80D v 7D MKii

What would you choose

  • 80D

    Votes: 5 55.6%
  • 7D mkii

    Votes: 3 33.3%
  • Other

    Votes: 1 11.1%

  • Total voters
    9
Messages
1,701
Edit My Images
Yes
#1
80D v 7D MKii

I’d like to hear from people who’ve owned both or either.

I’m looking at seriously upgrading my kit to cope with the amount of low light shooting I’m doing

My current kit is
Canon 60D
17-55 2.8
55-250 stm

I already plan on changing the lenses out
17-55 f/2.8 for a 24-70 2.8L
55-250 STM for 70-200 2.8L or magic drainpipe

But I’m torn between the 80D and the 7D ii to replace my 60D

I like among other things , the higher FPS with the 7D ii, but I’m not sure how the lack of a flip / adjustable screen will go down as I have been using it more and more for composition .

I mostly shoot animals
Horse sports
Dog sports etc
As well as live music

So I’m shooting fast moving subjects, often indoors and low light, though occasionally I throw in some architectural to mix it up a bit

Given what I’m shooting, I’d like to hear people’s opinions on both bodies performance especially in low light
 
Messages
1,512
Edit My Images
Yes
#2
I have the 7d2 I think it’s great just the ticket for dogs and horses. I have used it in low light and to be honest it works fine. There will be people here who will say the 80d is better in low light. I would like to say that I don’t understand your reasoning about the 24-70 lens not sure what you would gain by changing it. Best advice is go try both out
 
Messages
123
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
#3
I have never used a 7d (1 or 2) but have the 77d which is similar as a 80d sensor wise. Shooting a lot of low light stuff was my reason for the 77d as it was better than my 100d I was using before. I was happy for a while with the results but only in comparison to the 100d, when looking objectively it was still not handling low light very well.

Have since gone to full frame for the extra low light abilities and it is a huge step forward in my opinion!

The problem you have is your lenses are ef-s lenses so no good on FF, it is why I stepped up to a 77d rather than going straight to FF as I had the same issue.

Once I bought a couple of FF lenses then the body was an easy step to make. Wish I had the budget to make the step in one and bought FF lenses and FF body and not the 77d, in my opinion it was a bit of a wasted step!

Low light improvement is the main reason, the 80d would do for a while but for how long?

I was mainly shooting at dimly lit restaurant events, at night with no extra lighting allowed!

What is your budget?
 
Messages
443
Name
Geoff
Edit My Images
No
#4
Had both, 80d outperforms the 7d2 in low light in my experience. 80d has better dynamic range, and resolution. From a workhorse perspective then the 7d2 shines with dual cards more af points and a larger buffer. In all honesty there is not a great deal between them, the 7D2 does in my opinion require a lot more work and technical ability to get the most out of it.

Just to add, Canon sensors are pretty whack when it comes to low light stuff in my opinion! -- even canons latest gen sensors are well behind the curve in comparison to other brands. That's my 2 penny worth.
 
Last edited:
Messages
3,149
Name
Dominic
Edit My Images
Yes
#5
I have the 80d (not had or used the 7dii), I wouldn't call it a low light camera, but it's pretty good for a Canon crop. Focusing speed and accuracy is good. I tend to think of the 80d as a 7dii lite.
I would be looking at a 5diii if I wanted better low light performance.
When you're on a budget that won't get you top notch equipment (in your case, high end full frame sports equipment), then there is always going to be a compromise.
I use my camera for a variety of subjects, horse's (static and in motion), dogs (pet's), macro and it performs well. My biggest draw back is lenses, I would say a 70-200 2.8 is a lens that lends it's self to what you want to photograph.
 
Messages
66
Name
Nigel
Edit My Images
Yes
#6
I've had both, as Geoff said above 80d is better for low light but 7D II has much better auto focus and feels much better to use imo.

If buying new it might be worth waiting to see what Canon release later in the year as its rumoured that a 80d/7D II replacement is on the cards which may have a new 32.5mp APS-C sensor.
 
