Canon EOS 7D vs 5D Mark II

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by nathan_milner, Jan 13, 2010.

  1. Hey there.
    I am thinking of buying a new camera as I broke my old one =[
    I have been looking to upgrade for awhile now, and actually have an excuse to.

    Now first off, I mainly shoot portraits if that helps.
    I am just alittle new with the whole full frame thing. How does this affect my images and so on?
    I am really into the 7D's new focussing system though.
    I have been stuck on which one would be better for me and what I'll be using it for (portraits)
    The 5D MKII is like an extra $1,000 or something, I am just wondering if its worth it, and which one you guys think is better.
    If you want anymore info etc just ask.
     
  2. For portraits, if you have the money then it is easy. If you don't, or have ef-s lenses, I would go 7D.
     
  3. The lens I use for all of my portraits is a 50mm f/1.8 =]
     
  4. Did your old camera have a smaller-than-full-frame sensor? Do you own Canon lenses that work with only a small sensor camera? Will you have to factor in the price of new lenses if you go full frame?
    I've never used a 7D but by most accounts they're both very nice cameras. If you want to shoot sports or wildlife, shoot in bad weather, or if you need more video feature, the 7D is probably the safe bet. If you want better high-ISO capability of if you want to manually focus on your subjects through the viewfinder, the 5DmkII is probably the better choice. For most other applications, you could go either way.
     
  5. That is an excellent lens for portraits on both the 7D and 5DmkII. The 7D has a wireless flash system if it interest you and have 430 or 580ex flash. The 7D is a real joy to use and image quality is about the same with the 5dmkii up to ISO 1600. But for portraits, the 5Dmkii just adds something special to them. I have both and have actually used the 7D more, but that is because I use the wireless flash system.
     
  6. I used to own a 400D so I have never used a full frame, so I have no idea what the difference is.
    The lens I use as I said before is a 50mm f/1.8, I do own one of the EF-S lens, but haven't used it since I brought the camera, its the kit lens.

    The main thing I am wondering is, what the full frame actually does to you're images and what is best for portraits.
     
  7. The 50mm will probably not be such a good portrait lens on the 5D as on the 7D since you actually get 50mm on the 5D instead of the crop factory which effectively makes it an 80mm on the 7D.
     
  8. A full frame camera will show a bit wider than your 400d and your 50 F1.8 lens, as Kristjan has mention you actually have 80mm. Using a full frame camera will give you a real 50mm FOV, that may or may not be good for you.
    Aside from the sensor size you also get thinner depth of field (more background blur) and cleaner high iso's. i have nevered used a 7D but from what i read here high iso's from that camera is very good that even its a crop camera, it can still compete with full frame cameras due to advancement in technologies
    i think if you are already comfortable with your 400D FOV then you will have no problems with the 7D but only you will know for sure what you need
    Christian
     
  9. The best combination for outdoor portraits that I've seen is a full frame camera with the 135mm 2.0 lens. For indoor portraits you need a shorter focal length. I would go with the FF for portraits.
     
  10. Nathan
    I am in the same boat since my 20D and 24-70L was pinched from my house. (no insurance :(, I have now though) I am mainly into portrait and macro images and my 20D served me great for both purposes. I am slowly saving to get either a 7D or 5DMK2. I am leaning toward the 7D though because my crop 20D gave great portrait images and my nephew and his cousins have started BMX racing so I think the 7D will be a more all round camera for photographing them racing.
    I only have the EF/S kit lens along with a canon 100 2.8 macro, 70-200L 2.8 and a 50 2.5 C/M, one thing leaning me toward the 5DMK2 is the lenses I have and the room I have, I will be struggling for full body indoor shots and to buy the 24-70L again will set me back another 900 pounds in this current economic climate.
    Anyway I am nearly 100 percent on getting the 7D and saving again for the 24-70 allthough this time I might go for the cheaper 24-105 because for indoor portraits with the bowens lights I usually shoot at f/5.6.
    Good luck woth your choice.
    Jim
     
