5dmk3 or 7D and 5dmk2

<p>I have recently found myself getting into wildlife and birding. I love it! I have been thinking about getting the 5dmk3 for some time now. But with my recent love I figured I would need a fast cropped sensor body and the get the full frame 5dmk2 for landscapes and portraiture. I do own a 50D right now. So my question is which set should I go with? Should I go for the 2 cameras or just the 5dmk3? Will my 50D be good enough for what I want to do with birding and wildlife? Better yet is the 5dmk3 capable of handling my needs as well? Thank you in advance for your opinions, they are greatly appreciated. :)</p>

<p>For birding, I would go with the the 5D MkIII. It has better AF than the 5D2 and the FPS is faster. The 7D is a great camera, but just can't keep up with a FF in my opinion.</p>

<p>There is a 7D disliking thread below..... it's great for some, not for all.<br>

I tried 5d2 and didn't like it, I was in minority I know, but even color rendition was different from the 1d4 color I was used to. <br>

7D I wasn't motivated to try (since I already was using 1D4), and still now i wouldn't be, I would rather want to try a 5D3 if picking from your list..... even if I would even more prefer a 1DX because I like it's "pause to think" AF which 1D4 didn't do for me, it was just shoot even if it didn't have time to acquire proper focus, it didn't favor focus (versus rate) even though my settings told it to -- I tried a different copy, and same, but it was something I had to live with, but now with 1DX I have more interest in its AF and all around benefits too (full frame, low light besides having action camera benefits).<br>

Having a budget... well having a $6500 budget, I would get 500mm f/4 and 40D for birds, because while the 10megapixel size wouldd be ok but not great, getting to use 500mm f/4 would be great. I would favor that lens for birds (on a full frame or not body), but it is way expensive and maybe 400mm f/5.6 will have to do, but still I would prefer to first try 5D3 with 400mm f/5.6 and use 5D3 as an all around camera (even if 7D had a bigger buffer, and the 1.6 crop "benefit"), as opposed to 5D2 for landscapes and 7D for birds.<br>

With birds you want to get a 400mm or longer, and go take pictures often, and learn their ways and if you cant' get longer lenses, then learn to sit and wait as opposed to approach and scare away</p>

<p>And if birding is only seasonal for you, or wears out when it seems hard, then you're still left with a more all around camera of 5d3<br>

If all you have is a 300mm, then that's all you have (400mm is better) but if you keep going and keep trying, sooner or later some great shot must happen if you persist<br>

<img src="http://robertbody.com/animals09/images/2009-02-13-riparian-herons-94218.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<blockquote>

<p>2009-02-13-riparian-herons-94218.psd - Nikon D300<br />2009-02-13 17:48:29 - (lens: 300mm f/2.8 AF-S)<br />1/2000s <a title="Sunny-16 f/stop, aperture, ISO table" href="http://robertbody.com/answers/support/fstop.html" target="_blank">f</a>/4 - ISO-200 - 300mm (x1.5=450mm)<br />Exp: Aper AE.Multi-segment. -2 step. (Flash:Yes)<br />AdobeRGB - NEF(raw) - 23 MB - Daylight/5500K<br />Size: 3608x2405 pixels - 71% crop<br />Orig: 4288x2848 pixels - Res: 240x240dpi</p>

</blockquote>

 

<p>Interesting. Right now I have a 50D 7D and 5DII. Image quality of the full frame 5DII is great but AF is not any better than the 50D. It's not bad, but it's not the best for BIF. The 7D's AF is fast & accurate but takes some getting used to for things like birding. The 5DIII also has the faster AF you want and it is full frame, but honestly I prefer the smaller frame for things like birds; for full frame you have to buy a larger lens to fill the frame and I'm cheap.</p>

<p>But if your options are both a 7D & 5DII, or one 5DIII. I'm not sure it matters. Either option will probably give you what you want. But two cameras have the advantage of reliability and having two lenses mounted and ready to shoot. Having just the 5DIII has the advantage of just one camera to pack around. I think it just comes down to a personal preference.</p>

