CompactRod
Member
5D :thumbsup:
Canon 7D or 5D Classic for your Taste?
- Thread starter koljaho
- Start date
5D :thumbsup:
Totally untrue. The 7D may be 'better' specs wise, but I wouldn't agree that the 7D beats the 5D in terms of IQ output.
chrisyeong
Member
Just when you're holding a 5d or 7d, thinking what a gem you've got -
http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/article.php/20
These cams are a buncha disasters!! Wahahaha!!:bsmilie:
http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/article.php/20
These cams are a buncha disasters!! Wahahaha!!:bsmilie:
NovJoe
Senior Member
Comparing the actual functions is the key thing. Many would agree that the video functions for DSLRs are secondary. We are talking more on photo IQ, ISO handling, fps, resolution, colors, egronomics preferences here.
Video function to me is value added. I would not swear by it when comparing to a true video camera. If you are a true blue videographer, why choose a camera DSLR instead of a true blue video camera and vice versa?
Last edited:
chapterone
New Member
Comparing apples against oranges, are we? I don't see your point at all
CompactRod
Member
i will get myself a FF when the next release have better fps
For simple reason, FF have a bigger range of "suitable" EF lens to play with !
I am happy with everything on my 50D except that it is not FF. (+my math is poor)
and Auto ISO is only up to 1600.
7D ? Not for existing xxD users i think. The diff is quite minor.
I still don't understand why canon name it "7D" instead of "60D"
The whole debate come because the current 5dm2 fps is still quite slow.
Hence no suitable for event shots.
When 5dm3 out, don't need to think:bsmilie:
Focusing speed? it got to do more with len u use right? i.e ring USM.
For simple reason, FF have a bigger range of "suitable" EF lens to play with !
I am happy with everything on my 50D except that it is not FF. (+my math is poor)
and Auto ISO is only up to 1600.
7D ? Not for existing xxD users i think. The diff is quite minor.
I still don't understand why canon name it "7D" instead of "60D"
The whole debate come because the current 5dm2 fps is still quite slow.
Hence no suitable for event shots.
When 5dm3 out, don't need to think:bsmilie:
Focusing speed? it got to do more with len u use right? i.e ring USM.
Personally, I don't do continuous shooting unless i am taking "jump" shots. I don't see a need for continuous shooting unless you are into wild life or sports. The usage of continuous shooting dramatically shorten the lifespan of the camera shutter. Moreover, there will be a lot of wastage when you do continuous shooting. So if you are someone like me who do more still photography, then the FPS is more or less useless.
eosdigital
New Member
If you're taking the 5D classic, just hope the mirror wont drop out halfway when shooting :bsmilie:
My vote would be for the 5D too actually
My vote would be for the 5D too actually
Last edited:
Today i took picture with 7D @12800 with 50mm1.8. I don't have 5D but if any 5D owner can post similar setup picture @ 12800?
7D, @12800, 1/3200, 1.8, Nature light, hand-held (EXIF intact).
Can 5D shoot 12800? i used the cam before and i doubt that it can.
From a preference perspective, I will vote for 7D over 5D (becuase technically it is much better), I would prefer 5D MarkII over 7D anytime.
I think it has a lot to do with what you are shooting, your lenses choice and your budget. If you are planning to invest in L Lenses for your body, then 5D or 5D2 because frankly L lenses today are design and optimized for FF body, put aside quality and aperture, a 17-40L is actually an ultra wide zoom on FF but it is less than a standard 18-55 when it is put on a crop body like 7D or 50D. The most popular 24-70L and 24-105L walkabout lenses, loses it 24mm ultra wide angle and became a 38.4mm slight wide on crop. If you like telephoto range it is actually a good thing, because the 200mm end of 70-200mm f2.8 now become a very expensive 320mm f2.8 lens if you are in FF body. If you are like me like to shoot wide angle landscape it is actually bad.
If you are not into L lens, then the downside of 5D is that you are not able to use EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS USM lens which is a very good lens comparable to EF16-35L f2.8 (except for the L build quality but at a much much cheaper price).
I would said reviews all your old photographs on the kind of shoots you take, look at the image quality to evaluate whether is it too soft for your liking corner to corner and of course look at your budget. If you are satisfy with the pictures of the good old faithful kit lens, not interested in weather resistant lens and FOV, then 7D is the best choice today. If you like many of us dying to jump into L lenses bandwagon then you need to reconsider your choice of body, I would said 5D MKII :thumbsup: I think it really pay to have a FF body to enjoy the L lenses.
I think it has a lot to do with what you are shooting, your lenses choice and your budget. If you are planning to invest in L Lenses for your body, then 5D or 5D2 because frankly L lenses today are design and optimized for FF body, put aside quality and aperture, a 17-40L is actually an ultra wide zoom on FF but it is less than a standard 18-55 when it is put on a crop body like 7D or 50D. The most popular 24-70L and 24-105L walkabout lenses, loses it 24mm ultra wide angle and became a 38.4mm slight wide on crop. If you like telephoto range it is actually a good thing, because the 200mm end of 70-200mm f2.8 now become a very expensive 320mm f2.8 lens if you are in FF body. If you are like me like to shoot wide angle landscape it is actually bad.
If you are not into L lens, then the downside of 5D is that you are not able to use EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS USM lens which is a very good lens comparable to EF16-35L f2.8 (except for the L build quality but at a much much cheaper price).
I would said reviews all your old photographs on the kind of shoots you take, look at the image quality to evaluate whether is it too soft for your liking corner to corner and of course look at your budget. If you are satisfy with the pictures of the good old faithful kit lens, not interested in weather resistant lens and FOV, then 7D is the best choice today. If you like many of us dying to jump into L lenses bandwagon then you need to reconsider your choice of body, I would said 5D MKII :thumbsup: I think it really pay to have a FF body to enjoy the L lenses.
Anthony Lee
Senior Member
Is it necessary to shoot at ISO 12800 for such a still life photo. Can't it be done at ISO 800, f1.8?
Agreed with Anthony.
Question is how many shoots do you missed without ISO 12800? from my experience very little to none and never use my ISO 25600 at all till date. I think we need to evaluate the overall needs and not base squarely on high ISO.
Of course it can, but you lose sharpness and DOF. Increasing aperture does not necessary give the solution a high iso performance can.
My point was made as i do not know why commonjunks was calling for a 'similar setup picture'? The 5D cannot shoot at 12800, so it cannot be a fair comparison at all. Comparing an apple to oranges.
commonjunks
Senior Member
It can even be done at ISO 200, but this picture was take to show the capability of 7D ISO.
commonjunks
Senior Member
I missed 2 there, what i mean that time was 5D2 (of-course then i don't know 5D-1 cannot do ISO 12800).
Similar threads
