7D MK II vs 5D MK III

[Nishi Nao]

Hey guys,

i need kinda help! Right now i am intrested in the mentioned bodies. I know its kinda typical.... full frame or not.

Basicly right now i own eh 70D. It is a good kamera with descent performance, but there is one thing i dont like which kinda annoys me. That are the ergonomics. My hands are to big for that little body.

So i got the idea to step up to the higher end of the canon line up.

So while there is no "real" upgrade on the sensor side from the 70D to 7D MK II there is still the amazing body.

On the other side there are a lot of used 5D MK III on the market for arround 2000 Euro. So for arround 400 Euro more i can enter the realm of full frame goodness.

On the lense side there is no problem all of my lenses are fullframe lenses.

Mainly i do creative work like costume/cosplay shoots with a 3 flash setup, but often i find myself do some day/night street photography as well as some nature/wildlife photography.

So any suggestions?

 

[BeenThere]

Since you don' have a lot of crop sensor lenses that would have to be upgraded, I would say the used 5D3 would suit you better. Great images and low noise at higher ISO. You don't need a high frame rate for most of what you do.

 

[NancyP]

6D is the low-light king, but the AF is relatively primitive (11 points), although sensitive (-3 EV).

 

[Ruined]

Get the 5D3.

7D2 is best for sports/nature.

 

[MTCWBY]

Definitely the III IMO. I've shot both in a variety of lighting across a day from high noon to under the high school stadium lights. The 7DII has a fantastic autofocus and ability to shoot fast but the pictures were less refined IMO. The noise pattern for one thing is regular but more pronounced on the 7 in all light but is worse with the shots under the light at 5000 ISO. That said, it took good pictures but not as good as the III. For the kind of shooting you're doing the III is just a better choice and I don't believe you'll be disappointed.

 

[rpt]

I have both. If you are not into sports, get the 5D3. I got that camera 3 years back and I swear by it. The reasons I got the 7D2 were:

• 10 fps
• AF during video
• higher pixel density

However, 5D3 is my general go to camera.

 

[Click]

Get the 5D3.

7D2 is best for sports/nature.

+1

5D III

 

[Monte]

I agree with the others, get the 5D3, then also buy a grip for the 70d. Then you can use the 70D for e little bit of wildlife photography that you do and don't have to switch lenses, just have both cameras ready to go for what ever pops up whether it be an animal or a beautiful landscape shot. I as well have big hands and the grip makes them more holdable for me. I have put a grip on every camera that I've used for this reason.

 

[monkey44]

I have both 5DM3 and 7D2, and my work shooting is primarily sports and wildlife/nature ... the 7D2 does a better job in sports and wildlife -- I own both so it's a non-issue, however, if I had only ONE choice, I would stay with the 5DM3 and get the glass to make it happen in my work. It would not be an easy choice, regardless.

The 5DM3 is more versatile in that respect and will give you better overall performance ... 7D2 is a fine camera, ass close as you'll get to 1D series performance, but will not match up in areas that the 5DM3 excels ... Good luck with whatever you choose ... there can't really be a bad choice between the two.

 

[old-pr-pix]

Step 1, get the grip for your 70D and see if that satisfies your ergonomic concern. Once you use it with a grip you may decide that's all you need. Or, if you still want to upgrade your body, you'll know if you need to budget for a grip as well. As to 7Dii vs. 5DIII the choice is up to you and your budget, they are different but both are great. Listen to the pros and cons, handle both with and without grip if possible, and decide for your self. Monkey44 said it... no bad choice there.

 

[FTb-n]

Get the 5D3. The 7D2 should offer advantages with tracking action, frames per second, and be less taxing on the buffer for those like burst mode. However, the 5D3 is no slouch with action.

The FF 5D3 will open up a new world for you. It's better in low light, has more color depth, and the thinner DOF for the same aperture will give you far more creative control over your images.

I admit that the 7D2 has me intrigued for sports, but low light is still an issue. I shoot RAW, so the noise reduction benefits of the 7D2's JPG conversion is useless to me. The 5D3 is still better in low light.

As I understand it, the 5D3 is also easier on the battery. I've never run a 5D3 battery down during an extended shoot of 2,000-2,500 images. Most of my shoots are far less.

 

[jdramirez]

Put me down for the mkiii as well. I don't think there was anything in what you wrote which suggests that the 7d mkii is a better choice for you.

 

[FEBS]

Get indeed the 5D3. Most versatile body. I would leave home without the 7D2 but never without the 5D3.

 

[NancyP]

Do you use an L bracket routinely? That adds a bit of size to the camera. I am a big fan of L brackets - I use a tripod much more than with old-style plate.

 

[pwp]

I'll run with the majority viewpoint here too...the 5D MkIII.

Most work here is done with 5DIII & a 1D MkIV (and lately a very surprising Panasonic GH4)
1D MkIV files tend to outperform the 7DII. When I shoot with just one body, it's the 5DIII I reach for.

-pw

 

[gqllc007]

I have both. I use the 7DMk2 for sports and nature. I use the 5Dmk3 for landscapes, street photography and portraits.

 

[Deleted member 7828]

Another one who has both.

IF your budget allows - I would say this: Unless you REALLY need the speed and reach of the 7D2, I find the 5D3 to be the better all-around general-purpose camera (and that is its role in my lineup).

 

[Travelintrevor]

"Mainly i do creative work like costume/cosplay shoots with a 3 flash setup, but often i find myself do some day/night street photography as well as some nature/wildlife photography. "

I do not share the opinion that the 5D Mk III is overall better and actually prefer the 7D MK II. The IQ at lower ISO setting is, for all intense and purposes, equal. At higher ISO, the 5D Mk III has less noise but the 7D Mk II noise is easy to deal with post and it lacks the horrible banding and blotchiness that the 5D Mk III has when you push the exposure/shadows during post regardless of ISO setting.

For what you describe (usage), the 7D would work as well or better. For landscapes, I would choose the 7D MK II over the MK III because of the cleaner shadows and ability to push the files more and then not having do deal with banding.

People seem to like to shoe-horn the 7D MK II into the wildlife/sports category because it shoots 10 fps but the camera will do anything you ask. When I leave the house, I now grab the 7D MK II instead of the MK III. Overall, it is the better camera.

I received an email message from a forensic photographer that asked if I can send him a few high ISO files. He specifically asked for 10,000 ISO from the Mk II and Mk III. While shooting the high ISO files, I also shot some underexposed shoots and pushed them post. I am including them all here. To me, the 7D MK II retained detail MUCH better and the Mk III is just a soft mess. And this is at a low ISO (250) setting.

The files are unsharpened, cropped and have no NR. I reduced the blacks of the 7D MK II to match the 5D MK III files. Colors are also different for the 7D MK II at all ISO, not just high.

These were handheld and thus should not be used to measure sharpness of camera/lens. (Same lens was used)
Not meant to be a conclusive test but to illustrate that the 7D handles noise well enough and handles pushing exposure better than the MK III .

 

[Travelintrevor]

and the pushed files