Original 5D vs. Crop 7D Body - Please help!

<p>Soooo.....not to bring up an overdiscussed topic yet again, but I'd really like everyone's feedback / opinions on this decision. If one hopes to upgrade to a nicer full-frame sensor one day, is it worth getting the 5D original over the 7D simply so that the lenses we collect will be useful for the upgrade someday? Some facts:</p>

<ul>

<li>Portrait / low light / some landscape / scenery / architecture / general action (kids running around, not sports or true wildlife photography) is what's important to me</li>

<li>I like shallow DOF in general, and have heard that full frame achieves this at smaller apertures than apc - should that be a factor?</li>

<li>I'm not heavily invested in any lens type, and this is what really draws me to the original 5d - so i can easily upgrade someday to another FF.</li>

<li>I really like that the 7D is newer and in general looks and feels like a modern camera with a ton of powerful features. The 5D is older, looks older, etc. - not sure if I'm being nitpicky on this front.</li>

<li>The two main things that are "negatives" in my mind for the 7D are 1) not full frame and 2) boy do I wish it had dual SD slots like the nikon d7000 - but i just like the handling, image rendering / colors, and controls of the Canon way more, which is why i've eliminated the d7000 from my list after much debate. So from the memory card perspective - no difference between the 5D and the 7D. </li>

</ul>

<p>Thanks in advance for your feedback!</p>

 

<p>One more thing to add - I am on a budget and do like that I can spend a little less for a used 5D original and put more into lenses etc. vs. the 7D.</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00V7tz<br>

http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00UTPu<br>

and<br>

http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Y0K1</p>

<p>are just the first three finds here on Photo.net alone that come from a search for "5D or 7D".<br>

Your needs seem pretty well those of most photographers, so the older discussions are relevant for the most part.</p>

<p>There are several threads covering this subject. I have a 5D but if I were you I would get a 7D. It probably works better and it is hard to tell the difference in the pictures. I do like the 5D, however. </p>

<p><em>is it worth getting the 5D original over the 7D simply so that the lenses we collect will be useful for the upgrade someday</em><br>

You can get a 7D and only use lenses that can also be used on a FF. <br>

If you are on a budget let that guide you. Consider a refurb:<br>

<a href="http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/subCategory_10051_10051_-1_29252">http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/subCategory_10051_10051_-1_29252</a><br>

If you are considering the 7D you should also take a look at the 60D.<br>

Richard</p>

 

<p>Second thought. Look at the 60D. Less expensive that the 7D but quite capable of doing most of what the 7D does. </p>

<p>Buy the 5D Mk II. Unless you are into rapid-fire sports photography, IMHO there is no contest here. 21mp, high def. video, and the most reasonably priced FF dSLR on the market today. When the 5D Mk III comes out at ~$3,000 you'll wish you'd pulled the trigger when you had the chance.</p>

<p>The 7D makes a lousy full frame camera. If what you want is full frame, then definitely get the 5D, because you'll eventually buy a full frame camera anyway. However, there's a lot to be said for eventually building a dual format system, so the 7D could be the beginning of that system.</p>

<p>This article I wrote may help you to decide between the two formats:<br>

<a href="http://www.graphic-fusion.com/fullframe.htm">http://www.graphic-fusion.com/fullframe.htm</a></p>

<p>Thanks everyone. Sarah, loved the article you wrote (i read it before, about a week ago) and it's very informative. I think 5d II is the way to go for me but I'd really have to extend myself. <br>

Question to Bill and others - when the 5d III comes out (canonrumors.com seems to think it may be announced in the upcoming weeks), do you anticipate the 5d II used prices to come down? What usually happens?</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00WOR3</p>

<p>I would guess the 5D mk III would be priced somewhat higher than the mk II, and in the short run mk II prices would not change much at all.</p>

<p>In the Aug 2008, the 5D1 was selling new for $2,000 when the 5D2 was announced (5D2 initial price was $2,700 as I recall). 3.5 years later, an excellent condition 5D1 body is $1,000. So the price does drop, but slowly.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>... when the 5d III comes out (canonrumors.com seems to think it may be announced in the upcoming weeks), do you anticipate the 5d II used prices to come down? What usually happens?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The 5D Mk II has already seen a slight price reduction along with instant rebates through larger sellers. As new models are introduced, the outgoing technology will almost certainly be depreciated further. </p>

