Upgrading 40D to 7D???

Started May 3, 2010 | Discussions thread
Dave Luttmann
Forum ProPosts: 12,492Gear list
Like?
Re: re-invent yourself :)
In reply to jm67, May 4, 2010

jm67 wrote:

MAC wrote:
re-invent yourself since you photograph people

sell 40d = $700
sell 17-55 IS $850
Add $ not spent yet for 70-200 II $2500

total = $4050

now here is how to spend the $4050 since you photograph people and could get true dof control

used 5d mark1 $1000
tamy 28-75 f2.8 $400
50 f1.2 $1500
135 f2 $1100
kenko 1.4 $200 gives you 189 f2.5 on the 135

$4200 for true control of dof

smi wrote:

Dear all,

I have been reading the CANON forums for a while with a lot of interest. I am really impressed by the number of comments and the frequency that are being added. You can really learn a lot! This is my first time that I participate with an issue that is bothering me.

I've recently upgraded my 40D's lens collection, with the 17-55 F2.8 IS. I am extremely pleased with this lens.

I'am dealing with a pretty difficult decision at the moment: what should be my next upgrade step? 7D or 70-200 F2.8 II IS lens? I mainly use the camera for photos and I can live without the video capability for a while. I realise that I would eventually purchase both items, but in your opinion which one should come first?

Any advise will be greatly appreciated.

Careful smi. I'm not sure you ought to pay too much attention to someone who thinks there's no other gear in the world other than his outdated 5D and shoots events for friends and family only, not as a real business. And it's only as a part time hobby at that. There is no reason whatsoever to sell everything you own and buy used and outdated equipment. What you own is more than sufficient for your personal use of landscape and your family photos. And when you add in the 70-200, you'll be better off still. There's nothing wrong with the "fake" dof control with your camera and you'll keep $thousands in your pocket.

The only thing I was actually curious about was why you'd buy the 'II' version. Yes it's better but there isn't really much lacking in the original and you may save a few $'s as well. Maybe pick up another lens.
--
I am as ignorant as ever, and wiser than I've ever been.

I agree. The I've used the 40D a fair bit for weddings, but have also had it handy on road trips, etc. I produced a number of 16x24 from the 40D that when printed on HM Photorag 308 on my Epson 3800 just glowed. Yes, they didn't have the detail of MF or 4x5 film, or a 24mp DSLR....but they looked pretty decent.

And yes, his sole criteria is shallow DOF. Yet really, for a lot of use, stopping down below f2 isn't much of a help....unless you love everyones eyes in focus, and nose blurred.

Get the glass. The 40D is great for general use up to 16x24.....more than 99% of people ever print!

 Dave Luttmann's gear list:Dave Luttmann's gear list
Canon PowerShot G3 Canon PowerShot SX150 IS Canon EOS D30 Canon EOS 10D Nikon D2X +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
OopsNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow