5D I vs. 7D

[DLS]

Hi All. Haven't posted for a while....so long in fact that I forgot my password, ha ha. This is only my second post but I am usually on every day soaking up all the wisdom that you all provide. I have been shooting away with my XT350 for a while but have only become serious in the last year or so. Money is tight and I've been wanting to upgrade for a while. I was set on the 50d...then the 60d came out - not impressed really with video or the Kodak Color Charts. I keep salivating over the 5D II every time I see those charts....alas, I do not have the money for that body....yet. But I have found a great deal (or so it seems) on a 5D I - $1400 (Canadian, that is) with a Sigma 28-300 f3.5-6.3. Not keen on the sigma but am on the 5D I. Trouble is, the seller says the body is 3 months old....uh...wasn't the 5D I discontinued some time ago? The 7D is also attractive, mostly for the AF system and resolution. I realize that moving up from the 350 to anything would be an improvement but what do you think?? 5D I or 7D. FPS is not big deal to me (the 350 is also 3 fps as is the 5D so no problem there). Thoughts, suggestions, advice? Thanks in advance.


Damian

[Fast Glass]

is, the seller says the body is 3 months old....uh...wasn't the 5D I discontinued some time ago?

Yes, but stores still have them on there shelves and are brand new. But be carefull anyway.

But I have found a great deal (or so it seems) on a 5D I - $1400 (Canadian, that is) with a Sigma 28-300 f3.5-6.3.

That is a average deal, nothing special. $1,000 for the 5D and $400 for the lens.

The 7D is also attractive, mostly for the AF system and resolution.

Unless you shoot action the 5D's AF is adequete. If you want resolution the T2i has the same resolution and IQ.


What lenses do you have and which ones do you want to get latter on. That has a huge impact on your choice of camera bodies. Ex, you want thin DOF for portriats.


John.

[JJphoto]

the answer is simple if you are not that crazy about FF body, go with 7D since their price are almost the same, and in reality it

[DLS]

Thanks John for the reply. Action - not so much, just my nieces and nephews (ages 2 - 5) running around. The biggest attraction is full frame and the low noise and low light performance that comes with it. I have the 50 1.4 which I

[Fast Glass]

JJPhoto: Do you notice a difference when shooting high ISOs between the two? Say 400, 800, 1600?

Sorry to beat him to the punch.[] But you could just look at Bryans noise samples in his reveiws.


John.

[JJphoto]

JJPhoto: Do you notice a difference when shooting high ISOs between the two? Say 400, 800, 1600?

I'm not really sure how much difference between these two bodies in terms of high ISO performance, and I do feel 7D is pretty noisy when using ISO high than 400 out door, especially when the picture is not properly exposed. indoor low light shots seems a lot better. I use 35mm1.4 for indoor and walk around shots, so most of the time I don't need to pump to a very high ISO to get enough speed.


7D has a lot of nice features/function that 5D don't have, and noise can easily be fixed in PP. tripod, flash, IS will also help, it's just not a big deal to me. here is the sample picture I shot in indoor low light( readers, I'm sorry if you are tired seeing this picture again cause I have posted this one so many times, but I think it's just a good example to show )


7D, 135mm 2.0, f2.0,1/2500, ISO1600





ok, here is another one, and I think the ISO of this one should be 800





just my 2 cents again.

[clemmb]

Thanks John for the reply. Action - not so much, just my nieces and nephews (ages 2 - 5) running around. The biggest attraction is full frame and the low noise and low light performance that comes with it. I have the 50 1.4 which I'm very happy with for indoor low light shots. My other lens is the 17-85 4-5.6 USM IS. The barrel distortion and chrom. aberration on the wide end I try and avoid, sticking to the 24-85 range mostly. My next lens will likely be the 70-200 f4 or a used 70-200 f/2.8 if I can find it for a good price. The 24-105L is also one of my considerations or the 24-70L.


JJPhoto: Do you notice a difference when shooting high ISOs between the two? Say 400, 800, 1600?
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

Damian


I have a 5D with a 24-105 and the 50 f1.4. I am not a big fan of wide angle so I find the 24 plenty wide for me. I like the high ISO performance. I am happy with shots up to 1250. At 1600 it is starting to get a little noisy. I prefer FF especially for portraits which is what I shoot most. I would like the auto focus and a few of the other features the 7D has to offer but my next camera will probably be the 5DII or next which ever I can afford at the time. The 70-200 will probably be my next lens. I got to play with a 70-200 f2.8 IS in a shop the other day and loved it.


I say, go with the 5D.


Mark

[StapledPhoto]

You must be in Vancouver like me because I just saw a 5D I + sigma 28-300 posted for $1400 yesterday on our local CL.


Personally I'd say pass on that deal. I buy and sell a lot of gear here and I'd say you're going to have a lot of trouble flipping any mid-low quality 28-X superzoom. Since that lens is basically discontinued and sells for $300 US new, you'd be pretty lucky to get $200 for it. That leaves you with a $1200+ 5DI and a lot of hassle.


www.photoprice.ca/.../Sigma-28-300mm-F3.5-6.3-DG-Macro-for-Canon-price.html


There's just no market for a low quality full frame superzoom lens. Anyone on crop is going to want a crop superzoom that'll offer 17mm or 18mm on the wide end and anyone spending money on a 5D or 5DII is going to want something better. If it really is 3 months old then maybe it's worth it, but that sounds very fishy. If they have a receipt then I'd consider it, see if they'd be willing to sell the 5D alone.


As for the 7D, it doesn't sound like you'd be getting your money's worth there. You don't sound interested in video, high burst speeds or shooting fast action. Obviously better AF is always good, but for portraiture and candids you'll be fine with any new camera, even a rebel. Do you even find your 350D to be lacking as far as AF performance in decent light? Without wanting those things, you're basically spending a bunch of your budget on features you aren't going to use in a heavier ( although much better built ) body. That money is better spent on glass if you ask me


Waiting for a better deal on a 5D is a good option. It's an old camera but it takes great photos, and you can't beat full frame for portraiture / events work. You could also consider spending your money on glass and making a modest upgrade to a newer rebel. Sure it doesn't feel professional, but as others have said it's IQ that counts and the 7D has the same sensor as the T2i. You could probably find a used 50D for 700 now which isn't a bad option either.


That's my $0.02.


-Yoni

[Daniel Browning]

I suggest the 7D. Unless you really need the benefits of full frame, it

[Richard Lane]

Hi Damian,


Welcome to the Jungle! I am not familiar with the 5DI at all, but I am familiar with the 5DII, and I am also truly amazed with it's output. I have a 7D and I need it for it's reach and higher fps, but I think that the pictures from the 5D II are better due to it's even higher resolution, lower noise and what appears to be a greater dynamic range in regard to colors.


I don't like the deal that you mentioned, because I think that you can do much better than that Sigma lens, so money will be wasted. But since the 5DII is not in the budget, I think I would opt for a New 7D over a used 5DI and a low quality lens.


Rich