Out with my 7D....in with what..? 5D MkIII or 1D MkIV..?

[Subevent]

Hi y´all!

My first post in this forum is a question you may have heard before...but I´ll try it out anyway.
I´ve been using the 7D since it was released and today my main lenses are a 100-400 L IS and a Tokina 11-16 2,8. I mainly shoot wildlife (birds), roadracing and recently I started to fiddle a bit with landscapes as well... (examles at www.subevent.se)

Now...firstly I wanted to look for a new lens which would be faster and give me a better "reach"...and I got stuck on the Sigma 120-300 2,8 OS EX...because I thought it would be nice with a 2x converter.
But on the way I´ve started to wonder if it wasn´t time for a new camera instead...

What I ultimately want is still speed for birds and roadracing...but also an improvement in image quality for my landscape shots. (well...to be honest I want a IQ-improvement across the board)
I talked to my local cameradealer who also happened to have a used Sigma-lens available - and asked him if I should go for a camera or the lens. (I almost always get the answer to go for the lens - but not this time)
His adwise was to get a used 1D Mark IV or the new 5D Mark III instead...and I could tell he was lobbying toward the 1D Mark IV.

So...what is the feel about this? If I am to change the camera - I want to see a real difference in IQ which is the main reason for me to let go of the 7D.
The cameradealer sat neatly on a used Mark IV as well - which looked really fine and would cost me less than the 5D...

...eh...help?

/Patrik
www.subevent.se

 

[coreyhkh]

Wait until January and see if canon is going to talk about the 7D mk2

 

[Kernuak]

If the Tokina is the only wideangle you have, depending on your style for landscapes, you may find it a little wide on the 5D MkIII (although you could of course crop). Also, if you want to progress your landscapes, filters would come in useful at some point. If your focus wa going to be mainly on landscapes, with some wildlife, I would say the 5D MkIII. I found myself using it almost exlusively instead of the 7D for wildlife a couple of weeks ago wihile I was away. Howeever, if your main focus is on wildlife with some landscapes, then I would opt for the 1D MkIV, unless you want to do a lot of low light work (although the 1D MkIV is certainly capable there too). I haven't used it myself, but the IQ is in a different league to the 7D (as is the 5D MkIII).

 

[TeenTog]

Wait until January and see if canon is going to talk about the 7D mk2

Definatley do that- but if they dont heres what I would do. If you are thinking about doing mostly landscape, either one will work, but take into account that the 1D mkIV is larger and heavier than the 5D mkIII. If you are primarily doing sports, wildlife or track racing, as you said, you should probably opt for the 1D MkIV, as its faster burst rate will help you out. However, If you are doing EVERYTHING, than go for the 5D Mk. III. It's burst rate is fast enough, it's AF is pretty good, It has a lot of new and improved tecnology, including the Digic V processor, if i'm not mistaken.

If It were me, I would do the 5D III. It is more of an all around camera, and if a "professional" camera costs less than the 5D Mk III...... you may want to make sure it works

 

[Rat]

If the Tokina is the only wideangle you have, depending on your style for landscapes, you may find it a little wide on the 5D MkIII (although you could of course crop).

No worries - it would crop automatically, as this is a crop lens : It's not meant for either camera; it might be a 16mm on the 5D3 and even be used at 14 or 15 on the 1D4, but ymmv and I wouldn't call it a zoom lens anymore anyway.

Also, a word of warning on the Sigma 120-300: reviews have it that AF is not all that reliable, which is why I scratched it from my must-have list. If you don't have a good copy, you can't shoot what you want, when you want it. I'd say that lens is not guaranteed suitable for sports and birding, and your purchase will involve risk

For more reach, I think most of your solutions would work. Any 300/2.8 with an extender means 600mm and that's 1.5 times your current resolving power. I think my 5D3 is significantly sharper than a 7D, especially at high iso - it's not double, but it might come close to your 7D with 200mm extra. I don't think the 1D4 will make a much bigger difference. For versatility, I'd choose the 5D3 over the 1D4 because of the freedom the high iso performance gives you, which I'd value higher than framerate.

