5D III or 7D II?

[ahsanford]

WHY DO PEOPLE KEEP PUTTING THE 7D2 AS A SOLELY A SPORTs,WILDLIFE CAMERA IT CAN DO EVERYTHING U NEED IT TOO DO AND MORE ESPECIALLY IF U HAVE THE RIGHT GLASS

Where to begin...

Compared to a FF rig, here are the drawbacks to the 7D2:

• Except on the very long end, EF mount zooms' usefulness is marginalized by the crop factor, in particular with standard zooms. A 24-something EF mount lens becomes a 38-1.6X something on a 7D2, which is very frustrating as a walkaround -- I had a 24-70 f/2.8 on my old crop rig and I constantly was changing it out for my EF-S 10-22.
• FF generates smaller DOF for a given aperture
• FF does a better job in low light
• Canon famously does not develop L grade glass for the EF-S mount. This tends to burn you on the ultra-wide end, where it is not possible to 'crop up' to the FL range you need. In other words, you can make do with a 16-35 f/2.8 as a standard zoom on a crop, but this becomes impractical / prohibitively expensive to get a great UWA lens on crop. You are stuck with decent EF-S glass that lacks weathersealing or USM focusing, or you eat $3k to slap that 11-24L on your crop rig to build a FF equivalent 18-38mm lens. Those aren't winning options.

So it's not that the 7D2 is a poor rig -- far from it! It's just that once you are in the $1,000+ territory for a body, for a host of reasons, a 6D or 5D3 is almost always the more powerful tool for general photography. The EF standard zooms are perfect length-wise, there are professional grade / sealed / USM focusing UWA lenses available, and small DOF / low light opportunities can be more fully realized.

But on the long end or with high burst applications, the 7D2 shines as those drawbacks typically are a secondary consideration to burst speed or reach. Those scenarios naturally lend themselves to birding, wildlife, and sports. That's why that's the 7D2 tends to be marginalized as a specialty tool in comparison to most FF rigs.

Can you use the 7D2 to shoot just about anything? Absolutely. But the the various FF rigs will outperform it pretty handily unless burst or reach is key to what you shoot.

- A

 

[Maximilian]

WHY DO PEOPLE ...

Sorry mate, but the message is not easier to read and understand if the caps lock is broken
Even if it's right.

 

[tomscott]

WHY DO PEOPLE KEEP PUTTING THE 7D2 AS A SOLELY A SPORTs,WILDLIFE CAMERA IT CAN DO EVERYTHING U NEED IT TOO DO AND MORE ESPECIALLY IF U HAVE THE RIGHT GLASS

Where to begin...

Compared to a FF rig, here are the drawbacks to the 7D2:

• Except on the very long end, EF mount zooms' usefulness is marginalized by the crop factor, in particular with standard zooms. A 24-something EF mount lens becomes a 38-1.6X something on a 7D2, which is very frustrating as a walkaround -- I had a 24-70 f/2.8 on my old crop rig and I constantly was changing it out for my EF-S 10-22.
• FF generates smaller DOF for a given aperture
• FF does a better job in low light
• Canon famously does not develop L grade glass for the EF-S mount. This tends to burn you on the ultra-wide end, where it is not possible to 'crop up' to the FL range you need. In other words, you can make do with a 16-35 f/2.8 as a standard zoom on a crop, but this becomes impractical / prohibitively expensive to get a great UWA lens on crop. You are stuck with decent EF-S glass that lacks weathersealing or USM focusing, or you eat $3k to slap that 11-24L on your crop rig to build a FF equivalent 18-38mm lens. Those aren't winning options.

So it's not that the 7D2 is a poor rig -- far from it! It's just that once you are in the $1,000+ territory for a body, for a host of reasons, a 6D or 5D3 is almost always the more powerful tool for general photography. The EF standard zooms are perfect length-wise, there are professional grade / sealed / USM focusing UWA lenses available, and small DOF / low light opportunities can be more fully realized.

