Canon 7D vs 5D Discussion - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

11/29/2011 02:17:32 PM · #26

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Giles_uk:
is this US only or worldwide?

i fancy a 5d mkii hehe

It's still expensive, just a nice discount. About 1800 bucks, I believe, and it's a refurbished Canon with a 6-month warranty you get.

R.

I calculated it to be just shy of $1700. The warranty is 90 days.

MinsoPhoto

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

11/29/2011 02:18:50 PM · #27

Lets just say I had a 7D and 5DMII at the same time and had to sell one of them. You see which one survived the cut :)

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

11/29/2011 02:23:57 PM · #28

I think I'd agree with Shannon. If the wide angle from the full frame is not your huge priority I would probably go with the 7D. You get video and you get lots more fps. The upgraded DIGIC probably makes noise control pretty much a wash (though I don't know objective evidence to suppor this). The 10-22 is a good enough AP-C lens that the wide angle problem can be overcome.

I loved my 5D though, but I think the 7D is a pretty sweet camera.

11/29/2011 02:23:59 PM · #29

Originally posted by MinsoPhoto:

Lets just say I had a 7D and 5DMII at the same time and had to sell one of them. You see which one survived the cut :)

I currently have the okay from the boss fora 5D or a 7D for sure. Ill see how negotiations go tonight with the new info.

11/29/2011 02:25:34 PM · #30

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Full frame is a pretty high priority for me and landscapes.

Samsung Galaxy S24, S24+, S24 Ultra

11/29/2011 02:30:04 PM · #31

I would love to have a new ff camera for my Hawaii trip in Feb.

Bear_Music

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

11/29/2011 02:35:04 PM · #32

Originally posted by MinsoPhoto:

Lets just say I had a 7D and 5DMII at the same time and had to sell one of them. You see which one survived the cut :)

Well, WE have both. And for all that I absolutely LOVE the ergonomics of the 7D, I wouldn't trade my 5D for it. It's MUCH harder to produce those buttery-smooth (there's that phrase again!) landscape images with the 7D. I know this for a fact. That 7D is a great camera, but it's not for me. Next stop, 5Diii, unless I get some killer deal on a 56Dii in the interim.

R.

MinsoPhoto

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

11/29/2011 02:36:45 PM · #33

I miss the focusing system of the 7D but that is about it. Not a bad camera by any stretch but boy do I love my FF

Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS

11/29/2011 02:44:57 PM · #34

If I cannot convince the boss of the mark II, I'm still split about 50-50 on the 5D and 7D.

vawendy

Sony Alpha 1

11/29/2011 06:19:11 PM · #35

If you ever do wildlife, I wouldn't consider the 5D. The crop sensor is so nice for wildlife, and the 10-22 is a very sweet lens for landscape. And 10 fps? 5D can't even begin to touch that! If you only want landscape, get the 5D. If you want to branch out to other things, I think the 7D is more versatile.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

11/29/2011 07:21:39 PM · #36

FWIW, you can compare the image quality of both cameras side-by-side HERE. The 5D is certainly smoother at full size with mid-ISO settings, but I suspect you'd have a hard time telling the difference on a print, and the 7D wins easily at ISO6400. ;-P It comes down to your intended use: if it's strictly landscapes and studio work, then it's hard to go wrong with a 5D, but for anything off a tripod I'd rather have the 7D simply because image quality is irrelevant if you miss the shot.

11/29/2011 07:31:05 PM · #37

So, where I stand at this point is if I can get the go ahead on the Mk II ill do that, if not my leaning is toward the 7D.

MikeO

Fujifilm x100

11/29/2011 07:38:52 PM · #38

Of course a much cheaper way to go FF is to buy a decent 35mm , plenty of high end Canon and Nikon out there for next to nothing and you get to take photos whithout seeing them instantly, which may not suit if you use your camera in machine gun mode.
I moved from a 30D to a 7D and love my 7D, I still use my 30D and my 20D. I also have a EOS 5 35mm which still produces excellent images and when processing I always get a cd cut.

