Upload & Sell: On
| Re: 50D or 7D? |
I have both the 50d and 7d. In good light, they both focus equally well. .
That\'s good to know. If there\'s not significant difference in IQ, then maybe I\'ll stick with the 50D and just buy better glass. The 70-200 f4 is tempting, but the Tamron 70-300 for $330 used is a tempting too. Other than 6 weeks of little league baseball though, I don\'t really have a need for the extra reach. I was thinking the 18-135 STM would be an upgrade to the 18-55 for FL and possibly IQ, and 135 would help at the baseball field if I\'m close. It\'s little league, so it\'s not like a big stadium The 18-135 and 50 1.4 would be a nice combo. I\'d have a good walkaround lens and a good portrait lens.
I went from a 40D (and 30D and 10D before that) to a 7D, and I completely agree - in sunlight, I don\'t think the AF of the 7D gives you a big enough advantage over the 50D to upgrade.
Also, when you say LL baseball, are you talking 45-foot basepaths? If that\'s the case, then a 70-200 would be plenty, and f/4 is fine in daylight too. Assuming you have a good shooting position (dugout, or along the baselines) you can easily get the entire infield and the batter with a 70-200. Outfielders (who rarely see much game action anyway in LL), I used to shoot warming up between innings. Impossible to tell that it\'s not game action.