<p>I do know that if you get accustomed to either the 7D or 5DIII and keep the 50D it will likely remain unused. The faster AF is addictive.</p>

<p>Let's start with what lenses will you be using?</p>

<p>Interesting. Right now I have a 50D 7D and 5DII. Image quality of the full frame 5DII is great but AF is not any better than the 50D. It's not bad, but it's not the best for BIF. The 7D's AF is fast & accurate but takes some getting used to for things like birding. The 5DIII also has the faster AF you want and it is full frame, but honestly I prefer the smaller frame for things like birds; for full frame you have to buy a larger lens to fill the frame and I'm cheap.</p>

<p>But if your options are both a 7D & 5DII, or one 5DIII. I'm not sure it matters. Either option will probably give you what you want. But two cameras have the advantage of reliability and having two lenses mounted and ready to shoot. Having just the 5DIII has the advantage of just one camera to pack around. I think it just comes down to a personal preference.</p>

<p>I do know that if you get accustomed to either the 7D or 5DIII and keep the 50D it will likely remain unused. The faster AF is addictive.</p>

<p>Christina,<br>

I own the 7D and the 5D Mk II. I also do a bit of birding, (http://imagepro.photography.com/Michael_Gregory). Of the two I own and use, the full frame sensor is superior in many ways as long as the subject is not moving fast. I love my crop sensor 7D for subjects where I need faster focus and more frames per second. The 5D MK III seems to me to be a hybrid between these two. I sometimes do travel and street photography and when walking about without a specific subject in mind, I find that mounting my widest lens, (17-40), on the 5D Mk II and my 24-70 on the crop sensor body gives me a broad range of composition options. If I were going to start from where you are, I would go with the MK III and keep the 50D as backup, or for a second lens.</p>

<p>Peter J:</p>

<p>"Let's start with what lenses will you be using?"<br>

<br>

Exactly. I've been shooting birds for decades, and the pixel density of the 7D is great. I find my self shooting birds with my 300/4 IS (with or without the 1.4x extender) about 50% of the time, and when I do use my 600/4, I find myself using it far more often without the 1.4x extender than I did when shooting film. Every day I go out in the field I come home with more decent images than I ever did with film. Partially due to the extra reach thanks to the APS-C 18 MP sensor, but I'll also add partially due to the better performance of modern digital sensors at high ISO speeds compared to film. Now, the 5DIII definitely does better in noise performance than the now-elderly 7D but do keep in mind that the 7D is so much better than slide film in that regard, that you'll still find ISO 800 or ISO 1600 pretty decent with the 7D.<br>

<br>

I also shoot landscapes and travel a lot, so at some point I'll probably add in a FF body, though at the moment I'm somewhat committed to the crop factor because I own the 10-22 EF-S (a great lens).<br>

<br>

Arthur Morris shoots full frame, almost exclusively birds, but he also owns both the 800/5.6 IS and the 500/4 IS. Probably the 600/4 IS too :) Most of us have to compromise in the lens department, though, and you can get more reach and good quality for much less $$$ for serious bird photography if you go the 7D route.<br>

<br>

Another way to phrase the "what lenses will you be using" is "how big is your budget". We can also ask "how strong is your back" as the bigger glass needed to fill a FF sensor is correspondingly heavier than the glass needed to fill an APS-C sensor at the same distance. <br>

<br>

And the upcoming 7D MK II is probably going to be a very nice upgrade to the 7D ... less noise (improved IQ) is the only reason I'd choose full frame over crop for wildlife photography, and I expect the upgrade to be noticeably improved over the 7D in this regard ...</p>

 

<p>Actually, I just ended up getting a 50D for your purpose. Since I don't do video, at least not now, it gives me decent resolution and the 1.6X stretch to supplement the 5Dii I got earlier this year.</p>

<p>I really don't personally use most of the new features on the latest models, but for wildlife work, I could see the focus improvements on the 7D as being important.</p>

<p>I've had the 7D for quite a while and got the 5DIII, my first full-frame digital camera, not long after it came out, hoping that it would help with birds-in-flight shots. It is superb for that...and for other types of photography, I'm sure. As with many photographic situations, it's all a matter of compromise, based on your own priorities. If you're mostly interested in perched bird shots, then the extra reach of the 7D is a big plus, especially for smaller birds. For BIF, and the larger shore birds, I'd go with the 5DIII, whose autofocus is greatly improved over the 5DII.</p>

