SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Super, people here tend to be VERY guarded with your money! It's almost reverse snobbery. They advice you learn what you have till it's holding you back, yet many of those very advisors are shooting with say a Nikon D810 and their old camera wasn't holding them back either, but yet you need to somehow pay more dues than they did!! LoL
Let me put this in perspective for you...., Take a Canon 70-200 L mkl lens, and compare it to the same in a new mkll lens. The mkll is better in EVERY way. But how much better? Maybe 5%, definably not 10%.
Some are bringing up the Nikon D700...., that camera no matter how GOOD it was in 2008 is almost 10 year old technology. Why is it EVEN in this conversation?!?!?
I shoot with two contemporary cameras. I use them every day. I shoot a lot of studio and sports. I do that with a 7Dll and a 5Ds. BOTH are current technology. After I view 1000 images shot at 50 mp then look at shots taken with my 7ll, I say to myself, "why are all of these shots so SOFT??!!! LoL, then I have to pinch myself, because it's the difference between 50mp and 22mp! The sharpness difference is HUGE!
Anybody that tells you a new lens will make more difference than a new body has been living a very photographically sheltered life. Maybe the absolutely crappiest lens made versus the BEST lens made. But nobody thinking of being a pro is even remotely thinking, "cheapest lenses"!!
The difference between a Canon 85mm f1.8 and a Canon 85mm f1.2 can probably only be seen on test equipment. But the difference between 50mp and 24mp is HUGE! In a portrait at 50mp, seeing the veins in someone's eyes, super sharp, in a 16x20 is just amazing. The difference between an outstanding portrait and every other portrait you see taken by anybody.
The difference between 17mp and 24mp is very little, but the difference between 24mp and 50 mp is HUGE, no matter what good lenses you use, and you still have the ability to crop to 25 mp(50%) and you still have more IQ than 24mp. do that with 24mp and you wind up with only 12mp, not much if you're trying to do Pro grade work.
You said it best, you OWE IT to you're customers to deliver the BEST product that you can. NOT because the CUSTOMER understands it but because that's what Pros do.
If you're a pro you need a FF, if you're not a Pro, it really doesn't matter!
So I stick to my original recommendation of the Canon 5DmklV. It has the very latest tech backed by the biggest most complete system made! You can grow with that model and it won't be replaced for at least 3 years.
Again, good luck.
SS

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Duplicate.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

I'll take your word for the softness of Canon cameras, because everyone who tests sensors says that Canon makes unfortunately poor sensors. But if the 7DII is that much worse than the 5Ds, it certainly is not due to the difference in pixel count! The 7DII has a resolution of 122 lp/mm, and it clearly should produce sharper images that a Nikon D800/D810 with 103 lp/mm, a Nikon D750 with 84, or a D4 with 68 and even a D5 with 78 lp/mm. But the Canon sensors don't make the grade.

And for portraits, where low ISO is used and high dynamic range makes a difference, the best Canon sensors are right there with the low end entry level Nikon D3300 sensor. Here is a chart generated by member bclaff (Bill Claff).

Bill Claff Chart

Canon has very good marketing, which is what it takes to sell their products.

Sheltered in the glow of Sony sensors, used by both Sony and Nikon! The difference between a standard "kit lens" and the high end professional lenses is indeed significant. Using zooms with a 10x (or greater) zoom range might not affect the image quality on a poor sensor, but the difference on high quality sensors is significant.

A good example of Canon marketing. That difference actually can easily be seen, but the real significance is that the Canon 85mm f/1.4 is a lens that makes sense, and the f/1.2 doesn't. The 85mm f/1.8 is not the lens a portrait professional wants.

Yes, and a Nikon D5200 such as the OP is using produces sharper images on 16x20 prints than either of your Canon cameras. (This isn't actually a difference that is significant, except maybe with the 24mp Canon.)

The Canon 5DmkIV has a Dynamic Range to ISO graph that is worse than the entry level Nikon D3300.

Following the fanbois that are like football fans chanting rah rah for a team is hardly the way to choose which camera system to invest in.

Mickey Mantle Loc: New York City

I just switched to mirror less. I shoot with the Sony A6300 and 7R. I love the A6300 more. Crop. Big deal. Go for this combo. It is also better to shoot people with these cameras. Smaller and not as offensive.

Haydon

Thanks for the laugh Apaflo.

Mickey Mantle Loc: New York City

Get old and travel around the world with your Canon gear and then see what I mean

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

There actually are decent reasons to use Canon equipment. SharpShooter rarely ever mentions them. That fanboi stuff is the joke, it just has to arranged in the right order to get the laughs!

You use Canon, and I'm sure you are happy with it. Did you actually compared the differences in cameras and lenses, or are you like SS and look around for what "Pros" are using as your only criteria? I would hope not the later...

queencitysanta Loc: Charlotte, North Carolina

I have a Nikon D800 and Nikon D800e both low activations. They are just to heavy for these 70 year old arms. Let me know if this might interest you.

Mickey Mantle Loc: New York City

NEVER. Could not lug around my D810 and holy trinity anymore

A.J.R. Loc: Devon, UK

Used mainly medium format (and sometimes large format) as a professional (1957 to 2000). Have only ever used APSC since switching to digital and would have no problem using this format professionally, unless I wished to print larger than A3. Have a look at this -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHYidejT3KY

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I see no harm in going to full frame, but I prefer standard (Nikon) DSLRs.

Mickey Mantle Loc: New York City

Get old and then you will switch

tdekany Loc: Oregon

When will you ever stop with your nonsense? The camera is a tool. It doesn't take pictures. You are the very best example how insignificant the gear is. All this DR bs. Every camera body manufactured today is more than good enough. Their only limitations are the gorilla holding the camera.

Mickey Mantle Loc: New York City

I agree. Sony gives me much more enjoyment since it is much easier for me to carry around and take pictures

seemore_Stars

The canon 5D markIV is a nice camera. Full frame cameras require full frame lenses two good ones are canon's EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM and Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM Lens.

camera = $3800
lenses = $3700

You can't take it with you.