<p>However, if the Mk III price is in the $3,000 neighborhood, then you can be confident the Mk II units will disappear fast. And you can count on there being a back-log on the Mk III regardless of price or specs. </p>

<p>Therefore, because of the factors noted above (and others), IMHO you are not hurting yourself by buying the Mk II now. </p>

<p>As Sarah says, there's virtue in having a dual format system. </p>

<p>I got a 5DII upon its release in late 2008, and recently picked up a used 50D. The latter is very good at lower ISO's, so I tend to use it outdoors for walkabout shooting. The extra effective reach of the crop body is advantageous for me outdoors, where my subjects tend to be further away, and I'm less apprehensive about using the cheaper body in adverse shooting conditions. For lower light (such as indoors) or more "critical" applications, I use my 5DII. </p>

<p>Based on your description of needs, I'd say get a used 5D. I still use one for weddings. Had the shutter replaced recently and it is just like a new camera... The 5D original has lots of fans who say there is just something really nice about the file quality.</p>

<p>However, I would recommend that one should always rent the camera one is considering before buying, to be sure.</p>

If you are not interested in wildlife or action I can't see why

you would get the 7D over a cheaper more modern crop

like the 60D as the main difference are the advanced AF

and frame rate which you don't need.

 

Then you have more cash towards lenses and that eventual

full frame.

 

I may be wrong but I suspect a 5D classic and a 60D/7D

are not so apart in noise performance, but if you realy want

full frame then a 5D may be a better route.

 

A bit of background, I started out assuming I wanted full

frame comming from a 35mm and MF film background, but

had to get a crop (before the 5D came out).

 

However, my interests changed to wildlife as soon as I

realised how much more one could do in this area with

modern DSLR systems. What I am saying is interests

change and you can still get good dof control with a crop

format if you get fast prime lenses.

<p>As a owner of both the 5DMk2 and the 7D I have to agree with the benefits of a dual system. I use the 5D for studio, landscapes and high detail work because it's IQ and low light ability is far, far better than the 7D. I use the 7D for wildlife for it's extra reach.<br>

Interestingly, I have found my 24-70L to give better results on the 5D. It might be because of a focussing issue on the 7D which I am checking, but I suspect the smaller pixels on the 7D are more demanding on the lens. Strangely enough, my 100-400L shines on the 7D as well as the 5D, totally contrary to it's reputation for being a poor quality lens.<br>

Based on your stated application I would go FF - either the 5D or 5DMk2.</p>

<p>The dual format system works for me, I've gone that way for the last 5 years.<br>

Vincent makes a couple of good points, the 100-400 shines on the 7D and the 5D and that the 5D or Mk 2 would be a good place to start.</p>

<p>4 years ago I chose the 40D over the 5D and 2 years ago I chose the 7D over the 5D2. I had several reasons but one of the main ones was AF. Put it simply, the AF systems in the 5D and 5D2 are primitive by today's standards (derived from the 2D). IMHO it is O.K. to good when you use the central AF point and simply lousy when you use the other AF points. Contrary, the 40D has a very good AF system <a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1039520">while this of the 7D is simply superb</a>. <br>

 <br>

About a year ago I had a chance to buy a 5D at a very good price so I bought it. IQ and VF were as good as my 7D while the AF system performed every bit as I feared. Needless to say that I sold it very quickly.<br>

 <br>

Another thing that I learned to love are some EF-S lenses. 4 years ago I traded the 24-105 L for the 17-55/2.8 IS, the 17-40 L for the 10-22 and the 100/2.8 macro for the 60/2.8. IQ is every bit as good and in some instances (17-40 and 10-22 is a notable example) IQ was better in the EF-S lens.</p>

 

<p>Shallow DoF? I like it too and find APS-C to be shallow enough. In fact, I sometimes close the aperture to get <em>more</em> DoF. See attached pic as an example.</p>

 

