Which Body should I go for?

I currently shoot with a 30D and my lens line-up is EFS 17-55mm 2.8 and EF 50mm 1.8. My typical subject matter seems to be landscapes (both tripod and hand held), and people shots (indoor and outdoor) - portraits and groups, candid. My style is generally photo journalistic and I also do a lot of HDR. I am an available light photographer. My future lenses will be both wider and longer, and I want to keep my line-up fast, at least 2.8 (except for 15-85mm (for landscapes) and 8-16mm sigma).


Why the upgrade?


I love my 30D but its megapixels come up short when doing enlargements and cropping, and the noise is a problem with my HDR and high ISO available light shots. These two issues are my main drivers. Noise is the biggest issue.


The two bodies I'm considering are the 7D and 5DII. Two things that count against the 5DII are cost and non-EFS compatibility. I am open to any suggestions, I'm not restricting myself to these two bodies, they're just my first guess.


I'm in no great rush.





"If I told you that you have a nice body, would you hold it against me?" - Bennie Hill

I went with a Canon 7D and have had no regrets. I own 3 EF-S lenses and it would be very difficult for me to let them go when upgrading to a full frame, as getting a comparable full-frame equivalent for all three would be costly.


The 5D Mark II is undeniably a great camera--but for me, the 7D has been a great choice for me.

I'll be interested to hear what those with both bodies think. My quick take is that you are talking about two great camera bodies. The 5DII is probably a little better for everything you just mentioned (including high ISO performance--I believe the 5DII is about a stop better than the 7D), with the possible exception of candids (AF and FPS of the 7D may help you out there). But, to get that slight improvement, it will cost you a fair amount, and as Sean just noted, not just in the camera body, but also for the lenses that are equivalent to the EFS lineup.


I have the 7D and am very happy with it. But if I was a low light landscape, portrait first type of shooter with sufficient money, I would probably get the 5DII (or, with enough money, the 1Ds :) ).

Thanks Kayaker72. One stop is a lot when you need it, but you

I use the 60D and the noise is quite good in real life and print very well. But for HDR

I shoot with a 5dmkii and a 7d and Im afraid to say the 5dmkii is more than a stop in real life stuations, it sometimes blows me away how the 5d can shoot in the dark. I do like my 7d but its far more suited to a faster pace life. Just my 50cents

Sometimes I think we take too much time to decide on equipment.


In its day (not that long ago) the 20D was state of the art.


It is now outdated.


BUT


It is one of three cameras I carry at a wedding


and to tell you the truth it still great photos.


I wish I had another one.


Rather than change lenses and settings I have three cameras with a predetermined lenses and settings.


On the 20D I mount my 50mm 1.4 and have it set to time priority so that it stays above camera shake level. (100)


Then I use this for quick, up close, almost in our face shots and low low light shots.


That way it is just a quick pick up then back and forth to the other three bodies.


I still find that fumbling though the menu causes me to loose shots. So this works great for me.


The point is the 20D is a great body, and takes great photos, as does my 50d and 5d.


I wish I could find another 20d actually for when this one goes out.


20D 50d 5D they all take great photos. Buy what you can afford and try to have several bodies (50d x 3 = 1 x 5d) [id rather have 3 x 50d]


and spend more time on learning how to use them.


This is sort of like golf clubs, we still think we need a better machine, when the old one would would great if we spent more time training on it.

You could consider a used or refurbed 5D .... you would have full frame, high ISO, low noise, a few more pixels and less expensive than a 7D, Then keep your 30D for the 1.6 crop factor

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peterborough_photography

I shoot with a 5dmkii and a 7d and Im afraid to say the 5dmkii is more than a stop in real life stuations,

---

Acording to Bryan's noise crops it's about 1 1/3 stops, with another 1/3 between f/2.8 and f/4 that makes 2/3 stops. Also FF lenses are sharper than EF-s lenses at wider apertures apertures such as f/2.8 and requires less sharpening. Mabye thats what you are seeing.


