The old 7D/5DII conundrums...

zerodeluxe

zerodeluxe

Messages
262
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
No
Hi all

Okay, I've been saving up and am looking to upgrade my Canon - been looking at a 7D, but the lure of the quality of the 5DII is in the back of my mind...

I'm not a pro, and use my gear mainly for family stuff, landscapes etc... but I do sell images on Dreamstime, do the occasional kids portraits for beer tokens and may have some Second Shooter roles later in the year.

I can afford now a 7D body (refurbished, which is good enough for me) and a Tamron 17-50, with a view to getting a Canon 70-200 2.8 over the coming months... if I did go full-frame then the lenses might be a problem! The HD video on both will be great too.

I have a backdrop for portraits, but limited lighting, so the better low-light performance of the 5DII is also a draw...

Whichever, it's going to be an step up from my 450D! I'd think the likelyhood for my budget and type of photography, the ideal solution is the 7D, but the FF option is so tempting!

Any tips or experiences from those who've owned them would be very much appreciated!

Thanks in advance!

Ben
 
If you've only got EF-S lenses for your 450D then you'll be wanting some decent glass first. Even if it means you keep the 450D for a bit longer before you get a body, once you have the lenses it's easy to get the right body. I jumped for a 7D last september, then a month later I got a 5D2 and the 7D was hardly used after that. I wish I'd waited the extra time and not got the 7D in hindsight, as it was dead money really. I've since sold the 7D and the 5D2 and got a 5D3 instead, but the 5D2 is an awesome camera for what you're shooting. Keep your 450D for a while > get some glass > miss out the 7D > get a 5D2 ! Sorted.
 
If you said I like photographing wildlife, action photography, then the choice would be easy 7D. As you're more landscape, portrait, studio work etc, its the 5D MKII all the way, your problems arise because you probably haven't got mainly EF lenses, rather the EF-S types lenses for the cropped sensor. The 5D MKII are going for £1000 - 1400 used, where as the 7D used price is around the £750 - 900 mark. It depends on your budget, but if you're talking about a 70-200mm f2.8 that's another £900 - 1700 depending which version you buy.

Personally for you the 5D MKII is the camera for you, but perhaps sort out your lenses first, because the price of the MKII will fall as the MKIII establishes itself in the market.
 
pete.rush said:
but perhaps sort out your lenses first, because the price of the MKII will fall as the MKIII establishes itself in the market.
Click to expand...

Having spoke to Canon at focus this yr, they are not expecting the Mk2 to drop in price significantly with =in the next 12 months as they are running them side by side.

having said that you never know
 
In your position I'd be asking myself if a 7D is going to get me shots that I wouldn't get with my current camera and if it'd get me better quality pictures. If the features of the 7D aren't required you could think about getting one of the other Canon 18mp cameras that'll give you the same IQ but at a lower price.

As well as thinking about those little questions you could also think about scrapping the idea of a 18mp APS-C or 5DII and go for a 5D + lens or lenses.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the answers - think I'll get mixed opinions on this, but hopefully it'll help me out!

I like the idea of the speed on focusing on the 7D - with fast moving kids that could be a plus! Also, weather sealing could be good, even if I do try and not get it wet anyway.

Lenses - I've got a 50mm 1.8, and a 28-135mm which are both FF compatible.

I had toyed with a 60D, as it pretty mush the same as a 7D, less the focusing/processor and sealing.

But I do want to upgrade the 450, as the ISO performance should be better (at least I would expect it to be).

But I do understand that the lenses will be a very important factor in improved image quality. Hence why I'm juggling options in my head!
 
Not sure I fancy a 5D classic - I appreciate they are fantastic cameras still, but being a bit long in the tooth I'd like something a bit newer if I'm still spending several hundred pounds on it....
 
Well, yeah - but if I wait a little longer I could probably afford the 5DII... it's just whether I can justify spending nearly double the amount on the body... was gauging if people thought the difference in the two cameras is worth it for what I shoot.
 
camera body makes more of a difference these days than the lenses. As an example everyone runs around saying that there is not much difference between all the 50mm lenses in one breath and then saying invest in glass in the next. Most lenses that are produced are of good quality and sharp, id rather have a 50mm1.8 on a 5d mark 2 than anything on a 7d. personally.
 
