I have both, I shoot birds and wildlife, and I'm thinking about selling the 7DII. If you are interested, check out birdphotographers.net and look for Arash Hezeghi's thoughts on the 5DIV vs 7DII. In short, the AF is far more reliable in the 5DIV. The 7DII is known to have a "twitchy" AF and in my short experience, the 5DIV AF yield far higher yield rate of in focus images.
The only issue I find with this is that it doesn't fit my experience with my 7D2 which I have been shooting with since November 2014. The AF is not twitchy. Also, I have been shooting with the 5D4 this week (from Canon CPS) and I don't find the AF yield any higher. In fact, since all the AF squares are crammed into the center compared to those on the 7D2, the hit rate might be lower. The IQ on the 5D4 is great though and compared to my 6D, the 5D4 is certainly a big plus and worth adding to the kit. But I think there are those who have good 7D2 and there are those who don't, and thus it depends, when comparing to the 5D4. Certainly, if you don't have or want a 600mm f/4, the 7D2 (if it works) is a worthy option since you can get the 100-400 m2 or the 400 f/4 DO2 as to use with the 7D2.
While I'll grant that there are some number of 7D2's that AF is an issue I have not read anywhere that the 7D2 AF is the equal of the 1Dx or 1Dx2. On the other side there are many who consider the 5D4 AF the equal of the 1Dx2 other than FPS and with a 2xtele attached.
Who said anything about the 7D2 AF being the equal to the 1Dx? I am not responding here to the OP but to the poster saying there is some twitchy business with the 7D2s AF as though it is a known fact or something. It is not. In any case, I'm not making any statement about 7D2 being better than 1Dx 1 or 2.
If those two scenarios are correct the 7D2 AF is not the equal of the 5D4. I think many are enamoured with the 10fps of the 7D2 and somehow equate that to better AF.
What? Please provide some data that shows without doubt that that 5D4's AF is better than that of the 7D2. The 7D2 provides wide coverage of its frame while the 5D4 does not. 4 and 8 point expansion and the other modes cover less of the frame. This equates to making it harder to get focus squares on moving subjects. In my mind that doesn't make them better at all... there certainly could be other factors like CPU speed and such, but on the surface, other than price, there isn't any convincing evidence to suggest that the more expensive bodies have better AF.
I have a 7d2, 5D4 and 1Dx2 and had a 1Dx. My 7D2 AF is not the equal of the 5D4 in either accuracy or keeper rate. (BIF, aircraft and race vehicles.)
This is your opinion, but perhaps you have a flakey 7D2. I used the 1Dx2 earlier this year and I didn't find myself overly impressed with its focus tracking in comparison to the 7D2...it felt very much like the 7D2 but with faster FPS. In fact, the frames are so different in terms of coverage that I find it difficult to even make a realistic comparison. Also, after reading claims on these forums I'm finding it hard to trust people to just claim - without proof - that accuracy and hit rate are better, especially for large objects like aircraft and vehicles.
Since you own these more expensive bodies perhaps you have some need within yourself to believe they offer better AF. Frankly, I too "expect" the AF to be better in the more expensive bodies, but from my use so far, I'm certainly not at all convinced of it. I hope like heck it is true though as I'm thinking of buying my next FF body....and I want some benefit for the extra cash (beyond IQ, I mean).
--
Blake in Vancouver
Canon and Zeiss Stuff. Mac Stuff & annoying PC & Windows stuff.