John.

I owned the 7D for a short time, and the 5D II. In the situation you describe I would take the 5D II every time. The 7D only if I wanted to shoot some action shots, sporting events or wildlife.


For noise and ISO the 5D II handles it better than the 7D.


With the 7D you could consider it a low light camera because you have a pop up flash and it is "available light". That wasn't a serious statement.


So I would say 5D II given the description you gave.

I think my satisfaction with the 7D is linked to two facts that apply to me:


1) I have 3 EF-S lenses that I really like, and the cost to replace them would be significant.


2) I very rarely shoot at anything above ISO 400, because lack of light is rarely an issue for me. :-)

Hey William,


For what you describe, I would probably vote for the 5DII, but then you would have to sell your EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS. You can always buy the 24-105 f/4L IS kit lens that is offered with the 5D II for an extra $800, but then I see that you like fast lenses and that you prefer f/2.8, so that would mean purchasing a 24-70mm f/2.8L which is even more money. If you have the money to spend then that would probably be your best bet. However, if you would like to keep your EF-S Lens and just get a new body then I think you will be very happy with the 7D as it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William

I would like to hear from those of you who have experience with both, or shoot the 7D under the same demands.

---

I have both. I got the 7D first, and really liked it. Since getting the 5DII, I have used that body for nearly 90% of my shots. The 7D is used almost exclusively with the 100-400mm for birds/wildlife (not listed among your interests), although I keep the very nice 17-55mm just in case I need a general purpose zoom (i.e. for a trip to shoot birds/wildlife where I don't want to carry two bodies).


Aside from birds/wildlife, the rest of my shooting comprises family shots, portraits, architecture, landscapes, and macro - and the 5DII is, hands-down, the body of choice there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William

My future lenses will be both wider and longer, and I want to keep my line-up fast, at least 2.8 (except for 15-85mm (for landscapes) and 8-16mm sigma).

---

Can I ask, why do you want to keep your lineup fast? Is it for the shallower DoF of f/2.8, or the faster shutter speed, or both?


The reason I ask is that while I think the 17-55mm is the best general purpose lens for APS-C, it is out-spec'd by the 5DII's kit lens, the 24-105mm f/4L IS. The FF-equivalent of the 17-55mm is a 27-88mm f/4.5 (aperture in terms of DoF for equivalent subject framing). So, with the 5DII + 24-105mm, you get a lens that is wider, longer, faster, and still has IS. In terms of exposure, you lose a stop...but thanks to the FF sensor, you actually gain 1.33 stops of better noise performance, so you can bump the ISO a stop to compensate for the lost aperture, and still be ahead on noise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William

Noise is the biggest issue.

---

If noise is the biggest issue, get the 5DII. It handles noise much better than any crop body - I find ISO 3200 quite acceptable with the 5DII, whereas I prefer to keep my 7D to ISO 800 or lower.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William

Two things that count against the 5DII are cost and non-EFS compatibility.

---

Cost is always an issue. Still, for the types of photography that you do, I think the 5DII is the better choice. Yes, you'd have to sell the 17-55mm - but depending on when you bought it, you likely will not lose much, if anything.


The other part of the cost puzzle is lenses, and EF lenses cost more than their EF-S cousins, if you want good quality. That's especially true for the UWA zooms - quite nice for landscapes - where the 10-22mm is an excellent lens, and the 16-35mm L II is twice the cost (the 17-40mm is similar in cost, but the IQ is lower than the other two).


But, you have 17mm at the wide end now, and have mentioned the 15-85mm for landscapes - and on the wide end, 15mm on APS-C is 24mm on FF, so with the 24-105mm, you might not need anything wider.

5dII would be my suggestion (and i own the 7d only). if quick action shots are not in your future, go with the full frame camera. enjoy!

