7D and 5D II that different?

[briansquibb]

They both are suffering from noise

They're both ISO 3200 and the presentation size is roughly 24". There's some noise, but neither "sucks", and there really isn't much at all to choose between them. (And some of the roughness you consider "noise" would disappear in a print where all pixels can be laid down on the paper instead of scaled down by algorithm.)

I wouldn't be happy with that noise - there is some ugly stuff in the left image

 

[mibu]

yeah marek, you’re absolutely right! so the main point in the choice between 7d and 5d can be the final printed image. and that means if you want to print large, then the 5d is a better choice.

 

[paul13walnut5]

Unless you are trying to get a keeper out of a very fast moving subject.

A 7D may exhibit more (but perfectly acceptable) noise, but in some situations you might want a choice of 24 frames taken over 3 seconds rather than 10 or 11.

You might also want to have more of those shots in focus.

In which case BETWEEN A 7D AND 5D2 you would want a 7D.

I am not knocking the 5D2, or blind to any of the shortcomings of the 7D, but they are different cameras optimised for different users.

 

[mibu]

exactly!

 

[Random Orbits]

Why would one shoot strictly for equivalence?

The original comment was that a 5D2 lets you stop down more before diffraction impacts sharpness. This is false. When shooting equivalent landscapes (FoV and DoF) diffraction does not impact any format more than any other. You cannot get "more DoF with less diffraction" with FF. This is true across the spectrum, from 4/3 to large format.

What does this have to do with my comment that you cited? ???

For me it would depend on other factors. Again I'll point out that if you need more DoF then you can get with a wide open prime on FF, then you've lost the sensor ISO advantage. f/1.4 is not a sweet spot for FF, it's hardly usable. And I have more trouble nailing focus with a fast prime on the 5D2 then on the 7D, aggravated by having the lens wide open.

Now if we're talking f/2.8 zooms where f/2.8 offers sufficient DoF, then yes, I would pick up the 5D2 for the dark auditorium. The f/2.8 zooms make complete sense on FF for, say, wedding and PJ work.

Yes, you would lose the speed advantage to maintain the same DOF but it wouldn't be any WORSE than the crop sensor. The FF sensor gives you add option of shallower DOF, and that can be traded for shutter speed. I like having that option. A crop sensor does not give you that option.

The same lenses will also result in higher resolution (lp per image height) on a larger sensor.

A false meme caused by a general misunderstanding of lens testing. The same lenses will result in higher detail contrast (sharpness). If these were the film days, that difference would be a big deal. In the world of PS it's inconsequential between these two particular sensors, except at higher ISOs where sharpening increases the noise differences.

I don't understand what you're saying. I'm saying that the enlarging process will affect details when printed at the same size and that higher density crop sensors will require better optics to resolve the same level of detail when printed at the same size. Are you saying that it's not true or that it doesn't matter? Interpolation (uprezzing) can not create more detail. I don't mean to sound petty but I'm genuinely curious. I recently printed an image from a 5DII 24in x 36in. I was happy with the print. Would the 7D have provided the same print quality?

 

[RLPhoto]

+1 to what Neuro said.

You could also get the same benefits he speaks about with a 5Dc but that is a much older rig in terms of menu systems, etc.. The images from a 5Dc have a wonderful quality about them and you can pick one up for under $800.

+2. Get the 7D + 5Dc combo. I've used that combo for years before getting the 5D3.

 

[bdunbar79]

Or you could just get a 5D Mark III or a used 1D Mark IV and have everything in ONE camera, considering you can only take ONE picture at a time. What good does having two cameras with seperate qualities do you when you need both qualities at the same time? I purposefully sold my 5D Mark II and 7D for a 5D Mark III so I could have both in one camera (and then some).

RLPhoto has the right idea regarding cost, however. A 5D and 7D will be much cheaper than either camera I mentioned. Price is certainly a factor and I won't pretend that it doesn't matter. So I am also caught between a rock and a hard place when people ask me this question. Do you spend a lot of money for ONE camera with everything, or for much cheaper, get two cameras; one with quality A and one with quality B? Unfortunately my photography does not allow me to do so. If yours does, then yes, by all means have an A and B body (not to be confused with main and backup).

Yes, the 7D and 5D2 are different and are a great A and B body duo.

 

[drmikeinpdx]

I use a 7D and a 5D Classic. Once you get your Lightroom process figured out for each camera, you have to pixel peep to see the difference.

I use the two cameras almost interchangeably in my work, but if I want shallow DOF, I use the 5D, deep DOF, the 7D. If I shot sports or other fast moving subjects, the 7D would be the choice for sure. It is a much faster handling/focusing camera.

In portrait work, the 5D gives smoother skin tones, while the 7D picks up every pore and blemish, probably due to the greater megapixels. I really do prefer the 5D for portraits.

I haven't used them much in low light. I normally keep both set for ISO 100 and never go over 800.

 

[EOBeav]

Thank you all for the comments. I decided to pull the trigger on the 5D Mk. II. My bank account looks a little sad, but (hopefully) it'll be worth it. I'm a college student so being poor is nothing new.

You won't regret it. I moved from a Rebel to a 5DmkII last winter and haven't looked back.

 

[picturesbyme]

But also the 5D MKII is a step backwards. AF system is so old and ruins the camera really, is it still worth £1600 I don't think so, if it were £1250 £1300 then I would say yes. But then the 5D MKIII is that worth another £1000 premium again no, but this is a frustrating time as a buyer for Canon so you did right pulling the trigger I just won't! It would be my luck to pull the trigger on one and it be dropped in price by a big margin or this consumer FF camera would be released. Also still shooting a 40D and spending £1600 on a camera with the same AF system would be counter productive IMO.

Sold my old 5D2 and got one for $1899 brand new not that long ago, canon auth. dealer+freeS&H (that's about £1212 right?).

Doesn't work like that here in the UK cheapest atm in around £1600 second hand the 5D MKII are about £1250. The 5D MKIII is £1000 more here than it is in america..

That offer from adorama on the home page for $4299 with a 24-105mm and the grip. Well it is $4299 body only in the UK or £2800, prices are ridiculous over here.

Fry's ships worldwide... I got it from them a few weeks ago.