Is the 5D markII worth the extra money then the 7D ?

[calin_deac]

<p>And here is another comparison thread between 7D and 5D2 :<br>

http://www.cameratown.com/reviews/canon7d/<br>

by 6400 the are no more details in the 7D images.<br>

But better buy it and be happy.</p>

[bluphoto]

<p>For me, the full-frame vs crop argument had nothing to do with image quality. Full frame simply gives me the ability to throw shallower depth of field for portraits.</p>

[steve_wagner1]

<p>Just got back from an early morning shoot with the 5d2 and going through the shots. The quality is absolutely stunningly amazing. Using a relatively modest setup - 5d2, 70-200f4 and standard issue Bogen tripod. Cable release, mirror lockup, self-timer, 100iso.<br>

<br /> The quality is heads and tails above my scans of my Fuji 6x9s, which were shot with world class optics. Incredibly clean, sharp images out of the 5d2 with beautiful color, zero noise, and spectacular detail. I've owned the D60, 20D, 40D, and 50D, and the color, white balance, tonality, and detail on the 5d2 blows them all away.</p>

[miklosphoto]

<p>I used to be a Canon shooter with a 5D and 1D II N.<br>

When the 5D Mark II came out I was on the verge to ditch both bodies and get the new 5DII.<br>

Did not do it because there was something other new out there: Nikon D700.<br>

I switched to Nikon, exactly because of the same reasons why the OPer does not like the 5DII.<br>

Don't misunderstand me, I am not into the brand war. I know well both brands I owned and used 4 Canons and 3 Nikons. And countless amount of lenses from both sides. Both companies make great cameras and glass.<br>

But, I considered exactly same reasons and made the switch in 2008.<br>

Just my thoughts.</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>I own both and have posted images and crops from both. If you are trying to compare the two cameras than you do not have a good idea what type of photography you want to do as they both serve different purposes. In my opinion and testing the 5D2 produces significantly higher image quality than the 7D - this is not to say that the 7D is bad. The 7D is in a different league for AF as the 5D2 really only works with the center AF point. The FF sensor on the 5D2 has a big advantage for wide angle shooting as you can get wide angle shots with top quality optics. Conversely the 7D is useful for telephoto shots due to the 1.6x factor.</p>

<p>Thus rather than be an unhappy 5D2 user at the 7D launch I was happy as it 7D launch as it is a great complement to the 5D2. I use the 5D2 for most work but the 7D for sports.<br>

However if you asked me to sell one and keep the other then I would keep the 5D2.</p>

[steve_wagner1]

<blockquote>

<p>the 5D2 really only works with the center AF point.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sorry Phillip, you have a faulty camera then. All of the af points work perfectly well.</p>

[zack_zoll]

<p>William-<br>

I fail to see how a blog post written primarily about the Sony A900 in Antartica has to do with non-Sony camera durability over time. For starters, the Sony cameras are not known for their durability; if anything, their main selling point is value. Secondly, I said I was only concerned with image quality and durability in my cameras (admittedly, I left out the phrase 'over time'), and your link does not address either of those things - at least as relates to the brand in question. Perhaps I skimmed it too fast or I just don't 'think outside the box' enough, but I don't get it.<br>

Most print and advertising photographers use medium or large format cameras. They are much more of a pain in the butt to use, but all they care about is how the image looks on the two-page spread in <em>Vogue</em>. Many landscape photographers feel the same way. Before digital, almost nobody in the print world shot 35mm, unless they needed mobility or speed. Why? Bigger film. In today's words, bigger sensor. If that's not argument enough for you as to why full frame cameras are produced, coveted, and eventually purchashed, than nothing is.</p>

<p>I refer you back to my previous example of using attractive people to sell clothes and makeup. If you don't understand why Coco Rocha models for Gucci instead of Reba McEntire, then I suggest you investigate the wonderfully low-priced clothing selection at Wal*Mart. You are not a Gucci customer. You can be content in the knowledge that you're dressed just as well as the people with $2000 suits, and you can tell yourself that they don't have a better appearance because they have better clothes, because those don't matter - they're just more attractive people.</p>

[mike_whalen]

<p>I don't own a 7D so I can't comment, but from what I've seen from the reviews it looks like a nice camera. Personally, I do wonder if putting 18MP on a crop sensor may be pushing it, but I'm sure time will tell on this.<br>