 

[señor Steve]

First of all, nice pics on your site. Second, I'm not a fan of 3rd party glass and I would be careful how you replace your 100-400, especially trying to get more reach while considering a camera with less or no crop factor. I went from a 7d to a 5d mkiii and am pleased to say the least, but for a lot of what you are photographing I think the 7d is a good camera. To answer the autofocus question, the mkiii is downright awesome. I was a fan of the 7d autofocus, but it simply cannot match the newer camera's precision. Of course the 1d mkiv is better than either for action (except for high iso vs 5d mkiii) and gets my vote for your style. I'm not expert on the subjects, but don't believe birds and motorsports necessarily require faster glass than you already have. Have you also considered a 5d mkii for landscapes and keeping the 7d? Unfortunately, I think you will also need a new wide angle lens. Best of luck.

 

[CanonGirl]

Well, I own both a 7D & 5D Mark III, and I've shot the same subjects using the identical lens on both cameras. I bought the 5D, in part, because it is nearly identical to the 7D ergonomically, but primarily to obtain better low-light performance & full-frame. So, in my experience, the 5D locks on autofocus faster and more consistently than the 7D. Noise, even at iso 100 is much better, which is very obvious at 100% viewing of, for example, blue sky areas. As for low light performance, I'm in complete awe of the 5D, with it's iso 12800 roughly matching my 7D's iso 1600 performance, visually. As for dynamic range, I use a Sekonic L-758 light meter for some of my work, which can be calibrated to match the dynamic range of each camera. Using Sekonic's targets & calibration software, the 5D gives me about 1.5 stops more range than the 7D, too. I'll also say that I LOVE, really LOVE the silent shutter mode on the 5D, which is really nice for candid shots. So I'm one happy girl, and the 5D is worth every penny I paid, at least to me. I still have the 7D, and I still like it, but I was really surprised at how much better the 5D is.

Anyway, I doubt you would go wrong either way, but I do VERY much like my 5D & 7D cameras.

 

[Kernuak]

If the Tokina is the only wideangle you have, depending on your style for landscapes, you may find it a little wide on the 5D MkIII (although you could of course crop).

No worries - it would crop automatically, as this is a crop lens : It's not meant for either camera; it might be a 16mm on the 5D3 and even be used at 14 or 15 on the 1D4, but ymmv and I wouldn't call it a zoom lens anymore anyway.

I had meant to say check if the Tokina is compatible, as I know very little about them, but some are compatible with full frame. However, I would be more concerned about damage to the mirror assembly if it isn't compatible. We can't all be experts on every single lens. Besides, personally, I find 16mm too wide for my tastes, but everyone is different.

 

[Kernuak]

Well, I own both a 7D & 5D Mark III, and I've shot the same subjects using the identical lens on both cameras. I bought the 5D, in part, because it is nearly identical to the 7D ergonomically, but primarily to obtain better low-light performance & full-frame. So, in my experience, the 5D locks on autofocus faster and more consistently than the 7D. Noise, even at iso 100 is much better, which is very obvious at 100% viewing of, for example, blue sky areas. As for low light performance, I'm in complete awe of the 5D, with it's iso 12800 roughly matching my 7D's iso 1600 performance, visually. As for dynamic range, I use a Sekonic L-758 light meter for some of my work, which can be calibrated to match the dynamic range of each camera. Using Sekonic's targets & calibration software, the 5D gives me about 1.5 stops more range than the 7D, too. I'll also say that I LOVE, really LOVE the silent shutter mode on the 5D, which is really nice for candid shots. So I'm one happy girl, and the 5D is worth every penny I paid, at least to me. I still have the 7D, and I still like it, but I was really surprised at how much better the 5D is.

Anyway, I doubt you would go wrong either way, but I do VERY much like my 5D & 7D cameras.