Last edited:
mart77 said:
camera body makes more of a difference these days than the lenses. most lenses that are produced are of good quality and sharp, id rather have a 50mm1.8 on a 5d mark 2 than anything on a 7d. personally.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree less :D Personally I think that if you shoot RAW and process with modern software you'll see next to no difference between camera bodies until you reach the higher ISO's. But use two lenses at either end of the optical quality scale and there no hiding the results, or the shape of their aperture blades :D in the case of the nifty. Personally I wouldn't use one of those to rest my tea mug on :D

Of course you really only see differences other than DoF and bokeh etc if you look really closely. Avoid that and almost any body and lens will do :D

I remember doing a head to head, my 20D+50mm f1.4 v 5DII+L zoom and even the 5D owner agreed that my shots looked better :) :)
 
Last edited:
Depends what you shoot, but I found that having to use shorter length lenses on the 7D meant perspective distortion set in earlier than using the 5D2. There were some pictures I just didn't like the look of SOOC. My preference (and it is) would be the 5D2 + some decent lenses, but the problem with full frame is decent lenses tend to be expensive... Buying my 5D2 cost a lot less than the cost of the lenses I then ended up buying to partner with it (12-24, 17-40, 24-105, 70-200, 100mm macro)....
 
arad85 said:
Depends what you shoot, but I found that having to use shorter length lenses on the 7D meant perspective distortion set in earlier than using the 5D2.
Click to expand...

I can't really get my head around that TBH. Perspective distortion is all about camera to subject distance and angle of view so if you're using, for eg, a 30mm lens on APS-C and a 50mm lens on full frame from the same distance to maintain the same FoV the shots should look pretty much identical if you can ignore the slightly deeper DoF the wider lens will give. With the APS-C you'd only see the centre portion of the shot so any close perspective distortion of things beyond the 50mm equivalent FoV will be cropped out. Use the 30mm lens on the FF and you'd have to move much closer to maintain the 50mm FoV plus you'd see the whole image and that's when you'd get the increased perspective distortion. Surely.
 
Thanks for the answers guys - not sure it's made me any clearer though!

I think realistically that for the moment the 5DII, although my ideal choice, may be out of reach for now. I'd HAVE to invest in a good lens immediately really (as while the 28-135 is okay, it's not as sharp as I'd like). I can get the 7D and a Tamron 17-50 in my budget now and hopefully get some cracking images with that combo. I can then get the 70-200 in the coming months...

The only way I could get the 5DII now really is to do it on finance... not sure I want to get into that really... times is tight and all that! I could keep saving and wait... but I am impatient...

The biggest factor here will most likely be convincing my wife that spending 2K on a camera set up is a good idea, when I don't really make much money back from it! :)
 
woof woof said:
I can't really get my head around that TBH.
Click to expand...
Whether it is perspective distortion or something else, I could never get as good photos from the 7D as I do from the 5D2. It always looked perspectively compressed compared to the 5D2.
 
the 5d sensor is a lot better, its not just about ISO performance etc, its just the tone and colour and style it produces looks like film, the 7d looks more digital. id pick the 5d mark 2 every time. the votes for 7d are because its easier to use. Id rather have better image quality, tbh the 5d mark 2 focussing isnt great but its fine, you learn to work with what you have but when the 5d mark 2 gets it right its unbeatable imo.
 
Thanks for the replies - weighing it all up I went for a 7D in the end, as until my photography brings in enough to justify it, spending so much on a body in my current situation didn't seem right, even if the 5DII is superior in quality.

The 7D was £750 - Canon Outlet Refurb, so now I can get the Tamron lens, and hopefully the 70-200 also soon, and maybe when I've got a bit more cash behind me I can sell the 7D on and go for a 5DII - maybe even a mkIII by then!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top