What to buy - Canon 7D or 5Dmk2?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Azuremen
  • 22 comments
  • 2,714 views
Azuremen

Azuremen

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Premium
Messages
17,865
United States
509
I'm in a situation where I can afford to buy either at the moment, and where I really feel my 400D is holding me back quite a bit. The issue is which to get, the 7D or 5Dmk2... Basically, I need reasons to justify why I should go with the 5Dmk2 over the 7D, as I am not making money off my work at the moment, and I don't know if I need a full-frame sensor, or if it is worth the extra money.

So, talk me into getting a full-frame, or over sell the 7D for me. Just can't settle at the moment. Though I guess I could say what I am wanting to shoot now - more indoor, lower light portraits and documenting events and conventions. Will still do landscape work quite a bit, but I've been wanting to get access to a better sensor and ISO options for the low lighting I keep finding myself in. The 7D appeals to me at the moment because of the higher burst modes (nice for catching facial expressions from players, etc) and superior AF system, plus the cost being low enough that I could fit another lens into my budget. The 5Dmk2, well, it is full frame and a very solid piece of equipment, plus the slightly higher resolution.

So, tell me what to buy :dopey: Also, lens suggestions would be nice as well.
 
I've been recommended the 7D as the best all rounder... I think if low light situations are common I'd get the cheaper camera and put the saved money towards lower f lenses (if possible)

Just my two cents, I'm no expert!
 
What lenses do you have at the minute? The 7D takes - to my knowledge - EF-S lenses, whereas the 5D2 definitely does not. If you've got a bag-full of EF-S that suddenly makes the 5D2 very expensive.

That said, full frame is definitely worth the money. It's difficult to pin down exactly, but I just find that FF images are more analogue in appearance, especially at very wide apertures. Plus, the larger, brighter, viewfinder makes shooting much more pleasureable.

The only thing I don't like about my 1d3 is that it's only APS-H. I still use the 5D quite frequently.
 
At the moment, I just have a kit lens from my 400D, and an EF 50mm f/1.8. At least one piece of quality glass will be bought with the camera. But I honestly haven't looked into what is what for lenses since I've just not had the money or desire to scrap it together for these kind of purchases.

I've also never worked with the 7D, but the times I've used the 5Dmk2 have made a lasting impression of it just being incredibly solid. And it the shutter sounds like a real camera :lol:

I am aware I could get some serious improvement just getting some better glass, but my 400D is beat and it really, really suffers from noise at ISO 800 or 1600, much more than the 5Dmk2 does at 3200 from what I've seen.
 
GilesGuthrie
It's difficult to pin down exactly, but I just find that FF images are more analogue in appearance, especially at very wide apertures. Plus, the larger, brighter, viewfinder makes shooting much more pleasureable.
Click to expand...
This x1000. More than better ISO performance or anything else, this is what makes the difference.

FF images have this "character" to them, that can't quite be described. Especially when you combine wide focal lenghts and apertures, there's this "pop" that APS-C sensors can't reproduce. A bit like 35mm vs medium-format.

Also, for me, 35mm focal lenghts make more sense, but that's not that important.


As for lens, I don't know Canon's system that well, so I can't help. I mean, I know there are those excellent f/1.2's... ;)
 
Azuremen
At the moment, I just have a kit lens from my 400D, and an EF 50mm f/1.8. At least one piece of quality glass will be bought with the camera. But I honestly haven't looked into what is what for lenses since I've just not had the money or desire to scrap it together for these kind of purchases.
Click to expand...

I've just had a scoot through your photostream. You should be thinking about the 24-70 F/2.8L to go with your 5d MkII. It'll give you a similar FL range to your 18-55, and the flexibility to play with the wide aperture. But if you get a good price offer on the 24-105 F/4L IS, don't be shy of that: it's a better lens than its detractors make out.
 
GilesGuthrie
That said, full frame is definitely worth the money. It's difficult to pin down exactly, but I just find that FF images are more analogue in appearance, especially at very wide apertures. Plus, the larger, brighter, viewfinder makes shooting much more pleasureable.
Click to expand...

That's because it is a little more analogue in appearance, FF will always have a slightly better dynamic range than crop sensors. I'd say 5Dmk2 any day of the week, wait a few months though for the mk3 to appear, then get a mk2 cheaper.
 
GilesGuthrie
I've just had a scoot through your photostream. You should be thinking about the 24-70 F/2.8L to go with your 5d MkII. It'll give you a similar FL range to your 18-55, and the flexibility to play with the wide aperture. But if you get a good price offer on the 24-105 F/4L IS, don't be shy of that: it's a better lens than its detractors make out.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I think most of what is on my flickr is more stills and landscapes, though I do have that auto-x in there.

