My wife is thinking to upgrade her 40D to one of the above. Has anyone got experience of both. What are the benefits of the 5D. Is it worth the extra.
She does have a few lenses already if that makes a difference. I want to sound like a knowledgeable husband when trying to help her make the decision.

Full frame vs crop sensor is the big difference. If her current lenses aren’t for full frame they’ll be no use* on a 5D.

*not sure if you can just use the centre of the sensor on a 5d, some nikons have this mode. Bit pointless mind.

Yup need full frame lenses to make proper use of the 5D II, and they can be pretty spendy.

I have a 5D MK I and a 7D, but apart from megapixel count and video there’s not too much difference between the MK I and II. Bear in mind there is widely rumoured to be a MK III coming out soon.

The 7D is more suited to action/wildlife stuff – more ‘reach’ from the cropped sensor, 8FPS, very fast AF tracking.

Both have great video modes if you get into that side of things.

I’ve used a 40D a fair bit and it’s a good camera. Personally if I was upgrading I would want to go full frame – there’s just a certain magic to the images (some might dismiss this as snake oil or whatever). If she shoots a lot of sports/wildlife then the 7D is a better option though.

Canon EF lenses work on all the SLRs/DSLRs Canon have made in about the last 20 years.

Canon EF-S lenses only work on crop sensor cameras. These tend to be the cameras under £1000 new, other than the D7.

If your wife has independent makes like Tamron or Sigma, some of those only work on crop cameras too, but I dont know the ranges well enough to quote on that, check their web sites.

If you wife has a lot of lenses that only work on a crop camera it might be quite an investment of money to get a new set of lenses to work on a 5D.

If like I did, she only bought lenses that work on both full frame and crop, she need not worry about buying more lenses and that factor is out of the equation.

If she shoots a lot of interiors, landscapes, wide angle pictures etc she might be better off with the 5D2 just for the wider angle of view with all lenses. If she likes wildlife, sports, picking faces out of crowds, shooting things at a distance, the crop camera might be more use.

The 7D has a better and newer design autofocus system, is better at tracking fast moving things, has a built in spirit level so you don’t get sloping pictures (mush more use than it sounds).

I use a 7D and a 5D (original model, not mark II) and find the most useful difference between them is the auto focus and using the 5D for wide angle and images in darker places.

They are all good cameras. You can download the user manuals for them from canon web site to see and compare details of focusing screens, menus, specs etc.

If you know what sort of subjects your wife likes to take or will want to start taking in the future, it will give people more info to help you with 🙂

I prefer full frame so would go for the 5d mk2 (i have a mk1)

If you are not fussed about this then the 7d is an amazing camera. Lots of mtb videos are being shot on the 7d

Full frame lenses can be at the lower end of the lens price range – the 85mm 1.8, 50mm 1.4 and 1.8 are fixed length can considered very sharp. There are others as well.

Generally EF lenses are no dearer than EF-S fittings that cover a same focal range. Unless you mean the professional ‘L’ lenses, but thats a different ball game. You dont need to run those even for the 5D2, I get good images with non L lenses on both my cameras as does a friend who runs a 5D2.

One of the things with image quality is that the lenses actually count more than the camera. You can get a sharper image with an L lens on a bottom line camera than you can get with a cheap lens on an expensive camera as so much is in the glass quality – though for most of us the non L lenses are sharp and more than acceptable. However, as an alternative your wife could consider getting better glass instead of upgrading – the glass will usually ‘outlive’ several cameras anyway.

One of the things with image quality is that the lenses actually count more than the camera. You can get a sharper image with an L lens on a bottom line camera than you can get with a cheap lens on an expensive camera as so much is in the glass quality

True in terms of sharpness but there is something about the colour depth and dynamic range on full frame that you just don’t get on a crop camera. High ISO noise on full frame is more appealing and ‘film-like’ too imo. Some people would argue it’s all in the mind though.

I agree that in general buying better lenses will make more difference than a new camera.

I have a 20D, 1D2n, 5D mk1 and a 7D.

From an overall IQ (image quality) point of view for me it’s 5D, 1D2n and then the 7D. That’s based on depth of field, tone, noise handling and dynamic range.

I’m also lucky that I have every sensor size and can swap bodies to match the subject.

The AF servo tracking on my 7D has been shite and I’m hoping a recent trip to Canon has improved matters. Not had a chance to test it in anger.