But on the long end or with high burst applications, the 7D2 shines as those drawbacks typically are a secondary consideration to burst speed or reach. Those scenarios naturally lend themselves to birding, wildlife, and sports. That's why that's the 7D2 tends to be marginalized as a specialty tool in comparison to most FF rigs.

Can you use the 7D2 to shoot just about anything? Absolutely. But the the various FF rigs will outperform it pretty handily unless burst or reach is key to what you shoot.

- A

Negatives are all well and good but what about the positives? Lots of benefit of crop

FF is great if you need smaller DOF but what about situations where you don't?

The current gen 5DMKIII and 6D are old cameras the difference between it and the current crop sensor gen is 1-2 stops which is much better than the old 18mp sensor.

Say your shooting wildlife in low light the FF camera may be the best camera for the job but with wildlife DOF is always welcome at F4 or even F5.6 your plane of focus is quite thin. if your shooting the 100-400mm you may be shooting F5.6 at 400mm at 3200ISO on FF you can do the same on crop but the DOF is more like F9 at the same settings, to get the same DOF on FF and go up to F8 you will need to up your ISO to 6400 to compensate for the stop of light loss. This narrows the game quite a bit the difference is 1 stop of light and with the crop camera your getting 640mm with the same lens.

Its true the FF cameras will always be better because they have better light gathering capability. But the new gen crop vs current gen FF its pretty close. I cap my 5DMKIII at 4000ISO and I'm quite happy to shoot the 7DMKII at 4000. The grain of the new crop cameras is very natural, it also has no colour noise either the 5DMKIII is so annoying I'm forever cleaning it up.

The 17-55mm F2.8 is also excellent it may not have the build but certainly has the IQ. Had mine for about 6 years and love it, although its had no use since I went FF but now I have the 7DMKII I wouldn't hesitate to use it instead. These lenses are also cheap now the 17-55mm can be had for around £500 and the 10-22 £400. The 24-70mm has no IS either and is £1250 the 16-35mm is also £1200. There are also really fantastic budget performers like the 10-18mm, 17-85mm. One of my good friends a marine biologist is currently in Antarctica for a year long stint and his gear - 7D MKI 10-18mm 17-85mm and 70-300mm L and he loves it. Very difficult conditions and he's had no problems so far.

People really overestimate the need sometimes and its amazing what results you can get.

So really if you want to stick with crop canon has you covered with the 10-22mm which is 16-35mm equivalent 17-55mm which is 24-70mm roughly equivalent then any other lenses for longer from the EF range will fit. Also the third parties make some awesome stuff Sigmas 18-35mm F1.8 anyone?

My 7DMKII was £800 and a 5DMKIII is still running for £1500+ so its half the price. Fantastic camera IMO.

So ye both have their benefits and negatives. But currently until the 5DMKIV is released the crop cameras have a lot of benefits on current gen FF. IMO having both is the ideal situation both for different jobs but if the 7DMKII is top of your budget then it will excel at pretty much anything you throw at it and is probably canons most versatile camera for bang for buck at the time of writing. Especially with its newer features like 10FPS, range of points across the viewfinder, Dual pixel AF, the hybrid viewfinder and the GPS.

Ive had my 5DMKIII for 3 years and have shot over 150,000 images with it shooting weddings, events and motorsport and I have been blown away with the 7DMKII. The 5DMKIII has taken a back seat for the time being, it is still my go to camera for weddings and events but the 7DMKII makes a fantastic BU camera.

I couldn't say any of this for the old 18mp sensor I had a 7D original and sold it within a few weeks because I was so disappointed with it. The new 7DMKII is a huge upgrade on the older tech.

To push people toward FF for everything is a mistake a lot of people continue to do on this forum, its often overkill for most people and the upgrade in lenses etc is usually a large one. Canon now offer such a great range of primes that getting smaller DOF at all the usual focal lengths 35, 50 and 85mm is nice and easy.

Like I said you can never replace the light gathering of the FF cameras or the very shallow DOF, but with both comes challenges. The crop cameras offer 90% of the performance for 50% the price. Now there is a good alternative in the Canon line up its a no brainer to get one IMO.

