Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: RBland on August 28, 2012, 03:26:31 pm
-
My old 40D needs replacing. My budget will only allow a 5D Mark II body at the top limit of what I can spend. I know both the 5D Mark II and 7D, another consideration, are "long in the tooth" as far as digital goes, and I have a large set of Canon L series lenses.
Any good advice or opinions? Are the 5D II or 7D still good buys or would that be a bad move?
Will be used for mostly landscapes and other tighter, landscape-ish, (not close-up), nature photographs.
-
A 7D is probably a better buy at this point than the 5D Mk. II
-
Opinions vary on this. I would consider the 5D MKII over the 7D especially if you are shooting landscapes. I don't prefer Canon's Crop factor on the 7D.
I still have a 5D MKII and it has been a very good camera for me over the years. You can find them now new for under 1.9K. You are looking at 21mp vs 18, however the 21 to me is much cleaner. I never liked the 7D due to what I felt were higher noise levels. I realize Canon is releasing (may already have) a new firmware that is going to give new life to the 7D, but I still prefer full frame.
A few things I would consider on the 5D MKII:
1. Full frame sensor
2. Cleaner files, less noise at least in the iso 100 to iso 800 range
3. Ability to turn off long noise reduction (as I recall this is not an option on the 7D)
I would also consider waiting until after Photokina, coming up soon. Nikon is due to announce the D600, everything seems to point to 24mp for the D600, final price is still up in the air. However it may force Canon to re-price the 5D MKII even lower.
Both cameras are old and longer in the tooth, but the 5D can still do a very good job.
Paul
-
The 5D Mark II is still an excellent camera. I, along with thousands of other photographers, still shoot with it daily. I bought mine last winter, knowing it was at the end of the product cycle, when the price with the 24-105 came down below $2800. I'd never owned a full frame digital camera, instead using 40D bodies for personal work and 1D Mark IV bodies for actual work.
The 5D2 is significantly better than the 40D in pretty much every possible way, with the minor exception of shooting speed. Autofocus is decent, not the same as the 1D series cameras, but I'm getting very good results. Better than I expected, to be honest. The files are lovely, even at high ISO speeds. The 24-105 is an excellent lens, and joins my 70-200/4 for personal work and days when I want to carry lighter gear.
Now I use the 5D2 in general rotation at work, mixed in with the 1D bodies. The larger sensor gives me a different look than the 1.3x APS-H sensors in the 1D4's, and the files are comparable in quality. I use it for portraits, architecture and landscapes, and general photojournalism. Not sports, though.
If I needed another camera, I'd almost certainly buy another 5D Mark II. While the Mark III is newer and "better," for me it wouldn't justify the extra $1500 over the Mark II right now. I really didn't expect to like this camera as much as I do.
EDIT: If you own EF-S lenses, that might be a reason to look at the 7D. However, having tested a 7D when it came out, I'm much happier with the files from the 5D2
-
Is the 5DII still a good buy, you ask? I knew this question would come eventually, but so soon?
-
I have a 5D M3 and M2. For most landscapes, I use them interchangeably. I use whichever one has the lens I need. I expect to continue using the M2 for many more years. If the M2 died, would I buy another? Probably not, but only because the M2 and M3 have enough control differences that I find it frustrating at times to bounce between them. Before the M3 was announced I almost bought a second M2 just because I liked it so much.
-
I am putting off the decision to buy a second body, while my 60D is still within expected shutter actuation lifetime. The 5DII seems to get good marks from users and comparative reviews for low to medium ISO use IQ, and if you aren't doing sports or wildlife shots requiring best autofocus and still frame rate (5DIII improvements), it would seem to make sense to save a few bucks.
-
Dear Sir,
To give you an answer - being owner to both 5DMK2 and 7D I would still say - please consider the Canon EOS 5D Mark II before even thinking on 7D!
What the users above have said I can fully agree! I now on almost ONLY use 5DMKII because of the much cleaner files (using only RAW full files) together with high-end L-lenses makes this combination exquisite and makes me very happy with post-processing the images in the end of the day!
So I would choose 5DMKII and for the saved money buy another excellent Canon L-lens to the very good camera body of Canon EOS 5D MKII!
Happy shooting!
All the Best,
Charl
-
i have been using 7D and 5D2 and only use the 7D for action and when i need the crop factor for wildlife. the 5D2 files are that much better
and with a new 5D3 i will use the 7D even less
-
For general photography 5D II wins hands down.
If your specific requirements include a lot of action, wildlife, and bird photography then reasses.
7D may fit the bill then but 5D III would be substantially better.
Of course the 1D series cameras are specifically designed for the purpose.
My $0.02 worth
Tony Jay
-
For general photography 5D II wins hands down.
If your specific requirements include a lot of action, wildlife, and bird photography then reasses.
7D may fit the bill then but 5D III would be substantially better.
Of course the 1D series cameras are specifically designed for the purpose.
My $0.02 worth
Tony Jay
Totally agree with this... I would only use the 7D for long tele work (like wildlife) or when I would need good AF performance.