Upgrading from 550D to 7D2 or 5D3 - Opinions...

Ryan_W

Ryan_W

Messages
91
Name
Ryan
Edit My Images
Yes
Evening all,

Essentially I'm looking to upgrade from my 550d to either a 7D2 or 5D3.

Now I'm no professional and both cameras will probably be more than I ever need, however, I don't want to have to buy twice, so I don't mind laying down a bit of money on a great camera.

I'm after a camera that does everything well: landscapes, portraits, wildlife etc.

I know the 7D2 is great for fast moving objects and the 5D3 is better in low light conditions, but will I really see a difference between the 2 with my amateur eyes?

As for lenses, I'm a little unsure on these also. I want to buy the camera with a lens to reduce the initial cost and I've got a few in mind:

  • 15-85 f/3.5-5.6
  • 17-55 f/2.8
  • 24-105 f/4L
  • 24-70 f/2.4L
I hope I'm not ridiculed with newbie 'go search' replies, be gentle!

Cheers all in advance.
 
The 5D3 and 24-105/4 is a great setup, almost all you'd ever need, later on add a 70-200 and you will have a spanking setup IMO. I'd rather have low light from the FF sensor and the 5Ds auto focus is amazing for action or stills! It's worth buying just for the AF.
 
As you're probably aware the first too lenses won't fit on the 5D3 as they are EF-S lenses. I think my choice would depend on what would be the main use for it. If landscapes and portraits are going to be predominant then I would go for the 5D3. If it's wildlife then the MkII.

In terms of ultimate image quality then the 5D3 is the winner but if you're viewing only on a screen or TV then the extra quality wouldn't really count for much. Either camera will be a very significant upgrade on your current one. I've owned them both and I prefer the 5D3 but my preferences are based around the fact that I am not reach limited with the lenses I have.
 
I won't be printing anything larger than A3, so assume the quality difference would be minimal (if any)?...

I'm aware of the lens issue, but hoping the EF-S lenses will be adequate? Out of the two would the 15-85 or 17-55 be the best allrounder?

A big thing with the 7D2 and 5D3 is price, the latter being twice as much. Would I really see the difference?

Thanks all.
 
I don't have any experience of the EF-S lenses Ryan. At A3 you'd have to look closely to see the difference, assuming good exposure etc in both instances. However for wildlife I considered the upper ISO limit on the MkII to be 1600 maybe 2000 at a push. I'm sure that others will be able to give examples of higher though. On the 5D3 I would shoot quite happily at 3200 and expect very good results.

Both bodies have virtually identical layouts with the odd exception. The MkII has an upgraded version of the AF system in the 5D3 and is very versatile with regard to customising it. Try and get to handle them both, see which you prefer although they seemed pretty much the same to me with the MkII a being a touch lighter but nothing to be a deal breaker. Good luck
 
I have both a 5D3 and a 7D2 and also came from a 550D (with a 15-85mm). I don't have anything else to add to what has been said, but if I had to choose one, it would definitely be the 5D3.
 
I would say to get the 5Dmkiii and the 24-70. You will see a difference but only when using high iso.
 
Depending on what you shoot, if you don't need the autofocus of the 5D3 I would probably recommend the 6D instead.

The 6D has better low-light focus sensitivity (-3EV vs -2EV of the 5D3) and very slightly better higher ISO performance. It comes at the cost of AF performance & points.

However I was able to buy the 6D and Tamron's 24-70 f/2.8 with stabilisation for less than the price of the 5D3. I'd much rather have a wide angle lens, fast 24-70 (rather than a slow 24-105) and a 70-200 to cover all commonly used focal lengths.

I myself went from the 550D to 6D and haven't regretted the decision at all. I don't shoot sports so the AF of the 5D3 offered me little extra but for a LOT more money.
 
Now why on earth would you go and put the 6D option in front of me?!............

That is a very good option with a 24-70, and it's pretty much the same price as the 7D2.

I'm just cautious since I only want to own a single body, and will the crop 7D2 give me the quality I'm after, or shall I chop some of it's features and go for the 'safe bet' 6d and nearly £1,000 cheaper than the 5D3?...
 
The 5D3 will give you all the things these good folk have told you. The 7d2 has the benefit of 10 frames a second. Image quality will be better and I think the 5d3 will last your interests and photographic, shall we say, development for a long time. If you have the money and this game of ours is not cheap, I would go for the 5d3 every time. And I have both... 7d2 is for speed and reach for sport and chasing birds around the sky.... (Crop factor is 1.6 I think). I have no EFS lenses and that's a bit of a pest but then the 5d3 covers that brilliantly. The 5ds mentioned above is a pixel monster and, my friend has one, your focus and stability of the camera have to be spot on; he describes it as unforgiving.... and monster size files..too. Good luck with your decision.
 
