Is the 5D III a successor to the 7D - Is it the perfect sports camera

I have been using a 50D and a 20D before that to shoot various sports activites and family photos. I shoot volleyball as well as soccer, so I have both ends of the spectrum from a shooting perspective. The problem with the 50D is low light in the volleyball games do not allow me to get shots without bluring, even when cranking up the ISO. My friend has the 7D and is able to get the shots I want.

I have been holding off getting a new camera, but was hoping this would be the 7D II not the 5D III. After looking at the specs and reading the initial review, it seems that this could be a very good sports camera, given the new auto focus. The one negative is that there is no pop up flash, this is simple and keeps my wife happy. The other issue is both a positive and negative, the full frame. I know the quality will be better and I will be able to get closer shots. But now my daughter playing soccer and son football, will not be as close as they are with the 1.6 Crop.

The video option is also appealing, since my video camera died recently and I would like to replace it with the video features of the camera. The video features of this camera appear to have everything, but what would I miss other than the form factor of a video camera.

So my question is: Is the 5D III going to be the ideal sports camera for both still and video and supperceed the 7D, or why would I want to go with the 7D or wait for the 7D II? 5D II is out due to auto focusing issues.

Please help, this is an honest question and I am looking for helpful responses. Money is important, but I can afford the 3500 if it is the right choice. I would keep this camera for 4+ years.

the 7d is still the best camera, the 5D III seen to have almost all the specs of the 7d beside the full frame.

Regardless of the specs, the 5D III is the successor to the 5D II. The 7D successor will be a crop frame and have a built-in flash.

Mark

EdCanon said:

So my question is: Is the 5D III going to be the ideal sports camera for both still and video and supperceed the 7D, or why would I want to go with the 7D or wait for the 7D II? 5D II is out due to auto focusing issues.

Click to expand...

As I see it - it depends on what you shoot. If you find yourself in a reach limited situation then the 7D will still be the best option. Otherwise the 5DIII will probably be a better choice.

I say probably because, at the moment, it really is way too early to be making any definitive statements about what the 5DIII is and isn't.

The AF system on the 5DIII, despite being lifted from the 1DX, is yet to be proven. The 7D, on the other hand, is sorted and works.

What sports do you shoot and what lenses do you use? (that'll help a lot with our postulations here )

I'm certain the sensor in it will be a decent one. That said, I simply see the 5D3 as the 5D2 that can finally focus properly.

It is an interesting camera. The 6 fps is acceptable to some, but those that are used to the 8 fps of the 7D and the 1.6 CF and the built-in flash/controller will probably pass on this one, unless they really want to go Full frame. I have a 5D2 already, and I don't think I'll get this model either.

I wonder how Canon will "cripple" the 70D or 7D Mk2 so they won't compete with this model ...

Just my thoughts.

Regards,

Bobby K.

--
To God be all the Glory!

I'm thinking 60D + 7D = 8D. The 60D was/is a glorified T3i. For the successor of the 7D to not compete with the 5D mkIII it smells like the 70D or 7D mkII might be a fight for the $1,500 to $2,000 market.
--
Mark

--I have a 7D & a 5Dii. I think that the 5Diii looks great on paper & I may get one eventually, but I also think that for your purposes the 7D fits perfectly. The kind of family sports action shots that you are interested in taking are the kinds of shots where the 7D shines. The crop gives you a distance advantage & the extra money could be used for a fast lens that would improve your keepers when shooting action shots. Bab
http://www.flickr.com/photos/28700476@N08/

EdCanon said:

But now my daughter playing soccer and son football, will not be as close as they are with the 1.6 Crop.

Click to expand...

No.. they are the same distance unless you move back....

Seriously.. this is probably one of the most misunderstood thing about a 1.6 crop... or any crop vs. full frame.

I shoot with a 7D and 5DMKII and use a 300 2.8 and 100-400L and on the 300 will use a 1.4 and 2X TC. Given the choice... I'll shoot the 5DMkII as I find the images noticeably better for my output. The 7D shines when it comes to challenging targets... small.. fast moving.

Another little discussed advantage of the FF MKII is the low light advantage. The 100-400L is not a fast lens and the sweet spot is f8. The MKII allows me to shoot at iso 800 and higher when needed giving me images I much prefer over the 7D... I like the files much better than equivalent 7D files.

Enter the MkIII... it will take it a step or two better. The new AF will be very nice.

Given the choice.... all other things equal.... if you had to shoot sports with a 7D or MKIII very few people are going to shoot the 7D. Now.. factor in the cost difference it is obvious the 7D survives....

Of course.. .all these are my opinions....

Here is an interesting review...

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/technical/brent_stirton_shooting_eos_5d_mark_iii.do

Richard

--
http://esfishdoc.com/blog

My Flickr Photostream Slideshow

http://www.flickr.com/photos/33755787@N03/show/

My Images at Photo.net
http://photo.net/photos/esfishdoc

Ed:

If you want the 5D3, pre-order it now. I am not a sports photographer, so I can't comment on whether 6 fps is enough. The 7D has 8 fps, 1/3 faster. I've never wished for a faster burst rate than 8 fps, but I do appreciate it.

