September 20, 2014, 12:31:33 AM

Author Topic: 7D or 5D III?  (Read 8065 times)

moocowe

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 47
    • View Profile
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #15 on: August 10, 2013, 12:51:06 AM »
Night Hawk,

You didn't say what lenses you own. No offense meant, but as a 1100D user, I can't imagine you have much fast glass. If you only own f/4 zooms or slower, then I would get the 7D and possibly 70-200 IS II.
My 7D hasn't had a battery in it since I got the 5D3, but all my lenses were already full frame compatible f/1.4 or f/2.8 before I upgraded the body.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #15 on: August 10, 2013, 12:51:06 AM »

Night Hawk

  • SX50 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #16 on: August 10, 2013, 12:59:18 AM »
You all make good points.
And you're right, moocowe. I don't have good lenses. I've got the kit lenses (18-55, 70-300), 50 f/1.4, and the 17-40 f/4L. Now I'm starting to lean towards the 7D because of that. I do have more questions about the 7D, though:

How bad is the noise? I do have Lightroom, so how difficult would it be to fix any issues? What'd be the highest usable ISO after processing (I shoot JPEGs, by the way. Should I change that? I feel that it takes too long to render thousands of RAW photos, so I just don't bother :P). I publish online, so that may allow me to take the ISO a bit higher than if I printed.

Also, how fast is the AF? I really don't need blindingly fast AF, but I'd like it to be somewhat fast (preferably not much hunting).

How would a 7D + 300mm f/4 combo go?
« Last Edit: August 10, 2013, 01:12:52 AM by Night Hawk »

Pi

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 937
    • View Profile
    • Math and Photography
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #17 on: August 10, 2013, 01:55:14 AM »
You all make good points.
And you're right, moocowe. I don't have good lenses. I've got the kit lenses (18-55, 70-300), 50 f/1.4, and the 17-40 f/4L. Now I'm starting to lean towards the 7D because of that.

Actually, this is good enough reason to go FF. Aside from the 18-55 which has no real resale value, your lenses will work better on FF. You would need a standard zoom though and if you do not need UWA, you can sell the 17-40 a nd get the 24-105.

moocowe

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 47
    • View Profile
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #18 on: August 10, 2013, 02:05:02 AM »
I think ISO 3200 is as high as I would go with the 7D. I do fond it quite a noisy sensor, so to get the best image quality you will want to shoot in raw. Keep the exposure as far to the right of the histogram as possible without significant highlight clipping, and then bring the exposure down in Lightroom.

If you're only posting relatively low res photos online, you might get away with ISO 12800 images in good light or converted to black & white.

I never found the AF to be lacking on mine. Any shots I missed were usually due to a problem behind the viewfinder.

I've never used the 300mm f/4, but it looks good according to the review on The Digital Picture.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-300mm-f-4.0-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

AlanF

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1080
    • View Profile
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #19 on: August 10, 2013, 02:23:31 AM »
If you can afford go for the 5D III. The consistency of AF is just so much better.  Many of us, in contrast to moocowe, have found that we have to take several shots when doing bird photography with the 7D to get tack sharp focus whereas the 5D III is spot on every time. The more consistent AF has been verified by FoCal and LensRental in proper testing.  The IQ at higher iso is so much better that the D's shorter reach often gives just as good resolution (but not always) and some times much better.  Also, the 7D needs better, not worse lenses, to take advantage of its smaller pixels. 

Having said that, I am sure you would also be pleased with the 7D as it is still a great camera and in good light can outperform the 5D III. Like the others who have both, I don't actually use my 7D and it gathers dust as a back up in case the 5D III needs to go in for repair. 
5D III, 70D, Powershot SX50, 300/2.8 II, 1.4xTC III, 2xTC III, 70-200/4 IS, 24-105, 15-85, Sigma 10-20, Tamron 150-600.

tpatana

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 257
    • View Profile
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #20 on: August 10, 2013, 02:38:33 AM »
I have both. For your purposes, I might go 7D + lens, but it really depends on the person.

I love my 5D3. With 7D, I was ok with ISO3200 but 6400 was really terrible. With 5D3, I'm happy at 6400, ok at 12k and if really needed and can ETTR the 25k is still usable.

tpatana

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 257
    • View Profile
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #21 on: August 10, 2013, 02:39:30 AM »
Like the others who have both, I don't actually use my 7D and it gathers dust as a back up in case the 5D III needs to go in for repair.

Exactly. I did use it once when I needed two bodies at the same time, but 99% of the pics come from 5D.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #21 on: August 10, 2013, 02:39:30 AM »

insanitybeard

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
    • View Profile
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #22 on: August 10, 2013, 04:09:05 AM »
Nighthawk, sounds like you are 'one of those' photographers, so I would suggest you to go for two eos 1dx's!! You can fire away in the dark and not miss a shot AND look rather cool and professional at the same time  8) YEAH!