 

[Sporgon]

My 7DMKII was £800 and a 5DMKIII is still running for £1500+ so its half the price. Fantastic camera IMO.

Agree with all you've said but where are you getting those cameras from in the UK for those prices ? Even without VAT the 7DII is about £1100 and the 5DIII £1850.

 

[tomscott]

My 7DMKII was £800 and a 5DMKIII is still running for £1500+ so its half the price. Fantastic camera IMO.

Agree with all you've said but where are you getting those cameras from in the UK for those prices ? Even without VAT the 7DII is about £1100 and the 5DIII £1850.

I get all my gear grey market. The prices are from SLRHUT, usually buy all my stuff from DREV but with the yen to the dollar SLRHUT are much cheaper.

You get a year worldwide warranty, come within 3 days. All of my grey market gear has had no problem with being repaired through my membership with CPS. Don't see the need to spend the extra 30% buying from the UK, its cheaper than claiming the VAT back at the end of the year.

I have also found the service as easy as the companies in the UK the turn around time is about the same. I usually buy all my Canon gear grey market, funnily enough they all come european spec anyway, on the odd occasion I buy off brands they will be from UK because if I'm not happy sending them back is quite costly. I find the Canon stuff is incredibly durable and the 1 year warranty a bit of a joke really for the prices, have found no benefit so far to buy from the UK unless I'm not happy with the lens itself and want to return it which is a hassle.

The one issue I've had so far is my 70-200mm MKII wasn't right when it arrived from DREV I'm assuming it was from transit so they sent it to CPS for free and all postage paid and it was aligned and came back as new. So I'm pretty happy with the service. Also DREV and SLRHUT have their customer service based in the UK now so you can actually deal with things there and then, rather than on HK or US time.

Its even cheaper now at £780

http://slrhut.co.uk/product/ID1666C5/9128B043AA_Canon-EOS-7D-Mark-II-DSLR-Camera-_Body-Only_-/

 

[ahsanford]

Negatives are all well and good but what about the positives? Lots of benefit of crop

...

FF is great if you need smaller DOF but what about situations where you don't?

...

To push people toward FF for everything is a mistake a lot of people continue to do on this forum, its often overkill for most people and the upgrade in lenses etc is usually a large one.

Awesome reply, thank you, Tom. I really appreciate it. I agree with much of what you said.

However, please recall why I wrote what I wrote -- it wasn't to smear crop cameras or push anyone towards a conversion to FF. It was to shed light on why the 7D/7D2 brand is thought of (right or wrong) as a wildlife/action/sports rig.

My argument, put another way (in broad strokes): anything the 7D2 can do, a 5D3 can do equivalently or better with the exception of reach or burst. So, the corollary to that is the 7D2 shines in areas where reach/burst is needed, i.e. wildlife/action/sports. That doesn't mean it doesn't shine elsewhere -- it just means that it's longest suit / most impressive parameters are oriented to that need. That's all.

- A

 

[tomscott]

Negatives are all well and good but what about the positives? Lots of benefit of crop

...

FF is great if you need smaller DOF but what about situations where you don't?

...

To push people toward FF for everything is a mistake a lot of people continue to do on this forum, its often overkill for most people and the upgrade in lenses etc is usually a large one.

Awesome reply, thank you, Tom. I really appreciate it. I agree with much of what you said.

However, please recall why I wrote what I wrote -- it wasn't to smear crop cameras or push anyone towards a conversion to FF. It was to shed light on why the 7D/7D2 brand is thought of (right or wrong) as a wildlife/action/sports rig.

My argument, put another way (in broad strokes): anything the 7D2 can do, a 5D3 can do equivalently or better with the exception of reach or burst. So, the corollary to that is the 7D2 shines in areas where reach/burst is needed, i.e. wildlife/action/sports. That doesn't mean it doesn't shine elsewhere -- it just means that it's longest suit / most impressive parameters are oriented to that need. That's all.

- A

Sorry it wasn't meant to come across as i don't agree with your points more the other aspect of the pros for the 7D.

