Thinking of a new body, want your opinions

[FTb-n]

Before the full frame "purists" dutifully flame me and put me in my place, ...

"Convert" is more accurate. When I got my 7D, I was amazed at what it could do. But, after a year of cleaning the noise from low light sports in post, I began to consider FF. I didn't want to. It costs too much. But, then I took the plunge with a 5D3...and I'm amazed at what this FF body can do.

Still, the 7D2 has me intrigued with it's improved AF tracking system. I agree that it would also be a fine upgrade from the 40D.

 

[pjn0629]

Before the full frame "purists" dutifully flame me and put me in my place, ...

"Convert" is more accurate. When I got my 7D, I was amazed at what it could do. But, after a year of cleaning the noise from low light sports in post, I began to consider FF. I didn't want to. It costs too much. But, then I took the plunge with a 5D3...and I'm amazed at what this FF body can do.

Still, the 7D2 has me intrigued with it's improved AF tracking system. I agree that it would also be a fine upgrade from the 40D.

I think i'm leaning towards the 5Diii, especially with my current glass... I went and plotted lens on the x-axis, dxo's percieved megapixels on Y, and a series for each body to compare... IQ on the 5D is in a league of its own compared with the 40D and 7Dii by their metrics... And in decent light I doubt I'll be able to tell much of a difference between the AF systems other than frame coverage

 

[FTb-n]

I have a 7D MK II, a 6D and a 5D MK III. I shoot landscape, wildlife and a lot of indoor high school sports in low light. I have 12000 clicks on the 7D MK II, 9000 clicks on the 6D and 82000 clicks on the 5D MK III. If I could only have one camera, it would be the 5D MK III without question. It is sharper than the 1 DX (18 mp vs 24 mp), has a better focusing system than the 6D and much better noise performance than the 7D MK II. It is a hard combination to beat and definitely a workhorse all around great camera!

I shot a lot of indoor sports with the 7D ISO 3200-4000 and found myself constantly cleaning noise in post. My upgrade to the 5D3 was huge. I routinely shoot between 3200 and 6400 with just a little noise reduction preset on import in Lightroom -- but not enough to loose detail like with the cleanup of the 7D images.

Still, the AF sometimes misses on the 5D3 when tracking fast moving erratic subjects. I've assumed that I need a 1Dx to overcome this. But, just today, I looked at both the 1Dx and the 7D2. Both are impressive, but the price of the 7D2 makes it extremely attractive relative to its features. I know that both are better at tracking subjects than the 5D3. The question for me is with low light performance.

Can I shoot the 7D2 in RAW at 6400 without requiring lots of cleanup and suffering a loss in detail?

How much of the 7D2's ISO improvement is in the sensor versus the DIGIC 6 in-camera JPG conversion? (Meaning, is there much noise improvement in the RAW images?)

 

[rpt]

Still, the AF sometimes misses on the 5D3 when tracking fast moving erratic subjects. I've assumed that I need a 1Dx to overcome this. But, just today, I looked at both the 1Dx and the 7D2. Both are impressive, but the price of the 7D2 makes it extremely attractive relative to its features. I know that both are better at tracking subjects than the 5D3. The question for me is with low light performance.

Can I shoot the 7D2 in RAW at 6400 without requiring lots of cleanup and suffering a loss in detail?

How much of the 7D2's ISO improvement is in the sensor versus the DIGIC 6 in-camera JPG conversion? (Meaning, is there much noise improvement in the RAW images?)

I have not bothered to do a back to back low light comparison of both but the 7DII is noisier than the 5DIII. My earlier comparison of the 7DII with 5DIII involved my 100-400L but as it turns out the lens has issues and is out for repairs. I am waiting for its return to do the final compare. However, due to the smaller photon collectors, you will see a difference at 3200 and beyond. In good light there are hardly any focus misses. I think may be a couple out of 930 odd that I shot at a bird sanctuary last month in the span of two hours. It was between 8:00 am and 10:00 am.

 

[deleteme]

I'm always thinking of a new body but whenever I get to the mirror I know I will get no trade-in value. :-[

 

[Danzq]

I have a 7D MK II, a 6D and a 5D MK III. I shoot landscape, wildlife and a lot of indoor high school sports in low light. I have 12000 clicks on the 7D MK II, 9000 clicks on the 6D and 82000 clicks on the 5D MK III. If I could only have one camera, it would be the 5D MK III without question. It is sharper than the 1 DX (18 mp vs 24 mp), has a better focusing system than the 6D and much better noise performance than the 7D MK II. It is a hard combination to beat and definitely a workhorse all around great camera!

I shot a lot of indoor sports with the 7D ISO 3200-4000 and found myself constantly cleaning noise in post. My upgrade to the 5D3 was huge. I routinely shoot between 3200 and 6400 with just a little noise reduction preset on import in Lightroom -- but not enough to loose detail like with the cleanup of the 7D images.