<p>If all this sounds to you that I do not like the 5D series you are right. I see them as great sensors wrapped up in a mediocre body. So, if you are mainly interested in great IQ for a modest price they are excellent and will serve you well. However, if you expect a good all-around camera and willing to sacrifice a bit of IQ (mainly in high ISO) for a lot of other useful features then the 7D gets my vote.<br>

 <br>

Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p><div></div>

<p>Wow, I really appreciate the additional responses - thanks everyone!<br>

Bill - thanks for the note on the pricing. So I guess I shouldn't get my hopes up about prices dropping quickly after release of a 5d III.<br>

Mark P - agree that dual format is probably ideal, but I have family obligations and don't have the budget for it right now. Maybe someday....<br>

Nadine, Vincent, Peter, Lester & Yakim - I've been told the same (go for the 5d or Mk II) by some friends who are pretty seriously into photography and are committed to the FF format. Those same friends also pointed out to me that the AF isn't all that great, just like Yakim says. I myself have used the original 5d and have found the images to be pretty good, although I did the same thing Yakim is stating - used the center point AF. Also I just really wish that the LCD screen was better. Yakim makes some very interesting points and is convincing in his/her arguments - what do you all think about what Yakim says? The lenses that he/she traded are priced about the same, but Yakim feels that the IQ is BETTER with the EF-S lenses. The shallow DOF sample posted is also pretty impressive. I guess that's what attracts me to the 7D is just that the features are more "modern", the AF is supposed to be way better, 100% viewfinder, battery life awesome, etc. etc. I don't have as much experience with the 7D outside of holding it at a local shop, but it feels great - very sturdy and I love the controls. Lester made a comment saying "why not the 60d?". I simply don't like the handling / controls of the 60D as much and prefer the original 5d over it. Just personal preference. Interesting point though that your interests changed over time more towards wildlife! You seem to be on the same page as Yakim with regards to going for the cropped sensor.<br>

In general based on your feedback so far, I feel like for what my interests are today - I'd be happy with FF. I MAY get frustrated by not having some of the better features of the 7D vs. the original 5D. Sounds like i'd be happier with a 5d ii, but ugh - I'd have to seriously think about it before spending over $2k for a body right now. Yakim confuses me a bit more by saying that i'll actually be happier with a 7D over everything else because it delivers the same as FF in every area with those EF-S lenses, except perhaps with IQ at higher ISOs. However, if I invest money into EF-S lenses (similar to how the comparable L lenses cost) I feel like i'm making more of a commitment to this format. <br>

FYI - the 7D is priced at ~$1350 right now on B&H and Amazon, a deal which I believe will be there until Feb. 4th. About $450 more than what I see a used 5d being priced at. Thanks again for the valuable feedback and let me know if you have any additional thoughts based on the discussion. :)</p>

<p><em>What Yakim said...</em></p>

<p>Just to clarify my earlier response, Summer, I wasn't suggesting that you necessarily adopt a dual format kit now, but rather was implying that whether you get a crop or full frame body at this time, you can always get the other later. This is precisely what I did.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>got it, thanks Mark.</p>

 

<p>Out of the things you listed, the 7D is superior for low light, landscape/scenery, and general action. The 5D is only better for architecture if you use T/S lenses, otherwise the 7D wins again. The 5D will achieve more shallow DoF for portraits, but I'm with those that say APS-C can already go too shallow. More often than not I find myself stopping down my fast primes a bit. If you only shoot f/2.8 zooms then the FF DoF argument makes more sense.</p>

<p>For portraits the 7D can also remotely fire Canon flashes. You can do a lot with a pair of 430ex II's and some stands/umbrellas off eBay.</p>

<p>It should be noted that shallow DoF photography really taxes the AF system. The 7D is not only far superior here, but for still subjects it offers LiveView. You can manually focus in LiveView and make sure the plane of focus is exactly where you want it. For landscapes (deep DoF) you can easily check DoF and choose the optimum focus distance / aperture combination. Doing this rather than guessing and stopping down too far can gain significantly more detail in your landscape shots.</p>

<p>At small to medium print sizes you'll be hard pressed to ever tell the difference between the two. Challenging subjects at larger print sizes will show the 7D to have a small but noticeable IQ advantage.</p>