Your not wrong and I agree but atm it doesn't do it 50% better unlike the hike in price. We are talking about a 3 year old camera vs a 6 month old one. When the new 5DMKIV comes out I think the balance will be addressed. Comparing the 5DMKIII to the original 7D was a huge huge difference.

The 7DMKII is not really any different to any of the other crop cameras in terms of its shoots the same way as a 100D does, its just much more complex, shoots 10fps and has a killer AF system. It doesn't mean you can't slow it down and shoot as if its a much slower camera, it is aimed at sports and action but theres no reason it cant be used in all other situations. Landscape its a powerhouse because of the pixel density and DOF increase etc etc the only thing its not really suited for is high end portraiture and you could say weddings, because of the look FF gives you but its a safe way to shoot weddings no worries with shooting such large apertures and missing the area you want to focus. Crop is more forgiving which leads to my next point.

Moving to FF is also a bit of a learning curve, certainly was for me 5 years into shooting professionally I went FF with a 5DMKII, relearning how your lenses behave, DOF, FOV, also ensuring to shoot fast enough to reduce camera shake which is intensified from the sensor size and then bettering technique to get back to where you were before with crop. For someone thats not as savvy and looking at the market with the money to spend going straight to FF can create disappointing results and its been seen many many a time on the forum, people aren't getting the results they expect which then leads to Canon is *£%@, throwing money doesn't always result in a huge bump in quality. The skill is always important.

5 years later after thinking I will never go crop again and growing my skill set I've come to realise that its not really one or the other its choosing the right tool for the job and essentially making the most money you can from that decision. So choosing a 7DMKII could save people money if they are shooting anything but portraiture... on the other hand FF gives such a lovely look for other subjects... its something everyone has to weigh up and for me having both is now a no brainer.

 

[Sporgon]

My 7DMKII was £800 and a 5DMKIII is still running for £1500+ so its half the price. Fantastic camera IMO.

Agree with all you've said but where are you getting those cameras from in the UK for those prices ? Even without VAT the 7DII is about £1100 and the 5DIII £1850.

I get all my gear grey market. The prices are from SLRHUT, usually buy all my stuff from DREV but with the yen to the dollar SLRHUT are much cheaper.


Its even cheaper now at £780

http://slrhut.co.uk/product/ID1666C5/9128B043AA_Canon-EOS-7D-Mark-II-DSLR-Camera-_Body-Only_-/

Thanks for link. Gotta be worth a punt at £780, even if just for the giggle of 10 fps. I've been really impressed with the 7DII IQ from what I've seen.

 

[ksgal]

This whole crop vs FF frame is an old debate, that really doesn't apply to the technology as much as it use to.

Here we go, two pictures, one is crop, one is ff. Now, can one really tell and does it really matter? I don't have a 5DIII, but I do have a 5DII and a 7DII so... tell me which is which without looking at the exif.

If you know what you are doing, and you know your tools, then the gap between ff and crop is really zero except with extreme conditions (aperture, focal, lighting, iso, etc... ) I could make them both perform equally except in very specific conditions. Pick the right tool for you and your photography style and budget.

 

[Big_Ant_TV_Media]

WHY DO PEOPLE ...

Sorry mate, but the message is not easier to read and understand if the caps lock is broken
Even if it's right.

didnt know canon rumors had typing/grammar police

 

[Big_Ant_TV_Media]

Negatives are all well and good but what about the positives? Lots of benefit of crop

...

FF is great if you need smaller DOF but what about situations where you don't?

...

To push people toward FF for everything is a mistake a lot of people continue to do on this forum, its often overkill for most people and the upgrade in lenses etc is usually a large one.

Awesome reply, thank you, Tom. I really appreciate it. I agree with much of what you said.

However, please recall why I wrote what I wrote -- it wasn't to smear crop cameras or push anyone towards a conversion to FF. It was to shed light on why the 7D/7D2 brand is thought of (right or wrong) as a wildlife/action/sports rig.

My argument, put another way (in broad strokes): anything the 7D2 can do, a 5D3 can do equivalently or better with the exception of reach or burst. So, the corollary to that is the 7D2 shines in areas where reach/burst is needed, i.e. wildlife/action/sports. That doesn't mean it doesn't shine elsewhere -- it just means that it's longest suit / most impressive parameters are oriented to that need. That's all.

