Ok, I'm really confused. Backstory: I've been a reasonably proficient amateur for 30 years (good enough to chimp, not good enough to sell. ;-) ). About two years ago I indulged my sticker/feature envy and went to a 1D Mk III from a 5D. I was working on HDR and wanted the wider bracketing and higher frame rate. I had to sell the camera a bit a go to pay some bills (sucks owning your own business in this economy), but am ready to pick up a replacement main body. Another point is my physical problems: I have both constant vertigo and rheumatoid arthritis. So the wide angle nature photography I enjoyed really isn't an option. The 1D hurt to carry, much less shoot with. Lastly, I have two AB lights and a fairly good selection of modifiers from Photoflex. I am looking at getting into studio still life (and product, if I absolutely have to) at home. Oh, and I have a 20D I've kept as a backup, and a few L glass zooms. I've been looking at the reviews, reading here and elsewhere and I can't make a decision on what I should plan for. I had an original 5D and loved it, in fact I probably shouldn't have bought the 1D- it was more camera than I needed for what I wanted it to do. I learned my lesson there. What I can't figure out is where the cameras fit in terms of overall quality. The 1D systems are obvious, and I'm not going there again anytime soon. Am I right in thinking the 5D II is sort of a poor man's 1Ds III, and that the 7D is the same to the 1D III/IV? Am I right in thinking that outputting the images in the 16x20 to 20x24 range I'm not going to notice THAT much difference? I know that I am doing this for personal enjoyment, and outside of the occasional photo club critique/competition I don't think I'll be printing the images very big. My objectives for use have changed too. I don't need the ultra wide angle capability because the opportunities to use such a lens seldom happen now. The price difference between the 5D II and 7D is not enough to make it a significant factor Ultimately what I think I am asking is this: does the 5D Mark II have features, whether in usability or image capture, that justify it's added expense to the semi-advanced amateur? Or am I better off with the 7D and putting the savings towards a decent panorama head?.