<p>The only place where you end up having to buy a crop lens is ultra wide angle. Otherwise you can stick to normal EF glass.</p>

<p>You might want to consider a 60D, but I have to admit that the 7D is just a nice camera to own. IQ, feature set, and ergonomics are fantastic. It's a baby 1D with a sensor that offers 90% of what the 5D2 offers.</p>

 

<p>I used to use the 40D, but have gone to the original 5D. I don't regret it for one minute. In terms of auto focus, I have never had any problems with the focus on my 5D. Maybe Yakim had a bad body with issues? I am getting into portrait work more and more, and this is where I feel the 5D image quality is way better than my 40D. I have never used the 7D, but I hear it is good as well. I find the image quality of the 5D is more "film-like" or just has a better fell about it, but that is comparing it to my 40D. You will love the shallow depth of field that full frame offers, as well! I am attaching a portrait I took at f1.8, using my 85 1.8.</p><div></div>

<blockquote>

<p>You will love the shallow depth of field that full frame offers</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Full frame <em>does not </em>offer a shallow DoF, Paul - the lens does that. DoF is <em>entirely </em>a function of the focal length and aperture of the lens and the distance to subject.</p>

<p>FF gives you a different <em>field of view.</em></p>

<p>Ms. Smith (no relation),</p>

<p>As someone else pointed out if you get a 7D you can use all the same lenses that work on a FF camera. I have a digital Rebel and a film EOS. I just buy lenses that are compatible with both.</p>

<p><strong>One thing that hasn't been fully addressed in this thread is video</strong>. A 7D is an excellent video camera. Mated to a good lens it will blow all those consumer video cameras out of the water. In the video department the 60D has some extras that are absent on the 7D. Audio control is better on the 60D and it has a fold out screen. The 7D has HD video out so you can monitor your recording in Hi Def on a separate monitor while you record.</p>

<p>The other thing is what are you going to do with this camera? I have owned a couple of digital Rebels over the years and I like them. The great thing about them is you can sell them after a couple of years and move up to the latest technology. You limit your depreciation downside. If you buy a camera for $600 the most you can lose is $600. And realistically the most you will be out is $200-$300 after 2-3 years. Even if you are in a professional environment you will sell the camera long before the shutter wears out. Keep in mind the image quality between the 600D, 60D and 7D is basically identical. Where do they differ? Build quality. Although I have never damaged by digital Rebels. Auto focus gets progressively better 600D<60D<7D. Again though I haven never had a problem with auto focus with the Rebels. If auto focus doesn't work I aim one of the auto focus points to an area of high contrast in the image and it locks in then I recompose. FPS gets progressively better.</p>

<p>Based on some of the questions you've asked and some of the statements you've made it seems like you are an amateur that just wants a decent DSLR to shoot around with. I don't know why you would jump all the way to a 5D or a 7D. You might be surprised at how well a 600D/T3i fits your needs. Spending the extra money on a 7D or 60D will not make your pictures look any better. It will help you if you are shooting a track meet and want a fast shutter speed. If you are shooting your kids do not get a 5D. Get a camera with video capability. Trust me you will thank me later. <strong>Go to vimeo and search for 600D, T3i, 60D or 7D movies. You will be blown away and any thoughts about the 5D will evaporate.</strong></p>

<p>The other thing to consider is lenses. A 7D or 60D has features that help if you are doing pro level shooting. Meaning you are on the clock and have to pay for models, studio time, assistants, etc. You want to be able to access all the features of your camera quickly so you need all the extra LCD display and ergonomic features of a 7D or 60D. Again if you are shooting your kids or landscapes I have never lusted after those kinds of features with a digital rebel. The money you save can be put towards a great L lens or a couple of great primes. <strong>A Rebel with a great L zoom will take better pictures than a 7D with a crappy kit lens. Nobody in this thread will disagree with that.</strong> Furthermore you will keep that lens for life. I shot some pictures over Christmas with a lens my dad bought before I was born. Your digital camera body will depreciate to virtually nothing <10 years regardless of what body you buy. Buy a pro or semi-pro body if you are going to use it like a pro or semi pro. If you are just shooting your kids get the cheapest body that gets the job done (high image quality, video) and spend the rest on glass.</p>