roslucas

Thanks! These are excellent resources.

CanonShot Loc: Lancaster County, PA

I own and extensively use both of the camera bodies mentioned by the OP and totally agree with this response.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

For the subjects you mention, go with the 5DIII. Just keep in mind that any EF-S lenses you may have will not work with it. (I assume that the 24-70 that you mention is a 2.8, not a 1.8). Good lens, but for architecture and landscapes with a full frame camera take a look at the EF 16-35 f/4 L.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Your current camera is a perfectly serious camera. Get the lens first and your current camera will be fine.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

The 5DIII is a has a much better full frame sensor. But although the 7DII has a crop sensor and is physically slightly smaller and slightly lighter, its build and general functionality is equal to and in some respects more advanced than the 5DIII. This is not to say that they are the same. The 5DIII is superior in some significant ways. But, it may beg the question why it costs $1000 more based on the parts and materials and overall functionality.

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

It may over time come to up speed with the 5DIII but a 50 mpix pic is not what the public is crying for. It's a lackluster beta for something that will likely get better but not enough to spend $3,400 - 3,500 for a body.

jimbrown3 Loc: Naples, FL

That being the case, I feel the 5D III is the one for you. I have both.

haroldross Loc: Walthill, Nebraska

40 grams in weight difference... Not noticeable. The physical size of the 5D MK III (152x116x76mm) and the 7D MK II (149x112x78mm). Again, no noticeable difference.

I would go with the new lens first and then decide whether or not to go a new camera body right now.

bigwolf40 Loc: Effort, Pa.

O how true....Rich

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

For your stated uses most people would go with a 5DIII FF (full frame).

A crop sensor like the 7DII (and your T3i) will do those things just fine. But FF will do them a bit better.

I would suggest working on getting a good selection of lenses first. However, if you plan to go FF get only EF mount lenses. They are made for FF but will fit and work on APS-C crop sensors. The EF-S crop sensor lenses will not work on, or even mount on, FF bodies.

Canon makes most of their best grade (L) lenses in EF anyway. The EF lenses are bigger, heavier, and more expensive. But more versatile since they fit both types of body. All but one of my lenses is EF since they work on my 6D FF (5DIII's little brother) and my 7DII APS-C.

For portrait and landscape you will mainly be using wider lenses. For landscape 50 mm and wider mostly. You get more of the scene in the frame. For portrait mostly 50 - 105 or maybe a bit longer. They allow you to get good tight head or head and shoulder shots without sticking the camera right up to the person. Gives the subject some breathing room and you some working space. Beside the wide angles tend to distort things like noses when you get in close enough to frame a head shot. A really good choice for portraits might be a good Macro lens in the 90 - 150/180 range. A good length for portraits and also a macro lens if you want to give macro a try. They tend to be more expensive and better built than non-macro lens of the same length because macro photographers are picky about quality, resolution and IQ.

You will have little use for longer telephotos or zooms in portraits and landscapes. I on the other hand am into birds and for me "the longer, the better".

My most useful lens on both bodies is the 24-105 f4L. On a FF it covers fairly wide to the beginning of telephoto. I have gone all day at a Civil War Reenactment without taking it off my 6D. On the 7DII it covers "normal" to short telephoto. A good general purpose "walking around" lens. For a 7DII a zoom in the 16/18 or so to 135/200/250/300 range works as a walking around/do anything lens. Canon, Sigma and Tamron all make zooms in those ranges that are good quality. One of the "in" things right now is Tamron's 16-300, but it is crop sensor only. Their 28-300 is a FF lens and will work on both types of body.

There are EF-M lenses, but they are for Canon Mirrorless bodies only. Also don't buy any very old (pre late 80's) Canon lenses, they are for a no longer produced mount system and require adapters to use on new bodies.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Sorry, but I disagree with some of the previous responses...



First, I agree with some other responses that full frame is ideal for landscape and architectural photography. It also can be very good for portraiture. Canon currently offers five FF models: 6D, 5DIII, 5DS, 5DS-R and 1DX. (The latter is a very high speed sports-oriented camera... and costs around $4500.) A used 5DII also might be worth consideration.

Considering your uses, I'd recommend you take a hard look at the 6D.

The 20MP 6D has a fairly straight-forward 11-point AF systems, not the greatest for sports/action photography, but just fine for your intended purposes. The 22MP 5DIII would be fine, too, but has a much more complex and sophisticated 61-point AF system, better for sports but likely more than you would need for your purposes. That AF system and a few other things are what you pay an extra $1000 for, with the 5DIII.

Both these FF Canon are capable of similarly high image quality... The 6D is considered by many to be the best high ISO/low light Canon model. 6D controls, size and weight will be more what you are accustomed to with your T3i. The 5DIII is bigger, heavier and has a somewhat different control layout.

6D costs roughly $1000 less than the 5DIII (approx. $1500 vs $2500), which will go a long way toward that 24-70 lens, which you are going to need immediately since your EF-S kit lens will not physically fit onto or work properly on any of these full frame cameras. (More about lens choices below...)

If you were to consider used, the 21MP 5DII has a simpler AF system similar to 6D, but is built more like the 5DIII. Used 5DII often can be found for the same or a bit less than a new 6D.

If you have a really big budget, the 50MP 5DS might be worth consideration... it is essentially the same as the 5DIII, except for the much higher resolution sensor. At $3400, it costs roughly $900 more than the 5DIII and almost $2000 more than the 6D, but anyone considering one also may need to spend some more for computer upgrades to be able to efficiently handle to the huge image files the 5DS produces. The 5DS is not a high ISO/low light camera. In fact, it's highest settable ISO for still photography is ISO 6400 (5DIII and 6D both can be set as much as 4 stops higher, to ISO 102400). If planning to make really huge prints, the 5DS may be ideal... But Canon recommends it be carefully matched to select lenses that also have extremely high resolution.