Still, the AF sometimes misses on the 5D3 when tracking fast moving erratic subjects. I've assumed that I need a 1Dx to overcome this. But, just today, I looked at both the 1Dx and the 7D2. Both are impressive, but the price of the 7D2 makes it extremely attractive relative to its features. I know that both are better at tracking subjects than the 5D3. The question for me is with low light performance.

Can I shoot the 7D2 in RAW at 6400 without requiring lots of cleanup and suffering a loss in detail?

How much of the 7D2's ISO improvement is in the sensor versus the DIGIC 6 in-camera JPG conversion? (Meaning, is there much noise improvement in the RAW images?)

I have a 7d2. Love it.

Noise levels for me get a bit too much to handle after ISO 3200 so I try my best to stay below it.

-Dan

 

[Ruined]

Before the full frame "purists" dutifully flame me and put me in my place, ...

"Convert" is more accurate. When I got my 7D, I was amazed at what it could do. But, after a year of cleaning the noise from low light sports in post, I began to consider FF. I didn't want to. It costs too much. But, then I took the plunge with a 5D3...and I'm amazed at what this FF body can do.

Still, the 7D2 has me intrigued with it's improved AF tracking system. I agree that it would also be a fine upgrade from the 40D.

I think i'm leaning towards the 5Diii, especially with my current glass... I went and plotted lens on the x-axis, dxo's percieved megapixels on Y, and a series for each body to compare... IQ on the 5D is in a league of its own compared with the 40D and 7Dii by their metrics... And in decent light I doubt I'll be able to tell much of a difference between the AF systems other than frame coverage

I have found DXO's data to be suspect and/or not applicable to real world applications. But full frame will work better in the dark than crop.

Also couple of things:

* For sports, the 7D2's autofocus is better than the 5D3's.

* 5D3 has a problem with AF points not illuminating in AI servo mode (they remain black instead of blinking red) which is not fixable via firmware. This may be a big problem for your type of usage.

* Thus, I would either get the 7D2 or if you want something that can "see in the dark" waiting for the 5D4 might be your best bet.

The Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II can be gotten rather cheaply used these days, perhaps that might be wide enough? Though frankly for your conditions it sounds like the 24mm f/1.4L II would be a better bet - but I assume that is not wide enough.

 

[FTb-n]

* 5D3 has a problem with AF points not illuminating in AI servo mode (they remain black instead of blinking red) which is not fixable via firmware. This may be a big problem for your type of usage.

For what it's worth, I consider AF point illumination in AI SERVO to be a "nice to have". I don't think it's absence has affected my own use.

I shoot mostly kid sports using AF Case 2 and 6, then bias the first shot toward "in focus" more than "release shutter". It won't fire if not in focus. In practice, there are very few times when it won't lock on and fire. And, when it doesn't lock on, it's noticeable in the view finder (at least with 2.8 lenses). If it looks sharp in the viewfinder and fires, I know it's in focus.

The problem that I occasionally run into is losing focus while tracking erratic movements. I suspect it may have difficulty with some jerseys or figure skating attire that lacks contrasting elements. This is where I would expect the 7D2 and the 1Dx to shine. My dilemma is that I'm not entirely certain if this is due to not using the right AF Case and not fine tuning it properly or if I'm pushing the limits of the 5D3.

I should probably rent a 7D2 and/or 1Dx to get a true comparison and to see if either solve my lost focus issue.

 

[pjn0629]

Before the full frame "purists" dutifully flame me and put me in my place, ...

"Convert" is more accurate. When I got my 7D, I was amazed at what it could do. But, after a year of cleaning the noise from low light sports in post, I began to consider FF. I didn't want to. It costs too much. But, then I took the plunge with a 5D3...and I'm amazed at what this FF body can do.

Still, the 7D2 has me intrigued with it's improved AF tracking system. I agree that it would also be a fine upgrade from the 40D.

I think i'm leaning towards the 5Diii, especially with my current glass... I went and plotted lens on the x-axis, dxo's percieved megapixels on Y, and a series for each body to compare... IQ on the 5D is in a league of its own compared with the 40D and 7Dii by their metrics... And in decent light I doubt I'll be able to tell much of a difference between the AF systems other than frame coverage

I have found DXO's data to be suspect and/or not applicable to real world applications. But full frame will work better in the dark than crop.

Also couple of things:

* For sports, the 7D2's autofocus is better than the 5D3's.

* 5D3 has a problem with AF points not illuminating in AI servo mode (they remain black instead of blinking red) which is not fixable via firmware. This may be a big problem for your type of usage.

* Thus, I would either get the 7D2 or if you want something that can "see in the dark" waiting for the 5D4 might be your best bet.

The Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II can be gotten rather cheaply used these days, perhaps that might be wide enough? Though frankly for your conditions it sounds like the 24mm f/1.4L II would be a better bet - but I assume that is not wide enough.

I have no doubt that the 7DII would be a rockstar for shooting cycling events, I'd even go so far as to say that it might even be overkill since my 40D keeps up just fine, and I only brought my Fuji to a crit yesterday, and got some nice shots of my girlfriend's race (not painface close-ups, but just nicely composed/focused shots of the peloton that actually tell a bit about what's going on in the race... not bad for mirrorless/fixed lens)

16-35 is on the list, but I don't do much landscape, so that'd end up being a "normal" lens, and I bet i'd get a ton of use out of it on a crop body.

You're also right about a 24 1.2 being a great option, I kind of got the Fuji for that reason alone, it's a 23mm f2.0 and it's got jaw dropping quality and low light performance when compared with my 40D, plus the whole camera is smaller than that 24 lens would be. for "normal" shooting, i find myself reaching for the fuji more and more these days.

Given that the 40D handles the specific sports that I shoot just fine, I don't think I'd really notice the difference between the 5D3 and the 7D2 under the shooting situations I'm going to find myself in.

I don't need it to "see in the dark" per se, but being able to push 1/500s in shade without a strobe wouldn't hurt.

My main thing is that all of my lenses are designed for full frame, and I think I'm "wasting light" by using a crop sensor... ie. crop design lenses are focusing all of the light into the effective space for an APS-C sensor, so the result would be more photons in that area given the same amount of available light than a full-frame lens that's gathering the same amount of light, but spreading it over a larger area.

But, given that what I'm shooting is generally well-lit, I don't NEED the low light performance to be 1 stop better, since anything I get now will be like 4-5 stops better than the 40D

The thing that really throws me off with the DxO stuff is their perceived megapixels metric, I plotted the same batch of lenses, on two cameras with similar starting resolutions, and the 5Diii looks to be far and away the better option, looks to be in a league by itself where the 7Dii is an improvement, but not a mind-blowing one over my 40D.

 

[ksgal]

I went from a 50D to the 7DII. The difference is mindblowing, IMHO.

You probably wont ever need to shoot at 16,000 (sixteen thousand) iso. But if you have to, you can with a 7D mark II. See below photo, SOOC no processing other than resizing the Jpg.

I think you will find situations where you need more reach - and not having to pay $$$ for a longer focal length lens may be the ticket.

I am totally drooling over the 5DIII and can't wait to get one.. but my 70-200 has more reach with my 7D2, I can get decent anywhere in the arena with it. I suspect that I'll be using the 7D2 more often for action, and 5D3 for portrait, how it is intended, but the 7D2 does everything (portrait and sports) and I don't regret it for one second. The pair together is going to be the ticket for me. Each able to carry on as a backup for the other if the need arise, but able to use them where they perform best by having both.

JMHO but I wouldn't let anyone tell you a 7D2 cant take portraits. That is all about the light.

1/800
F 3.5
iso 16,000
70mm

 

[pjn0629]

I went from a 50D to the 7DII. The difference is mindblowing, IMHO.

You probably wont ever need to shoot at 16,000 (sixteen thousand) iso. But if you have to, you can with a 7D mark II. See below photo, SOOC no processing other than resizing the Jpg.

I think you will find situations where you need more reach - and not having to pay $$$ for a longer focal length lens may be the ticket.

I am totally drooling over the 5DIII and can't wait to get one.. but my 70-200 has more reach with my 7D2, I can get decent anywhere in the arena with it. I suspect that I'll be using the 7D2 more often for action, and 5D3 for portrait, how it is intended, but the 7D2 does everything (portrait and sports) and I don't regret it for one second. The pair together is going to be the ticket for me. Each able to carry on as a backup for the other if the need arise, but able to use them where they perform best by having both.

JMHO but I wouldn't let anyone tell you a 7D2 cant take portraits. That is all about the light.

1/800
F 3.5
iso 16,000
70mm

Only thing is... I can get to within ~3 feet of my subjects on a regular basis, I'm not reach limited, so I don't get much of an advantage out of a crop sensor for "reach"

 

[ksgal]

Then certainly the 5D III will meet all your needs

Better get one ordered before March 28th!

 

[FTb-n]

This has been a fascinating thread for me. The 5D3 set a new bar for my expectations of image quality. Sometimes I push its AF tracking to its limits with action shots and I often wonder if the 7D2 or the 1Dx will up my keeper rate. My wish list has included a 1Dx for both frame rate and color-based AF that <i>should</i> overcome the occasional tracking issues that I have with the 5D3. It also includes the new 100-400 for outdoor sports.