So save Â£Â£Â£Â£ or $$$$ and get a 'proper' camera ;-)

Tamron 16-300mm Di II VC PZD MACRO w/Canon Nikon mount

11/29/2011 07:50:45 PM · #39

Here is my take on the 7D

It sucks in low light, it is the most horrendous camera around for low light. I can not even begin to describe how bad it is. Okay I can. I bought a Rebel T3 as a back up, it is the most amazing camera for low light, unbelievably sharp, , my old 50D was amazing in low light, sharpness etc. My 7D can not even handle taking a snapshot with all the kitchen lights on with the kids in the picture without it having to be above 2000 ISO + usually it has to go to 3600 and it is chock full of grain.

BUT outdoors, it is amazing, just horrendously terrible indoors.

If I had a choice now, I would have bought another 50D, but I wanted bigger and better with more bang and whistles. My fault entirely!

BUT again, BUT, I could have a shitty camera that was made on a Friday evening at 5pm and others do not have this problem. (unless you Google it, then you see all the other dissatisfied people with a 7D).

Tamron 16-300mm Di II VC PZD MACRO w/Canon Nikon mount

11/29/2011 07:51:38 PM · #40

And, I also belive you will have to buy a complete set of new lenses as your old one will not work with the 5D

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

11/29/2011 08:00:58 PM · #41

Originally posted by JulietNN:

Here is my take on the 7D...It sucks in low light...

I'm surprised (very) that you have compared it unfavorably to the 50D. Check out this page. Scroll down to the RAW noise graph, click through the Chroma, Black and Gray options, and notice how the 7D simply spanks the 50D at high ISO. If you are seeing much worse performance from your 7D than you are used to from a 50D, I'd check if something is wrong.

Tamron 16-300mm Di II VC PZD MACRO w/Canon Nikon mount

11/29/2011 08:25:37 PM · #42

This is how bad it can be in low light, and this was NOT even indoors, this was taken at:

08.15am

Auto ISO 6400

F8

1/400

100% crop

Remember I live in the desert, so bright sunlight most times.

Tamron 16-300mm Di II VC PZD MACRO w/Canon Nikon mount

11/29/2011 08:25:59 PM · #43

Too add, this was with the new whiz bang Tamron Lens

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

11/29/2011 08:35:26 PM · #44

Originally posted by JulietNN:

This is how bad it can be in low light...

Well, yep, that's got some "character," LOL!
So, I grabbed a screenshot and brought it into Ps. I looked at each channel sequentially... and got a surprise! The "noise" pattern is exactly the same in each channel. Not right at all. So looked closer, and the "noise" has the telltale signature of JPEG compression artifact. I ass-u-me that you shot this in JPEG, and that for whatever reason the compression setting on the captured images is set to be very high.

Tamron 16-300mm Di II VC PZD MACRO w/Canon Nikon mount

11/29/2011 09:05:31 PM · #45

Nope this was shot in RAW!!!

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

11/29/2011 09:10:47 PM · #46

Originally posted by JulietNN:

Nope this was shot in RAW!!!

Well now you've really piqued my interest... would you mind sending me the RAW file? I'd like to see what it looks like, well, in the RAW.

Tamron 16-300mm Di II VC PZD MACRO w/Canon Nikon mount

11/29/2011 09:25:46 PM · #47

I had to reduce the size to 2000 to send it to you (with just a save as), but it is in your private email right now. Have stuck the 2000 in my workshop too!

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

11/29/2011 09:45:31 PM · #48

Um... I'm not seeing a problem? I would expect a significant amount of noise at ISO 6400 (a setting that's not even available on the 5D), and a slow 15X zoom isn't going to perform anywhere near the camera's potential. Under the circumstances, I'd be thrilled with those results. Of course I probably wouldn't choose to shoot at ISO 6400, but by using auto ISO you've left that decision up to the camera. So it's sort of like making all the AF points active and then complaining that the camera didn't focus on what you wanted.

11/30/2011 01:50:30 AM · #49

New dilemma, I have ruled the old 5D out I think. I think I could just barely eek out enough for a 5D mark ii and comfortably a 7D. After reading some reviews the 7D is quite compelling. That sucker is FAST. For me, its selling points are its speed, price, and built in flash transmitter! The 5D Mk ii has the full frame and fantastic quality. It's a little slower and is a bit more. I thought the Mk ii was a no brainer at first but the 7D is quite compelling. I think my wife is okay with the Mk ii, still a little hesitant though whereas the 7D is for sure ok. I didn't think it'd be this tough.