I probably wouldn't go quite as far as saying ISO 12800 on the MkIII is a match for 1600 on the 7D, but certainly 6400 is significantly better, so it isn't far off. I'm in total agreement for all your other comparisons though. I fould myself not missing the crop factor to my surprise and even like the results with a 2x extender on my 300 f/2.8 instead of the 1.4x, so I actually ended up with as much reach, at the expense of AF speed, with only minimal loss of IQ.

 

[CanonGirl]

I agree with your comment about the crop factor, Kernuak. I was photographing the Blue Angels last week and started with my 300mm f4L with & withough the 1.4 teleconverter and found the pictures to actually be a bit better than with the 7D using the 300mm f4L. I think primarily due to the greater background noise of the 7D. Plus, there might be some effect of the smaller pixel size of the 7D being more sensitive to camera shake, with respect to image sharpness, as I was shooting handheld. As for the 1600 vs 12800 iso part, maybe not quite that dramatic overall, but in part, my statement is based upon the observation that the 5D has not only lower noise overall, but it seems to me that Canon did something to reduce the chroma noise, which is quite more ugly. So, if I'm looking at overall noise, it seems to me that your 2-stop improvement is a fair call, but as the 5D also seems to control chroma noise better, I guess I feel it does a bit better than 2-stops in this regard. Have you noticed this? Anyway, I'm very happy with the 5D Mark III. ;D

 

[Rat]

I had meant to say check if the Tokina is compatible, as I know very little about them, but some are compatible with full frame. However, I would be more concerned about damage to the mirror assembly if it isn't compatible.

I'm pretty sure it will work normally except for the crop circle (which is going to be more of a very jagged crop rectangle), like all Tokina UWA's. I'm also pretty sure that all EF-compatible lenses will work with all Canons and not crash the mirror in the process, except for the Canon EF-S range. I'm unaware of any other exceptions, but I too don't know everything about all lenses - I'm just hoping that together, we'll get there in the end Anyhoo, TS needs a new wide angle lens :

 

[Zusje]

I have both the 5D iii, and 1D IV. I purchased the 2nd hand 1D IV after the 5D iii, in particular because I wished to practise bird photography, however for low-light shots or sunsets, I prefer the 5D iii, not so much because of iso performance (1D IV, although not as good as 5D iii is actually not too bad in my opinion) but due to the 1D IV has a problem with AF having difficulty locking focus in very low light.

If I had to limit myself to just one of these great cameras, 5D iii would be the choice by a narrow margin.

 

[PackLight]

If you want Landscape camera go with the 5D MKIII.
If you want a Wildlife camera go with the 1D Mark IV.

But my suggestions is this;

Don't buy either one. Sell your 100-400mm. Take the 2 or 3K that you were going to apply to the new body, it will give you close to 4K. Then find a good used 300mm f/2.8L IS original version. You should be able to find one between 3.5 and 4.5K depending on condition. This lens will do more for you IQ than either of those bodies and put your photography at another level.

 

[maralahal]

I had the 7D. It is a great camera for the price. About 8 months ago I purchased a 1DM4 and then sold the 7D. The Mark4 is a superb camera and I have been extremely happy with it. I have 5 L series lenses and my favorite lens is my 100-400. I take pics of my kids playing sports, birds, college football games, and use a 16-35 2.8 for landscapes - when I want to get wide.

You are here asking a question about what you should do. Based upon your situation, and when I compare it to mine, I would say go with the Mark4 and don't get rid of that 100-400!

 

[Wilmark]

I would say get rid of that dog the 7d. Its a rebel in a hardbody that has to be the most mismatched sensor with the rest of the cam. When you go to the ff body you will never look back at the 7d. I am amazed at those who try to be kind to the 7d through out these forums. Like the girl above who says that she still loves the 7d but is really impressed at how much better 5D3 is - jeez please be honest. BTW why would you want to wait for the 7dii its not like you existing lenses/equipment/compatibility are 7D series lenses. Consider even the 6D.