The only thing I can imagine that would lead me to buy a 7D2 over the current, now 2.5-year-old 7D, would be cleaner images at higher ISO, and the 7D really isn't bad at all. It has excellent video, superb AF, and produces fine images in my hands. I often am focal-length-limited and so for me going to the 5D3 wouldn't be a great option, although I'd love to own the camera. Perhaps its better hoise control wold compensate for the reach limitation.

I don't think I'd buy a Canon 1DX or a Nikon D4; I think I'd buy a D800 or a 5D3 instead. I think the 5D3 will be a great camera. The 7D already is, and amazingly after 2.5 years there's still nothing in its price range that's better.

FF

With 6 frames per second and 61 point autofocus, the 5D-III covers off several of the main features of the 7D.

With the %d-III we still lose the "free telephoto" stuff, but we can buy a 35mm f2 lens and get a really good fast and moderate wide angle, which we can't do with a 7D.

And with the %d-III the new expensive wonderful 100mm f2.8 IS macro turns into a great head and shoulder focal length person-shooting lens.

It could mean a return to ten years ago, when a Nikon F4 with 35mm, 50mm, 1005mm and 80-200 (back then( lenses would shoot everything I wanted.

But will the 7D be replaced with a twisty-back, which is really important for convenient movie making?

And for a lot of semi-casual work, a built-in flash is really nice, although a 270EX on a 5D-III would be even better.

Twice the price of a 7D...

BAK

I do mostly bird photography and to me the 5D3 is not a replacement for the 7D. I certainly do hope that the 7D replacement has the AF that Canon gave the 5D3 though. Pro AF on a 1.6x camera is what I have wanted since Nikon came out with the D300.

Greg

Birdman50 said:

I wonder how Canon will "cripple" the 70D or 7D Mk2 so they won't compete with this model ...

Click to expand...

With a 1.6x sensor of course.

Greg

Whether the 5D-III is a successor to the 7D is entirely up to Canon. For those interested in sports photography, the answer is probably no !
See http://thesportsphotographer.blogspot.com/ for a review.

The 7D has 2. Surely the 5D3 has greater demands for handling data than the 7D?

FF

I agree it becomes an interesting choice for some. For birding and outdoor sports the 1.6 factor likely wins. For me it is mostly indoor sports in venues that are poorly lit. The chance to have a full frame that may be 2 stops better than the 5DII to shoot the games would be great.

Seems like it would pair nicely with my 70-200 2.8 IS II to shoot the indoor games. No more going to the 85 1.8 in the worst of gyms, and the ability to get higher SS at lower ISO in the mediocre gymes. The loss of the crop factor would be no big deal as I always liked the range of my Sig 50-150 for shooting basketball and volleyball. For my one outdoor sport (softball) I would have to see if my 60D with the 70-200 or the 5DIII with my 100-400 would work best.

The 6 fps would be fine for me as I currently use a 60D and have no big complaint.

No hurry though so will have to see how it reviews and what the early owners think of it. Also if the 7DII were to come out before next winter's sports start then would have to see how it compares.

It's not really a review though? It's just an overview of the spec sheet. Until some people have one in their hands to tell us how it performs it's all speculation. I doubt I can ever justify a 1DX, but the 5D III is certainly an interesting proposition. If the AF and specically the AI Servo tracking is better than the 7D, then I'd be willing to trade that off for losing 2 FPS. I don't need the crop factor for the sports stuff I cover.

photoprof said:

Whether the 5D-III is a successor to the 7D is entirely up to Canon. For those interested in sports photography, the answer is probably no !
See http://thesportsphotographer.blogspot.com/ for a review.

Click to expand...

Some folks want and need the 1.6 reach. It isn't a hinderance but a benefit. The 2 bodies are for different styles, one isn't an upgrade path to either. Many are switching from a 7D to a 5D? and I wonder how many are also finding the need to buy extenders or longer fl lenses?

Whatever the advantages of full frame I think APS-C makes more sense for sports, where that bit of extra reach always comes in handy. The 7D will eventually have its own successor, probably when the N brand gets its act together and pushes the boundaries again with the D300s successor. The 7D probably already does everything you need; get it and be happy.

EdCanon said:

. But now my daughter playing soccer and son football, will not be as close as they are with the 1.6 Crop.

Click to expand...

As some had done extensive testing on the point, there is no real world advantage or 7d over 5d2 in reach, actual resolving power is the same. We all know the theoretical advantage so there is no need to repeat it.

What apsc can not replicate is high ISO noise. it is limited by physical size of the sensor, so assuming you are not reach limited, ff always have 2.56 times better ISO performance.

EdCanon said:

So my question is: Is the 5D III going to be the ideal sports camera for both still and video and supperceed the 7D,

Click to expand...

Yes it is.

EdCanon said:

or why would I want to go with the 7D or wait for the 7D II? 5D II is out due to auto focusing issues.

Click to expand...

There are strong indications, which I find reasonable, that there will not be a 7d2, 7d was made to compete at d300 level but it appears that Nikon has moved away from that market bracket, so chances are 70d will be back to the place between 7d and 60d. If so I think it will have 7d af but less fps.

EdCanon said:

Please help, this is an honest question and I am looking for helpful responses. Money is important, but I can afford the 3500 if it is the right choice. I would keep this camera for 4+ years.

Click to expand...

5d3 will serve vey well, many people still use 5d1 with great effect, and that camera is on its 7 th year.