- A

Sorry it wasn't meant to come across as i don't agree with your points more the other aspect of the pros for the 7D.

Your not wrong and I agree but atm it doesn't do it 50% better unlike the hike in price. We are talking about a 3 year old camera vs a 6 month old one. When the new 5DMKIV comes out I think the balance will be addressed. Comparing the 5DMKIII to the original 7D was a huge huge difference.

The 7DMKII is not really any different to any of the other crop cameras in terms of its shoots the same way as a 100D does, its just much more complex, shoots 10fps and has a killer AF system. It doesn't mean you can't slow it down and shoot as if its a much slower camera, it is aimed at sports and action but theres no reason it cant be used in all other situations. Landscape its a powerhouse because of the pixel density and DOF increase etc etc the only thing its not really suited for is high end portraiture and you could say weddings, because of the look FF gives you but its a safe way to shoot weddings no worries with shooting such large apertures and missing the area you want to focus. Crop is more forgiving which leads to my next point.

Moving to FF is also a bit of a learning curve, certainly was for me 5 years into shooting professionally I went FF with a 5DMKII, relearning how your lenses behave, DOF, FOV, also ensuring to shoot fast enough to reduce camera shake which is intensified from the sensor size and then bettering technique to get back to where you were before with crop. For someone thats not as savvy and looking at the market with the money to spend going straight to FF can create disappointing results and its been seen many many a time on the forum, people aren't getting the results they expect which then leads to Canon is *£%@, throwing money doesn't always result in a huge bump in quality. The skill is always important.

5 years later after thinking I will never go crop again and growing my skill set I've come to realise that its not really one or the other its choosing the right tool for the job and essentially making the most money you can from that decision. So choosing a 7DMKII could save people money if they are shooting anything but portraiture... on the other hand FF gives such a lovely look for other subjects... its something everyone has to weigh up and for me having both is now a no brainer.

so u saying the 7D mark too isnt that good at high end portraits?? hmm

_W9A2331-1 by Bigz Ant, on Flickr
_W9A2407-1 by Bigz Ant, on Flickr

well i guess this isnt high end portraits

 

[tomscott]

so u saying the 7D mark too isnt that good at high end portraits?? hmm

well i guess this isnt high end portraits

I didn't say it wasn't suitable, I said it would save people money unless they are looking for a high end portraiture, specific look.

In your images above I would say a FF camera would have been more suitable as there is a lot of DOF to the point where the bg is distracting in both images, especially in the first image with the black curtain not sure whats in the bottom right corner but at a wider aperture would have looked much more aesthetic.

At F5 your effectively shooting the equivalent of F8 at 85mm against a flat background with a lot of texture, close range not leaving much room for a clean background. If it had been shot full frame you could have got a nicer creamier background but at the distance the subject is to the curtain it may not have made much difference unless you shot a much larger aperture. It would have also added a better bokeh effect in the second, but again he's so close to the lights it would be difficult. Changing the perspective moving the model further forward would have given a creamier look. But depends on your intended look.

But if your shooting in a studio with controlled lighting a FF camera is a no brainer.

 

[privatebydesign]

Negatives are all well and good but what about the positives? Lots of benefit of crop

...

FF is great if you need smaller DOF but what about situations where you don't?

...

To push people toward FF for everything is a mistake a lot of people continue to do on this forum, its often overkill for most people and the upgrade in lenses etc is usually a large one.

Awesome reply, thank you, Tom. I really appreciate it. I agree with much of what you said.

However, please recall why I wrote what I wrote -- it wasn't to smear crop cameras or push anyone towards a conversion to FF. It was to shed light on why the 7D/7D2 brand is thought of (right or wrong) as a wildlife/action/sports rig.

My argument, put another way (in broad strokes): anything the 7D2 can do, a 5D3 can do equivalently or better with the exception of reach or burst. So, the corollary to that is the 7D2 shines in areas where reach/burst is needed, i.e. wildlife/action/sports. That doesn't mean it doesn't shine elsewhere -- it just means that it's longest suit / most impressive parameters are oriented to that need. That's all.

