Must choose!

[armis]

Hi all,

I have the opportunity to get either a 5d mark II or a new lens for my 20D: a Sigma 70-200 OS.

I realize comparing cameras to lenses is like apples to oranges, but:
- assuming I like being able to shoot in low-light conditions and even with a 50 f/1.8, the 20D just doesn't cut it (1600 ISO is just terrible even with noise reduction, and 800 simply isn't fast enough for bars or concerts)
- assuming price isn't a factor here (I have enough for the 5D, if I get the lens I'll just save the remaining amount)
- assuming that whatever the outcome, I'll get one before Christmas and the other as soon as I save up for the rest (no ETA on that)
- assuming all my current lenses fit the 5D, and that I won't need to buy any accessories again (CF cards and remote are all compatible)
- assuming that without the lens I don't have anything in that focal range wider than f/5.6 or so (all I have is a general-purpose 18-250 superzoom) - see my sig for my other lenses
- assuming, finally, that a friend asked me to cover his wedding on New Year's Eve (not as a pro photographer, he knows better - but I'd still like to be able to grab a few good ones for him)

Which would you grab first?

[OsmosisStudios]

The body, for sure. It wont work with your 17-50 or 18-250, but assuming you're paying the same price, you're getting an wicked deal on the 5DII

[armis]

I'm not getting a deal on anything. I have enough money to get the 5DII, or the lens and keep the extra cash for a later purchase.

However, you have me worried: why wouldn't the 17-50 or 18-250 work? Aren't they both EF mounts?

[OsmosisStudios]

EF-S. They work on the crop-sensor cameras (like your 20D) but not on the full-frame bodies (like the 5D and 1 series). They wont even mount.

[armis]

Wow, you're right! The 18-250 seems actually listed as a EF mount but the 17-50 is definitely an EF-S. Dang, now I'd need to get another wide-ish zoom, or a wide prime... Although I can turn in the 17-50 to fund that.

[ceremus]

Originally Posted by armis

Wow, you're right! The 18-250 seems actually listed as a EF mount but the 17-50 is definitely an EF-S. Dang, now I'd need to get another wide-ish zoom, or a wide prime... Although I can turn in the 17-50 to fund that.

If you like the framing FOV on your 17-50 you'll probably want to seriously consider something in the range of a 24-70mm lens, that's about the equivalent FOV on a full frame. If you still want an f/2.8 it's worth considering the Canon L, it's expensive, but a rock-solid workhorse and practically the best option in that range. If that's out of budget, Tamron makes a 28-75 that's worth consideration, though it's a lot softer in the corners.

[sk66]

Tough call. The lens is no big help for what you want to do and the body will require new (more expensive) lenses....

I'd suggest you consider upgrading to a 60d or 7d.... Do some research on ISO performance.
And then get a couple of better lenses. 70-200 would not be my first choice for what you are wanting.

[armis]

Hmm. All the decent fixed or zoom lenses I see in the 17-50 equivalent full frame range are actually pretty expensive... And I don't want to do without a wide lens. Guess that solved my dilemma then: 70-200, here I come!

Thanks for the pointers.

Originally Posted by sk66

Tough call. The lens is no big help for what you want to do and the body will require new (more expensive) lenses....

I'd suggest you consider upgrading to a 60d or 7d.... Do some research on ISO performance.
And then get a couple of better lenses. 70-200 would not be my first choice for what you are wanting.

Well, above 50mm I can't do better than f/4, and at 200mm I'm stuck with f/6.3, so f/2.8 would be quite the improvement. What lens would you suggest then?

As for the bodies, my research seems to indicate that neither the 7d or 60d are significant improvements over the 20d in terms of low-light persformance. Maybe one stop better, tops; not worth the money.

[harvk5]

Get the body. Use a higher ISO with your 1.8. you should have plenty of light. Do you use the view finder or do you try to shoot using the screen? If you are using the screen you are losing lots of speed. Holding the camera away from your face creates lots of camera shake. You should be able to hand hold at about 30th of a sec with some practice. At that speed, with 1.8 and say 3200 ISO you will get some neat shots. Just some suggestions.

[armis]

There's no live view on the 20D; plus half the reason I got a DSLR in the first place 3 years ago was because I wanted a proper viewfinder!

Now that I think about it though, the 5DII is getting a bit old, isn't it? Shouldn't we expect a 5DIII or something soon-ish? (in which case the 5DII would drop in price, I suppose)