  11. "...have been looking to upgrade for awhile now..."
    <p>Why? What exactly is making you want to do so? Is there something you feel you're missing?
    <p>Secondly, lenses are always the longer-term investment, especially in this digital age where dSLR bodies . Much as it is said that a full-frame camera is better for portraits, it doesn't mean that a crop-sensor one produces 'bad' shots. Most of my digital portraiture has been with my 400D and... my trusty 50 f/1.8 lens. I always knew I would go back to full frame eventually, as I started off using film.
    <p>I don't think you will go wrong with either, but you just might get a better ROI if you spend a bit less on the body and purchase a lens or two to aid your portraiture. Canon's 100 f/2 springs to mind. But again, you need to tell us what you feel you're lacking, so that the advice can be directed and relevant.
     
  12. Mark, Nathan is lacking a camera at the moment (since, as he says in the first line of his first post, he broke his old one)!
    Nathan, the 5D II's full frame sensor will give you shallower depth of field, and hence better control over things such as background blur for portraiture, than will the 7D. It will also give you better high ISO performance for low light portraiture, and better overall image quality. The 7D's superior AF system doesn't provide much advantage for portraits, but does for faster moving subjects.
    I have only ever used full frame bodies, having gone from film bodies to the 5D II, so I don't have any first-hand experience with the 7D. But I consider the 5D II to be almost the ideal camera for what I do most, which is candid portraiture. Only you can decide whether it's worth the extra money to you.
     
  13. Mark,
    In the OP first sentence he broke his camera and now he has reason to upgrade.
    He's missing a camera.
     
  14. It sounds that, for what you are using it for, you'd be just as well off with the 7D.
    Personally, I'm surprised you are using the 50mm for portraits. I found my 17-55 to be too short for most situations and am really happy now that my walk around lens goes up to 85 (admittingly, both *zoom* lenses are not ideal for portrait, but like they say: worst picture is one not taken, and this lens is on my camera when the moment happens). Anyway, the point being, if you buy the 7D, you have money left for the ultimate portrait lens: 85mm (1.4 or 1.8. Either one are good, really good according to the reviews).
     
  15. @Mark And Peter: Ooops! Somehow that little bit of info slipped through the net ;-) Sorry :)
    <p>Most of the rest of my post still stands though. It's usually a better return on investment to get decent glass, irrespective of the body. But as I said, I don't think you would go wrong with either 7D or 5D2, and given my other statement, it may well be a better investment to get that and splash out on some nice glass. I'm not sure there are many who could tell apart a large print from either camera, made from a well-taken photograph.
     
  16. buy a 40D and invest in glass, glass especially L lens keep their value, cameras don't as a rule
     
  17. If you have to ask which of these would be better suited for you, then you don't need it.
     
  18. Okay guys.
    Thanks heaps.
    I have been doing a fair bit of research into both still.

    But right now since I am in the situation where I don't have a camera at all.
    I think I'm going to go with the 7D. I am no pro. I have never used a Full Frame camera before so I wouldn't really know what I am missing.
    I agree with the statements about owning a good lens, I believe my 50mm is one of the best that I have used for my portraits.
    So I am thinking the 7D will be able to do everything I need it for. In all my portrait work I have done, I have rarely set the ISO above 800. It's either done with flash guns. Or in low light situations I've never found going over 800 an issue (as of yet) =p
    But I do thank people for giving their advice etc.
    Has helped me make a choice. Thanks guys!
     
  19. Good choice, Nathan M. The 7D is on my 'quasi-wishlist' but maybe not for a few years yet...
     
  20. Hmm...
    I'm not sure now haha!

    I have posted a few things on 'flickr' and have been doing MORE research, and I'm now thinking the MarkII might be more to my liking.
    I don't really know yet, I am still learning about cameras and their specs. I have never used a Full Frame before so if I do end up getting the 7D, I wont really know what I am missing.

    Though, I do have another question about the markII. Does the Full Frame affect you're prints in anyway?
    I thought I read something on it, but not too sure.
     

Share This Page