5DmkII or 7D. Jeez this is tough

[Allan Jeffers]

My camera right now is a 30D. Its a nice little camera, but dated but I am looking for other features. Live view, HD video, self cleaning sensor and so on. I was lusting for full frame and with the help of a tax refund, it would make a good down payment on a 5DmkII. The catch is, its just a down payment and I need to cough up yet more cash for it. I would also have to sell my 300mm f/4L IS lens to fund a 5DmkII. That is one of my best peices of glass, though it dont get much use.

Truth is, I was lusting after the 5DmkII for its claimed IQ and low light quality but looking at sample photos taken with the 7D (real world examples on a potn thread) I am starting to think I could save my self nearly a grand and just get a 7D.

The bad thing is, I keep flip flopping between 7D and 5DmkII and the fact I may get wet taking photos. Another thing I need to think about is getting a wide angle lense that is weather sealed as well. For that? I was thinking a 17-40mm f/4L anyway, so thats another 700 bucks. Not that I would allow the camera to get soaked

Full frame would be great because I do cloud scapes, sunsets look for atmospheric optics (halos, rainbows) some of which are quite huge, as well as clouds and storms then again even with an 11-16mm lens its about as wide as 17mm on a full frame, granted the full frame would be a bit wider. Photostitching?

 

[Adam Adkins]

In my opinion the 5DII ISO noise capabilities cannot be beat. This was shot at 400 ISO with a polarizer. A 100% crop on the sky is included. I have ALWAYS seen noise in deep blue skies even at ISO 100 but the 5DII shows none.

 

[Allan Jeffers]

I just seen some shocking examples from this blog:
http://rolandlim.wordpress.com/2009/11/06/canon-eos-7d-review/

About the 5DmkII vs 7D. The 5D blows the 7D away in his comparison (I had read about the sharpness issue on the digital picture as well)

BUT, what gets me is, the 7D photos where up scaled to match the 5D which to me is like taking a post it note and turning it into a standard sheet of paper.

Also read that the 5DmkII has more dynamic range. The files are cleaner.

Earlier today I was convinced the 7D would work. Now once again the scales tip in favor of the 5DmkII.

And another twist is with my 300mm f/4L IS lens. It don't get much use as most of my photos are either wide angle shots or close ups. It don't get much use, sadly

 

[Brandon Goforth]

I'm currently faced with the same question and the general consensus seems to be that for most situations you will only see a subtle difference in IQ and the 7D is close with high ISO performance. Obviously you're going to find varied opinions all over the place, but unless you're wanting very large prints, the 5D may not necessarily be worth the extra $1,000 and the 7D would be just as wide, actually slightly wider, @10mm with the 10-22 than the 5D @17mm. And the 10-22 is a really good quality lens...decisions, decisions...

 

[Allan Jeffers]

I am still leaning toward the 5DmkII. I have noticed I keep coming back to this camera. I will look at another, it will look fine, like the 7D, then I see something or think of something that defaults me back to the (more expensive) 5DmkII

What does that tell you?

I would love to make some larger prints some times. I shot some lightning last year with my 30D, I wish I could make a huge print of out.

Would anyone be interested in a 300mm f/4L IS canon lens barely used?

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

I have the 5D II now, and after my short use I'd probably do 1 of 2 things instead of getting it. I'd simply have kept my setup with 10-22 and XSi. The other possibility is I'd upgrade to the T2i coming out for $700, given the likelihood its image quality is no worse than the 7D anyway at the same res. Any added "weather resistance" seems a non-issue to me(any cam above the rebels).

I'm having a difficult time seeing any massive increase in low noise ability with the 5D II over the XSi files. Perhaps I need to shoot more scenes as I haven't had it long yet, like a week. I did give it a good whirl at night though and just am not sure I will eek out an added stop of oomph than I did with the XSi. 1600 on night images look pretty dang similar to those on my XSi. Might need to look harder into that claim too though lol. End result will be the same however. I don't think I am gaining much of anything at all on low noise. But it is still something, considering the added res it's being achieved at. But it's hitting me more and more how pointless past 12mp gets.

It so far feels like buying a nice new tripod. Seems neater than it ends up being lol. Seeing edge softness now I didn't see before on my 17-40L and 100-400L anyway. Like yay for that added res over there that is kinda on the soft side.

But, when looking at 7D to 5D II comparisons the noise difference was huge. So back to the T2i or just the 7D thing, might have still prefered the old XSi anyway. The 7D rapidly makes little sense to me, but so did the whole 10-50D series over the rebel series.

Now that I have the 5D II I'm not going to kick her out of bed or anything though lol. Any added usefulness out of her over my XSi is probably down in the .1% area. Not 1%..... .1%.

That is a 100% crop of a 400 ISO shot showing the flat sky noise one can expect. Awfully dang similar to the XSi at 400 ISO. But again much higher res. Getting to use that res will be the problem. 12mp seemed to print well to 16x24. Hardly anyone ever wants prints anyway, and rarely will anyone desire larger. But if they did or some other special use request came along, one would be a little more prepared. That said, larger is viewed from further anyway.

 

[Darren Addy]

Seeing edge softness now I didn't see before on my 17-40L and 100-400L anyway. Like yay for that added res over there that is kinda on the soft side.

This is an issue that you don't hear about (except from owners). The higher res and full frame is much more demanding of your lenses and you will see the imperfections in your glass that were cropped out on a crop cam. So committing to a full frame is essentially a corresponding committment to much more expensive lenses if you want to have that edge sharpness back. As a 5D owner in Colorado told us: "She will show you the imperfections in your lenses."

