which dslr do you think i should choose from this list

[matthewm]

Also, my wife has the 50 f/1.2 and it's a pretty neat lens. I've never used it on a crop body before, but on a 5DII and 5DC, it works wonders. We rarely, if ever, shoot at f/1.2 as it's just a little soft for me (probably just not nailing the focus which is frustrating and not really the lens' fault). Bump it to f/1.4 or even f/2 and WHOOOOOOOOOWEEEEEE! It's somethin' to see!

With that being said, you might be okay with a good copy of the 50 f/1.4 Canon lens. Sorry Sigma fans, I can't suggest their lenses as I've not used them. The fact that their QC is buggy and the chances of getting a good copy are sort of slim has made me leery of them. Their image quality seems okay, but I don't see a significant enough cost savings to go third party with their higher end lenses and stick with Canon.

 

[user237428934]

thanks for the advice

lets say Rice= Camera body, Curry= Lens

Bad rice mixed with a high quality curry obviously still tastes very nice and no matter how good the rice is if the curry is crap the whole thing is bad so id rather invest more money into lens regardless on how bad the rice is (taken the sensors of 600d is equivalent to 7d which is already not that bad)


28 f/1.8 lens and 50 f/1.4 sounds good to me, but i was told ill just ended up buying a 50 f/1.2 when i play more with cameras why not just knife and invest for the more expensive lens in the first place so i would not have an unused 50 f/1.4 lying around the house (lazy to resell).

to my understanding, 600d,650d,60d have the same sensors and processors as 7D which are already very good and image quality produced by the 3 cameras and noise are practically the same, not to say the price of 600d,650d! and better video.

all thats difference maybe the build quality, weather seal, burst rate ,focal points etc. which i personally think its an overkill for my situation since im not interested in taking pictures of flying bird or running dogs

i understand full frame takes better pictures on high iso with lower noise, ive seen the comparison but i probably wont spend that much for a better "rice" when whats playing the most important factor is the "curry"

I'd never buy the 3 digit bodys from Canon. The usability is just not good enough because some buttons/wheels are just not there.

50/1.2 ??? In my eyes just a play lens for bokeh bubbles. The overall optical quality is not good at all, no comparison to the 35L or the Sigma 35/1.4.

 

[user237428934]

Also, my wife has the 50 f/1.2 and it's a pretty neat lens. I've never used it on a crop body before, but on a 5DII and 5DC, it works wonders. We rarely, if ever, shoot at f/1.2 as it's just a little soft for me (probably just not nailing the focus which is frustrating and not really the lens' fault). Bump it to f/1.4 or even f/2 and WHOOOOOOOOOWEEEEEE! It's somethin' to see!

With that being said, you might be okay with a good copy of the 50 f/1.4 Canon lens. Sorry Sigma fans, I can't suggest their lenses as I've not used them. The fact that their QC is buggy and the chances of getting a good copy are sort of slim has made me leery of them. Their image quality seems okay, but I don't see a significant enough cost savings to go third party with their higher end lenses and stick with Canon.

You observation of the 50/1.2 is interesting. One guy in our local fotocommunity has one and we are all not overly impressed. It's very good for those photos where shallow DOF is the main subject 🙂

 

[robbeiflex]

It depends on what you want it for. I have a 7D and it has an amazing AF system, incredible FPS, weather sealing, and 3 custom setting modes. These are the things I value in it. I have a friend who has 60D, and it produces exactly the same images in most situations, plus he values the articulating screen highly. However, these factors do not hold a candle (pardon the pun) to low light shooters looking for high ISO performance, who should IMHO go for full frame. All great cameras, but all for different reasons.

Cheers,
Rob

 

[redisburning]

what exactly do you want to shoot?

I can think of several expensive 50s I would prefer over 50L personally; newest 50 Lux R, ZE 50 Makro-Planar, ZE 50 Planar, Rokkor 58/1.2, OM 50/2.0 Macro, etc. but none have AF.

Just to be clear, I like Canon lenses but I have to qualify that with telephoto or tilt/shift. If I was going to spend 50L money on a Canon lens it would be a 70-200 of some sort, preferably with IS. Im a huge fan of the 24 ts-e II and 70-200mm f2.8 II though, those are the two jewel's IMO.

 

[FA Limited]

so it seems like you've decided on canon. if you're into 50mm, i think going 5Dii + 50 1.8 is probably the best overall bang for the buck. if you value high image quality, i would avoid going Canon APS-C.

i'm not trolling, i got a 7D a few months ago to do action photos. it is great for that purpose as the body is a tank, but not overly large, customizable af, 100% vf, everything you would expect from a professional body. after using the Fuji X100 itself based upon the fairly old 12MP sony sensor and going to the 7D, it was pretty obvious the 7D wasn't as good on noise performance.

in fact the noise performance is nasty naaaaaaaasty ... not in the cool kids way but the bad way. canon has been pushing the same 18MP for more than three years without much improvement. i'm sure people will come and say yes i did take these great photos with my XXXD or XXD camera but it truly is a step down from the old sony 12 let alone the newer sony 16, 24 or toshiba 24. you have to work harder in post. when people have to defend ISO 100 noise you know something is up. i know dxomark isn't the end all of tests but take a look D90 vs 7D

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Ca...brand)/Canon/(appareil2)/439|0/(brand2)/Nikon

that being said i'm not bitter or upset because I knew this coming in because i wanted a better selection of tele lenses, something that nikon doesn't have.

 

[gavinlg]

50/1.2 ??? In my eyes just a play lens for bokeh bubbles. The overall optical quality is not good at all, no comparison to the 35L or the Sigma 35/1.4.

..nah... The 50L is far better than the 50mm f1.4. In fact overall it's the best 50mm i've ever used. The 35L is very very sweet too - can't go wrong with it as a single lens.

With the cameras, always go full frame over crop. Get the 6d or a 5d mkII for sure.

 

[Fraser]

I would go full frame with a 50mm 1.4, maybe the 50mm 1.2 is better but not sure really by how much. A 5d with the 50mm 1.4 is really nice to use as dslr go nice and light and quite compact. If I didn't have an M9 thats what I would use probably with a 28mm 2.8 and maybe the 85mm. I wouldn't rule out kit zooms either as they are great just to stick on the camera when on holiday etc. When I still had a couple of 5dmk11s the only lenses I had were L lenses so I ended up buying on ebay a 35-70 old Eos lens one of the original ones all metal construction for £30 and used that for holiday etc.

 

[j j]

600D, 650D and 7D all have the same IQ. If you shoot wildlife or sport the 7D autofocus is an advantage; I use one with long lenses for wildlife but for other uses I would not bother as it is bigger, heavier and more complicated to use than the other two.