2nd Body Choices!

[Fast Glass]

Good point Jan, but here in the US it is about $100 cheaper the D700. For a speed camera it has more than 1D III but less than a 7D but in my mind I can't even put the 5D II in the same class, it's was not intended for fast paced subjects.


To John. That is cerntainly true! LOL.


Personally I can live with the lower resolution thanwith higher noise,


John.

[btaylor]

I think you should go with the Canon Powershot SX20. 20 x zoom in a smaller body - how could you lose? [:P]


It's a pretty difficult situation the OP's in, he's got a pretty good camera already in the 50D. Let's be honest, if it's the very best of image quality that he wants then the 5D Mk II should be the weapon of choice (thousands of people can't be wrong). However there are obvious advantages with the 7D in terms of newer technology and that fantastic autofocus system.


I adore my 5D Mk II because every photo I take wow's me with the detail, dynamic range and tones. I'd take it anywhere with me, I can deal with having a little less reach.

[EdN]

I have tried it at a camera shop. Functionly it is great for a camera for it's class. But the IQ is not in the same leage with the 5D II that I also tried. Bryan's noise cropps show about 1 1/3 stops worst noise compared to the 5D II, ex 25,000 looks better on the 5D II than 12,000 on the 7D. That's apretty big differance.


But if I had to choose a camera from Nikon it would be the D700. It has a full-frame sensor, 8fps, large buffer, better weather sealling than the 5D II or 7D and about 1/3 stop better noise than even the 5D II!


I am seriously thinking about the Nikon,

Hello John,


Sidebar to the main topic of the thread:


Don't give up on Canon just yet to go over to the *dark side*. The 5D Mk II and the D700 are already in late middle age in camera body years. I'm sure that by this time next year, there will be a 5D Mk III . . . with better AF and an improved sensor. If you can wait, you may even see a lower price as occurred when the 5D Mk II came out.


As for the D700, yes it's got a nice AF system, more FPS, and maybe better high ISO performance. But it's only got 12 megapixels and it's pretty nice to have more when post processing or cropping. Also, do you REALLY need that marginally better high ISO?


I can't see how Canon can't or won't put the 7D AF into the next 5D body. As for sensor, the 7D sensor is a generation newer than the 5D Mk II and manages eke out pretty decent performance out of much smaller pixels. I think a lot of this has to do with improved algorithms in the processing of the image data as well as a more efficient sensor. I think these algorithms are optimized for outdoor use where there is good lighting. This combined with the excellent AF system and 1.6x crop factormakes the 7D a specialized outdoor/action body. That's maybe why I'm finding the IQ of 7D pictures are so good in outdoor / good lighting conditions. Perhaps the size of the firmware of the 7D, twice the size of the 5D Mk II, is an indication of the processing algorithms.


That may also be why Bryan's noise crops show the 7D to be so much poorer compared to the 5D Mk II. Those crops were taken in lighting conditions not optimized for the 7D and at higher ISO's which you would not normally use outdoors.


BUT looking forward, what if Canon applied all the technologyof the 7D sensor and then some, into the FF sensor in the next generation of 5D. You won't need any more pixels, but just think what better sensitivity and processing could do . . .


All speculative of course but who knows . . .

[Fast Glass]

Don't give up on Canon just yet to go over to the *dark side*.

Not quite yet, but it's temping!

that by this time next year, there will be a 5D Mk III

Sorry, I have been waiting for a year without a camera body.I don't want to wait another year!

But it's only got 12 megapixels and it's pretty nice to have more when post processing or cropping.

Yes indeed, but I was looking at the 1D III and it has only 10mp. Even less than the D700. I really don't like 1.6 crop cameras so the 7D is not even in the picture.1.3 is as small asI will go.I shot some film and love the DOF of 35mm and how all my lenses are sharper.

Also, do you REALLY need that marginally better high ISO?

No, but it is a plus since I shoot a lot of high ISO pictures simply because my subjects are moving alot.

the 7D sensor is a generation newer than the 5D Mk II and manages eke out pretty decent performance out of much smaller pixels.

Yes, but the 7D has not improved drastically per pixel image quallity. If you were to crop the 5D II and then downrez the 7D to the same resolution you will notice slightly better noise from the 7D, but not adrastic differance.