The 5DS-R is the same as 5DS, but a little more expensive and fitted with a weaker anti-alias filter in order to uncompromisingly capture the last little bit of fine detail in every image. The trade-off is that this will increase the chance of moiré and that can be problematic for architectural and portrait work, in particular.

You will want lenses that can serve well on these full frame cameras, in order to get the best out of them.

Often in kit with them you'll find the EF 24-105L IS USM. It's a pretty good lens, but unless you get a screamingly good price on it a far less expensive EF 28-135 IS USM can match it for image quality and other performance factors... it just isn't as well built or sealed for dust/moisture resistance as the L-series lens.

The EF 24-70/2.8L II USM is the top of the line choice for full frame cameras... Fantastic image quality, but rather large, heavy and it costs $1900.

An interesting alternative is the EF 24-70/4L IS USM, which also has very high image quality... and though still a lot of lens... smaller, lighter and a lot lower cost (usually $1000, presently $800 on sale). This lens also has image stabilization (IS), which the f2.8 version does not.

For landscapes, in particular, I'd also want a wider lens. It maybe useful for some architectural shots, too... particularly for interiors. The EF 16-35/2.8L II USM is the top-of-the-line option selling for around $1600... But the somewhat more compact and newer EF 16-35/4L IS USM is not only less expensive ($1100), it also has better edge-to-edge, corner-to-corner sharpness, as well as IS. For a little less money ($800) the older EF 17-40/4L USM is still available, too... with very good image quality, though the newer 16-35mm models are better.

And, for portrait work I'd want some longer lenses and usually use primes with larger apertures than any zoom offers, allowing for stronger background blur effects, which can be helpful particularly with candid portraiture where you have less control over backgrounds. On my full frame Canon, for portraiture I most often use the EF 85/1.8 USM and EF 135/2L USM lenses (about $450 and $1000, respectively). Both are excellent and fast focusing (which can be helpful for candid shots, in particular). The EF 50/1.4 USM (about $375) also is quite useful for full length portraits, couples and small groups. There also are the premium EF 50/1.2L USM and EF 85/1.2L II USM ($1450 and $2000, respectively). These are fantastic lenses, but bigger, heavier and more challenging to work with. The 85/1.2 also is a bit slower auto focusing. There also are Sigma "Art" 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 lenses that are excellent and sell for around $900 each.

For candid portrait work in particular, gear that's less intrusive may be an advantage. This is another possible advantage of the somewhat smaller, lighter 6D and a couple rather compact prime lenses.

Finally, you mention having an EF 65mm lens... The only 65mm Canon makes is the MP-E 65mm Macro which is a manual focus, extra high magnification macro lens. It is rather specialized since it can do no less than 1:1 (life size) and up to 5:1 (5X life size) magnification.

If macro photography is another area you are interested in, for more versatility I'd highly recommend you instead or in addition consider getting the Canon EF 100/2.8 USM macro lens ($550, or $725 with tripod ring & lens hood) or EF 100/2.8L IS USM ($800, or $975 w/tripod ring). Both are excellent lenses... The older, less expensive non-IS lens serves me well, IS doesn't help all that much for higher magnification shooting. Someone who wants to use the lens for non-macro purposes a lot might prefer the IS version. There also are some very good third party macro lenses: Tokina 100/2.8, Tamron 90/2.8, Sigma 105/2.8, for example. All these are 1:1 capable macro lenses, which means they can focus from infinity to 1:1 (life size)... for most people this is a much more practical range than the MP-E 65mm's 1:1 to 5:1. If needed, the 1:1 lenses can be boosted to a bit higher magnifications, around 2:1, by adding macro extension rings behind them.

Hope this helps. Have fun shopping!

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

gemlenz Loc: Gilbert Arizona

:thumbup:

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Get the 5D Mk III or even consider the 6D... I have the 7D MKII for birding and although it is an impressive camera the ISO performance sucks.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Yes. Also, since you are starting out on your journey you probably have some hard thinking to do. There will be no shortage of opinions to help you, some better than others, but at the end of the day you need to make the decision and thus what your criteria are.

If cost is a factor, then a full-frame system will likely end up being more expensive for fairly obvious reasons, both bodies and lenses tend to be more expensive. APS-C based systems can use good quality but less expensive lenses especially at the wider end of the spectrum since the area of coverage is less. Full frame lenses are frequently aimed at the higher end / pro market and are often built to higher standards which pushes cost higher.

If weight or size is a factor, APS-C based systems are likely to be a little smaller and lighter.

If those are not major considerations, and it comes down to other factors it is still a good idea to choose either full frame or APS-C from the outset unless you like trading equipment.

Finally, technology is always changing, but much faster with camera bodies than with lenses.

Since the 7D mk II is a relatively new high end APS-C camera it is unlikely to be replaced anytime soon, making it a very good basis to build an APS-C based system around. It has been on the market just long enough for the kinks to be ironed out!

If you want to be in the full frame realm, it starts to get interesting. The 5D mk III is coming up for replacement, as is the 6D. Both are well regarded, but may get even cheaper during the first half of 2016, as their replacements get introduced. If you want the latest and greatest it may be good to hold off for a few months.

Canon Rumors is an excellent resource for getting an idea of what the future may hold: http://www.canonrumors.com/predictions-on-what-to-expect-from-canon-in-2016/

Have a great New Year