I freelance for SSP and the 40D is the bread and butter body for two of my my colleagues. Another ditched both his 1D3’s for a pair of 7D’s and hasn’t regretted the step ‘down’.

So from a sports point of view you could argue you don’t necessarily need to upgrade to a 7D. Oh and we don’t shoot on full file size images and IMO 18Mp is waay too much on a crop sensor.

If Mrs Algore is more interested in landscapes, portraiture, still life etc etc, I’d definitely suggest a full frame, especially if she was to hold on to the 40D as a backup body (a sensible idea if you take photography half seriously).

Though don’t forget that EFS mount lenses don’t generally fit FF or 1.3X bodies so you may need to take that in to account.

We’re VERY unlikely to see the 5D3 until next year and when it does finally arrive it’ll be fork off expensive, £2500+???

Sorry if my reply is a lot ifs, buts and maybes but there isn’t a ‘right’ answer to the opening question. I will finish by saying that if you’re happy to blow £1500+ on new kit, then get better glass and a decent tripod first.

Cheers guys, some really useful info on here. Will need to do some more research. Mainly takes pictures of people, so not really landscapes or sports. But loves shooting (pictures-not guns) friends and family both whilst out and about and also indoors. She does the occasional wedding for friends etc.
Plan would be to keep the 40D as a back up and something for me to play on.
She’s already got a tripod, flashgun etc. But is slowly upgrading lenses.
Cheers for all the info so far. You have got some serious kit.

We’re VERY unlikely to see the 5D3 until next year and when it does finally arrive it’ll be fork off expensive, £2500+???

Yeah tbh I was only mentioning it because it might make 5D IIs cheaper. 🙂

Drop Chris a call on here – Just Canon and say that Ashley sent you. I know Chris has had all the models and as the stuff is direct from Canon uk, also gets first hand information on new products etc.

Algore

From the topics you’ve mentioned, I’d say full frame would be a better option were you to get another body. Very hard to beat the bokeh and sense of depth that FF and a fast lens shot wide open can give.

Oh and having lots of toys just means humping more kit, especially on zoo trips….. 🙄

300 f4, 70-200 f2.8, 7D with 500 f4, 1D2n, 5D, 1.4 extender, misc batteries and whatnot = 42Lbs of bag and kit.

do you have a pic of yourself in a mirror holding a camera in a purposeful manner?
just that i have a theory about amateur photographers who take snaps of their own kit and was wondering if you could confirm my theory?

I saw one of these beasties in a shop the other day, talk about massive and expensive – Pentax medium format

Oh and on the subject of wanabee pros – I’m fairly tempted to buy a basic Oly body with spare kit lens for £150, just so I can have two bodies and use two lenses at once.. but I’d feel pretty tragic doing it 🙂

Hijack over.

the pentax is cheap compared to other 39mpixel backs out there.
pro’s aren’t buying as there is no rental/back-up system in place.

do you have a pic of yourself in a mirror holding a camera in a purposeful manner?
just that i have a theory about amateur photographers who take snaps of their own kit and was wondering if you could confirm my theory?

Sorry Mr Smith but you’ll be 5hit out of luck as far as me taking pictures of myself. (and who said I was an amateur?)

However, just to keep you happy ( 😛 🙄 😆 ), here’s a snap of me shooting a Tri. Quite why the woman took the shot I don’t know though more to the point WTF was she thinking by uploading such a crap shot to an image library???? ❓

that’s my theory busted 🙁

Oh and one more thing – everyone should have a fish eye lens.

That Pentax is by all accounts a veritable bargain when considering the cost of other MF systems though as Mr S says if the backup isn’t in place it could be a bit of a gamble to buy in to.

Have to slightly disagree with Molgrips re the fisheye. I actually have two because I shoot 360′ panos for fun and you need the field of view. However the distorted perspective in single scenes doesn’t do it for me. They’re a bit marmite and easy to over do.

IMO a good wide rectilinear lens (10mm on crop bodies, 14 – 17mm on FF) gives an equally striking perspective but one that looks ‘correct’.

However the distorted perspective in single scenes doesn’t do it for me

Well you gotta work with it I reckon. I have some great shots from my first outing yesterday where the lens bent the near objects into a picture frame around the subject. Plus it did something really amazing to the contrast I think.. I am coming to the conclusion that my preferred style is creating strange and unusual images 🙂

I am excited, can you tell? I’ll start my own thread when I get the chance 🙂

PS rectilinear UWA is the LAST lens on my shopping list, hopefully pick one up in the US in November.