A random shot of what I think I'll be doing more of.

qd9jD.jpg


Floats
That's because it is a little more analogue in appearance, FF will always have a slightly better dynamic range than crop sensors. I'd say 5Dmk2 any day of the week, wait a few months though for the mk3 to appear, then get a mk2 cheaper.
Click to expand...

The issue with waiting is I'd like to have the new camera by the end of August for PAX, since I have a media badge this year and will have some responsibility to actually document things.
 
Azuremen
The issue with waiting is I'd like to have the new camera by the end of August for PAX, since I have a media badge this year and will have some responsibility to actually document things.
Click to expand...

You could always rent a camera for the event or even before hand if you really can't decide them.
 
I have a 7D which is great for capturing action with 8 fps, waiting for the 5d Mark 3 to come out though. At the moment though I think the 60D gives the 7D a real run for its money. Maybe get the 60D and a really good lens for the price difference? Like maybe a 24-70 f/2.8. Or maybe the 5D 2 when 3 comes out. Or maybe keep what you have and invest in L or EF lenses. So many possibilities with Canon. :lol:
 
Sell the 400D and lenses, get a Nikon D700 + 24-70. You'll then have full frame, awesome AF and noise handling. [/Nikon fanboi mode] :p

If you want to stick with Canon, I'd go for the 5DII, the AF may be worse but it'll do the job.
 
^ Are you ready to hear about the wonders of 21 megapixel and 1080p video...? :p
 
DiabolicalMask
^ Are you ready to hear about the wonders of 21 megapixel and 1080p video...? :p
Click to expand...

Been there, done that. :p 12mp and some good printing skills are enough really, as for video, it's a cool feature, not gonna lie. But Nikon do offer a camera that offers the best of both worlds for the needs he's specifying, so it's silly to let brand loyalty get in the way, especially if you're not heavily invested in glass.
 
F1GTR
it's silly to let brand loyalty get in the way, especially if you're not heavily invested in glass.
Click to expand...

Definitely.

And personally, for the same price, I'd go with a D700 as well.
 
Has the 5d Mk3 even been announced yet? 5d Mk2 was at least two years outside of the Canon refresh cycle, so if it hasn't been announced I'd be very surprised if you saw it before the end of 2012.

Right now, Canon need to be concentrating on replacing the 1Ds MkIII.
 
I've not seen anything official on the next 5D, though I've looked around only a bit.

As for sticking with Canon, part of the reason is to be able, if needed, to use my 400D as a backup and be able to use the same glass on it.
 
GilesGuthrie
Plus, the larger, brighter, viewfinder makes shooting much more pleasureable.
Click to expand...

7D (APS-C): Viewfinder coverage 100 %, magnification 1.0
5D Mark II (FF): Viewfinder coverage 98 %, magnification 0.71

Viewfinder size: (magnification x coverage x 100) / crop factor

7D: (1.0 x 1.0 x 100) / 1.6 = 62.5
5D Mark II: (0.98 x 0,71 x 100) / 1.0 = 69.58

The viewfinder of the 5D Mark II is larger, but not much (about 10 %).
 
Not only 10% is a very reasonable amount, but also, in pratice, the difference is big enough. Adding to that, the "brightness" factor is very important here, which makes the difference bigger than numbers can suggest.

But there's nothing like trying both side to side.
 
Starting to lean a bit more towards getting the 5D, though there is also the idea of now getting a T3i and some very, very nice EF lenses, and then upgrading to full frame later.
 
I probably can't offer much of a comparison view as I have never tried either the 5D MKII or the 7D, however I am an original 5D owner who has had many other Canon's including 500D, 20D, 50D & 1D MKII. I have to say that the image quality & dynamic range that come from a full frame is brilliant. It's now the only camera I will use and don't even feel the need to upgrade it. I pretty much only shoot exclusively with an EF 28mm f/1.8 mounted to it.

If you can spare the cash, I would suggest the 5D however I must admit, there has been a lot of positive noise over the 7D since it's release.
 
Well, I decided to do it live - ended up with the 5DmkII. Currently have the 35mm F/2 (compensation after a fiasco with Canon) and the 50mm F/1.8 - next lens is the 17-40mm L. And then the 70-200mm F/4 L.
 
The 17-40mm is an awesome lens,
Click to expand...

In my opinion the EF 17-40mm f4.0 is one of the worst EF lenses available. Especially on a full frame camera this lens (corner sharpness) is very disappointing.

so is the 70-200mm F/4L.
Click to expand...

If you mount a lens slower than f2.8 to a 5D Mark II, you lose the only availabe cross type AF field. I therefore would not recommend any f4.0 lens, unless you need 500, 600 or 800mm focal length.
 

Latest Posts

Back