- A

Sorry it wasn't meant to come across as i don't agree with your points more the other aspect of the pros for the 7D.

Your not wrong and I agree but atm it doesn't do it 50% better unlike the hike in price. We are talking about a 3 year old camera vs a 6 month old one. When the new 5DMKIV comes out I think the balance will be addressed. Comparing the 5DMKIII to the original 7D was a huge huge difference.

The 7DMKII is not really any different to any of the other crop cameras in terms of its shoots the same way as a 100D does, its just much more complex, shoots 10fps and has a killer AF system. It doesn't mean you can't slow it down and shoot as if its a much slower camera, it is aimed at sports and action but theres no reason it cant be used in all other situations. Landscape its a powerhouse because of the pixel density and DOF increase etc etc the only thing its not really suited for is high end portraiture and you could say weddings, because of the look FF gives you but its a safe way to shoot weddings no worries with shooting such large apertures and missing the area you want to focus. Crop is more forgiving which leads to my next point.

Moving to FF is also a bit of a learning curve, certainly was for me 5 years into shooting professionally I went FF with a 5DMKII, relearning how your lenses behave, DOF, FOV, also ensuring to shoot fast enough to reduce camera shake which is intensified from the sensor size and then bettering technique to get back to where you were before with crop. For someone thats not as savvy and looking at the market with the money to spend going straight to FF can create disappointing results and its been seen many many a time on the forum, people aren't getting the results they expect which then leads to Canon is *£%@, throwing money doesn't always result in a huge bump in quality. The skill is always important.

5 years later after thinking I will never go crop again and growing my skill set I've come to realise that its not really one or the other its choosing the right tool for the job and essentially making the most money you can from that decision. So choosing a 7DMKII could save people money if they are shooting anything but portraiture... on the other hand FF gives such a lovely look for other subjects... its something everyone has to weigh up and for me having both is now a no brainer.

so u saying the 7D mark too isnt that good at high end portraits?? hmm

_W9A2331-1 by Bigz Ant, on Flickr
_W9A2407-1 by Bigz Ant, on Flickr

well i guess this isnt high end portraits

Whilst I am sure there are many people who could shoot high end portraits with a 7D MkII, I doubt any do, there are better tools for less money.

On the other hand I do agree with your second comment, they are not close to high end portraits. I'd put them in first year art school class league, certainly not higher.

 

[Sporgon]

Negatives are all well and good but what about the positives? Lots of benefit of crop

...

FF is great if you need smaller DOF but what about situations where you don't?

...

To push people toward FF for everything is a mistake a lot of people continue to do on this forum, its often overkill for most people and the upgrade in lenses etc is usually a large one.

Awesome reply, thank you, Tom. I really appreciate it. I agree with much of what you said.

However, please recall why I wrote what I wrote -- it wasn't to smear crop cameras or push anyone towards a conversion to FF. It was to shed light on why the 7D/7D2 brand is thought of (right or wrong) as a wildlife/action/sports rig.

My argument, put another way (in broad strokes): anything the 7D2 can do, a 5D3 can do equivalently or better with the exception of reach or burst. So, the corollary to that is the 7D2 shines in areas where reach/burst is needed, i.e. wildlife/action/sports. That doesn't mean it doesn't shine elsewhere -- it just means that it's longest suit / most impressive parameters are oriented to that need. That's all.

- A

Sorry it wasn't meant to come across as i don't agree with your points more the other aspect of the pros for the 7D.

Your not wrong and I agree but atm it doesn't do it 50% better unlike the hike in price. We are talking about a 3 year old camera vs a 6 month old one. When the new 5DMKIV comes out I think the balance will be addressed. Comparing the 5DMKIII to the original 7D was a huge huge difference.