OP
OP
gothgirl
Messages
1,701
Edit My Images
Yes
#7
I would like to say that I don’t understand your reasoning about the 24-70 lens not sure what you would gain by changing it. Best advice is go try both out
I have the 17-55 which I’m usually using at 55mm , for what I shoot I use the higher end of the zoom more often so the 24-70 makes more sense for the extra reach as I very rarely use it at 17
 
Messages
23,103
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#8
low light? 80d.
The 7dII is better than the older 18mpix sensor - but not as good as the 80d, though I haven't tried both so I couldn't confirm by how much.

I have owned cameras with all of Canon's 1.6 crop sensors except the one in the 7dII, when it was launched, the reviews were mixed, some claiming it was revolutionary - others that it wasn't a dramatic improvement.
 
OP
OP
gothgirl
Messages
1,701
Edit My Images
Yes
#9
low light? 80d.
The 7dII is better than the older 18mpix sensor - but not as good as the 80d, though I haven't tried both so I couldn't confirm by how much.

I have owned cameras with all of Canon's 1.6 crop sensors except the one in the 7dII, when it was launched, the reviews were mixed, some claiming it was revolutionary - others that it wasn't a dramatic improvement.
The 7D MKII drew me mainly because of the 10fps , which would've been lovely, but the lack of a moving LCD had me umming and aahing as I do use it a lot for composition.

Knowing the 80D is the better low light functioner (also not as old) has this one running into first place I think, for what I shoot.

I think going from the 60D & 55-250 STM , to an 80D & 70-200 2.8L is going to be a gamechanger.
 
Last edited:
Messages
12
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
Yes
#10
OP, I have a 24-70 2.8ii and 70-200 f4is and a 7D and 5Div and my youngest has a 80D. If you're looking for good low-light a 6dii might be a better bet or 80d if you want the reach but ultimate would be 5Div, it's the business in low-light situations
 
Messages
347
Edit My Images
Yes
#11
Get a used 6D MK 1 instead with your planned lenses. Canon APS-C stink IMO but their FF bodies are excellent
 
OP
OP
gothgirl
Messages
1,701
Edit My Images
Yes
#12
Get a used 6D MK 1 instead with your planned lenses. Canon APS-C stink IMO but their FF bodies are excellent
Why though? Full frame would be great, but as stated in my post, I'm shooting fast moving subjects like horses and dogs...the 6D has both a slower shutter speed than my 60d (1/4000 v 1/8000) and a slower fps rate (4.5ps v 5.3fps)
 
Messages
501
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
#13
you could always jump ship to Nikon, thats what I did, moved from 80D to D750 and the quality is much much better in every way.
 
OP
OP
gothgirl
Messages
1,701
Edit My Images
Yes
#14
OP, I have a 24-70 2.8ii and 70-200 f4is and a 7D and 5Div and my youngest has a 80D. If you're looking for good low-light a 6dii might be a better bet or 80d if you want the reach but ultimate would be 5Div, it's the business in low-light situations
Budget is an issue though, I agree the 5D IV would be a lot better, but the budget doesn't stretch that far, especially when I'm replacing lenses with L glass as well .
 
Messages
6,589
Name
Ned
Edit My Images
Yes
#15
Why though? Full frame would be great, but as stated in my post, I'm shooting fast moving subjects like horses and dogs...the 6D has both a slower shutter speed than my 60d (1/4000 v 1/8000) and a slower fps rate (4.5ps v 5.3fps)
The rest of the discussion aside, when have you ever been concerned about hitting 1/4000? From what I gather your problem is too slow a shutter speed due to low light, and half a frame a second FPS isn't going to make any difference either. You need to be using f/1.8 lenses in bright sunlight before 1/4000 stops being fast enough and even then you can stop down the aperture a little, won't really make much difference to the overall image.
 
Messages
347
Edit My Images
Yes
#16
Why though? Full frame would be great, but as stated in my post, I'm shooting fast moving subjects like horses and dogs...the 6D has both a slower shutter speed than my 60d (1/4000 v 1/8000) and a slower fps rate (4.5ps v 5.3fps)
Have you ever used 1/8000 though ? I did once to freeze a bee flying, their wings are much faster than a horse though.

I would rather 4.5 fps and much better iso performance than a canon aps-c with 10 fps that gets you a ton of duplicate shots or shots that look almost identical.

But everyone sees it differently so just get what you feel is right, your the one who has to use it.
 