<p>Christina, here's an example of a hairy woodpecker shot with a 7D, 300/4+1.4x just a few days ago. Now, that lens plus extender weighs perhaps 2.5 lbs. Shooting a full-frame sensor, I would've needed to use my 600/4 (first gen, non-IS) which weighs 13.3 lbs to get an equivalently sized image. I shot this hand-held, at either ISO 800 or 1600 (I forget which), and it's a bit soft due to the slow shutter speed I was stuck with, even with IS helping me.</p>

<p>Still, it's not bad. To shoot this on a full-frame sensor with my old 600/4 I would've used my heavy-duty gitzo carbon-fiber tripod. The new 600/4 IS II weighs in at a bit over 8 lbs, and for me at least would easily be usable on a monopod, which is a great improvement. Still, it's large and bulky and I love the flexibility and mobility shooting with a much, much lighter 300/4 (with or without the extender).</p>

<p>As far as birds in flight goes, the 7D is miles ahead of any non-1D series camera until the recent 5DIII. I find it adequate.</p>

<p>I doubt if I'll ever switch to FF completely for bird photography. If I had the money, adding a 5DIII for those situations where I can get close enough to fill the frame (most likely with the 600/4, 400-ish is much to short for most bird photography on a FF body) would be sweet, but my 7D would still get heavily used because of the fine image quaility and extra reach ...</p>

 

<p>P.S. yes, I know I haven't tweaked the exposure or white balance or noise in that hairy woodpecker shot, just in case someone is tempted to point that out :)</p>

 

<p>Here's another shot a couple of days before the hairy, a pileated that landed about 5 feet in front of me, shot at ISO 800. I could do without the branch growing out of his head, and wish I'd had a little less reach for a change (hmmm, maybe an argument for a 5DIII after all! :) ) but actually, I kinda like the headshots I got from this.</p>

<p>It's not every day that a pileated nearly lands on your head, after all.</p>

<p>Missed focus on this guy slightly, the focus point was just in front of the eye at the base of the bill. I was startled, to say the least, by this guy decloaking in front of me, and barely got a handful of shots. At least I remembered to focus!</p>

<p>I think the ISO 800 performance is really quite OK. No noise reduction in this one, white color balance was tweaked, sharpness was the default lightroom settings for ACR and export to JPEG for screen viewing.</p>

<p>I've owned the 5D MkII and now own the 7D and the 5D MkIII. For BIF, the 5D3 is the clear winner from this group. The MkIII's AF increased my "keeper rate" by a factor of two or three as soon as it replaced my 7D as my main birding camera.</p>

<p>I carry two bodies with two lens set ups. My 500mm f/4L IS is mounted on my 5D3 and my 70-200mm f/4L IS is mounted on my 7D. I use the 500mm/5D3 combo for most birds, except for those, like pheasant, that are likely to fly up close, suddenly and fly fast, then I use the shorter lens.</p>

<p>Having three times as many shots in focus trumps the small pixels and added "reach" of the 7D. If the 7D's AF system came even close to the 5D MkIII, then it'd be a sound argument in support of the 7D; however, shooting both on a daily basis, I know that they're not even close. The 5D3 files will stand substantial cropping and have substantially less noise than the 7D at ISO 800 and above. That's just my experience.</p>

<p>If you chose the 7D, all is not lost. Its noise performance up to ISO 800 is very good. Be sure to expose to the right, so that you maximize dynamic range and don't need to raise levels in Raw conversion.</p>

<p>I've got plenty of great 7D files, but here's a hand held 5D MkIII file:</p>

<p><a title="Hummingbird watching out for competition by dcstep, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8427/7820669586_c7b4dc87cb_b.jpg" alt="Hummingbird watching out for competition" width="683" height="1024" /></a><br>

