Canon 7D vs 5D Mark II

SmileyShazza

SmileyShazza

Suspended / Banned
Messages
383
Name
Sharon
Edit My Images
Yes
At the moment I shoot using a Canon 40d and am thinking of possibly upgrading to something a bit newer.

I've been lusting after a Canon 5D Mark II for a while now but someone suggested the Canon 7D to me. Am not really sure of the differences in the two (except that the 5D is more expensive)

Can anyone who has experience with either (or preferably both) of these cameras give me their impression of them. Will I be able to jump from a body such as the 40d to one of these and would one suit better than the other?

Also can I use my Canon EF lenses with these bodies or would I need to invest in new lenses as well as a new body?

Any comments / help / advice gratefully received :)
 
EF will be fine with both bodies (EF-S will only work with the 7D). All depends on what you shoot.

Thanks

Alistair
 
Hi Sharon,

I've just moved from a 50D to the 5Dmk2.

There is a great link in the "Offical 5D Mk2 owners thread" (or something like that) thread in here that shows shots from the 7D and 5D2 compared, quite a big difference in quality and noise in favour of the 5D..

From what I understand though the 7D has a huge advantage in the AF stakes, so I guess it depends what you shoot!

EF lenses will work on both, EF-S won't work on the full frame 5D mk2!

HTH
Dave.
 
If you shoot sports or wildlife, get the 7D
if you shoot landscapes or people, get the 5D2

However, if your current lenses on the 40D do exactly what you want, the 7D will keep this, otherwise you'll need to rethink your lenses.
 
PVO_Dave said:
Hi Sharon,

I've just moved from a 50D to the 5Dmk2.

There is a great link in the "Offical 5D Mk2 owners thread" (or something like that) thread in here that shows shots from the 7D and 5D2 compared, quite a big difference in quality and noise in favour of the 5D..

From what I understand though the 7D has a huge advantage in the AF stakes, so I guess it depends what you shoot!

EF lenses will work on both, EF-S won't work on the full frame 5D mk2!

HTH
Dave.
Click to expand...

Shooting wise I'm quite a mixed bag as I like to try out all kinds of different stuff but I like portraits, animals and landscapes.

It's a shame that the EF-S lenses won't work as I love my 17 - 55 IS lens that I recently brought second hand off here. I'm thinking I would most probably keep my 450d as a back up camera though so I could keep it for using on that I suppose.

I'll go check out that thread - thanks :thumbs:
 
SmileyShazza said:
Shooting wise I'm quite a mixed bag as I like to try out all kinds of different stuff but I like portraits, animals and landscapes...
Click to expand...

Hi Sharon,

That's exactly the same dilemma I was in... I've given the 7D two chances and had two duff ones so I've done what I should have done in the first place and bought the 5DMKII.

There is a noticeable difference in terms of image quality between the two cameras with the 5DMKII seeming to have richer colours and more detail. There was an awful lot to like about the 7D but in the end, I needed something was going to deliver the results I was expecting. I shoot weddings and had one recently where the 7D nearly let me down - as it was, I ended up doing nearly twice as much post-processing as I would normally do and that's unacceptable to me. The last wedding was shot on the 5DMKII and the results were better by a country mile.

Whichever way you decide to jump, make sure you go into a shop somewhere with a couple of CF cards and take a few shots at from base ISO up to the top and then compare the results when you get home.

Hope that helps,
Si
 
I'm in the same boat with my 10-22 Canon (which I can use on my 50D), but am now looking to swap it for a 17-40L as it would be a very simlar focal range but better IQ because of the sensor in the 5Dmk2.

As pointed out by Andrew, the reach on your lenses will change if you go full frame as you are then on x1 not x1.6 :)

What you like shooting currently would be fine on the 5D2 with it's less advanced AF system.

Dave.
 
Remember whichever you buy they will both show up any shortcomings in your lenses.

I went from a 40D to a 5d2 and wow the difference is unbelieveable, sharper, crisper more punchy by far.

For those that need to know it's true that the 10-22 won't work on the 5d2 but you should if you decide be able to do a trade and get yourself a 17-40L which is a great step up from the 10-22 which I've had and was without doubt a superb lens.

The step up for me meant less post processing, I hardly touch the output from the 5d2, I've heard the same of the 7d which a number of my friends have and are very happy with.