I upgraded from an XSi to a 5Dii back in August and I've been doing quite a bit of shooting with the new camera and comparing it to it's baby brother. Here are a few of my thoughts on the 5Dii:<br>

1) Image Quality: I have found the image quality to be outstanding and slightly better than the 12MP XSi in many respects, expecially at the extremes. IMO, the 5Dii will produce better photos under a wider set of conditions than a crop-sensor camera with fewer MP's. You just have more to work with. (More MP, bigger pixels, possibly more dynamic range, and better high-ISO noise). You can push the camera to the extremes and still get a very good result. I also feel that having more and bigger pixels can produce slightly sharper images under certain conditions. However, when your not pushing it (good light, lower ISO, 8x10" prints or less) you may not see much or any difference when comparing the results with other cameras. Even under the right conditions, today's P&S cameras can produce quality images.<br>

2) Autofocus: I'm not sure why there have been so many complaints about the 5Dii's autofocus. I have taken close to 1000 photos in the last few months and almost none of these have been out of focus. In the few cases that were, it was probably my own fault. I should admit that I don't do much high action photography, and if I did I may scrutinize the AF more, but for the most part, I find the AF to be more than adequate for general photgraphy. For me, this is a non-issue since the 5Dii's AF does what it is supposed to do. Sure, more AF points would be better, but in the end I'm not really sure this would contribute significantly to me taking better pictures given my style.<br>

3) Full frame sensor: The FF sensor buys you more ultra wide-angle lens options and a shallower DOF. If these are important to you (as are to many) then FF would be an advantage. However, if your photography is geared more toward long telephoto shooting you will probably be happier with a crop sensor due to the extra reach.<br>

<em>... I was not impressed. I felt that if you took away the 21 MP full frame sensor, what was left was rubbish.</em><br>

I don't agree. This is just not true.<br>

<em>... The AF points </em><em>on the 5d looked lost to me, cramped in the center of the frame. Canon might as well just put one AF point in the center.<br /></em><br>

I use the focus-and-recompose method so having most of the AF points centered has not been a problem for me. The focus seems to almost always lock in and when it does, the image is correctly focussed.<em></em>

<p><em>...The images looked soft on the 5d at high ISO, as if it was applying some in camera noise reduction. When I compared the 7d, the images were sharper with a little bit more noise. </em><br>

I think it is a known fact that JPG's are a little softer than RAW out of the 5Dii. I only shoot in RAW so this has not been an issue for me. Shooting in RAW just gives you much better control of your final output.<br>

<em>Another disappointment was weather sealing. The 7d has it 5d doesn't. Not impressive for a £2000 camera.</em><br>

I would never take any camera out in the rain without protection. I wouldn't trust any weather sealing on either the 5Dii or the 7D. Why take the chance with expensive equipment. If you want to shoot in the rain, buy a rain cover, or use a see-thru showercap in a pinch.<br>

<br /><em>Please can you give me your opinions over the 7d and the 5d.I have always had it in my mind to go full frame and now I feel I'm going backwards. But my heart is telling me there's more to a camera then megapixels and sensorsize.</em><br>

Depending on your shooting style (action/telephoto vs. portrait/landscape), one camera may work better than another for you. However, I believe it is possible to produce award winning photos with either one. I also believe that there are so many other variables (lighting, lenses, subject, composition, PP, shooting style, etc.) affecting final image appeal that the camera body gets way too much attention. IMO under certain shooting conditions the 5Dii will provide you with a small IQ edge over crop cameras. However, except for very large prints, heavy cropping, or if you're looking really hard, or if you are working at the extremes, these differences may not be very noticable. OTOH, for me, the 5Dii was worth it, I have no complaints, but I'm also happy to now have both a lightweight crop (XSi) and a full frame.<br>

Good luck in your decision.<br>

MW (<a href="http://www.capitalareaphoto.com">www.capitalareaphoto.com</a> The 'Vermont' gallery was taken with the 5Dii, all other photos taken with the XTi or the XSi)</p>

</p>

[william_bray1]

<p>I don't know why you weren't able to read the full article. So this is for you Zack.<br>

The largest group of failures through were among the Canon 5D MKIIs. Of the 26 samples of this camera onboard, one quarter (six) failed at one time or another, and while three recovered, the other three never did. In all cases it appeared to be water or humidity damage. Of particular concern were two cameras which stopped working while completely protected within Kata rain covers during a light rain ashore. They came back to life the following day though and were mostly fine for the rest of the trip, but one died permenently just before the end of our voyage.<br>

Several people noted that when returning to the ship after working in light rain 5D MKIIs with vertical battery grips tended to collect water in between the grip and the base – something that may have been the cause of some of the failures.<br>

I should note that the 5D MKII's are not rated as weather resistant, but then neither are the Sony A900's. I deliberately allowed both of my A900 bodies be exposed to the rain for two days ashore to see how they would stand up. There were no operational difficulties. I also have used the Sonys back here in Toronto in snow storms, (unprotected), both before and after the Antarctic trip, with no ill effects. Though also not claimed as weather sealed, they appear to be as well protected as any other camera I've ever used.<br>

I don't know what conclusions should be drawn from this high percentage of 5D MKII failures. All I can do is report on the facts of the matter. As for the weather during which most of the failures happened, it was no worse than a drizzly day in winter in New York or Berlin. Nothing Antarctic about it at all.</p>

[steve_wagner1]

<p>William you should start a 501©3 non-profit organization dedicated to informing the world about the horrible quality of the 5d2. You would save thousands of veteran professional photographers from wasting their time using such rubbish for equipment.<br /> <br /> Yeesh, someone close this thread already. People, quit feeding the troll (I should talk) and go out and take some photographs.</p>

[william_bray1]

<p>I'd like to thank people like Mike Whalen who give honest opinions and not get defensive when someone dares to question a camera that they may own.<br>

I have spent a lot of time testing these cameras out and searching for reviews. The results I have found are the 5d gives amazing images but the 7d is very close behind it in terms of IQ. To quote Mike "under certain shooting conditions the 5Dii will provide you with a small IQ edge over crop cameras. However, except for very large prints, heavy cropping, or if you're looking really hard" and he and others who have a open mind are right on the money.<br>

Sorry if I'm one of the few who expected more of a battle between a crop sensor and a full frame.But I say what I think.<br>

The body of the 5d was rushed IMHO to answer nikons D700 but if canon didn't start to up their game with their body's I think I would be joining all those who swapped over to nikon. But thank God with the arrival of the 7d I think Canon's finally got their finger out and started listening to their customers. Be honest if the 5dMKII had a 12mp sensor like Nikon, the camera would be a insult in todays market, you couldn't really call it cutting edge.<br>

One other issue that I don't think has been pointed out is diffraction between these two cameras. The 5d should beat the 7d here, but considering the greater depth of Field you get with a crop camera you shouldn't have to use as smaller aperture as you would have to use with the 5d.Thus your lens should perform better when its not stopped down so much and you will reduce the effect of diffraction on a cropped sensor. So in the I suspect the difference here would be the same as mentioned about IQ with large prints and heavy cropping.<br>

In the end I'm going for a 7D and with the money I save I will get a 5d mark I. The money I spend will not be much different to getting a 5dmkII.<br>

Thanks for everyone taking the time to write, but this is the end of the road for me on this discussion.</p>

[steve_wagner1]

<blockquote>

<p>under certain shooting conditions the 5Dii will provide you with a small IQ edge over crop cameras</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, sorry, back to school. The 40D, a crop camera at 10mp, vs the 5d2 full frame 20+mp, much larger sensor, no contest</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I have spent a lot of time testing these cameras out and searching for reviews.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>B&H 264 reviews average 5/5</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Thanks for everyone taking the time to write, but this is the end of the road for me on this discussion</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thanks for quitting, you never had any interest in discussion to begin with, you just wanted to show how cool you are</p>

<blockquote>

<p>But thank God with the arrival of the 7d I think Canon's finally got their finger out and started listening to their customers. Be honest if the 5dMKII had a 12mp sensor like Nikon, the camera would be a insult in todays market, you couldn't really call it cutting edge.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /> Yes, and if the ocean wasn't full of water you wouldn't call it wet. What is your point? Everything you write just oozes with condescension, dis-ingenuousness, and insidiousness, and a generous serving of not having much of a clue what you're talking about.</p>