Thanks for your feedback guys! Yesterday I took the time to reply to all of you because each of you have submitted some very valuable information and pieces of the puzzle. There are also some further questions I

What if you dropped back to a used 50D? Still get a massive update in the body from a 30D standpoint. Good magnesium housing, better noise, AFMA, and still cheap enough to afford another lens.

Partly because the 50D is not that much cheaper. I have played a little bit and taken some noise comparisons and the new 18mp sensor is quite an upgrade and worth the few hundred extra dolars. Since speed is not really a priority the 60D is a very nice camera if you want 1.6.


John.

Typically my advice to anyone wanting to invest a few more dollars into their equipment would be to put the money towards glass rather than the body. But for me the glass is already pretty good so the aim now is to capitalize on the lens with a good body. Unfortunately no amount of skill or training will reduce the noise, and the only way to increase the megapixels for landscapes is to stitch my images.


Although I love the idea of using strobes, they just don

Hi William. In comparing the 7D to the 5DII you may also want to refer to some tests John/Neuro did a few months back:


community.the-digital-picture.com/.../5926.aspx


On page 2 there is a noise test.

William, I think the point John (Fast Glass) was making was that you gain ~1.33 stop of ISO with the 5DII, and you

Neuro beat me to it!


The exposure will not be the same but the noise is 1 1/3 stops better so you can increase the ISO without a noise penalty. Just as Neuro already said, just wanted to make sure your with me. :-) But because the aperture is 1 1/3 stops slower it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kayaker72

Hi William. In comparing the 7D to the 5DII you may also want to refer to some tests John/Neuro did a few months back:


community.the-digital-picture.com/.../5926.aspx


On page 2 there is a noise test.

---

It always seems that body comparison threads start the same way. A Page of general comparisons then it isinevitable, it turns in to several pages of technical discussion on Noise.


One of the things I did not like about the 7D using it with the 500mm, it seemed I was always fighting for light. What I mean by this, I didn't like getting the ISO to high. Often wildlife shots are in less than ideal lighting situations. So I found myself shooting slower shutter speeds to keep the ISO down, then the shutter speed would be to slow. With the shutter speed slow, say at 1/500 it gets really hard to "hand hold" the lens even with IS and get a good sharp picture. That said this is one of the things I really like about the 1D IV, it doesn't feel like I am fighting for shutter speed as much. It makes the 1.6 vs 1.3 crop factor loss a forgotten issue.


The 7D just doesn't handle the higher ISO's as well as the 5D II or the 1D IV. I still stick by my conspiracy theory(which is...the 7D is dumbed down somewhat with the firm ware). Part may or may not be the sensor depending on who's opinion you read.

1D IV, two 5D II's and a 7D. Your alucky man! :-)


Cheers,


John.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fast Glass

1D IV, two 5D II's and a 7D. Your alucky man! :-)


Cheers,


John.

---

I gave the 7D to my brother a few months back...he is the lucky one. I had to buy mine. I really need to sell my backup 5D....it is a bit excessive.

I read your review Neuro, nice work and very informative. I'm now squarely wedged on the horns of a dilemma, but at least I'm a lot better informed and feel more confident in my decision making. Thanks again to everyone who had some input. Cheers : )


Any further comments welcome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William

Any further comments welcome.

---

7D has a lot better AF system than the 5DII, and the 5DII has a better overall IQ. if I were you, I will go to check if the ISO performance of 7D is acceptable. if it's not, than no choice, have to pick the 5DII.(or 5DI)


I used to think the 7D is very noisy, but after I learned how to reduce noise by getting the "best exposure" when taking the picture and in PP, noise has become a minor issue.


BTW, 5DII is selling for $1999.99 new on www.henrys.com. I believe the prices of camera bodies should be down since the new camera body is coming out with some new tech.


here is the shot I took using 7D with 1.4X TC, ISO2500,1/8000


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/800x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/24/3666.IMG_5F00_1183_2D00_1.jpg[/img]


do you think the noise is acceptable? maybe 60D is better choice since it has the same senor as the 7D, just my 2 cents.