I went from the 550d to a 7d2 and certainly found a nice improvement. I think you will find that efs lenses only fit crop sensor cameras were as ef lenses will fit either. As its been stated here the 5d3 is really good and its quality is great. All I can say is so is the 7d2, you will need to read up on the afternoon system coming from the 550d but canon do a puff just for it worth a read. What would do is get to a shop with a couple of memory cards and try them go back home and see for yourself.
 
Right, just back from London Camera Exchange. Had a nice and lengthy chat with a chap in store.


After holding the 5D3, 6D and 7D2, I have decided that the 7D2 is more than enough for me and definitely the best choice for my needs.


Really nicely built, very solid, great bit of kit.


Now the hard part, which travel lens to buy with the camera?.........


I'm torn between the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM or the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.


Anyone have any personal experience with these?


Would you sacrifice the range of the 85 for the quality of the f/2.8 on the 55?


Cheers all,


Ryan
 
Just ran some figures to try and help me decide:


EF-S
  • 7D2 w/15-85 f/3.5-5.6 = £1,135
  • 7D2 w/17-55 f/2.8 = £1,240

OR

EF Zoom
  • 7D2 w/24-105 (38-168 actual) f/4L = £1,150
  • 7D2 w/24-70 (38-112 actual) f/4L = £1,210

Now I understand the L lenses are superior to the EF-S lenses and for around the same price, I'd be silly not to go for one. However, all I'm thinking is that 38mm may be a bit too long for a travel lens?
 
All I can say is I went from 10d to 1d2 to 50d to 5d3 and I can't see me replacing the 5d as it does everything really well and FF is just a "better” image.
Matt
 
17-55 f2.8. Extra stop of light is worth it. The difference between 55 and 85 is small, with cropping even less.
 
FWIW I'm a fan of the 15-85 ef-s lens. Sharp, focuses quickly, excellent IS system, not too bulky. The only downside is the relatively slow maximum aperture.
 
Well I have a Canon 1Ds II and also have a Canon 350D (but as a second camera in case of a major fail) and have found that the Canon 28-135mm IS USM lens is an excellent lens for walkabout and gives some excellent pics on both cameras.
.
 
I wouldn't be so hasty about getting the 7D2 :)

If you get the 6D you then have a full frame camera that has the best low-light performance of any camera in Canon's lineup AND you can still use your 550D if you need a cropped sensor.

The only time I'd get a 7D2 from a 550D is if I was *seriously* into my wildlife photograpy. Not because it's a bad camera, far from it - read my review here - http://davidcandlish.photography/canon-7d-mark-2

It's just that the 6D gives more options for more photographic situations. If you don't *need* the faster autofocus or things like 1/8000th sec shutter speed then the 6D offers so much more for a lot less money.

I know your original request is a camera that does everything well - landscapes, portraits, wildlife as you say - but the 7D2 does one of those REALLY well, wildlife, if you have the good glass to do it justice. If you don't, or will only shoot wildlife infrequently, you've bought a more specialised body when you're photography is more general.

Honestly I was in the exact same situation as you.

I went from a 550D to a 6D and bought the excellent Tamron 150-600 lens for wildlife with the money I saved not getting the 5D3. 95% of the time the 600mm reach on the 6D is fine - those times I need a little extra AND the light is good I use the 550D.

For every other need I have, the 6D is better than either the 550D or even the 7D2
 
Ahhhhhhhhhhhh.... There's always one when you have your mind 100% set that seems to be able to change it for you.

My shooting needs will be as follows (in no particular order):


· Portraits

· Landscapes

· Wildlife (not loads, mostly my dogs)

· City snapping

· General holiday


I am by NO WAY an expert, I just enjoy snapping what my eyes like.

I must admit that the built in flash on the 7D2 was favourable, but I hardly use mine on my 550D and assume I would use it even less on the 6D since it's FF and has higher ISO capabilities?

The use of L lenses at 24mm would be favourable too. I would almost certainly go with the 24-105 as a 'do it all' lens.

Price wise, they are nearly identical so no issue there.

So guys, what are we thinking?
 
I went from a crop sensor 450D to the 6D. I didn't suggest it as you gave a choice 7Dmkii or 5Dmkiii. Personally I think (6D) it is more than enough for you according to what you say you shoot. The high iso ability is great. That said the greatest improvement in my photography came through learning how to use Lightroom. (Insert your own choice of editing software). To get the best out of your camera is to shoot RAW and then edit. If you are only going to shoot JPEG then you won't be making good use of the money you spent. IMO the main benefits of the 7 and 5 don't apply to your needs. FPS, dual card, AF servo tracking, high shutter durability, number of cross type AF points for tracking and accuracy with fast lenses f1.4, 1.2 etc. I hope I don't come across as too harsh. At the end of the day it is your money and what you will be happy with so hands on experience is the best advice which is why people often say borrow or rent a camera to see how it feels in use. If you find the menus confusing, buttons not suitably placed for your fingers all theoretical advice from us is null and void.
 