Last edited:
Messages
123
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
#17
Budget is an issue though, I agree the 5D IV would be a lot better, but the budget doesn't stretch that far, especially when I'm replacing lenses with L glass as well .
I would change the lenses with L glass first (70-200 first, then the 24-70). If you make sure they are f2.8 then you will notice a jump in image quality and better low light ability in the longer lens (which will help).

Currently at 250mm you are at f5.6, with the change at 200mm you would be a f2.8.

You then have nothing stopping you changing to FF to get the big jump in low light ability when the budget allows (which is a huge jump, much more than the 80d/7dii would give), or changing to the 80d/7dii if you want. The glass changes won't be a wasted investment whatever you decide to do body wise.

Can you rent an 80d for a day to see if it does what you want it to do in the worst of your situations?
 
OP
OP
gothgirl
Messages
1,701
Edit My Images
Yes
#21
7D2 is crop, but I think the OP knows that.
Big apologies. Silly mistake.

I do indeed, though words on the iso performance have given me food for thought about the 6D and going full frame

The issue is o would have to replace BOTH my current lenses at the same time as the body swap , as both are Ef-s and unsuitable for full frame cameras , and considering full frame cameras are never cheap , that’s going to be one hell of an impact on my budget

As much as I love my nifty fifty , it’s not the best all around lens for what I shoot

Another big issue is the crop factor

If I go from the 60d and 55-250 , I’m shooting 250mm on a crop sensor

To the 6D (or 5dii whatever) and the 70-200 , im then shooting 200mm on a full frame

Going from 250mm on a crop v 200mm on full frame ?

That’s going to be a big jump in reach, if I went full frame I’d probably have to look into something 300mm
 
Messages
1,866
Name
Glenn
Edit My Images
Yes
#23
I have a 7DII, the missus has an 80D. Both have advantages over the other, one useful one being additional f/8 focus points available on the 80D

At the moment, I've been using the 80D on a tripod for some table-top shots. The swivel touch-screen is very handy for use as a waste-level finder, much better than the 7DII for this.

On safari in Zambia, the missus borrowed a 55-250mm for the trip and got some great results. However, she later picked up the new EF70-300mm USM Nano and that in combination with the 80D and EF-S 18-135mm USM Nano makes for a very useful package. The new USM Nano lenses focus instantaneously, faster than my EF-S 15-85 and EF100-400mm II and produce decent images.

On the other hand for birds, Motorsport and general shooting sometimes in the rain, I much prefer the 7DII 100-400II combo. It's just faster to use. For me there's nothing much in it for image quality, though I've never really A-B tested them.

Coming from a 60D, I'd probably go with the 80D and be happy. Coming from a 50D, I chose a 7DII and am still happy with that choice three-years on even when compared with the 80D.
 
Messages
971
Name
Tyson
Edit My Images
Yes
#24
I own a 7Dii coming from 7D then 400D.
The AF points and AF speed are very good on the 7Dii.
It is a great camera you dual processors it is a very fast and capable dark.
For a more of a rounded camera and Jack of all trades the 80D is better.

Never camera are ideal for low light and canon APSC sensors are among the worse performing in the camera world for low light.

Either a canon 6Dii, or eos RP might be the better choice. The camera technology at the moment nis going through a big change right now so it might better to wait and see what happens.
Personally forward light I would go Sony A7iii !
 
Messages
724
Name
Tristian
Edit My Images
Yes
#25
I have an 80d and have had a 70d and 50d. The 80d high iso performance is ok a bit better than 70d the 7dmkii uses the same sensor and the 70d-80d is maybe around 1 stop better. If you really want high iso performance I think you might be better going for the full frame body. 5d mk3 or 4 or maybe 6d mkii. Indoor sports in dim sports halls it think end up disappointing due to the noise, my daughter does quite a bit of indoor sports and while the photos are ok I'm never happy with the noise. I think I will be moving over to full frame I would like 5dmk4 when funds allow.
 