[pedroolivo]

<p>William you should show your photography work to see if you need the 5D2, the 7D or some photography classes.</p>

 

[g dan mitchell]

<blockquote>

<p><em>"...this is the end of the road for me on this discussion."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Please move along everyone. Nothing happening here...</p>

[william_bray1]

<p>ok Pedro I'm only allowed 6 photos I've had a quick look to show a variation I also have sports photos some where. But I have a early day tommorrow.<br>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=942184">http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=942184</a></p>

[kamush1664878711]

<p>Why don't we all together look at the differences in outputs huh? Just forget about technical details...<br>

For me 5DMkII is unbeatable until any succeeder like 5DMkIII or whatever...<br>

7D just doesn't look attractive to me at all... Just checked the simple jpeg outputs... Compared... and let me tell you that I wouldn't change my 30D to 7D when there's 5DMkII...<br>

Regards...</p>

[william_bray1]

<p>You think I'm cool Brett. I didn't know you cared.<br>

And G Dan is still playing his games, you enjoy it don't you, come on tell the truth.</p>

[steve_wagner1]

<p><strong>"for everyone taking the time to write, but this is the end of the road for me on this discussion."</strong><br>

-- <a href="../photodb/user?user_id=3915565">william bray</a></p>

[stephen_asprey2]

<p>Occasionally a thread produces emotion..and usually its Canon v Nikon, or digital v film. there's nothing wrong with it so long as its informed discussion.<br>

It would not be overstating it there there is a lot of disappointment voiced on this and other threads about the 5D2 and the 50D. It seems that Canon is repositioning its product line a little and asking more than others for FF and underestimating the requirements for better AF and a good body.<br>

the 5D2 may get the 7d's body and better AF. That would be good, then it would be a little brother to the yet to be release the new 1Dxx etc. It will be 2010 to know if that is the reasoning. It makes it hard for prosumer buyers though. Nikon made it easier by releasing the D3/300/700 fairly close together and kept the feature set common between them. It was logical and made sense. Canon seem unable to do the same. Perhaps the design teams don't communicate enough. Technically theye are certainly just as capable as anyone else. So its marketing thats getting in the way.<br>

The near future will tell whether Canon can do the same and make it logical and easy to see the price/feature points as you go up in the product range. I also think that Canon were as complacent with their bodies as Nikon was with its recent lenses. Both are guilty of being blind to the market and its also called arrogance. Watch for Sony IMHO. Good, sealed bodies, Ziess lenses...they just have to do more work on software and AF.</p>

[steve_wagner1]

<p>Prosumer vs. pro is in the results IMO. Cameras exist to take pictures, not for their own sake. 5d2 results are at the very top for any camera made by Canon or Nikon at any price.</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>Two quick comments<br>

To Brett Cole - my 5DII is not faulty and the other AF points will work - point was simply than unless you use the center AF point on the 5DII the results are not that great. Using just the center AF point with assist turned off in one shot gets the best results for studio and portraits. Using the ccnter AF with assist in AI Servo for sports will give about 95% hit rate for ski racing and 90%+ for ice hockey using an L series F2.8 or better lens (e.g. 70-200 F2.8 or 300 f2.8). If you have not tried shooting a moving target with an off center Af point try it.</p>

<p>To William Bray - the 5DII is very similar construction to the 7D - flash apart and the slightly different plugs there is very little difference in construction. I have read the posts about 5DIIs in the Antarctic but I am unsure how they failed. I have been shooting climbing and skiing for almost 25 years and have never had a camera fail. Over this time I have used New F1s, T90s, 1NRS, 1VHS and even the 5DII. I try not to shoot digital below -25 C but have done so and have definately had a 5DII in the car overnight when it has been below -40C. On the subject of the Nikon 700 I do not think that the 5DII is a Canon response to the 700. Firstly they were released too close together for Canon to have done this in a rush. Second the 5DII had video and a much higher resloution sensor - surely the simple response would be an upgraded version of the first gen 5 (e.g. 12 MP no video etc...). On the subject of tests saying the 5DII is the same as the 7D try these</p>

<p>http://darwinwiggett.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/the-canon-7d/ (Darwin is a top landscape shooter)<br>

