7D or 5D Mk II

[wavemachine]

Well now I am confused, I went to my local camera shop which is not part of a huge chain and looked at the 5D and the 7D.

The guy knows me quite well and he reckoned the 7D is the better camera for me, he uses a 5d and said for portaits and weddings which he shoots it is great but everything else he reckoned the 7D was a far better option.

Also he reckoned I would miss the 1.6 crop factor giving me extra reach as I do quite a bit of out and about shooting.

Thinking about it I do have a nice selection of lenses and it will take me a while and a lot of money to accumulate those for the 5D.

I am thinking maybe full frame is not for me just yet, I would love to make the jump but maybe the time is not right.

I think the guy in the shop was giving me good impartial advice as he probably gained more information about my shooting than I probably can or have communicated in the forum. Also it could be potentially his loss by selling me a cheaper camera although chances are I would by more gear anyway.

I guess it is something for me to nut out.

[flake]

Originally Posted by anglefire

What, you have inside information as well?

View the patent application here

[flake]

I don't think the 7D is better at landscapes! Also another point not mentioned is that of diffraction, this is a degradation of image quality which begins with the 7D before f/7.1 on the 5D MkII it's f/11 the further past this you go the less sharp & less resolution the image has. An article here describes it.

It might be useful if you give a list of the lenses you currently have many of them might not need to be upgraded.

[wavemachine]

Interesting article that!

Here are the lens I currently have (I know they are far from the best):-

Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM

As I understand it all will work except the Tamron and the Sigma.

I am not sure how well the 70-300 would perform on a 5D for example or whether I would need to look at a 70-200 L series.

I do know what the chap in the camera shop was saying and I can imagine a lot of occasions where having the extra reach of APS-C will be missed (birdy in a tree, squirrel etc), however on the same token if I went for the 7D when doing portraits I will crave the 5D.

If I was buying a camera from scratch and had not had the extra reach of APS-C then I wouldn't be having this delema, I would be out shooting with my 5D

[xavier]

Frankly Wavemachine I think its down to the results, the pictures that you produse at the end of the day. It dose not matter if you have a high end camera or your kids Micky mouse one, as long as you get agood shot. most cameras today range between 6-12 megs if not more so your sure to get a good shot

[Forseti]

Originally Posted by wavemachine

Interesting article that!

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM

The DC indicates that this is a special lens designed so that the image circle matches the smaller size of most digital cameras i.e. those with a crop factor. So this lens is ok for the 7D but not for the 5D (full frame) for which lenses with the DG abbreviation would be required. Lenses with the DG abbreviation also work on crop factor lenses of course with sometimes better results as the periphery of the lens (usually where the weaknesses show) doesn't translate to crop factor camera.

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

Full frame lenses that are also suitable for crop frame camera often with better results as lens imperfections at the peripheral are not so critical.

I sometimes think that we get too bogged down with all the technical jargon - diffraction and where it starts etc which whilst no doubt important in theory doesn't really translate that well into normal everyday use by your average photographer. If you're going to blowing up every single image that you produce up to gigantic sizes then this may be of importance to you but in the real world you're never going to notice it. More important in my opinion is the glass used and it's quality. Not having tried it because I don't own, and never will, a full-frame camera it would be my assertion that in the real world you'd be hard pushed to tell whether a certain image had been captured with the 7D or a 5D. In general terms, a crop factored camera such as the 7D will be far more forgiving of less than excellent optical lens quality than a full-frame camera.

Yes - a more than happy 7D user whose photography is roughly 90% landscape and wildlife orientated who wouldn't go the full-frame route even if you gave me one. Well ok then, as a gift maybe but it would probably spend most of it's life in the spare camera bag.

[wavemachine]

Thanks for that Forseti, you have hit on a really good point there and a concern I had in the back of my mind with regards to lenses, I have read in places that you have to be very careful what lenses you choose for the 5D.

I think another key point I have not made clear is that I am trying to ease my self into the side line of taking portraits and doing a couple of weddings (yes I have already done a wedding which turned out to introduce some very challenging circumastances) but ultimately I want to shoot what I want to shoot.

I have come to the conclusion that the 5D is quite clearly a superb camera however I don't think it offers for someone in my situation the flexability that I want which comes back to the crop factor and reach, if I am wondering around as I do and I see a fox (as I did once) then the more zoom I have the better.

If I had the money then it would be a 5D and a 7D but I don't so that has killed that train of thought

The information given by other forum members is valid and valuable but at one point I felt it was getting a little one sided i.e. get a 5D and it is good to see that Forsetti is happy with the 7D.

So I think 7D it is, if I find the sideline does get to the point where I need to quit my fulltime job then the plan will be to invest the sideline money in better gear and make the jump, so I think 5D is on the cards at some time but not just yet.

