7d v 7dmk2 v 6d v 5d2 etc

  • Thread starter Thread starter tlr
  • Start date Start date
tlr

tlr

Suspended / Banned
Messages
222
Edit My Images
Yes
Please help me out here before I go mad trying to come to a conclusion – I have read more reviews than I care to admit, but none seem to make things any clearer for me.

I am an amateur photographer, shooting wildlife (mainly birds), landscape, some sport and other general snaps.

I have had a 7d for a few years now which has been great, its only drawback really is its low light performance, particularly when married to heavily cropped bird shots. I’d say ISO 1000 was about the limit for me.

There are odd occasions when 2 bodies would be a distinct advantage, and save lots of lens swapping. However that does seem a huge luxury for a hobby, and its yet more gear to carry.

My lenses are mainly full frame compatible.

My options seem to be:


a. Do nothing, 7d is fine, cheapest option.

b. Buy a 2nd hand 6d as well for the low light performance, landscapes and 2 body option.

c. Buy a 2nd hand 5dmk2, cheaper than 6d, but reviews seem to suggest that the 6d is a better camera, still need 7d for birds.

d. Buy a 7d Mk2, I can’t seem to get a clear idea how much better this will be in terms of noise at low light than the 7d, let alone the 6d.

e. Buy a 5dmk3, great camera by all accounts but I’d miss the crop factor for wildlife.

f. Any combination of the above options!


Money isn’t the overriding factor here, but keeping things sensible for a hobby would be nice.

Anybody got real world experience or opinions please?

Thanks.
 
Lots of discussion in the 7d2 owners thread. Not sure if you have read it.
The 7d2 is a big leap forward from the original 7d so IMHO good upgrade. The 5d3 and 6d are also very good cameras so it down to you as the user to compare results. So maybe off to a shop and give them all try.
 
E
And yes i have owned all of the bodies you have listed.
 
"low light performance, particularly when married to heavily cropped bird shots"

As Neil says, that sentence equals a 5D3. You won't want to crop heavily into a 7D2 file at over ISO1000 either.
Although one option that you haven't listed would be a used 1DIV.
 
My choice would be the 5D3,
have/had crop bodies, have a 1d2, love the 5d3 though, tbh I'd probably keep the 7d in your situation then sell it after a couple of months when you realise the 5D3 does everything you want.
Really should get rid of the 1D2, battered and bruised second spare body, rarely if ever gets used these days.
Matt
 
The 5d3 is the only body listed one that does what you require.

Other option would be 7d2 and 6d but you might as well get the 5d3
 
Not helping much but....

I have a 7D Mk1, came back from a trip to Iceland with very noisy Aurora shots so bought a 6D for my next trip

Was very happy with the noise performance of the 6D but missed the speed and reach of the 7D

Began to hate the noise even more of the 7D

Bought a 7D MK2

Selling the 7D Mk1 but keeping the MK2 & 6D (Ideal mix for me when I'm shooting Motorsports :) )
 
More food for thought!

Mr Gubby, have you found the mk2 much better than the 7d then? Close to the 6d or still a way behind?

5d3 seems the clear favourite, but could I really crop it sufficiently to make up for the lack of crop factor? Reports and reviews seemed mixed on this question.

I really can't justify a 500mm lens!
 
tricky.
I always liked the 7D but found it was disappointing in noise levels
the 5D3 is nice and even the noise is pleasant compared to the 7Di.
I think that you'll notice the lack of reach on full frame however, if you're primarily into wildlife shots
 
DizMatt said:
tricky.
I always liked the 7D but found it was disappointing in noise levels
the 5D3 is nice and even the noise is pleasant compared to the 7Di.
I think that you'll notice the lack of reach on full frame however, if you're primarily into wildlife shots
Click to expand...
1.4 teleconverter sorts that. :)
 
Last edited:
tlr said:
Mr Gubby, have you found the mk2 much better than the 7d then? Close to the 6d or still a way behind?
Click to expand...

Not had a chance to give it a test against the 6D. If I get some time on Friday I'll see if I can do some high ISO comparisons, 7D vs MK2 vs 6D
 
What proportion of your shots would you say are wildlife/sports, or is it more or less equally a bit of everything?

Having owned a 5D MK3 and a 7D MK2, personally I would go for option E. If you don't mind cropping a bit and maybe getting a 1.4x II+ extender I think the 5DMK3 will definitely yield better results overall, it's a better all-rounder without a doubt.
 
Ive had them all apart from the 6D. I'm put off by the size of the 6D and the buttons after having 3 5DII's and 2x 5DIII's Im in no denial about how good the 6D is in low light but when I sold my 5DIII I eventually went for a 1DIV that Id never sell after using for a few months now.

