'd considered the crop factor of the APS-C sensor on the long end of the focal range, but for whatever reason, I hadn't considered it on the short end. I prefer to stay away from non-Canon lenses, I know they're great, but I've had more than my fair share of lemons in the past, so I like to stick with Canon even though I know the price ultimately restricts my purchase. I have no problem going with the Yongnuo at all, I think they make a great flash, though I've already got two 580 EXII's. </p>

<p>I really do want to go to a full frame sensor because, as I stated earlier I started out in film, so I have certain expectations of what things should look like given a certain focal length of a camera. Slightly off-topic, I learned the basics of photography 17 years ago from reading this web site, back then Phil Greenspun ran it and it was a very simple white page with black text- clean and concise, I am glad the spirit of that simplicity lives on in the new photo.net. I am aware of the 5DS and 5DSr but I was under the impression that these <em>were not</em> a replacement for the 5D3, and that a 5D4 had yet to be introduced am I incorrect in this assumption? I'm not a huge fan of the 6D due to the 1/150 max sync speed and the 1/4000 max shutter speed, though the sync speed bothers me most. But I've heard the IQ from that is outstanding, perhaps that would be the way to go? <br>

A few have mentioned primes, I actually do intend to pick up one of the new 1.8 STMs today, I played with one at my local camera store the other day, and I've gotta say I really fell in love with it. may even pick up a second one for my wife.<br>

I really enjoy hearing the wisdom of the folks on this forum concerning this, please keep it coming. I'm getting a lot of good wisdom and logic that I hadn't already considered so the really gears are turning now. I want to invest wisely. </p>

 

[Marcus Ian]

<p>I think you should prioritize some fast glass - as well as a body. Your primary niche is<em> "individual and family portraits, senior portraits and a few weddings." </em>Frankly, I think you are doing yourself a diservice by continuing to rely on the 28-105 <em>especially on a crop sensor camera. </em>I can completely understand why you <em>"...wished I had a better quality lens in the shorter FL..." </em>It is because with tht lens on a crop 60/30D there<em> is no</em> shorter FL! (the effective widest FL is ~ 45mm!) <br>

<br>

On your limited budget, you'll need to prioritize the best bang for the buck, and neither a 7D2, nor a 24-70/2.8L II are it. You simply cannot afford to have the latest greatest of everything. At this point, it is far more rational to obtain high quality tools which will significantly improve your output's quality and range than buying the newest shiniest prettiest which will not improve either significantly. <br>

<br>

I am assuming that your budget is a bit over $2k (enough to purchase a 24-70/2.8L II). In your shoes I would pair a used 5D2 (a significant improvement in IQ over the 60D, as well as FF for proper DOF) with a new Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC USD (as good or better than the 24-70/2.8L though not the II). The simple reason is that <em>for your photography niche</em>, f4 is too slow (for creative exloration, and sometimes in practice), and the crop not only lengthens your FLs, but it also lengthens your effective DOF - control of which is <em>extremely</em> helpful for portraiture and weddings. For the type of shooting you are doing, ESP-like AF is nice, but completely unnecesary 99% of the time - and frankly, with proper use (ie. some skill) and a decent lens, the 5D2's AF is good enough to pluck a good sized bouqet out of mid air (BTDT). <br>

<br>

While you can certainly afford a 5D3, that would limit you to your existing 28-105. Which, for portaiture, puts you in a sad state unfortunately - though still better than with a 60D or 7D2. The IQ of a 5D3 is not really any better than a 5D2 - though it is newer, and shinier (and will improve things - even w/ the 28-105). Heck, you might even be able to afford a few cheap primes to go w/ the 5D3 (depending on the deal), a 50/1.8 + 85 1.8 would make portraiture a breeze! <br>

<br>

</p>

[de_isaacs]

<p>I also think you should prioritize for fast glass – and a new body. Your primary passion is<em> "individual and family portraits, senior portraits and a few weddings." </em><em>For many years I too</em><em> "...wished I had a better quality lens in shorter lengths..."</em> None of us (Mr. Gates notwithstanding) can afford to have the latest greatest of everything.<br>

In your situation I would pair a lightly used 5D2 (a significant improvement in IQ over the 60D, as well as FF for proper DOF) with a new Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC USD (as good or better than the 24-70/2.8L though not the II). The simple reason is that <em>for your photography passion</em>, f4 is too slow, and the crop not only lengthens your FLs, but it also lengthens your effective DOF - control of which is <em>extremely</em> helpful for portraiture and weddings. <br>

You might afford a few primes to go w/ the 5D2 (depending on the deal), a 50/1.8 + 85 1.8; 135 f2 or 135 SF f2.8 would make portraiture a breeze!</p>

[dave404]

<p><br />Glass holds it value. No brainer. Choose your upgrade path. I went from 20D to 5D to 5D3 but started with L lenses. The path was clear. Of course I spent a lot of money.</p>

 

[fran_ois_pottier]

<p>Just for the record, the flash sync speed of the 6D is 1/180, I believe.<br>

I think the high ISO capability of a recent body should be high on your list. It can allow you to work at f/4 in low light conditions.<br>

Last two cents: if you're thinking portrait and macro, the 100/2.8 L is pretty much an ideal lens. Not as versatile as a zoom, but in its niche, it is very, very nice.<br>

Good luck,</p>

[henry_gonzalez2]

<p>OK, conundrum resolved thanks to your input on this thread. </p>

<ul>

<li>I picked up a nifty fifty of the STM variety almost immediately- I was absolutely thrilled with that little lens- it instantly stoked my photography for passion, may have just been bit by the prime bug.</li>

<li>I placed an order for the 6D kit with the 25-105 f4L from my local camera shop+the vertical battery grip because I don't think I've owned a single Canon camera for which I didn't get the grip going back to a very early pre-2000 Rebel.</li>

<li>The best part of all- an older lady at church handed me a check for $2000 and said, it was to help out with my photography business. Do you believe in miracles? The miraculous 24-70 f2.8L USM II arrived the same day my 6D did- yesterday!</li>

</ul>

<p>I can't stop grinning from the results, I'm more than happy with my set-up now. Thanks to all who helped me figure it out.</p>