Should I trade my 7D for 5d ii??

[k3wt]

Ive had a 7D since December and am thinking that a 5d would suit my purposes better where i do not need the high fps but would rather the picture quality from a full frame. Im not by any means a professional (so i guess a lot of u will say that im wasting money now ).

I tend to shoot more landscape and architecture and generally in low ambient lighitng conditions where i notice a lot of noise in my images Whilst the camera will not necessarily make my photos better is there any reason i shouldnt upgrade to the 5d with the only negative aspects to it being monetary?

Would the quality of my photos be much better in the purposes i shoot in?

Thanks in advance

 

[grum]

As an owner of both....

The 7D is a much more advanced camera: the frame rate is miles faster, the AF is streets ahead and there are some other handy things like being able to use the built in flash as a commander, and auto iso.

That said, there is a certain quality to the images from the 5D that the 7D just doesn't seem to produce - not that there's anything really wrong with the 7D images. Also, while the 7D goes to higher ISOs and stays relatively clean, the noise on the 5D looks nicer imo. For the kind of stuff you've mentioned I think you'll really love the images from the 5D.

Oh just realised, did you mean a 5D MK II? In which case I've never used one.

One thing to bear in mind is you need nice lenses to make the most of full frame.

 

[k3wt]

As an owner of both....

The 7D is a much more advanced camera: the frame rate is miles faster, the AF is streets ahead and there are some other handy things like being able to use the built in flash as a commander, and auto iso.

That said, there is a certain quality to the images from the 5D that the 7D just doesn't seem to produce - not that there's anything really wrong with the 7D images. Also, while the 7D goes to higher ISOs and stays relatively clean, the noise on the 5D looks nicer imo. For the kind of stuff you've mentioned I think you'll really love the images from the 5D.

Oh just realised, did you mean a 5D MK II? In which case I've never used one.

One thing to bear in mind is you need nice lenses to make the most of full frame.

Yeh, sorry i meant 5d ii.

I think my reasoning behind getting the 7D at the time was for those reasons u mentioned above and didnt fancy spending that much more for 'older' technogy on those terms, if that makes sense.

I only have three lenses and seem to suit me fine for what i use it for. The only one i am able to keep is the 50mm 1.4 out of them though! I have taken that into account that i need new glass

 

[itsdavedotnet]

if you shoot a lot of interiors and architecture, why not just put the camera on a tripod and go down to iso 100? dead clean 18mp files from your 7d, for less money than a 5d...

both are good cameras, but the autofocus on the 5d is pretty damn lacking, and the 7d has a lot of much better features...

 

[draiman]

I've owned both and the image quality from the 5dii is noticably better. You do need good glass too, but providing you don't need the better focussing then your best bet would be the 5dii.

 

[k3wt]

5d mkiii out this summer it seems?! Thats gonna cost an arm and two legs

 

[ChrisH]

but the autofocus on the 5d is pretty damn lacking

Please do expand on why it's damn lacking.

I have both a 5D2 and a 1D3, different tools for different jobs. I see your a Nikonman, have you tried a 5D2 ?

k3wt if you can, try and borrow or hire a 5D2 and a 17-40L or 16-35L to try, for landscapes and buildings they are almost impossible to beat.

If your wanting the kit for the above then forget all these rumours that autofocus is lacking, it isn't. Just remember for some things it's not got the focus assist system of the 7D but image quaility and noise are way better than the 7D

 

[k3wt]

Thanks ChrisH. Not excited about the 5d Mk3?

 

[ChrisH]

k3wt

Not interested in a Mk3 when it does come out. I don't use what I have enough so spending more on something whimsical is madness.

I bought the 1d3 on a whim at Focus, but I must admit there's something about the pictures I get that I love but can't put a finger on. Slightly spoilt by a number of glowing pixels, but as it's under warrenty it will be going for a trip to Canon in a couple of weeks.

Just out of interest whereabouts are you ?

 

[Kemble3]

Hire or borrow a 5dII and see how you get on with it...........no point in changing if you dont see any difference/improvements.

 

[k3wt]

Im in Central London. Think I wil hang on till the end of the year and see what the prices are like for the 5diii or even wait until when the 5diii is out and see how much the 5dii is!

 

[itsdavedotnet]

Please do expand on why it's damn lacking.

I have both a 5D2 and a 1D3, different tools for different jobs. I see your a Nikonman, have you tried a 5D2 ?

k3wt if you can, try and borrow or hire a 5D2 and a 17-40L or 16-35L to try, for landscapes and buildings they are almost impossible to beat.

If your wanting the kit for the above then forget all these rumours that autofocus is lacking, it isn't. Just remember for some things it's not got the focus assist system of the 7D but image quaility and noise are way better than the 7D

yes, I'm a nikon shooter but have shot with both the 5 and 7. 7D has a modern autofocus system that is favourably comparable with the nikon's (fantastic) af system, 5d just isn't there. Of course, if you're a portrait photographer, that doesn't matter...

