SoCo n Lime wrote:
there are two main factors that make a good 'quality' image .. one is content the other is equipment

Equipment is clearly necessary because without some equipment you wouldn't have a photograph at all.

However, to imply that having 'better' (ie. apparently, in your mind more expensive) equipment will improve anybody's photography is utter nonsense. Most of the people who pay me for 1-1 tuition sessions have significantly more expensive equipment than me. Many of the GWCs who shoot crappy snapshots of my model friends have at least a 5dII (or Nikon equivalent) and yet some of their images are so bad that models won't even put them up on their blogs after being paid to model for them.

To say that anybody can 'outgrow' a camera like the 7D (in the OP's case after only 18 months of photography) is simply perpetuating the myth that somehow a more expensive camera will give you better pictures. Cartier Bresson used a 35mm rangefinder all his life. Nobody in their right mind would suggest that he'd have made 'better' pictures with an 8x10 view camera - he used the tool that suited him and that was adequate for the job.

Time for a couple of old sayings:-

The most important piece equipment for a photographer is 3 inches behind the camera."

"If you want to be a better photographer, stand in front of more interesting stuff."

When the OP talks about 'punch' he's not going to suddenly, magically get that by buying a FF camera. Yes, the 5d1 makes nice clean files (due to the large photosites), nicer than many crop cameras, but it's just a file. What the OP needs at this stage of his development is most likely a few more options in terms of focal length and DOF to play around with for a year or two, not the cleanest files ever to come out of a DSLR.

Of course, if you're photographing landscapes, buildings or even catalogues and need a huge file and the ability to capture the finest details and greatest possible dynamic range then yes, a larger sensor will probably be in order. But that's simply using the right tool for the job. For 99% of model photography (what the OP is interested in) a FF or MF camera is overkill, not necessary and certainly won't actually improve his photography in the slightest.



Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

SoCo n Lime wrote:
im stepping out to the gym for my weds 2 hour workout.. ive just printed out a copy of brunesci profile to stick on the punch bag

well.. seen as my head is so far up my ass my vision is somewhat obscured..

it would only be fair

Wow dude, what is your problem?

You should know that some of the best work ever created during this digital age was shot on the early crop cameras, D200's, EOS 20D's etc.

Now, repeat after me, 'it's not the camera, it's the creativity and vision of the person behind it that matters'

Then take a chill pill!

SoCo n Lime wrote:
a FF 5 d mk1 is a very cheap option and not expensive as you are detailing. the same cost as upgrading from a canon 300d to 550d which the op is already thinking about. a 300 d can be bought for £86 a 550d can be bought for £490. a used 5D mk1 body can be bought for £330

Clearly the used 5d1 is a bargain and certainly an option for the OP; I'm not disputing that.

However, what I am disputing, is this initial idiotic statement from your first post in this thread:-

   "It sounds like you've hit (experiencing) the aps learning curve roof "

What the hell is the "APS learning curve roof"?

To me, despite all your subsequent backpedalling, this statement implies that you feel that somehow a crop body is holding the OP back in his development (pun acknowledged) as a photographer. How? How exactly? And please don't talk about his portfolio because this isn't the Critique forum and he hasn't asked for a critique of his work.



Ciao
Stefano
www.stefanobrunesci.com

SoCo n Lime wrote:
you can afford it (although stefano seems to of over looked it) and you'll have all the benefits FF will give you with your preference to lighting and subject.. you'll even have change towards a new lens to go with your nifty 50mm

£330 quid for the body as ive already mentioned

Although I agree that the 5d1 is (was) a good camera (especially for this price), finding a used one with a relatively low number of shutter actuations over 7 years after they were released is likely to be a challenge for the OP.

Also, the "benefits" of going for an old FF body like this over a newer crop body like the 50D or the 550D the OP was originally considering are what, exactly? Worse AF, worse high ISO performance, no longer supported by Canon (no drivers for Win7 64bit for instance) etc. etc...



Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

SoCo n Lime wrote:
--snip--

snobbery..? my experience is having been schooled and plenty of real world experience on both crop canon's and full frame's.

--snip--

This might be a British versus English thing, but across the pond over here in the colonies, when someone says "having been schooled," it often refers to being lectured and corrected. I'm assuming you meant it in the formal sense of schooling, but I got a chuckle reading it.

Rachel Reilly wrote:
7d is an amazing camera!

Yes it is!

A  M  U   L  wrote:
Sorry someone mentioned something about getting a flash, could anyone suggest a good basic flash attachment to by? for my canon 300D / or 550D / or 5D / or 50D lol if I get them?.

I like my Canon 430EX II.

SoCo n Lime wrote:
..snip..

lenses / glass does make a difference but only a slight notable difference compared to the whip lash you receive by going up a format although ff to aps-c is not as big as from ff to medium say. i would certainly advocate good glass on what ever system you use.
have.

.. snip..

I shoot with a 7D (crop camera) and a 5DII (full frame).

On both these cameras I use; 24-70 2.8 L and 70-200 2.8 L, 50mm 1.8 and a 85mm 1.8. (I've even shot with a canon 55-250mm).

I've compared images from both cameras using these different lenses and you know what, most of the time no discernible difference. Certainly not the 'whiplash' difference you are talking about.

And this is not just web size images I'm talking about; I've had canvasses commissioned from clients at 50 inches x 35 inches in size. okay, that's not Billboard but it's big enough to test the image quality.

And further, if I had to recommend to the OP whom to listen to; you or Stefano; based on the images in portfolios and on websites, then I know who it would be my friend.

SoCo n Lime wrote:
i really dont care if im remembered or not

OK.






Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

Rachel Reilly wrote:
random post:
i read something about upgrading from the 7d

7d is an amazing camera!

It is amazing, no doubt about it, and paired with some quality L lenses it's totally fucking orgasmic!

PIEntertainment wrote:
I think if you have the cash you should go for the 60D, I upgraded last year from the 450D to this and it's much much better. You can shoot at higher ISO's more often, the moving screen actually is very useful as well and so is having the LCD screen on top to change setting faster.

I use the Canon 60D and am quite happy, if you're willing to go with a crop sensor, the Canon 60D, for me, has all the features I need to work in the studio and on location, its affordable (currently about $900 US) allowing you to spend money where it counts on glass.  The only issue I've had with the Canon 60D is that I frequently change f-stop accidentally.
Some people have found the 50D a disappointment, many people find that the images aren't as crisp as in the 40D, especially at higher ISO and with dramatic range.

SoCo n Lime wrote:

SoCo n Lime wrote:
..snip..

lenses / glass does make a difference but only a slight notable difference compared to the whip lash you receive by going up a format although ff to aps-c is not as big as from ff to medium say. i would certainly advocate good glass on what ever system you use.
have.

.. snip..

i covered this info already if you care to re-read. in your scenario we both agree there isn't a whip lash moment but there is a difference


lol do you know all about me? are you sure you have seen my work bar the 4 pics you see in my port?

if i was to recommend anything i would say not to judge a book by its alias cover.

im actually quite surprised you are leading on to of found my portfolio of work "portfolio and websites" considering 95% of my commercial work is done locally and all gained on word of mouth and building relationships i.e i dont need to put 95% of it online. it sounds more like sticking up for your buddy

The OP asked a question about upgrading and I do believe that it's been answered, several times!

So, maybe time to quit posting these lengthy replies? No-one is interested in your lectures!