Is the 5d2 worth the extra I think so, it still has the edge for most things over the 7d. Not everything is better but enough to make it worth the extra cost.
 
i did an engagement party over the weekend, and a guest there had a 7D + 17-55 2.8 IS and I saw some of his results later on, the 5DMKII produces such beautiful results straight out of the camera when compared with the 7D. I am not discounting the 7D completely and it is down to the skill of the person holding the camera, but in some cases, near identical shots were still clearly different in terms of quality and visual appeal.
 
I would say stick with the 40D for the moment. It is a VERY capable camera and invest in some good glass.
 
Dave Stone said:
I would say stick with the 40D for the moment. It is a VERY capable camera and invest in some good glass.
Click to expand...

I probably won’t be upgrading for a fair while yet, probably not at least another 6 months or so but am scoping out my options now so I know what I am aiming towards as I’m going to have to save up to afford the 5D if I decide to go for it :)

I’ve got two people who are looking very likely to book me for their wedding photography (both weddings are next year) and I would definitely like to have something newer by then. Plus if I can get something new I will be able to use my 40d as a back up camera which I know I will need if I am shooting weddings.

My only concern with investing in certain lenses is that when I move over to the 5D I will want to have as much stuff that I can move over with me as possible.
 
As you already have the EF-S 17-55, I would steer you towards the 7D. I was in the same position as you and the improvement in AF over the 40D is like night and day.

To be honest, the AF of my 40D was the one thing that let it down IMO and, whilst I was very tempted by the IQ of the 5D, I was a bit wary of the AF not being much of an improvement. Anyway, I'm happy with my 7D! :)
 
Sharon, having looked at your stuff on flickr I have to recommend the 5D II rather than the 7d. Okay, you'll have to sell on my 17-55 (;)) but believe me the 24-70 is a more than worthy replacement! I went from a 450d (which produces stella iq for a crop imo) to the 5Dii and quite honestly I've never looked back.

The 7D would be by far the cheaper option as the 17-55 would still work but going full frame instead is not something you'll regret, I guarantee!
 
Trixster said:
Sharon, having looked at your stuff on flickr I have to recommend the 5D II rather than the 7d. Okay, you'll have to sell on my 17-55 (;)) but believe me the 24-70 is a more than worthy replacement! I went from a 450d (which produces stella iq for a crop imo) to the 5Dii and quite honestly I've never looked back.

The 7D would be by far the cheaper option as the 17-55 would still work but going full frame instead is not something you'll regret, I guarantee!
Click to expand...

I doubt I'd sell on the 17 - 55 I love it so much I'd probably keep that as my lens for using with the 40d :) although I must admit the money would come in handy towards the 5D :thinking:

As I say there isn't much chance of me upgrading at the moment, even though I have got the money in savings I think I'll try and bump them up a bit for now and then look at getting a 5D towards the end of the year - unless I manage to come into some money somehow!
 
In that case, if there's no rush then it may be worth holding out into 2011 for whatever replaces the 5D II.
 
I had a 40D before upgrading and took the stance that the only big upgrade the 7D would give me over the 40D was an improved AF system (not interested in video). The increased cost for this advantage wasn't worth it to me. So I went for the 5DII, which definitely gives me something the 40D isn't capable of, and definitely felt like a worthwhile upgrade.
 
I went from a 40D to 7D to 5D MkII and then back to the 7D again. The 5D MkII is an excellent camera which can provide truly stunning IQ, but I felt that I needed to work hard to get the best results from it. Many of my shots involve kids, sports and fast movement. In these area the 7D's AF blows the 5D away.

If I shot portraits, weddings or landscapes the 5D would have been my choice. However, I found the 7D with a 17-55mm F/2.8 IS almost identical to the 5D MkII with a 24-105mm IS for indoor shots.
 
I have both the 5D MkII and 7D and rate them both very highly, quality on both is superb. I use the 7D for wildlife and sports where fast autofocus is useful and the 5D for general photography - landscape, portrait, street and macro.
 
Having now used a 5d2 for over a year - I just love it - the output on FF is just STUNNING - I will never go back to a cropped body - why would you? In every aspect its superior (other opinions are available!) the d2 has its limitations - which as sure canon will address in the next version - but it is a great cam - team it with some great glass and it opens up a whole new area image wise. Yes you have to WORK to get the mega results - but surely thats what we are all about . . . - Oh and get a G11 as well to carry around . . . They are FUN!