The 7DMKII is not really any different to any of the other crop cameras in terms of its shoots the same way as a 100D does, its just much more complex, shoots 10fps and has a killer AF system. It doesn't mean you can't slow it down and shoot as if its a much slower camera, it is aimed at sports and action but theres no reason it cant be used in all other situations. Landscape its a powerhouse because of the pixel density and DOF increase etc etc the only thing its not really suited for is high end portraiture and you could say weddings, because of the look FF gives you but its a safe way to shoot weddings no worries with shooting such large apertures and missing the area you want to focus. Crop is more forgiving which leads to my next point.

Moving to FF is also a bit of a learning curve, certainly was for me 5 years into shooting professionally I went FF with a 5DMKII, relearning how your lenses behave, DOF, FOV, also ensuring to shoot fast enough to reduce camera shake which is intensified from the sensor size and then bettering technique to get back to where you were before with crop. For someone thats not as savvy and looking at the market with the money to spend going straight to FF can create disappointing results and its been seen many many a time on the forum, people aren't getting the results they expect which then leads to Canon is *£%@, throwing money doesn't always result in a huge bump in quality. The skill is always important.

5 years later after thinking I will never go crop again and growing my skill set I've come to realise that its not really one or the other its choosing the right tool for the job and essentially making the most money you can from that decision. So choosing a 7DMKII could save people money if they are shooting anything but portraiture... on the other hand FF gives such a lovely look for other subjects... its something everyone has to weigh up and for me having both is now a no brainer.

so u saying the 7D mark too isnt that good at high end portraits?? hmm

_W9A2331-1 by Bigz Ant, on Flickr
_W9A2407-1 by Bigz Ant, on Flickr

well i guess this isnt high end portraits

Whilst I am sure there are many people who could shoot high end portraits with a 7D MkII, I doubt any do, there are better tools for less money.

On the other hand I do agree with your second comment, they are not close to high end portraits. I'd put them in first year art school class league, certainly not higher.

I just want to know why that guy in front of the Christmas lights has but one boob? Reminds me of the old Johnny Cash song, "I got it one piece at a time..."

I just want to know who suggested that colour eyeshadow to go with that dress, in the first picture ???

 

[takesome1]

WHY DO PEOPLE ...

Sorry mate, but the message is not easier to read and understand if the caps lock is broken
Even if it's right.

didnt know canon rumors had typing/grammar police

You must be very new to the forum, there have been lengthy threads dedicated to grammar.

But,

That wasn't the grammar police. You were just stopped by the netiquette police for shouting.

 

[Pixel]

Here's a graphic representation of the AF differences between the 7D Mark II and 5D Mark III. The points notated by the X's are the highest precision points the camera offers.
Also, I don't know if it has been mentioned in this thread as I didn't read the entire thing, the 5D Mark III only uses one processor for camera ops and AF while the 7D Mark II has a processor dedicated solely to the AF. When I need precision AF I reach for the 1Dx first or then one my two 7D Mark II's. The 5D Mark III sits in the bag until I need an extra pretty file or quiet shutter.

 

[geofpowell]

Forgive my ignorance but what is BIF?

 

[tomscott]

Forgive my ignorance but what is BIF?

Bird in flight

 

[Big_Ant_TV_Media]

I SEE U DONT KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT SMH
you were at the photoplus expo too say what needed too be done

so u saying the 7D mark too isnt that good at high end portraits?? hmm

well i guess this isnt high end portraits

I didn't say it wasn't suitable, I said it would save people money unless they are looking for a high end portraiture, specific look.

In your images above I would say a FF camera would have been more suitable as there is a lot of DOF to the point where the bg is distracting in both images, especially in the first image with the black curtain not sure whats in the bottom right corner but at a wider aperture would have looked much more aesthetic.

At F5 your effectively shooting the equivalent of F8 at 85mm against a flat background with a lot of texture, close range not leaving much room for a clean background. If it had been shot full frame you could have got a nicer creamier background but at the distance the subject is to the curtain it may not have made much difference unless you shot a much larger aperture. It would have also added a better bokeh effect in the second, but again he's so close to the lights it would be difficult. Changing the perspective moving the model further forward would have given a creamier look. But depends on your intended look.

But if your shooting in a studio with controlled lighting a FF camera is a no brainer.