7D and 5Dmk2, anyone own both?

jchin

Does anyone own both a 5Dmk2 and a 7D?

I want to go full-frame and considering that combination.
My current gear is a 40D and 20D as backup.
Since my 20D has been locking up more often then I'd like, I am considering saving for a new body.

I know, you'll ask what I shoot ...
I shoot mostly events (weddings, birthdays, parties, etc.).
I want the higher ISO of the 5D2 for that.

However, I do shoot some school sports events for my little nieces every so often, so the higher frame rate of the 7D would come in handy.

Back to my original question ... does the 5D2 and 7D make a good combination? One to back up the other (primary varies depending on what I have to shoot).

Recommendations and comments greatly appreciated.
Thanks.

tijoseph

jchin wrote:

Does anyone own both a 5Dmk2 and a 7D?

I want to go full-frame and considering that combination.
My current gear is a 40D and 20D as backup.
Since my 20D has been locking up more often then I'd like, I am considering saving for a new body.

I know, you'll ask what I shoot ...
I shoot mostly events (weddings, birthdays, parties, etc.).
I want the higher ISO of the 5D2 for that.

However, I do shoot some school sports events for my little nieces every so often, so the higher frame rate of the 7D would come in handy.

Back to my original question ... does the 5D2 and 7D make a good combination? One to back up the other (primary varies depending on what I have to shoot).

Recommendations and comments greatly appreciated.
Thanks.

I did that exact thing. I like the extra fps of the 7d, and it also allows longer reach with the cropped sensor.

I love my package.

dlplumer

I have both. I use the 5D2 for landscapes, and the 7D for most everything else especially wildlife/bird shoots. Two great cameras

ziggy53

Yes, I think you can make an easy argument for having 2 cameras of differing formats. You get to exploit their individual capabilities and create a system where the sum of the parts is greater than either alone.

I have multiple cameras and multiple formats and use them as I think appropriate, combining them into whatever system I need for the task.

JohnBiggs

I believe they are both the same battery too. Yet another plus.

Malte

jchin wrote:

My current gear is a 40D and 20D as backup.

I know, you'll ask what I shoot ...
Thanks.

I guess another question would be if you've invested heavily in EF-S lenses, since your current bodies are both 1.6 crop factor. I ask partly for selfish reasons, since I'm pondering an either or with tha 5D2 and 7D.

Malte

jchin

Malte wrote:

I guess another question would be if you've invested heavily in EF-S lenses, since your current bodies are both 1.6 crop factor. I ask partly for selfish reasons, since I'm pondering an either or with tha 5D2 and 7D.

Malte

Thankfully, I only have 1 EF-S lens (a 17-85).

Malte

jchin wrote:

Thankfully, I only have 1 EF-S lens (a 17-85).

OK, cool. So if I may hijack a little here, what are the drawbacks to using a crop sensor with "fullframe" lenses?

Malte

jchin

Malte wrote:

OK, cool. So if I may hijack a little here, what are the drawbacks to using a crop sensor with "fullframe" lenses?

Malte

Yeah, my EF 15mm lens does not look wide.
I tried it on my friends 5D2 and was blown away!

tijoseph

Malte wrote:

OK, cool. So if I may hijack a little here, what are the drawbacks to using a crop sensor with "fullframe" lenses?

Malte

Great Pictures

JohnBiggs

Malte wrote:

OK, cool. So if I may hijack a little here, what are the drawbacks to using a crop sensor with "fullframe" lenses?

Malte

There are no drawbacks.

An EF-S 15mm lens and a EF 15mm lens with both perform exactly the same as each other on a crop body assuming the design of the lens is the same.

craig_d

JohnBiggs wrote:

There are no drawbacks.

An EF-S 15mm lens and a EF 15mm lens with both perform exactly the same as each other on a crop body assuming the design of the lens is the same.

Not quite. One difference is that you will tend to get less vignetting with a full-frame lens on a crop-frame sensor, since vignetting is greatest around the perimeter of the image circle. Try comparing the EF-S 55-250mm at 200mm f/5.6 to an EF 70-200mm (any version) at the same settings. The difference isn't subtle. (Of course, the price difference isn't subtle either.)

