Upgrade dilemma

The23rdman

The23rdman

Messages
13,582
Name
Dean
Edit My Images
No
Okay, I've sold my 40D as I need something with better high iso performance.

My choices are now 5DII, 1DsII or 7D. They all have good and bad points. The 7D will allow me to keep hold of my 17-55 f/2.8, but doesn't have the same high ISO capabilities. It does, however, have a great AF system and I'm generally a baby, children and family photographer so really want something that will allow me to nail focus consistently.

The 5DII has the best sensor and ISO performance, but slightly dodgy AF system. both of these also have micro adjustments for my prime lenses too.

Been offered a 1DsII though, which seems to have the best of both cameras but without the micro adjust feature. Only probably usable up to 1600 though.

I'm in a pickle! Anyone used all three? What is the 7D like at high iso? AF on the 5DII?

I'd do a search, but it's nah working. :)
 
tiny73 said:
Can't help you on the camera choice but I've got a 17-40 F4L that I'm looking to trade for a 17-55 2.8 IS :D :p

Mods if I'm being naughty please spank me (electronically of course :D )
Click to expand...

No thanks, mate. I've no use for one. :) I may be selling the 17-55 soon though so keep an eye open. ;)
 
If you are doing baby/family stuff iso 1600 will be more than enough especially if you are using lights.
 
tiler65 said:
If you are doing baby/family stuff iso 1600 will be more than enough especially if you are using lights.
Click to expand...

Tom, since having Noah I've realised I want to do more natural light stuff. Lights seem so cumbersome and a stress with little ones.
 
I have to say that the focus on the 5DII is no slouch. The only reason that I feel that the focus can be a little lacking is because of the 7D and how good that particular focus is!! I have not been in a situation where the focus has let me down, and I am sure that if I was into portraiture I would take the 5DII certainly over the 7D.

I can not comment on the 1DsII, but I am sure that would be a truely awesome camera. I am sure that there will be many coming along once they've got up, who can give some real life comments on it.
 
Before I lost my job (kinda) I was going to save for a 5D MkII. If I were doing sports then the 7D would be the one to get but having a full frame sensor I think can't be beat!
 
For what you shoot I would guess the 5D2, but depends what glass you have as this could be an additional cost. The 7D is an awesome camera and I doubt you would be dissapointed with that either. So I would say 5D2 for low light advantage, and 7D for focus advantage...... decisions... decisions :D
 
This isn't getting any easier. :D
 
I do the same sort of work and use a 1D mkIII. Fast af and frame rate (when needed), no problem going up to up to iso3200. My 5D hardly ever gets out of the bag and the plan is to replace that with a 1d mkIV and use that alongside the mkIII, one with my 24-70 and one with 70-200 f2.8
 
I think that the 5D2 problems are a bit overblown. I am sure it will focus better than your 40D and the full frame advantage in portrait photograhy would win it over for me. In an ideal world I would own a 5D2 and 7D, best of both worlds!
 
paul_g said:
I do the same sort of work and use a 1D mkIII. Fast af and frame rate (when needed), no problem going up to up to iso3200. My 5D hardly ever gets out of the bag and the plan is to replace that with a 1d mkIV and use that alongside the mkIII, one with my 24-70 and one with 70-200 f2.8
Click to expand...
Mark III's are out of my price range right now. :)
 
menthel said:
I think that the 5D2 problems are a bit overblown. I am sure it will focus better than your 40D and the full frame advantage in portrait photograhy would win it over for me. In an ideal world I would own a 5D2 and 7D, best of both worlds!
Click to expand...
I think I'll go have a play with both and see what appeals. Not much love for the 1dsII though.
 
I would honestly say that for what you're looking for the 5DII would probably be the better body, but for reference, the following shot was taken on my 7D @ 1600 ISO in natural light (at Bristol Zoo) with the Canon 70-300 IS USM (so not the greatest of lenses).

4970215231_8a5f3dfea5_b.jpg


I think it handles high ISO very well, but I'd still go with the FF body for what you want to do.

Steve
 
paul_g said:
S/H they're about the same as a S/H 5D mkII
Click to expand...

Mmm, interesting. You use the 1DIII rather than the 1DsIII?

Jelster said:
I would honestly say that for what you're looking for the 5DII would probably be the better body, but for reference, the following shot was taken on my 7D @ 1600 ISO in natural light (at Bristol Zoo) with the Canon 70-300 IS USM (so not the greatest of lenses).

4970215231_8a5f3dfea5_b.jpg


I think it handles high ISO very well, but I'd still go with the FF body for what you want to do.