ISO 400, f/5.6 and 1/1250-sec.</p>

<p>Shoot whichever body that you chose in Raw and then you'll be in control of color, contrast and levels during Raw conversion. These camera's all have nice jpeg files, but they're all different. Someone up the thread said that they didn't like the color presentation of the 5D2, when they could have set up a preset in their Raw converter to give them exactly what they prefer. </p>

<p>I can't understand buying either of these bodies and then relying on the factory's selection of ideal jpeg as your basis of presentation. All make excellent Raw files that you can make look pretty much alike with proper processing. At this level, don't buy based on how the jpeg files look.</p>

<p>"For BIF, the 5D3 is the clear winner from this group."<br>

I don't doubt it a bit. On the other hand, the 7D AF is better than the 5DII, and who knows what the 7DII will bring? One assumes better AF than the 7D but bringing it up to the 5DIII level would be difficult, unless they can figure out how to shrink the AF sensors while improving performance, etc. But if they do, then the 5DIV will be better and it will just be a matter of when it comes out :)<br>

"The MkIII's AF increased my "keeper rate" by a factor of two or three as soon as it replaced my 7D as my main birding camera.<br>

I carry two bodies with two lens set ups. My 500mm f/4L IS is mounted on my 5D3"</p>

<p>Which gets us back to an earlier question, what lenses will the OP be using for wildlife and bird photography? For much of my bird shooting on film, 600/4 (often with the 1.4x) was pretty much my bread-and-butter and I still use it heavily with my 7D (though not often with the 1.4x). The 800/5.6 IS has become the go-to lens for many. A longest lens of 400mm on a FF body's going to be disappointing for someone trying to do serious bird photography.</p>

<p>If the OP has the money to go big, doesn't mind the bulk (fortunately with the 500/600 MK IIs weight's no longer such an issue, though they're only light in comparison with the previous generations), etc the full-frame option makes sense.</p>

<p>But it's a big commitment, both in expense and in lugging lots of stuff around. I travel quite a bit and my 70-200, 300, and 1.4x with 2 7Ds makes a flexible wildlife and bird combo that I can toss into a carry-on roll-on with clothes etc along with some wider options for landscapes.</p>

<p>I'm attaching a Broad-billed I've shot with a crop sensor to compare with yours.</p>

<p>This was actually shot horizontal, the jpg is a vertical crop of about 1/3 of the original frame.</p>

<p>Taken on a 20D ...</p>

<div></div>

<p>(accidental duplicate post deleted)</p>

 

<p>I agree with everything Don says about the 7D; however, it's "advantages" are outweighed, IMO, by its poor AF performance in the the AI Servo mode. It's fast, but hit and miss, with the emphasis on miss.</p>

<p>For landscapes and portraits, the advantages of the 5D MkIII over the 7D become increasingly clear, where the larger file trumps any detail that the 7D's denser pixels might provide. When I travel with only one body, it's the 5D MkIII. Of course, lens choices will be different and I don't see which lenses our OP already owns. If she owns some fine wide angle lenses or wide zooms for crop-sensors, then she might should stick with crop sensor bodies. However, if all she has is "kit" lenses, then she'll be needing to upgrade lenses at the same time. Once again, the 7D could come to the forefront because of the total budget. You can't chose a body without lenses also.</p>

<p>I think that Christina needs to price a complete kit with the 5D MkIII and the 7D as the foundation. Look at the total price and then decide which way to go. I think that the 5D3 is the superior body for her listed purposes, but its substantial price premium may preclude putting together a complete kit that meets her objectives.</p>

<p>"I agree with everything Don says about the 7D; however, it's "advantages" are outweighed, IMO, by its poor AF performance in the the AI Servo mode. It's fast, but hit and miss, with the emphasis on miss."<br>

<br>

Well, then we're agreeing ... 5DIII is newer with much improved AF, but the 7D was better than anything shy of a 1D series camera when it came out. 7D is three years old, that can't be denied.<br>

<br>

I'm eagerly awaiting the 7D II for that reason. <br>

<br>

As far as landscapes and portraits go, yes, the 5DIII is the obvious choice.<br>

<br>

"I think that Christina needs to price a complete kit with the 5D MkIII and the 7D as the foundation. Look at the total price and then decide which way to go."<br>