So the first accessory will be the battery grip + spare battery.

So I guess the question is what lens do I get with the 7D, apparently the 15-85 is cracking lens or should I be looking at the 24-70L (canon) or the sigma equivalent.

[Forseti]

Originally Posted by wavemachine

I think another key point I have not made clear is that I am trying to ease my self into the side line of taking portraits.....

One of the reasons that I recently purchased the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM lens. On the 7D (crop factor 1.6) this equates to a field of view (FOV) of 80mm - very good for portraits. With the combination of high resolution, high and usable ISO in addition to a fast lens for me this aspect of my photography is well covered.

Originally Posted by wavemachine

I have come to the conclusion that the 5D is quite clearly a superb camera however I don't think it offers for someone in my situation the flexibility that I want which comes back to the crop factor and reach, if I am wondering around as I do and I see a fox (as I did once) then the more zoom I have the better.

Careful - this is one of my pet hates. Focal length is a characteristic of the lens not the camera it is placed upon i.e. a focal length of 100mm remains 100mm whether it be used on a full-frame camera or a crop factor camera. What changes however, is the field of view (FOV) as mentioned above. Take for example your 100mm macro lens - place this same lens on a 5D and a 7D with both cameras placed alongside each other capturing a distant object. When the image is viewed the image produced by the 7D with it's narrow field of view will contain less of the overall view than the image produced by the 5D. Due to the reduced FOV the impression is given that one has zoomed, but this is only an illusion.

Using the 100mm macro lens as an example once again. Due to the 7D's crop factor the effective FOV is the same as though a 160mm lens had been used. This means that a frame filled with say an image of a butterfly would need no cropping whilst still maintaining the full resolution capabilities of the camera. To achieve the same FOV the 100mm macro lens used on a 5D would necessitate the user moving closer to the subject matter. With macro images this can often make the difference of whether the subject remains in place or chooses to fly away. Althernatively, the photographer could later crop the image in post editing to achieve the same apparent size although it goes without saying that this action also results in pixels being thrown away. Whether this is important or not depends of course upon the size of the finished product - with a 6x4 print it wouldn't make any difference at all.

Originally Posted by wavemachine

So the first accessory will be the battery grip + spare battery.

Yes, these will also be my next purchases. Here's an excellent site for lens reviews http://www.photozone.de/reviews . The only words of caution I would advise is think carefully regarding EF-S lenses as these are only intended for use on crop factor cameras. Should you eventually decide at some stage in the future to go the full-frame route then you won't be able to use these lenses.

[flake]

Sorry Forseti not wishing to dissagree, while you're right with some of the effects some of the technicalities aren't right.

With the crop factor there is a greater magnification than with FF thus a 100mm shot will have the magnification of 160mm lens. This is not a factor of the camera / lens combination, but because when the image is displayed on your monitor it is displayed full screen, the image from a FF camera is also displayed full screen and the effect is to give a 'digital zoom' equivalent to the crop factor. If both images were displayed at actual size then the true focal length would be seen.

With the 100mm Macro lens you do not get the effect of a 160mm lens as the closest focus distance remains the same whether on crop or on FF, what does change is the amount of apparant magnification. The 1:1 magnification remains the same on both cameras, but on the crop, the subject fills more of the frame, to get the same effect on FF you need a magnification of 1.6:1 Again this is due to the digital zoom effect of displaying the image.

The 24 - 70mm lens is perhaps the highest quality zoom lens in Canons line up, it's difficult to tell it apart from the 50mm f/1.4. The only issue with it is the variable sample quality, I'm happy enough with mine but not all are as good. The 15 - 85mm is an EF-s lens and so will not be useable if you do move to FF, consider the 17 - 55mm f/2.8 IS if you want the best image quality and fast aperture on a crop camera.

The 7D plus 15 - 85mm costs £1700 (ATM) the 5D MkII is £1735 without lens or £2350 with the 24 - 105 f/4 IS L For me I think an extra £650 for the 5D MkII lens kit represents good value, you have a 50mm and a 100mm Macro you can use if you want more reach just buy a Sigma 50 - 500mm which although not a fast lens, it will give you the reach you need, and 21MP means you can always crop when you need to.

[Forseti]

Originally Posted by flake

.... but because when the image is displayed on your monitor it is displayed full screen, the image from a FF camera is also displayed full screen and the effect is to give a 'digital zoom' equivalent to the crop factor. If both images were displayed at actual size then the true focal length would be seen.

With the 100mm Macro lens you do not get the effect of a 160mm lens as the closest focus distance remains the same whether on crop or on FF, what does change is the amount of apparant magnification. The 1:1 magnification remains the same on both cameras, but on the crop, the subject fills more of the frame, to get the same effect on FF you need a magnification of 1.6:1