Another one of your helpful posts...... Somebody who has had an entry level DSLR body for a couple years asks for opinion on an upgrade path and that's the best you can offer? If this is such a gear orientated forum perhaps you should remove yourself from it and go join some real photographers? Save wasting our time and yours  ;)
7D / EF-S 10-22 / 17-40L / 70-200 f4L IS / EF-S 60 macro

moocowe

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 47
    • View Profile
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #23 on: August 10, 2013, 05:35:28 AM »
Many of us, in contrast to moocowe, have found that we have to take several shots when doing bird photography with the 7D to get tack sharp focus whereas the 5D III is spot on every time.

Sorry, I should have stated I don't do any bird photography. Closest thing I've shot was an airshow, where I thought the AF performed really well. That was just after I'd stepped up from a 450D, and long before the 5D3 existed, however!

No doubt the 5D3 AF is superior, but the 7D AF should also be quite an improvement for someone coming from an 1100D.

lycan

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 41
    • View Profile
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #24 on: August 10, 2013, 05:42:36 AM »
go for the 5d mark III. It's a no-brainer if you can afford it

You guys are amazing. On the 60D iso 1600 at low light is way too noisy. It's horrible. Even iso 800 is very noisy in shaded areas. And the 60D is slightly better than 7D at high iso

Also, lenses are usually sharper on FF sensors

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2347
    • View Profile
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #25 on: August 10, 2013, 09:45:05 AM »
70-300 or the 75-300?  I never thought of the 70-300 as a Kit Lens.  It is soft-ish from 200-300 and a mkiii isn't going to change that at all.  I've said this a few times now, but why don't you see if you can your hands on a t2i, t3i, t4i, t5i, 60D, or 7D because they have the same sensor AND SHOOT IN RAW!!!

Compare the iso values (maybe look up an article or post here about native iso's), and see if you find it tolerable.  I'd also suggest tripod mounting the camera to eliminate shake as a variable. 

I personally would prefer to get a while host of lenses to go along with my $800 used 7D and spend the saved money, 2200 on really nice lenses.  Maybe the 300mm f/4L, or the 70-200 f/2.8L USM plus a 1.4x teleconvertor, a 24-105 would be a nice little upgrade over the 17-40 provided you don't love the 17-24mm... though for some/many 24mm x 1.6 is a touch too long and not wide enough.

I guess the real question is... how much money do you have?  Can we have some?

Everyone's definition of acceptable noise is different.  It matters what your definition of acceptable noise is and you won't find that out without getting a body in hand.  With lightroom, you should easily be able to shoot at 3200 with the 7D and still come away with some shots that look great viewed on faceboook.  I forget what the article I read said, but raw images have significantly more information that has been captured, so it is easier to change the exposure and to bring out the colors that were originally there.  It does take effort to do the post production, but you have to ask yourself whether you want your shot to look like what the camera sees, or you want it to look like what you see.  And that is often a big difference. 

I'd suggest shooting in both raw and .jpg for a while... and then really GOOD ones... do some post production with and see if it is better than the .jpg.

The more light, the better the AF... more light comes from the larger aperture of the lens... larger aperture lenses usually have better motors which are faster...

How would a 7D + 300mm f/4 combo go?

Part of the reason I suggest people buy used but in good condition is because bodies depreciate quickly.  @ $800, you can probably sell the 7D in 2 years for $700 or maybe $600.  So the real cost to own the body is only $75ish per year.  If you buy new, you are easily looking at a $400 depreciation after you take your first shot. 

I paid around $2600 for my new 5d mkiii (I got a really good deal for a new one from an authorized manufacturer).  In 3 years right before the mkiv comes out, I can probably sell it for $2000.  After 7 years (around the time of the mkv), I'm maybe looking at $1400.  I'm guessing at the timeframe of the new generations and the money I can get, but I'm paying about $171 to $200 a year provided it remains in good condition.

It is hard to know exactly what will be best for you, but I'm the kind of guy who likes to minimize risk... so if you get an $800 body and another $2200+ in lenses, you'll be better off than if you got a $3000 body and stayed with the 70-300 (provided it is a 70-300).

The 70-300 is about 100x better than the 75-300... and the reason I want a clarification is because very few people would suggest going out with a 75-300 and a mkiii with the expectation of getting good results.

[/quote]
« Last Edit: August 10, 2013, 10:50:18 AM by jdramirez »
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L->85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm ->100L & 85L

sdsr

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #26 on: August 10, 2013, 10:46:41 AM »
Do you live somewhere, such as the US, where it's easy and not that expensive to rent camera bodies?  Ideally, since only you know what you shoot and what your noise tolerances etc. are, you can answer your own questions.  If you can't, what is it that you shoot that makes you believe that the difference in shots  per second between a 7D and 5DIII would matter?  If, as seems to be the case, the 5DIII's autofocus is more accurate, won't that more than make up for the difference? (Maybe it won't.)

Otherwise, I would say what most others have said - if you can afford it, get a 5DIII.

Night Hawk

  • SX50 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #27 on: August 10, 2013, 12:18:25 PM »
jdramirez:
My mistake, you're right. I have the 75-300, not the 70-300.