<br />That's the thing, isn't it? And when putting together a system, one should look forward. The 7D II is bound to be a nice improvement over the 3 year old 7D (and I do hope for improved AF, for the reasons you state). The 5D MK IV undoubtably will cause current MK III owners to cry when it comes out - two or three years from now [multiple "?" marks, take that, Greenspun!]. </p>

<p>I was really happy with my 20D, thus the pic I posted. Then again, back in the day E100SW in my EOS-1N made me swoon with overwhelming joy (photo editors liked the results, too).<br>

<br>

I think we can both agree that either path will lead to results that would've seemed almost impossible 10 years ago (600/4 only weighing a bit over 8 lbs? Digital bodies with great performance at ISO 800 or even 1600 and above?).<br>

<br>

And the future's just going to get better ...<br>

<br>

So, Christina, if you're still paying attention to this thread, what's your budget?<br>

</p>

<p>Absolutely the 7D and 5D II combo! The 7D is far superior than the 5D III for telephoto photography and the 5D II is just as good as the 5D III for architectural/landscape photography. Either the 7D or the 5D II is good for portraits, you just need to select the lens/body combo that gets the shooting distance you want with the depth of field that you want. </p>

<p>I went from a Canon 1Ds/Nikon D2X combo to the 5D II and will get a fast crop body, perhaps the 7D, to replace the D2X for supertelephoto photography.</p>

<p>As a long time 7D user I think you would probably be better off keeping your 50D and adding the 5DmkIII. Though there were many advances to the 7D over the 50D, I'm not sure your money would be well spent on two cameras that are very good, but aging. Those who use the 5DmkIII and the 7D both almost always agree that the difference in AF performance is large. I think you'd be well served using your 50D in cases where you really need the reach without cropping and using the 5DmkIII the rest of the time.<br>

<br />As stated many times above, your lens selection will be at least as important as your camera body.</p>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=620661">John Crowe</a> , Dec 03, 2012; 06:44 p.m. said:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Absolutely the 7D and 5D II combo! The 7D is far superior than the 5D III for telephoto photography and the 5D II is just as good as the 5D III for architectural/landscape photography. Either the 7D or the 5D II is good for portraits, you just need to select the lens/body combo that gets the shooting distance you want with the depth of field that you want.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>John, I had the 7D/5D2 two-camera setup and the 5D MkIII blows it away as a BIF and wildlife photography setup. The AF in AI Servo mode is improved to such a high degree that my keeper rate has tripled. Any advantage to the 7D's higher pixel-density is offset by higher noise and, more importantly, many more OOF shots in the AI Servo mode.</p>

<p>While I'm waiting anxiously for the 7D MkII, I'm carrying the 5D3 with my 500mm f/4L IS mounted and my 7D with my 70-200mm f/4L IS mounted. Even with a much more critical lens mounted, the 5D3 still gets a much higher percentage of moving subjects in focus, at higher ISOs and with less noise.</p>

 

<p>David ... "While I'm waiting anxiously for the 7D MkII..."<br>

<br />Aha, the truth is out! Just teasing ...<br>

<br>

I was going to skip the 7D and stick with my 50Ds while waiting for the 7D MK II but after photokina decided to stop waiting and pick up a couple of 7Ds.<br>

<br>

I do hope the 7D MK II is worth the wait ...<br>

</p>

<p>WOW thank you all for your wonderful responses! I think I will go with the 5dmkIII. My lenses I planned on getting were the 400mm 5.6 and the 300mm f4 IS. I already have a 100-400 (I know it seems redundant) I wish I could afford the 500mm or 600mm. Maybe I will purchase the 7DII when it finally comes out but for now I will stick with the 50D in that department. My budget is around $7k possibly a little more around $8400 if my husband keeps up his overtime :) I just worry I won't have enough reach with the 5dmkIII since I can't afford any of the wonderful super telephotos. Does anyone know how the 400 5.6 is with the TC 1.4 III? Are my lens choices good ones?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Does anyone know how the 400 5.6 is with the TC 1.4 III?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The lens will become an f/8.</p>