Few months into 1D ownership I missed full frame shooting, So I managed to buy a second hand 5DII for £500 with a high shutter but with a new shutter replacement at some point in its life. My 1D constantly has the 70-200 on it and when thats not on it the 35L canon is on it. The 5D has the 17-40 bolted on and I love it.

I was also torn between the 6D and 5D and went with the 5DII seeing as my shots required in low light were minimum that Id manage with the 5D.

In your case you have a 7D so the button layout on the 5DIII is very similar ( the 6D having none of the left hand side buttons ) Id say to go for a 5DIII

The 7DII from what Ive read is still quite noisy but a great camera. The 5DIII especially when I had it produced some amazing shots, the 7D I had also, but very noisy, the 1D beats my 5DIII to me and the 5DII will always be one of the best cameras around for me. Its also cheap to buy and very easy to use but also has a very basic 9 point focus system where as the 5DIII has a much more advanced system, I was never happy using outer points on the 5DII and I'm still not, the 5DIII on the other hand blew that out of the water, but i have 1D body that works for me, complimented by the 5DII.

Go for a 5DIII and don't worry about cropping, if it bothers you get a 1.4 extender :)

Good luck, any camera in the list you mentioned will be great.
 
Before considering a new body, look at adding a new lens. It will improve your shooting opportunities much more than a new camera. You say that you can't justify a 500mm for your wildlife shooting, but buying a 5D3 wont help here. Have a look at the Siggy 150-600mm, half the price of a 5D3 and coupled with your 7D will give 960mm equivalent reach.

Cropping a 5D3 to match a 7D will only leave you with 8.6MP compared with 18MP on the 7D. The general consensus is that it is better to use a crop camera than crop a FF to the same image size.
 
Brachytron said:
Before considering a new body, look at adding a new lens. It will improve your shooting opportunities much more than a new camera. You say that you can't justify a 500mm for your wildlife shooting, but buying a 5D3 wont help here. Have a look at the Siggy 150-600mm, half the price of a 5D3 and coupled with your 7D will give 960mm equivalent reach.

Cropping a 5D3 to match a 7D will only leave you with 8.6MP compared with 18MP on the 7D. The general consensus is that it is better to use a crop camera than crop a FF to the same image size.
Click to expand...


In theory this makes sense, at low ISO. I found I needed to use high ISO settings with longer lenses to freeze a moving subject though, which introduced visible noise. Downsizing the image sorted this, at which point I might have well used a ff camera.

Depends what you are shooting and your tolerance to noise.
 
All good thoughts, thanks.

There is no right answer I guess, and as has been said, all are great cameras.

I do shoot more sports (running and biking, so no cropping required), and wildlife (regularly crop to less than 25% of original) than anything else.

I ought to do nothing and just take pictures with what I have, but I can't help thinking that if I don't at least have a go at full frame then I'd still hanker after one. 5d of some flavour or other and keep the 7d for now I think.
 
This season I am running a 7d Mkii for football matches, I've also used it a lot for birds in flight. In good lighting it is a great piece of kit, but as mentioned it is not so hot under low light and high ISO.

I'm contemplating adding a 5d Mkiii for the low light stuff, so find this thread very interesting.

I have tried it with a 400mm + 1.4x extender on birds, for me it was rubbish and just didn't work.
 
Brachytron said:
...[snip] with 8.6MP compared with 18MP on the 7D. The general consensus is that it is better to use a crop camera than crop a FF to the same image size.
Click to expand...

That depends.

I'd rather crop a 6d file at 1600 ISO plus than use the 7d file at the same ISO. The MP might end up ultimately lower, but it the cropped 6d file would be cleaner and lens for lens, contain more detail, and oddly, more ultimate resolution.
 
Last edited:
As others, I have had all in the list, now 7dii and 5diii and another vote for E especially if you want a one body kit.
 
E with me as well ,great camera that's what I'm saving up for ....
 
While not a scientific experiment this should give you an idea of the 7D v 7D2 at 12,800 ISO in the same light with same lens. These are 100% crops (hopefully the links work as I'm on my mobile).

7D
https://flic.kr/p/pSjwSc

7D2
https://flic.kr/p/pA8b6M

I use the 7D2 as one of my bodies for football and I'm happy to shoot at 8000 ISO. Image quality is nowhere near as good as a 5D3 or 1D4 but the high ISO handling plus fast focussing, extra reach and fps are what makes it work for me until I can afford another 1Dx.
 
Thanks a lot, that's brilliant.

The mk2 is clearly streets ahead of the mk1 at 100%.

Looks like an expensive weekend coming up!
 