Those crops were taken in lighting conditions not optimized for the 7D and at higher ISO's which you would not normally use outdoors.

I know what you mean. If the white balance is off by a significant degree then the noise will be worst. But Bryan's crops are taken with 5200k daylight balance studio lighting, there should be no significant differance in real daylight.


If you take a APS-C sensor and a 35mm sensor with the same technology you will automatically be a little over a stop worst with the smaller sensor.


Build quality is also a factor for me, I won't trade IQ for it but I would pay more for it.


John.

[btaylor]

Sorry, I have been waiting for a year without a camera body.I don't want to wait another year!

Gees John, over a year!!! You're going to go bloodynuts when you get a new body mate. Good to see you're still passionate about photography even without having a body on hand.


Are you not impressed by the 1D iv or is it just a little out of your price range? - I know it would be for me. I understand you are keen on a full frame camera (fully understandable - I'll never be able to switch back).


Ben


Sorry to hijack btw.

[Fast Glass]

Are you not impressed by the 1D iv or is it just a little out of your price range?

The 1D IV would be my choice of camera but it is way out of my price range. It's got the most resolution for a speed camera with almost as good noise as a FF.


John.

[Brendan7]

If I had the money, my camera & lens of choice would be the Nikon D3s and 200-400 VR. In my opinion the D3s is fully usable at ISO 25,600. Take a look at this. It's considered by many to be the best DSLR camera ever made.


The 200-400 VR is fast, light(er), and has 4-stop VR. It's better at 400mm f/4 than Canon's 400 DO. And did I mention it's a zoom??? I wish Canon made that lens. But then again, Nikon doesn't make a 300 f/4 VR, 85 f/1.2, 70-200 f/4, etc.


The 1D III is a superb alternative. It is better than the 7D at high ISOs, especially where it counts most (check out 1D3 images at ISO 800-2000!). It has the 1D build and sells for the same (plus or minus a few $) as the 7D. I will say that I have used every one of the 7D's 18 megapixels. I don't think the pixel density of the 1D3 is a plus -- it makes it harder to pull out the detail on some wildlife. I dislike how Nikon's D3 bodies have only 12mp. That means to get reach for wildlife it's a 600 or bust. I don't think the slight noise advantage is worth that loss of mp.


I agree w/ John #2 (fastglass) that 1.3 crop is to save money. If the 1D bodies didn't have APS-h they might sell for more. But why then are Nikon's D3 bodies FF and sell for the same (excluding the D3X)?


For portraits and still shots of animals the 5D2 can be a better body. But you get less reach and much less power ~ smaller buffer, slower frame rate... 8fps is a LOT slower than 10fps. 4fps just doesn't compare. And let's hope no one is shooting wildlife at ISO 12,800 [:P]

[Fast Glass]

That means to get reach for wildlife it's a 600 or bust.

LOL.[] I do have my Minolta600mm so reach is not a problem. I rarely ever crop, I'm talking about only a couple of shots in my whole porfolio.

8fps is a LOT slower than 10fps.

I have used fraps in my games and have used is to make 8fps and 10fps comparison, the differance is very note worthy to me. But I am trading alot for that extra 2 frames; extra resolution, huge noise differance,35mm DOF, much larger view finderandFFultra wide angle lenses. But one mark in the 1D III's favor is faster AF which is relavant in my choices, because Nikon made a auto-focusing 1.6x extender! And it can be made to work on newer Nikon bodies, and there is an adapter for Nikon to Canon without optics which allows focus to infinity and AF. It's not the fastest AF in the world but better than no AF and can be inproved with a faster camera body.


So here are my narrowed down choices,


John.

[SafariMonkey]

("Hey, are you still there?")

Yes I am! Sorry about the radio silence, but been out of the country with little to no internet access - can't believe how far this discussion has progressed in my absence... been a great read!


I am still undecided at present and unfortunately quite tied up with work []... will hopefully have more time to properly test the various bodies in a couple of weeks. I want to have the new baby in my hand by mid august LATEST so i can get to grips with it before the trip!


Current thinking is to stick with Canon (i cant afford a completely gear change!) and to forget about the 5DII - its a great camera and i'd love to use it, but the speed/AF is just not there for my needs.


Thanks to you all for your help! Will let you know once i've decided! []