In terms of money, I have just enough to get a 5D III. So if I were to get the 5D III, I'd have to stick with the lenses that I use right now, whereas if I were to get the 7D, I'd be able to get new lenses.

This is just a hunch, but I figure that (at ISO 100) the 7D with some nice glass would be able to get better photos than a 5D III with my 75-300. However, I often shoot in dark forests, so I'm seldom able to go below ISO 800. Because I upload online, I'd probably be able to get away with ISO 25,600 on the 5D III, which would greatly increase the number of photos that I get. However, the color fringing I get from the 75-300 can be quite bad. Will this pose a real problem if I were to crop the photos taken from a 5D III?

This is a question that's somewhat unrelated, but if I did shoot in RAW, would Lightroom allow me to view all of the photos? I'm pretty new to the software, and I'm also new to RAW, so I need help with this stuff :P

sdsr:

I do have a photography friend that owns a 5D III. Maybe, if he's not on vacation or something, I'd be able to borrow it and take some test shots. I don't, however, have any way to test the 7D.

In practice how different are the AF systems? Is the 5D III incredibly fast, to the point that it makes the 7D's AF system look primitive? Or is it just that little bit better that allows you to get a few more frames?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #27 on: August 10, 2013, 12:18:25 PM »

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2347
    • View Profile
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #28 on: August 10, 2013, 12:25:39 PM »
jdramirez:
My mistake, you're right. I have the 75-300, not the 70-300.

In terms of money, I have just enough to get a 5D III. So if I were to get the 5D III, I'd have to stick with the lenses that I use right now, whereas if I were to get the 7D, I'd be able to get new lenses.

This is just a hunch, but I figure that (at ISO 100) the 7D with some nice glass would be able to get better photos than a 5D III with my 75-300. However, I often shoot in dark forests, so I'm seldom able to go below ISO 800. Because I upload online, I'd probably be able to get away with ISO 25,600 on the 5D III, which would greatly increase the number of photos that I get. However, the color fringing I get from the 75-300 can be quite bad. Will this pose a real problem if I were to crop the photos taken from a 5D III?

This is a question that's somewhat unrelated, but if I did shoot in RAW, would Lightroom allow me to view all of the photos? I'm pretty new to the software, and I'm also new to RAW, so I need help with this stuff :P

sdsr:

I do have a photography friend that owns a 5D III. Maybe, if he's not on vacation or something, I'd be able to borrow it and take some test shots. I don't, however, have any way to test the 7D.

In practice how different are the AF systems? Is the 5D III incredibly fast, to the point that it makes the 7D's AF system look primitive? Or is it just that little bit better that allows you to get a few more frames?

I'm clairvoyant yo!
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L->85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm ->100L & 85L

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2347
    • View Profile
Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #29 on: August 10, 2013, 12:42:51 PM »
So you have about $3000.  Or you have @2650 and you are going to sell the t3 for around $350 used which then brings you back up to around $3000 ish. 

I have defended the 75-300 as a first zoom lens, somewhat decent bokeh and if you have enough light, you don't need IS.  But it isn't a sharp lens, it isn't good with color rendition, and contrast is also poor.  It is basically a $100 lens.  Simply getting a 55-250mm with IS will improve your distance photos significantly.  You won't get more light because it also goes to f/5.6 at 250mm, but it really is a much better lens. 

People will fight tooth and nail saying the 70-300mm IS USM f/4-5.6 is REALLY GOOD and it isn't bad, but it also isn't nearly as good as the L version which you can afford with the cash you have and the 7D + 70-300L will blow your MIND! 

As for the 5D plus the 75-300... I don't know that those two have ever met.  Seriously... people who pay $3000 for a body don't put a $100 lens on it. 

The image you will get from the 75-300 will be what you see on the t3 plus more.  So the color fringing at the edges will still be there, and as you go further to the edges, it will get worse.  The sensor isn't going to improve the bad image coming from the lens... it might make it sharper and more distinct, but it is there. 

You are trying to grind up pig face into a really expensive meat grinder and come out with chopped steak... NOPE!  You put in pig face... you are going to get chopped pig face.  But if you put in veal into a less expensive grinder, you will get chopped veal. 

As for lightroom, you can copy duplicates into your catalog.  I choose to only import raw photos, but you can do that with the settings.  How... I forget... but you can do it.

Also shooting in raw will fix some of the chromatic abberation and any bowing/distortion from the lens, but seriously... bad lenses don't become good with better bodies.

Like I said, t3i, t2i, t4i, t5i, 60D, all share the same sensor and overall RAW and iso performance... see if you can borrow one of those.  You might even be able to rent one from a camera shop for $30 for a day. 

I had the 60D and that was the little brother of the 7D... and I was able to get my shot more often than not.  7D will be more than enough for your purposes, though the mkiii is better.

If you are doing birds in flight, you might miss it, but your retention rate/keeper rate will still be around 80% with practice and skill.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2013, 12:55:11 PM by jdramirez »
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L->85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm ->100L & 85L

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 7D or 5D III?
« Reply #29 on: August 10, 2013, 12:42:51 PM »