Rog
 
If the 5D MkII included decent AF and was sold at the same price as the 7D, the decision would be easy. Unfortunately, my 5D struggled to focus on anything that moved, and it cost 50% more. This forum sold me on the idea of upgrading from a 7D to a 5D II, but after a few weeks of use it became clear the 7D was better for my use and ability.

There are areas where the 5D outclasses the 7D, but its falls short in just as many. In my opinion it was not worth the extra money over the excellent 7D so it was sold on pretty quickly. The wider range and cheaper choice of lenses available for the 7D is also a nice bonus. I love the IQ and range of the 17-55 F/2.8 IS, even if the build quality does not match my L's. The 70-200mm also makes a great sports lens on a crop, whereas I had to lug around the 100-400 with my 5D to get close enough.

I found the 7D to be the much more flexible camera. The 5D was excellent is some areas, but lacking in others. The 7D is just good all round, plus it costs less and it has a more useful feature list. In fact, the 5D feels closer to my old 40D than the 7D does.
 
It would if the 5D is £2.5k and the 7D £1k
 
Almost every single component inside the 7D is equal to or superior than the 5D II. The one very important exception is the sensor. The 7D is an excellent package with a solid sensor. The 5D is a solid package with an excellent sensor. Mate the 7D package with a 5D sensor and the result would be very nice indeed.
 
Orville said:
Almost every single component inside the 7D is equal to or superior than the 5D II. The one very important exception is the sensor. The 7D is an excellent package with a solid sensor. The 5D is a solid package with an excellent sensor. Mate the 7D package with a 5D sensor and the result would be very nice indeed.
Click to expand...

y..........essssssssssssssssssssssss.

One came out abotu 18 months after the other, technology move on...we know that.

The next 5D will be interesting.
 
Raymond Lin said:
y..........essssssssssssssssssssssss.

One came out abotu 18 months after the other, technology move on...we know that.

The next 5D will be interesting.
Click to expand...
The difference was actually less than a year, but I agree a year is a long time in technology terms. Saying that, Nikon employed much better AF systems than the 5D II for years before the the 5D II was released. The 7D AF was only such a big step forward because the 5D II was 3 to 4 years behind the competition. Canon merely "caught up" with technology after they got left behind.
 
I own and use both. I've got to say that unless I need 8fps I always go for the 5D MK2.
I don't get all the AF bashing that goes on with the 5D MK2.Granted, I tend to use mainly the centre point when it gets a bit dark but I've used the camera for everything from weddings to wildlife, aviation and macro and have never had any problems with the AF. I'm more bothered about the inconsistent flash exposures. The 7D craps all over the 5D in that respect.

The bells and whistles are very nice on the 7D but in the end it's the image quality that counts and there's no comparison. The 5D MK2 is far superior.The images just look better, especially at low iso's.

The 7D's pics also take very little pp before they start to break up. The 5D can take some serious abuse and still retain superb quality.

I wouldn't sweat the 17-55 either. I used to have one and it delivered nice image quality(no better than the 24-105 or the 24-70). I still ended up selling it because it felt awful in the hand compared to the 2 L's mentioned above.

I sold a 5D MK2 to buy a 7D. Six weeks later I bought another 5D. Did keep hold of the 7D though.

I agree that waiting for a MK3 might be a good idea. Could be a long wait though.I think the people who are expecting it to be the same as a 7D but with a full frame sensor are going to be seriously disappointed.

Cheers
Gray
 
It all depends on what you shoot. For sport and motion the 7D will nail AF 70-80% of the time. I found the 5D frustrating because my hit rate was more in the region of 20-30%. When you are stuck at 3-4fps and can only use one out of 4 images you lose a lot of good shots. 70-80% of 8fps makes a lot of difference (even though I rarely use 8fps because I can trust single shot mode).

For portraits, landscapes and weddings the 5D is clearly superior because it's AF system has few problems focussing on stationary targets.
 
Thank you all for your replies they are really appreciated and have given me lots of think about. I still think that the 5d Mark II is going to be my best bet - yes I could hold out for the Mark III (if there is ever one) but I am under no doubt that the price increase that would come with it will be out of my range anyway.

Hopefully the 5D will come down in price by time I get round to buying one - hopefully later this year :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top