Option g: Save a lot of money and buy 1DX and never look back, i have it and i tested 5D3, never tested 7D2 yet, but 1DX wins for me, speed, quality, focus, name it and you have it, i even shoot sports and crop heavily and still have amazing results even at high ISO [1600-6400 or even more].
 
TareqPhoto said:
Option g: Save a lot of money and buy 1DX and never look back, i have it and i tested 5D3, never tested 7D2 yet, but 1DX wins for me, speed, quality, focus, name it and you have it, i even shoot sports and crop heavily and still have amazing results even at high ISO [1600-6400 or even more].
Click to expand...

This is one thing that really frustrates me!!! People are often comparing the 1DX to 5D3s and 7D2s. It's like saying I want a car and comparing a Ferrari to a Bentley and a Ford.
 
tophatter said:
This is one thing that really frustrates me!!! People are often comparing the 1DX to 5D3s and 7D2s. It's like saying I want a car and comparing a Ferrari to a Bentley and a Ford.
Click to expand...

If i want a Ferrari then why i buy Ford or Bentley? but if i can't afford that Ferrari then either i don't buy anything or as i said to start saving money, Bentley is expensive itself, but it is not about cars, it is about cameras, and if a camera that has almost 95% of things i want to do then better to get it than another camera that is about 80-90%, bug will always play in head and heart for that more percent, i have 1DX and i may like 7D2 or 5D3, but if i have 5D3 or 7D2 then i will always dream and think about 1DX nowadays.
 
TareqPhoto said:
If i want a Ferrari then why i buy Ford or Bentley? but if i can't afford that Ferrari then either i don't buy anything or as i said to start saving money, Bentley is expensive itself, but it is not about cars, it is about cameras, and if a camera that has almost 95% of things i want to do then better to get it than another camera that is about 80-90%, bug will always play in head and heart for that more percent, i have 1DX and i may like 7D2 or 5D3, but if i have 5D3 or 7D2 then i will always dream and think about 1DX nowadays.
Click to expand...

The reason they are being compared is because Canon themselves initiated the comparison and also several pros who got their hands on one. Its no different comparing the MkII to the 1DX/5D3 than it is comparing the a 100D to a MkII. The only difference in the 3 cameras is that the MkII is a crop sensor. In all other aspects it's trying to play the same game as the other 2 bodies. The MkII doesnt compete with any other camera in the crop sensor arena. Even comparing it to the MkI is skewed because it has advanced significantly.
 
But comparing a £4-5k camera to a £1.2k camera and then saying it isn't up to it really isn't comparing apples with apples is it! Of course we all want the best. I have a 1dx and 7d2 and would love to change the 7d2 for another 1dx but financially it's not possible at the moment. I bought the 7D2 for a purpose and it fits that purpose perfectly for the money I had to spend. Saying it's not as good as a 1dx or go buy a 1dx is, imho, telling someone who has a budget for a ford to go buy a Fararri. Pretty pointless.
 
tophatter said:
But comparing a £4-5k camera to a £1.2k camera and then saying it isn't up to it really isn't comparing apples with apples is it! Of course we all want the best. I have a 1dx and 7d2 and would love to change the 7d2 for another 1dx but financially it's not possible at the moment. I bought the 7D2 for a purpose and it fits that purpose perfectly for the money I had to spend. Saying it's not as good as a 1dx or go buy a 1dx is, imho, telling someone who has a budget for a ford to go buy a Fararri. Pretty pointless.
Click to expand...

True, i would like to buy another 1DX but financially i can't, even i can't buy 7D2 until i sell one or two of my current bodies, but in the pat i was in tight budget but i worked hard to save and afford 1DX and never look back, i waited until i managed to afford it, if i didn't then i will never have 1DX even second hand, but i can't buy more than 1 expensive bodies in short time say 1-2 years, next year i should be able to buy another body that is over £4k or say less than £7k, until that time who knows what will be there and what will be m photography situations.

And, i know many asking for a budget/value cameras but then want a camera that have more than what those budget/value/consumer cameras can do/give, i always hear this in many photographic forums: ----> "YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR", so you pay £1-1.5k to have the same features/performance of £4-5k camera? so we are stupid then to buy those v4-5k cameras if so so cheaper one is the same exactly.
 
I went from a 7D to 5Dii, then agonised over the move to 6D. I eventually did and haven't regretted it once. For me I'm not bothered by FPS or AP points etc or features ( to some extent) and only rely on the basics. I wanted a smaller body so therefor the 6D fitted perfectly. It has great high ISO capability in a small body. If the features suit your usage then I would highly recommend it. They can be had at a great price now too.
I never enjoyed my 7D.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top