I'm always bemused at comments that the 'IQ is better on the 5d than the 7d' - at iso 6400, possibly, but at normal iso ranges, aren't the pictures.. basically the same? This 'image quality' thing is bandied around all the time and I'm fairly sure that a lot of the time it's a placebo/excuse to buy new toys...

 

[jennifer]

I shoot full frame and crop. My 5d2 is suited for this and my crop for that. The best news is that I had to go with L lenses. Once you go L.... anyhow. For how you say you shoot, go ahead and get the FF. even if it is only for the L lenses. The 5d2 is a lowlight spanking machine.

 

[Cris_L]

I bought a 5d2 around Xmas time. It's a fantastic camera. I'm a portrait So the AF doesn't other me but even so it's never failed, even in very very low light. I've read things like is not as good as it should be etc and wished I'd swapped to nikon...but then when I've looked for these faults myself I've never found evidence of them.

Go for the 5d2.

 

[ChrisH]

Dave

7D has a modern autofocus system that is favourably comparable with the nikon's (fantastic) af system, 5d just isn't there

I'm not trying to be a pain, but exactly whats wrong with it, is it because it's only 9 points, is it not fast enough ?

I've seen so many comments about the 5d2 having poor AF but I can't seem to find out why it's so poor. I get sharp pictures every time i use mine and that includes everything from fast moving aircraft to slow moving sloths.

 

[stevewestern]

The 5d2 is a lowlight spanking machine.

What a fantastic description !
One that I agree with too. I have never used a 7d, but have had a 30d, 5d and 5d2, and do not have problems with focusing, but it could well be that I just don't know what I am missing.
My subjects are mainly human, and not sporty, so I don't need to be able to re-focus super fast, but low light is often a problem, and the 5d2 is much nicer when the ISO goes up.
A crop body would be nice to own in some way, but mainly for the extra length I could get from my lenses.

 

[adam_229]

yes you should definitely consider Canon 5d Mark II but also there is a new version coming out I don't know whether its rumour or real but if you can wait for few months than can see what advance features Canon 5d Mark iii will have.

 

[c.moseley]

I'd also like to know what's lacking on the 5dii af system before I get one...

 

[grum]

Generally the centre point is fine but sometimes it can struggle to lock focus in really low light. The outer points especially struggle in low light and can be inaccurate. Not unusable though. Tracking in servo isn't anywhere near as good as the 7D but still usable.

This is based on the 5D I but I think they have pretty much the same AF.

 

[arad85]

I'm always bemused at comments that the 'IQ is better on the 5d than the 7d' - at iso 6400, possibly, but at normal iso ranges, aren't the pictures.. basically the same?

No. The 5D2 is basically a stop better at equivalent ISOs. That is, a shot at ISO 800 on the 5D2 will show similar noise to ISO 400 on the 7D. Also, the full frame means you get a DoF advantage for similarly composed shots.

 

[squishy]

Plus the full frame sensor means the 5DII has both higher resolution and a lower pixel density than the 7D, so shots will appear sharper.
Probably not noticeable at web size, but there is definitely a reason people say the 5DII has better IQ.

 

[bigsmiff]

Had both a 5Dmk11 and a 7D, I think full frame is a thing that once tried it's difficult to go back, 5D mk11 in my opinion was a lovely camera which produced excellent clean images but was lacking in the AF and frame rate so I bought the 7D cos I do a bit of sport/motorsport. Was never really very impressed with the images off the 7D (probably because I was used to the IQ of the 5Dmk11) ended up solving the problem by moving to a Nikon D3 (full frame and AF and frame rate) and the rest as they say is history.
Always used L glass on the Canon's so not down to the lenses, both nice cameras but my choice would be the 5Dmk 11 but not if you are taking a lot of shots of things moving quickly

 

[itsdavedotnet]

No. The 5D2 is basically a stop better at equivalent ISOs. That is, a shot at ISO 800 on the 5D2 will show similar noise to ISO 400 on the 7D. Also, the full frame means you get a DoF advantage for similarly composed shots.

OP shoots interiors.... which means tripod, iso 100, and high aperture for good depth of field.

So a 5d's not all that useful...

 

[arad85]

I tend to shoot more landscape and architecture and generally in low ambient lighitng conditions where i notice a lot of noise in my images

OP shoots interiors.... which means tripod, iso 100, and high aperture for good depth of field.

That's not how I read the OPs usage. I shoot a lot of landscapes and interiors, but don't use a tripod often. I do push ISO to get the shutter speed I want though and sometimes suffer noisy images as a consequence....

(and my reply was a general one to yours saying the only differences are at the highest ISO ).