replacing 7d with 5d3

[jeanluc]

I currently have a 5d mk2 and a 7d, with 16-35L, 24-105L, 100L macro and the 70-300L for glass. I keep the 7d on the 70-300L for the most part, and use the 5d2 for everything else. I mainly shoot landscapes, but some birds, wildlife etc. but no sports.

I sold my ef/s glass (10-22, 60 macro) and my plan was to stick with the above for a while.

I am thinking about replacing the 7d with a 5d3 since my current lens lineup has headed toward full frame; just wondering if that really makes any sense or not. I would like one body to have the more capable AF and speed that the 7d does for the birds etc, so replacing it with a 6d may or may not make any sense.

I love my 70-300L, but it is not teleconverter compatible (at least not Canon), and I am concerned about losing the reach it gives.

I am wondering how using a 5d3 with that lens and cropping in would compare with using it on the 7d in terms of IQ. Does the low light capability of the 5d3 more than make up?

I could also wait and see what the 7d2 does, but the real drive for this is to just have 2 full frame bodies since I (maybe too rashly) sold the ef/s glass.

Anybody have any thoughts or experiences?

Thanks!

 

[MichaelHodges]

Since you own the 5D II, you may already have an answer to your question. Do you like the 70-300 on that body? If so, you are good to go. I went back and forth on the 7D, 5D II, and 5D III. In the end, it was about more pixels on the grizzly, so I kept the 7D.

There's no question ( at all) that the IQ on the 5D's is superior...except when shooting wildlife and having to crop. And then there's the fact that one hasn't even cropped the 7D yet, so....

BTW, I found the 5D II's center AF point just as good as the 7D, and even better in low light.

Best of luck.

-------------

http://michaelhodgesfiction.com/

 

[Etienne]

I traded my 5DII for a 5DIII and I am very happy with the new camera.
I'd keep the 7D for now, but upgrade the 5DII if you want better AF, slightly better low light, dual cards, and much better video performance. The quiet shutter feature is nice sometimes too.

 

[timmy_650]

Why don't you trade your 5D2 for a 5D3 and keep the 7D. You keep the range and the speed of the 7D. I think I would just rather switch lens most of the time and keep using my 5D3 over the 5D2

 

[Loswr]

I am wondering how using a 5d3 with that lens and cropping in would compare with using it on the 7d in terms of IQ. Does the low light capability of the 5d3 more than make up?

Basically, at low ISO (less than ISO 800), there will be no meaningful IQ difference between the 7D and the cropped 5DIII. If the 8.6 MP of the cropped FF image is sufficient for your output needs (up to 16x24" prints), the 'reach' advantage of the 7D is an illusion. At higher ISOs, the IQ of the cropped 5DIII image will be significantly better. The AF of the 5DIII is also better than the 7D, and the higher percentage of in-focus shots may in part make up for the loss of 2 fps.

After getting the 1D X, I hung onto the 7D for the 'reach advantage'. I haven't taken anything but a few test shots with it since then.

I say sell the 7D and 5DII and get the 5DIII.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Capturing wildlife usually means fast shutter speeds, which means high ISO. Having more but noisy pixels on the subject does not mean better quality when compared to a crop. At low ISO, thats not a issue.

Personally, I think a 1D MK IV with its APS-H sensor was a good compromise for wildlife, and, they were available for less than a 5D MK III for a while, at least (I sold mine and haven't checked lately).

I sold my 7D after it was just sitting around with my 5D MK III getting all the use.

 

[RLPhoto]

I replaced my 7D with another MK3 after getting my first one. I doubt I'll ever go back to crop cameras...

 

[crasher8]

Noise over 800? Easy to part with for a 5D3 for me.

 

[MichaelHodges]

Basically, at low ISO (less than ISO 800), there will be no meaningful IQ difference between the 7D and the cropped 5DIII

I'd disagree with that.

I noticed a significant improvement in sharpness and low ISO noise (especially in blue skies) with the 5D II and 5D III. Those cameras lost their edge when shooting wildlife with a 300 prime, however.

The 7D and 5D II compliment each other really well. I didn't see the need for the 5D III when using the 7D for wildlife, and designating the 5d II for landscapes, although my 5D II had no issue whatsoever tracking sprinting animals in very lowlight with the center AF point and AI servo. The issue there is just reach.

If I was the OP, I'd stand pat and enjoy the flexibility.

 

[Loswr]

Basically, at low ISO (less than ISO 800), there will be no meaningful IQ difference between the 7D and the cropped 5DIII

I'd disagree with that.

I noticed a significant improvement in sharpness and low ISO noise (especially in blue skies) with the 5D II and 5D III. Those cameras lost their edge when shooting wildlife with a 300 prime, however.

Were you comparing images from the FF bodies cropped to the FoV of the 7D (and with the same lens)? That's the scenario to which I am referring. Using the entire image from the FF sensor, it will have an IQ advantage over the 7D at lower ISOs as well.