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/7D-hands-on.shtml (another top Pro - see image qualitysection)</p>

 

[danielleetaylor]

<p><em>On the subject of tests saying the 5DII is the same as the 7D try these</em></p>

<p>Another annoying thing on the Internet is personal opinion presented as truth. Reichmann's complaints are not supported by any samples I've seen, and he never followed up on his review. (Perhaps he did have a faulty beta model.) I respect the man, but he is one man and is not in the business of performing professional, reproducible, empirical tests.</p>

<p>As for Darwin, his results are well below the results obtained by two sites which specialize in professional reviews: dpreview and imaging-resource. (Not to mention below countless samples posted by individuals.) If you get soft photos with a camera model, and somebody else gets sharp and detailed photos with the same camera model, then the problem is <strong>you</strong> , not the camera model. This is common sense but common sense never stopped people from repeating stupid things and I therefore expect to see the Darwin review quoted every time somebody dares compliment the 7D or post a sharp photo from one, right up until the 7D mkII is released. Darwin's review will be the go-to piece for everyone trying to justify a 5D II or another brand.</p>

<p>Don't get me wrong. The 5D II does have superior IQ. I think it has pretty much the best IQ of any DSLR on the market today. But at ISO 400 and below no mere mortal can tell it from a 7D in print. It would be tough to tell even at 800. Keep that in mind when deciding how to spend your hard earned dollars.</p>

[markonestudios]

Wow, who'd have thought two cameras from one manufacturer would produce such in-fighting! :) I've no doubt that the 7D is a fine camera. I happen to own the 5D2. It was my plan to get a 5D regardless, so the Mark II was a definite plus. I wouldn't ever trade it for a 7D. It does what it says on the tin, and does it very well and fits my style and intended usage.

<p>Referring to the original question, "Is the 5D markII worth the extra money then the 7D ?" As has been seen here, there are strong opinions from some very seasoned shooters here. Whereas there seemed to be a lot of bashing, I think they key point is that with every subsequent iteration of a dSLR, there necessarily have to be improvements in one aspect or another, over previous models. It's the nature of this digital age. In the grand scheme of things, a camera is worth what you are willing to pay for it. So was a 1DsIII a worthwile purchase? For a shooter who required its features and had the cash, the answer would be yes. There are plenty of very happy 5D2 shooters as I am sure there will be many happy 7D shooters. The Antarctic test was, IMHO, not the be all and end all of 5D2 tests because, let's face it, how many of us buy a sub 1 series camera to shoot in extreme climates on a regular basis?

<p>Let's all get back to what really counts: making lasting images with our imaging machines. Mine is labelled 5D Mark II ;-)

[dcstep]

<p>I own the 5D2 and the 7D. My 7D's performance at ISO 1600 gets as noisy as my 5D2 at 3200. The OP seems to want to go full-frame but I'm not sure why. Given his lenses listed, it's clear that he's not a sports or wildlife photography. He lists a macro lens, so I think he should consider staying with a crop-body if he uses that a lot.<br>

For scenics and portraits it's hard to beat the 5D2. Look at the IQ reports on <a href="http://www.dxomark.com">www.dxomark.com</a> comparing to any body by any make you like. It's a top contender for high honors. This Nikon/Canon pissing match is absolutely rediculous. If someone personally like one over the other, then go with that personal preference, but come around here saying one blows away the other. Independent tests, like DxO's show that both have top contenders.<br>

As for AF, I'm personally not having any trouble with either the 5D2 or the 7D. Since I do a lot of birds in flight, I've made certain that I know what mode I'm in and which focal spot is likely the lock on (I usually specify only one for BIF). AF speed is a big factor in my lens selection and I haven't been disappointed.<br>

The video function is much more intuitive to use on the 7D vs. the 5D2.<br>

Oh, if I could only have one camera, it'd be the 5D2 and I'd figure out how to do my bird photography without the 7D's 1.6-crop.<br>

Dave</p>

[steve_wagner1]

<p>I think most of the strong sentiments in the thread were less about one camera or another and more about the OP acting like a troll. Photo.net is a serious forum that is largely free of troll like behavior. When someone eggs people on like that and spouts a bunch of hyped nonsense it gets people riled up.</p>