Ryan_W said:
· Wildlife (not loads, mostly my dogs)
Click to expand...

technically dogs aren't wildlife they're domesticated animals. :)

but this is a thread that i've been meaning to start - if (a big 'if' as it would mean a lot of investment for me) i upgrade from the 60D it's mainly to get better shots of birds some of which will be on the move

however i do like to shoot other stuff including in low light so the 5D ISO appeals to me also

i guess also i can't afford too many lenses to make the most of the 7D perhaps - as per another thread I've bought the 100-400 mk II and will probably get the 1.4x converter but then that's probably it
 
If you have the 100-400 MkII it makes a lovely combo with the 7D MkII as it would with a 5D3 or 6D. As ever there are compromises to be made. The crop factor is handy when you're reach limited but for low light work the FF bodies easily outdo the 7D MkII. I've owned them both, sold a 5D3 for a 7D MkII for the crop factor and then sold that because the image quality at higher ISO just wasn't right for me. Waiting a bit now to see if Canon upgrade the 5D3 in the next few months. Might buy a 6D in the meantime as I miss having a second body. IMHO if you want the best all round camera then it's the 5D3.
 
The 7D2 is brilliant for fast moving objects such as wildlife and sports and is a great allrounder for everything else. The 5D3 is a brilliant allrounder and will get sports and wildlife just as good but with less reach. The 6D is very capable too, a great allrounder but you might have to work a bit harder with it to get the sports and wildlife shots as the AF system is nowhere as complex but still very good in the centre point. I have all 3 bodies but would go for the 5D3 if I had to choose just 1 of them.
 
Last edited:
Before you do anything try each camera with the desired lenses in a shop. You may find a 7Dii or 5diii with 27-70 too heavy. The 550D is a light camera. The 7 & 5 are much heavier plus adding large lenses will add loads of weight.

Also if you go FF then to get the best out of it you really need quality lenses.

Also to me FF has a different and better quality to APS-C. FF is wonderful!!!

Oh and if you can afford it get the 100-400 Mkii It's a superb lens!
 
Last edited:
I've had the 17-55 f2.8 and it is a fantastic lens on a crop frame. On a FF the 24-105 is a very versatile camera.

Out of the two (or is it three?!) cameras, you have to think how you are going to use out and also how long you are going to keep it. If you get the 7D2 will you hanker after an upgrade in a couple of years or will you still be happy?

For me, having made a similar jump a couple of years ago (500D to 5d MkII) I discounted the 7D as the FF appealed to me more and as @AndyWest says, FF has lots of wonderful goodness in its ability to process your image through the lens.

Perfect set up would be 5D MkIII + 24-105 and 100-400 MkII with a 16-35 later on for you to complete the set up :)

The hard thing is you are choosing between good cameras so the ability to find a winner is harder - enjoy the challenge!
 
So, had a chap in the office today who came down to take some progress photos of my construction site.
He had a 5D3 and 5DS. Had a play with both with the 24/70 f/4L fitted.


Lovely bits of kit, however, I feel the 6D will do us better being lighter and a little more compact. My Mrs is only small and I don't want her struggling with a beast of a camera, so the lighter the better for her.


So I'll be placing an order for a 6D w/24/105 f/4L as soon as I find a cracking deal *Any help here will be much appreciated also*....
 
I'm about to upgrade from my 400D. I've decided on the 6D. I shoot quite a similar mix to you but without the dogs.

I'm not too concerned about the AF as it's still an upgrade from what I currently have and I'm very excited about the low light capabilities. I've already got a 24-105 F4, which has served me very well indeed, I am looking forward to it acting a little wider on FF. If I crop the 6D images to get the same apparent area as a crop it's about the same res as I'm currently using.
 
Personally Id have gone 5d3 over any other camera mentioned here, noting it can't do, ok so the fps are slower than the 7DII but its still plenty able. Good luck with the 6D I'm sure its a good camera.
 
The 5D3 is the best camera, but potentially not for my needs. The light weight of the 6D works in its favour. My Mrs is tiny and I just think the 5D3 would be too much for her little arms.

Soooo, I just sent an email to Simply Electronics regarding the 6D 24-105 bundle... Hopefully buying today / tomorrow.

I was going to buy from the UK but I'm no millionaire and didn't fancy dropping an extra £300.

I would like to thank you all for your help (and patience). Once it arrives I'll be posting more frequently annoying you with my photos!
 
I have the 7D2 and a 5D3 and would like to have wide capability on the 7D2. How good is the 17-55 f2.8? I have L series lenses for my 5. I would be interested to hear what you all think if you have this set up too. Cheers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top