Thinking about selling my 7d for 5d Mark ii

So I am thinking about selling my 7d for the 5d Mark ii as I really do not use the FPS as much as I would like and I could really benefit from the Full Frame.

Just wanted to see what everyone here thought.

I would plan to purchase a 28-135 for a starter lens for the camera as well.

All are welcome to chime in on the subject, Thanks

harvy3317 said:

So I am thinking about selling my 7d for the 5d Mark ii as I really do not use the FPS as much as I would like and I could really benefit from the Full Frame.

Just wanted to see what everyone here thought.

Click to expand...

I think you should do what you think is the best thing to do. Only you can know for sure which camera will suit you best.

Both cameras are great cameras - each with different strength but both very capable of delivering brilliant images.

The comparisons between these two have been done to death. There are volumes on this forum alone. Just read that stuff and you'll get an idea of what you can expect asking this question on this forum ;-)

If you don't use the fps, and you shoot single point center AF most of the time I don't see why not if you feel that full frame will give you benefits. Are you after the thinner depth of field? Or the better image quality when pixel peeping? How do you look at your photos? All of these are considerations. How big do you print if you print at all? Do you expect to see a difference on a 2mp HDTV? Both are great cameras, indeed.

As to the lens, not sure I would put that lens on either of these two great cameras if given a choice. The 24-105 f4 L IS + primes like the 85 f1.8 and Sigma 50 f1.4 would make a fantastic line up for general purpose and portrait shooting. Get that thin depth of field with the primes and a very respectable walk around zoom.

Those would be my thoughts, but obviously it's up to you.

harvy3317 said:

So I am thinking about selling my 7d for the 5d Mark ii as I really do not use the FPS as much as I would like and I could really benefit from the Full Frame.

Just wanted to see what everyone here thought.

I would plan to purchase a 28-135 for a starter lens for the camera as well.

Click to expand...

Hm..., not the hottest lens around. Canon is basically giving away the 24-105 for free (kinda) if you buy the 24-105 as a kit. You pay just $600 more for it vs. about $450 for the 28-135. There is no excuse not to get the L zoom.

BTW, most lenses are discounted now, so if your budget allows it, try to get one one of the L primes as well.

Yeah I think I am leaning toward the 24-105 L Series lens as well after doing my reviews on the other lens. lol

Yeah I technically do not find myself using the high FPS as much as I would like to take a African Safari trip with my once old Land Rover Defender, lol.

My shooting style is landscapes, cityscapes, plants, macro, art, portraiture, travel and a couple more.

Note: I do hate leaving a 8 FPS camera behind, I do not use it much but it is nice to have "just in case" if you know what I mean.

I am big on noise as well and would prefer less noise as well.

But my biggest reason for looking at the 5d Mark ii is the Full Frame sensor, I just really love how much can be fit into the photo. And forgot to mention Image Quality with noise at higher ISO settings.

Two things I dislike about the 5d Mark ii is the on/off switch location as I wish it were the same as the 7d location. And the second thing I was not to thrilled about was not having the dedicated flip switch for movie/video recording like the 7d. I do not record as much as I would like but it is a nice feature none the less.

As some of you have stated both are really great cameras and I have grown so close to the 7d and treat it like my digital baby, lol. I love the camera dont get me wrong but the Full Frame is drawing me in, lol.

Give your thoughts as you please, opinoins and thoughts are all welcome. Thank you

harvy3317 said:

But my biggest reason for looking at the 5d Mark ii is the Full Frame sensor, I just really love how much can be fit into the photo.

Click to expand...

You can't fit more into the photo with full frame. The widest lenses on the 7D give you the same field of view as the widest lenses on full frame.

So your saying you cannot fit more?

The 7d is a 1.6 crop sensor and the 5d Mark ii is full frame.

Below is just for example:

http://www.extremeinstability.com/topic-full-frame.htm



So? Am I missing something here? lol

Ive always used crop sensor dslr's and your saying I'm looking at this all wrong now?

You can fit more with the same lens, but you can get wider lenses for the 7D. The 10-22 gives pretty much the same angle of view on the 7D as the 16-35 on the 5D. The 10-22 doesn't work on the 5D. The Sigma 8-16 also is designed for crop sensor cameras, and gives a similar FOV on those to what you get with the Sigma 12-24 on full frame. I have the 10-22, and can't imagine wanting an even wider field of view than that gives me on my 7D. Even if I did, I could get the Sigma 8-16. Getting wider angles used to be an advantage of full frame over crop, but not anymore.

I agree that you shouldn't get the 28-135 to go with a 5D. The 24-105 is much better. I almost got the 5D2 when I bought my 7D. 40% of the time, I wish I had. But the other 60% I don't (and 60 is more than 40 ). Perhaps I'll get the 5D3 eventually, if the AF at least matches the 7D. FPS is less important to me than AF performance, but I do use the 8fps when I shoot basketball occasionally. It would be really hard for me to drop down to 4fps on those occasions. Perhaps the 5D3 will have at least 5fps. Who knows?
--
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

harvy3317 said:

So? Am I missing something here? lol

Click to expand...

Yes something definitely is missing here. Please don't tell me the only way you know how to change field of view is to change sensor size. lol.

Its not, lol but I just keep watching all these youtube videos I guess on what some experts are saying about the two.

The 28-135 lens would probably be a bad choice for the 5D, considering its optical quality and overall build quality. The 24-105 lens, which may be available to you as a discounted kit lens, would be a better choice. I also don't recommend selling a camera body, because you'll probably lose money on the resale and you won't have a second camera that you can use.

--
http://www.alexanderrogge.net/arshutterbug

If an expert said you can fit more on a full frame than a crop then they're not an expert.

If you want the same amount of scene in a crop camera then you change your lens or move away from the subject. As a statement on its own saying you can fit more in needs to be qualified by saying using the same lens & standing in the same place.

As others have said both cameras are terrific but find another reason than fitting more in & you won't then be disappointed in your choice.
Good luck mate.
Regards Rod

Just use 1.6x focal length factor to get the same field of view between the two. Did you know 17-85 on a crop camera has exactly the same fov coverage as 28-135 on full frame?

rodbam said:

If you want the same amount of scene in a crop camera then you change your lens or move away from the subject. As a statement on its own saying you can fit more in needs to be qualified by saying using the same lens & standing in the same place.

Click to expand...

But in some cases you may have the issue of not be able to stand back any further or sometimes not having several lenses on hand is not the best option ether.

Alot of my photography deals with hiking and mountain biking, so in this case I find myself sometimes on the side of a hill, cliff edge ect ect. So at times standing futher back is not an option here and carrying several lenses is not ideal. I usually pack three lenses. A wide angle, telephoto and macro and the camera of course - thats it.

I think another factor as I mentioned above/first message would be higher ISO performance with quality.

From a field of view standpoint there still isn't an advantage from full frame unless you are looking for wide angle prime lenses or a 180 degree fish-eye. The Sigma 8-16mm is very wide angle, paired with the 15-85 and 70-300 L you have 3 fantastic lenses covering a 35mm equivalent range of 12.8mm-480mm in a smaller package than you would get from the full frame lenses.

It's just not really an advantage, there are other advantages to full frame like 1-1.5 stop better high ISO performance and thinner depth of field for shooting primes wide open (though crops can do this well also, it's a matter of how thin you want/need). Also the advantage of thumping your chest and telling off people with smaller sensor cameras that you are the shiz....

There are differences, but we should be able to be honest about those differences.

Yes, that is a legit reason to go full frame, if you shoot in available darkness and push your ISO routinely to 6400 or above. The 7D is respectable (in my opinion) at 3200 and you can get some decent shots at 6400 as well. It's all about what you will be shooting and how you will be viewing it. I rarely need to shoot above 3200 and I usually like to shoot quite a lot lower so I control my lighting situations.

"Available light" shooting usually means crappy light shooting, which is a recipe for bad photographs in many instances. There are times you cannot get around it, of course.

My best friend just upgraded to 5Dii just because he found a good deal (btw - he is a VERY good photographer). He was actually on the brink of buying a 7D when he stumbled upon the deal.

Now he is regretting his decision on the purchase. 5Dii is clearly THE better camera, but his shooting style never needs it. He almost never go beyond iso400, and do PP extensively for his landscape work. No need for FF at all. He could have bought that L zoom if he stayed with 7D purchase, now he needs to start all over again replacing EF-S lenses with the more expensive EF equivalent.

As a wedding photographer, I see my clear needs to upgrade to FF (not yet - I just don't have the money) - but might as well as never since my crop cameras is delivering to my customer's satisfaction.

Others may have different needs to a camera body decision. Some are better photographers than the other, but in the end we decide on our own money.

Storitella said:

No need for FF at all. He could have bought that L zoom if he stayed with 7D purchase, now he needs to start all over again replacing EF-S lenses with the more expensive EF equivalent.

Click to expand...

He needs to replace the EF-S lenses with less expensive or similarly priced ones for the same IQ. The 28-135 will be at least as good as the 17-55, the 24-105 on FF is much better than the 17-55 on crop, the 100 macro on FF is better than the 60 macro on crop, etc.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=116&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=0&LensComp=398&CameraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=355&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=1&LensComp=398&CameraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=107&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=335&CameraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

BTW, even the Coca-Cola glass 24-85 ($140 on ebay) on FF holds its own against the $1K 17-55:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=119&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=0&LensComp=398&CameraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

When I go on the 1d, 5D forum, they hands down say the 7D IQ is NOWHERE near the IQ of the 5dmII. When I come on the 7D forum, everyone says the difference is not very much????

What's the deal?
--
Canon 7D, Canon 24-70 2.8L EF, Canon EF-S 10-22mm, Canon EF 75-300