Steve
Click to expand...

Also interesting, but I'd really need to see some full res RAW files to be sure. :)
 
1DIII is no good to me. I often have need to blow up quite large prints so will need more res than that.
 
That large. I've never been entirely convinced by GF. I'd like the option of cropping if necessary too and don't think 10mp's is enough.
 
You said that you got rid of the 40D because you needed high ISO, which means you can immediately count the 1Ds2 out.

Personally I'd be inclined to go for the 7D. It looks to me to be perfectly usable up to ISO 6400, and ropey (but usable perhaps occasionally) at ISO 12800. Is the 5D that much further behind?
 
Ok Dean,

I'll weigh-in here....

Not used a 5DMKII so I won't comment on that other than I much prefer the feel of 1D cameras to to the 5D Classic (I used to own) and 5DMKII's I've held in stores etc.

If you like portraiture then I feel there may be an advantage to full frame, but the 1DMKIII is a stunning beast with a quality that far exceeds the perception of the 10mp sensor. The sensor is much better than the one on the 40D you are used to.

The 1DsMKII and 1DMKIII are likely to be a similar price for a decent condition one.

Shots from 1DsMKII are absolutely stunning - I love my 1DsMKII and am constantly delighted with the output. The AF is very good, especially in good light. I have found it can slightly FF in low light and I often bounce my finger on the shutter to make sure I have a good lock. The 1DsMKII focusses accurately with all my lenses without need for MAF adjust. I tend to use my 1DsMKII at ISO800 or less.

1DMKIII - The AF is very good on one shot & on servo (once you've learnt to tune it). When you first try it on servo, expect to be disappointed - there is a learning curve. I've found that my 1DMKIII does require some MAF to adjust the focus, and this is particularly true of fast primes. I had the sensor replaced on mine due to damage, and afterwards even maximum MA wouldn't bring my 35mm f/1.4 in. I sent it back for some calibration and now it needs about +15. My 24-105 & 70-200 2.8 zooms need little or no adjustment. I'm gobsmacked at how clean ISO1600 images are on the 1D3. ISO2000 is the limit of what I see as acceptable though.

If you can live with the slightly sub-pro feel of the body, there seems to be a lot to be said for the 5DMKII. I wouldn't swap either of my 1D's for one though. Adding a grip helps I guess, but after I bought the 1DMKIII it was a matter of weeks before the rest of my bodies were sold to fund the 1DsMKII! I love the pro bodies.

I'm sure the 7D will do an admirable job for you and has the advantage of high MP while retaining your current lenses. Really I see it as primarily a birding / motorsport body, but the inclusion of a flash master gives you some nice options with external flashes for portraiture. It has reportedly great high-iso performance, but some have said that it's low ISO performance is poor - I think this is an issue with individual examples.

I very much doubt any of the camera bodies discussed will provide anything less than excellent images in large prints, so unless you plan to crop a lot, I wouldn't let megapixels have too much say.

Phil
 
5DII. You can't go wrong with that sensor, and you won't be exactly fighting polar bears in the arctic so no real need for 1Ds.

1Ds2 is no slouch and can do very reasonable ISO1600 and OK 3200 (both need to be well exposed). For commercial staged work, ISO400 max should give very smooth files.

7D I believe really needs top primes to make the most of its 18mp crop sensor, and perfect exposure for noise control. I might be happy with one as a BACKUP, but probably not for >£1k.
 
trencheel303 said:
You said that you got rid of the 40D because you needed high ISO, which means you can immediately count the 1Ds2 out.
Click to expand...

I [still] have both. 1DsII is easily 1 stop better than 40D.

As I said 5D II is better still.
 
I have a 5DMKII and a eight year old.........conbined with the Canon 24-70mm or the Canon 70-200mm or the 85mm f1.8 i've had no issues with focus.......focus is a lot less positive when using a 3rd party lens
 
I have both the 5DII and 7D cameras and came from two 40D bodies. For me the 5DII produces by far the better image quality with outstanding noise control and wonderful tonal quality, the AF is more than good enough for general photography, including moving subjects. The real strength of the 7D is it's lightning fast AF that will easily track the fastest of birds in flight, user technique allowing. The trade off with the 7D is the extra noise, not as good at low ISO speeds as I would have expected, but very usable expecially with Noise Ninja or similar.

My 5DII gets used most of the time but my 7D probably takes more exposures, just down to the nature of what I shoot. My 7D has a 400mm lens mounted most of the time for sport or wildlife.
 
Last edited:
Thank you all for such excellent feedback. I'm going to try and pick them all up over the next week or so and see how they fair.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top