Messages
11,877
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
#26
I would hold off a little on this decision, rumors suggest Canon are making what will be their new flagship APSC dslr. Apparently a combination of both these very cameras [in place of a 90D or 7DIII] and will possibly be 32mp

https://www.diyphotography.net/cano...replacement-for-the-80d-and-7d-mark-ii-dslrs/

I was looking at these 2 models not long ago but decided I want to stick to ML. For me it was the 80D that I fancied more, better IQ and low light performance with a cracking touch screen, wi-fi and better DR. The 7Dii has some perks of it's own though, better build quality, faster shutter, dual card slots and more AF points. Really depends on your priorities.
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,589
Name
Ned
Edit My Images
Yes
#27
I would hold off a little on this decision, rumors suggest Canon are making what will be their new flagship APSC dslr. Apparently a combination of both these very cameras [in place of a 90D or 7DIII] and will possibly be 32mp

https://www.diyphotography.net/cano...replacement-for-the-80d-and-7d-mark-ii-dslrs/

I was looking at these 2 models not long ago but decided I want to stick to ML. For me it was the 80D that I fancied more, better IQ and low light performance with a cracking touch screen, wi-fi and better DR. The 7Dii has some perks of it's own though, better build quality, faster shutter, dual card slots and more AF points. Really depends on your priorities.
Interesting that.

It’s been clear for a long time that camera ranges needed simplification/rationalisation in a congested and shrinking market. Having product positions such as “the better at AF one” and “the better at low light” one is too much for the market, especially in APSC, especially when Nikon smash you at low light.

Too much choice can be a bad thing in these situations, especially if it requires a more flexible supply chain.
 
Messages
11,877
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
#28
Interesting that.

It’s been clear for a long time that camera ranges needed simplification/rationalisation in a congested and shrinking market. Having product positions such as “the better at AF one” and “the better at low light” one is too much for the market, especially in APSC, especially when Nikon smash you at low light.

Too much choice can be a bad thing in these situations, especially if it requires a more flexible supply chain.
It is Canon though, so I'd not be too surprised if they did this, but also brought out a 90D and 7DIII and omit one really nice feature from each
 
Messages
123
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
#29
I would hold off a little on this decision, rumors suggest Canon are making what will be their new flagship APSC dslr. Apparently a combination of both these very cameras [in place of a 90D or 7DIII] and will possibly be 32mp

https://www.diyphotography.net/cano...replacement-for-the-80d-and-7d-mark-ii-dslrs/

I was looking at these 2 models not long ago but decided I want to stick to ML. For me it was the 80D that I fancied more, better IQ and low light performance with a cracking touch screen, wi-fi and better DR. The 7Dii has some perks of it's own though, better build quality, faster shutter, dual card slots and more AF points. Really depends on your priorities.
Quoted from the article about it taking the LP-E6 / LP-E6N battery

"The battery is the same as that found in the 7D Mark II, 5D Mark IV, 5DS, 5DSR, 80D, 6D Mark II and previous generation models of those bodies. So, this is what suggests it’s more than likely for a DSLR and not a mirrorless."

My mirrorless EOS R takes the same battery, they also say:

"and it’s unlikely to be for a mirrorless unless Canon is planning to drastically change the EOS M body design."

It would probably go straight into the R series and Canon have confirmed that there is a pro version coming in the future.

I know that they are just working with rumours but there is a lot of jumping to conclusions for no logical reason!!

T
 
Messages
2,805
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
#30
I own an 80D and have shot with a 7D Mk II on a few occasions. The 7D MkII is a bigger, tougher, better feeling camera. The 80D is smaller with a (slightly) better sensor. The 7D Mk II has more AF points but how many do you actually use at any one time? I think I have 48 points on my 80D and at most I'll be using a 3x3 grid of them, usually I have a single AF point selected.

The little joystick / thumb lever on the back of the 7D MkII for changing AF modes and points is brilliant. The 80D has a flippy screen (which I never use). Unless you're shooting landscapes in at night then the images from them will look pretty much the same so it depends which features of each body appeal to you more.

I had exactly this decision to make two years ago and I wish I'd got the 7D Mk II over the 80D if that's any help.
 
Messages
23,103
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#31
Get a used 6D MK 1 instead with your planned lenses. Canon APS-C stink IMO but their FF bodies are excellent
But the AF on the 6d would make it a PITA for the required usage. I've got the M5 with the same sensor as the 80d, and the high ISO IQ is streets ahead of the other Canon crops I've owned.
 
Top