 

[Allan Jeffers]

This is an issue that you don't hear about (except from owners). The higher res and full frame is much more demanding of your lenses and you will see the imperfections in your glass that were cropped out on a crop cam. So committing to a full frame is essentially a corresponding committment to much more expensive lenses if you want to have that edge sharpness back. As a 5D owner in Colorado told us: "She will show you the imperfections in your lenses."

Yeah, I have read that too. I got decent glass:
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 (its for a cropper, but I should be able to use it at 16mm)
Canon 24mm f/2.8 (this one may not be up to the 5Ds standard)
Canon 50mm f/1.8 (may be kind of iffy on the 5D)
Canon 70-200mm f/4L
Canon 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro
Canon 300mm f/4L IS (which may need to be sold off to fund the camera)

I have no problem buying glass with a red ring around it, well, I do, money. I have a 25-70mm f/2.8L on my wish list as well as a 35mm f/1.4L IS and perhaps a 17-40mm f/4L (cheap and weather sealed as well as the "brick")

Right now I have 2 crop cameras in my hand, a 20D (modded for astrophotography) and the 30D. I intend to keep my 30D. Often times I feel cramped by the 1.6x crop factor.

I am very interested in seeing what Mike can do with his 5DmkII. The photos on his site taken with XSi (I think thats what he has) are stunning. It would be also nice to see some weather shots with the 7D

 

[Stephen Locke]

High ISO Noise Reduction

I am interested in High ISO Noise Reduction. I don't have my 5D yet so have not run tests. Mike have you looked into this?


http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&articleID=1407

Edit; As I look into this further online I'm realizing High ISO Noise Reduction is little more than a gimmick. I don't think it fundamentally reduces noise at the time of exposure, rather it's just a set of instructions for post editing. Seems like the same effect can be done with any of the proprietary raw editors. Anyone got a comment on this?

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

I've never done in cam noise reduction shooting in RAW format, since like you say it seems more of an instruction for the RAW converter at that point. I'd much rather do it later if need be anyway, possibly on a new layer to a TIFF rendition. Even the RAW converter noise reduction in CS4 is kind of nasty, but just talking luminance noise removal. The color noise removal in that rules and is all I really ever use anymore.

Boy, looking for a fast wide angle for that now and not liking what I'm seeing. Sounds like both Sigma and Canon 20mm 1.8/2.8 respectively suck. Wish they'd make a good one faster than even 2.8, at least 20mm. Sounds like only real good one might be 14mm 2.8 but yeah, screw $2200 for that thing. Wanting something for night sky astro stuff. 17-40 just too slow. Heck selling that and going for 16-35L probably make more sense than 14mm for more at the same speed. Need to get those thoughts out of my head anyway, hard to justify more money just for astro type stuff at this point. There must be some old manual type of lens or something for cheaper that is fast and wide and not arms and legs involved.

 

[Stuart Robinson]

Just picked up a 5D Mk II today over a 7D - I really wanted the full frame that the 7D did not offer. Bear in mind that I am upgrading from a 10D - which has served me VERY well over the years - it will make for a good backup body just in case...

Question - What Compact flash (C.F.) memory card should I get?

I am thinking 8 or 16Gb to cover all my needs - I will not be using Video on the 5D

However All this C.F. speed thing confuses me - do I really need that much speed if I am just taking still shots (JPG + RAW)

Which C.F. card do you recommend - anyone ??

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

Didn't the camera come with a 16gig card? Seems most places are offering that same deal with a camera bag and a $140 16 gig card for "free".

Anyway, speed doesn't matter unless you plan on over filling the camera's buffer. That is when it would matter. So yeah, for storms it should never matter how fast the card is. Sounds like the buffer allows 13 RAWs at 3.9 fps. Shouldn't be many situations where one would go past that and need card speed.

I believe on mine with the 16 gig card in, shooting in RAW it says 588 or something for shots I can get, which is dependent upon ISO speed as well as detail in the scene I believe. Should be plenty. I picked up a cheaper 8 gig card with it just incase.

Quite the upgrade from the 10D!

 

[Stuart Robinson]

Mike / Anyone

Can you recommend any CF models that are proven to work well in a 5D?

I picked up my 5D2 really quite cheap (for the UK) but it did not come with a CF card - no worries, I will just get one.

So... 8Gb or 16Gb, what speed, SanDisk / Lexar or other - so many questions....

FYI: here in the UK a 5D2 runs at £1660 or $2,567 - Ouch!

 

[Darren Addy]

Anyway, speed doesn't matter unless you plan on over filling the camera's buffer. That is when it would matter.

What Mike says is technically true for shooting. However, the speed also comes in handy when it's time to transfer images and video to your computer. It is essentially read/write disk speed. Faster is always better.

Here's a decent primer on the subject: http://www.steves-digicams.com/accessories/flash-cards-storage-devices/

 

[Oscar van der Velde]

Boy, looking for a fast wide angle for that now and not liking what I'm seeing. Sounds like both Sigma and Canon 20mm 1.8/2.8 respectively suck. Wish they'd make a good one faster than even 2.8, at least 20mm. (...) Wanting something for night sky astro stuff.

I have the Sigma 20mm F1.8 and use it on the original 5D. It is a very good lens. Most of the photos on my website have been taken either with this or the EF 28mm f/2.8. For astro purposes, below f/2.8 there are of course some degradations in image quality, as with any lens (distorted stars and some light falloff). The brightest stars tend to smear quite a bit near the edges but overall sharpness and contrast are good. Here is an example I took at the Great Sand Dunes of the Zodiacal Light, wide open:
http://www.lightningwizard.com/showphoto.php?photoid=1342
Of course the issue is not so noticeable at such size. Pretty happy with it even when viewed much larger. More of a problem is that I hardly can take such pictures anywhere else with all the light pollution!

Oscar