The 7D2 is an intriguing option. It should track as well as the 1Dx. When matched with my 70-200, it's a cheap alternative to the 1Dx/100-400 combo. But, I can't get past the drop in IQ. Since I often live between ISO 3200 ans 6400, the 7D2 remains one stop "dirtier" than the 5D3 in the noise department. Plus, full-frame bodies resolve sharper than crop as the link below will show:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=972&Camera=963&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=972&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

In addition, FF has better color depth and offers narrower DOF. My advice to the OP remains the same. Get the 5D3. For me, as attractive as the 7D2 is, I just can't get past the drop in IQ for indoor sports. The 1Dx remains on my wish list.

 

[pjn0629]

Hi,
I guess it will depend on your type of photo ... Landscape or sports ...
Speaking of my own experience, just swapped from 40D (5 years) to 7DII end of last November, and i'm loving it (3k pics): coupled with 70-200 2.8 IS II, it makes a great combo ... I quite often shoot 800 and up to 3200 ISO (inside shots or for using the 2x extender) and results are quite good compared to the unusable soup of 40D at that level.

What i especially like on 7DII compared to 40D are the following:
- higher usable ISO and increased resolution
- 65 points with great user control to choose and compose in one touch (cf. below point, for sports but also macro with 100 2.8 L Macro and 24-70 4 L in its macro position)
- super high speed and silent speed all customizable
- customization (menus, lots of buttons can be customized, easy access to autofocus options and presets, focus points, ...); lever on back joystick is pretty convenient and also customizable (use it for ISO)
=> classic settings I am getting so used to is to be able to go with a push of thumb/finger from classical one shot to AI Servo and point extension/zone setting with focus avoiding obstacles for sport with high speed, or in some other cases to finetuned focus point composition with AI Servo for Macro jewelry/fine art macro, all while looking thru the viewfinder
A few reasons i didn't want to jump to 5DIII and FF (yet):
- reach (i got a 2x ext on the 70-200)
- speed (birds, sports ... and kids!)
- my 10-22 that i love
- price (preferred to upgrade glass)
- integrated flash for quick flash fill without bulky external flash to carry/install ...
- fancy gadgets on 7DII (gps, higher customization degree ...)

For UWA, you might try the 10-22 : have a look at the forum's images, it's a lovely lens, a few people deem it close to L quality (one that i didn't want to leave to my goddaughter if changing to FF!), you just have to be careful not to get your feet in the pics !
Regarding the 40D, why don't you try to give it to your gf ? Put the 50 1.4 on it, and you will be happy of the nice portraits she takes of you My ex had a 550D and she always wanted to get my 40D ... (now i'll give it as an upgrade to my goddaughter after she trained on my old 400D)

But on the other end if budget is not an issue with you, get 5DIII and one of the 16-35 ...

I want to keep it under 2k... and damn you for mentioning the 10-22... add that to the better ISO performance (i'm assuming it'll be usable up to ~ISO 5000 like my x100s), and it suddenly becomes a great option, at roughly the same price as the 5d... but with a slightly wider wide end (since i won't be getting any lenses anytime soon with the 5D route) and 10fps... which seems overkill for bike racing, but i really like the idea of.

One other thought - if i do the 5Diii, it'll presumably hold value better than a 7Dii and i can sell it in a year or two and get a 5Div

 

[Zv]

The 5D MkIII should hold its value well as will the 7D MkII but only because it's still really new. I reckon the 5 series just ages better! I had my 5D MkII for two years and sold it very quickly and easily for just $200 less than what I originally paid. My 7D lost me $300 + and took ages to sell.

Getting a 5D MkIII now is a great idea as they have come down in price but not so drastically. When the MkIV is announced there will be a fair amount of people looking to buy used MkIII's and I'll be one of them. The demand will be there so no need to worry if you have to upgrade quickly.

 

[pjn0629]

The 5D MkIII should hold its value well as will the 7D MkII but only because it's still really new. I reckon the 5 series just ages better! I had my 5D MkII for two years and sold it very quickly and easily for just $200 less than what I originally paid. My 7D lost me $300 + and took ages to sell.

Getting a 5D MkIII now is a great idea as they have come down in price but not so drastically. When the MkIV is announced there will be a fair amount of people looking to buy used MkIII's and I'll be one of them. The demand will be there so no need to worry if you have to upgrade quickly.

I hate to throw a wrench into the discussion, but I was just perusing eBay... and a 1Div looks to be a blend of the 5Diii and 7Dii.... 1.3x crop, 10fps, 16mp (seems enough to me on the fuji x100s I have) Anyone have any thoughts on the 1D iv? Used ones on ebay are like $1600... fits right between the 5D and 7D pricewise too. Only thing I wouldn't be looking forward to is the added weight/size... but then again I have the fuji when I want something small to carry around...