 

[Subevent]

If the Tokina is the only wideangle you have, depending on your style for landscapes, you may find it a little wide on the 5D MkIII (although you could of course crop). Also, if you want to progress your landscapes, filters would come in useful at some point. If your focus wa going to be mainly on landscapes, with some wildlife, I would say the 5D MkIII. I found myself using it almost exlusively instead of the 7D for wildlife a couple of weeks ago wihile I was away. Howeever, if your main focus is on wildlife with some landscapes, then I would opt for the 1D MkIV, unless you want to do a lot of low light work (although the 1D MkIV is certainly capable there too). I haven't used it myself, but the IQ is in a different league to the 7D (as is the 5D MkIII).

Thanks for your reply...
I would say more wildlife than landscapes for me...although landscapes is a new thrill, my passion is for birds. Also - of course roadracing - which mainly is about midday shooting with panning action at ...um...let´s say 1/60 and faster - and those high-speed shots in chase of a blurred background...

I understand that the new 5D III is a gadget-filled camera with a whole new way of thinking in several ways. ...and that the Mark IV is a sturdy, no-nonsense workhorse.
The Tokina lens will probably be sold or swapped for something else that fits either of the houses...(I even thought that the Tokina couldn´t fit those cameras at all...)

 

[Subevent]

Wait until January and see if canon is going to talk about the 7D mk2

If you are doing EVERYTHING, than go for the 5D Mk. III. It's burst rate is fast enough, it's AF is pretty good, It has a lot of new and improved tecnology, including the Digic V processor, if i'm not mistaken.

If It were me, I would do the 5D III. It is more of an all around camera, and if a "professional" camera costs less than the 5D Mk III...... you may want to make sure it works

Yeah...I´m actually is one for doing everything with my camera... I´m dying to try out macro too and the one thing I don´t do yet to any extent is portrait and studiowork...
Maybe the 5D is more of an all-rounder...

I´m mostly terrified of making a wrong turn here and spend a great deal of money on the "wrong" camera.

 

[Subevent]

Also, a word of warning on the Sigma 120-300: reviews have it that AF is not all that reliable, which is why I scratched it from my must-have list. If you don't have a good copy, you can't shoot what you want, when you want it. I'd say that lens is not guaranteed suitable for sports and birding, and your purchase will involve risk

For more reach, I think most of your solutions would work. Any 300/2.8 with an extender means 600mm and that's 1.5 times your current resolving power. I think my 5D3 is significantly sharper than a 7D, especially at high iso - it's not double, but it might come close to your 7D with 200mm extra. I don't think the 1D4 will make a much bigger difference. For versatility, I'd choose the 5D3 over the 1D4 because of the freedom the high iso performance gives you, which I'd value higher than framerate.

Thank´s for the heads-up on the Sigma. It is more and more looking like a choice between cameras now...
I can feel it in my gut...probably the 5D is the right choice after all...but theres a hefty pricetag and I´ll also need to get me a batterygrip which will cost me a bit more still...

argh...

 

[Subevent]

First of all, nice pics on your site.

Thank you so much!!

I went from a 7d to a 5d mkiii and am pleased to say the least, but for a lot of what you are photographing I think the 7d is a good camera.

Yeah...i´ts not a bad camera...but what I lack is that "oomph" in the images I tend too see everywhere else...both in landscapes and sports. ...hard to explain but one thing I havent mentioned is that I often crop my images. Would this have any impact on wich body to choose?

 

[Subevent]

Noise, even at iso 100 is much better, which is very obvious at 100% viewing of, for example, blue sky areas.

That´s something I feel the 7D is really struggling with. When I bought it and replaced my 40D - I was amazed that I got better shots at higher ISO with the 7D. Downside was noise even at ISO 100. Don´t get me wrong here...I´m a hobby photographer and the 7D probably would suffice, but "suffice" is not the thing I´m looking for. I really wan´t to be "wowed" and kickstart myself as a photographer again - and for that I wan´t to see significant IQ-improvement regardless of which camera I´ll choose.