Another problem with your answer is that the only EF 15mm lens is a fisheye, which behaves very noticeably differently on crop-frame and full-frame cameras. The fisheye effect is stronger toward the edges of the image, which are exactly the part that the crop-frame sensor crops off. I do not recommend the EF 15mm fisheye for crop-frame cameras. For a good crop-frame fisheye, you have to resort to a third-party lens such as the Sigma 10mm since Canon does not offer one.

The original question here was a bit vague. It could mean, "What are the drawbacks of using a crop-frame sensor (compared to a full-frame sensor) with full-frame lenses," or it could mean, "What are the drawbacks of using a crop-frame sensor with full-frame lenses (as opposed to crop-frame lenses)". So far we have dealt with the latter, but let's consider the former as well.

The difference between crop-frame and full-frame sensors with a full-frame lens is simply that about half the frame is cropped off by a crop-frame sensor, while a full-frame sensor gets the whole image. This can be nice on the telephoto end, since it means a 200mm lens gets a field of view more like a 320mm lens. On the other hand, it sucks at the wide-angle end. The widest rectilinear lens Canon offers for full-frame is the EF 14mm f/2.8L. If you put this on a crop-frame camera, it acts more like a 22mm lens. To get the same field of view on a crop-frame camera, you would need an 8mm rectilinear lens, but the widest lens Canon offers for crop-frame is the EF-S 10-22mm.

One minor drawback to using a crop-frame sensor (with any kind of lens) is that the fact that it uses less of the image circle (along with its greater pixel density) makes the most of any aberrations in the lens. Shoot the same scene with the same lens, framed identically (with focal length or shooting position adjusted to compensate), with a 7D and a 5D2, and you will find that any CA in the lens will be more obvious with the 7D. Fortunately, correcting this in PP is not difficult if you're shooting RAW.

We could also talk about the inherently inferior high-ISO noise of crop-frame sensors, but enough for now.

JohnBiggs

craig_d wrote:

Not quite. One difference is that you will tend to get less vignetting with a full-frame lens on a crop-frame sensor, since vignetting is greatest around the perimeter of the image circle. Try comparing the EF-S 55-250mm at 200mm f/5.6 to an EF 70-200mm (any version) at the same settings. The difference isn't subtle. (Of course, the price difference isn't subtle either.) .

Umm, those obviously have different optical designs as well. The point being putting a full-frame capable lens on a crop body doesn't change the way the light travels through the glass.

craig_d wrote:

Another problem with your answer is that the only EF 15mm lens is a fisheye, which behaves very noticeably differently on crop-frame and full-frame cameras. The fisheye effect is stronger toward the edges of the image, which are exactly the part that the crop-frame sensor crops off. I do not recommend the EF 15mm fisheye for crop-frame cameras. For a good crop-frame fisheye, you have to resort to a third-party lens such as the Sigma 10mm since Canon does not offer one..

I was talking in general/hypothetical lens terms. I wasn't talking about specific canon lenses nor did I say the lenses were Canon at all. However I knew when I posted that someone would stumble because such a comparison doesn't actually exist.

I still say the answer to his question exactly as asked would be 'there is no difference'. Changing the size of the sensor does not change the physical properties of the glass or lens.

Malte

I think I got that using fullframe capable lenses wouldn't worsen the results of the crop sensor. I suppose I was asking the other way around, won't the crop sensor worsen the results of fullframe capable lenses?

When using a smaller sensor than the optics are made for, you have to get light going through the lens hitting outside of the sensor, right?

Malte

craig_d

Malte wrote:

I think I got that using fullframe capable lenses wouldn't worsen the results of the crop sensor. I suppose I was asking the other way around, won't the crop sensor worsen the results of fullframe capable lenses?

When using a smaller sensor than the optics are made for, you have to get light going through the lens hitting outside of the sensor, right?

But that's true in any case. Any lens produces a circular image, and the sensor uses only a rectangular portion of it. There is always light falling outside the sensor. The crop sensor just uses less of the image than a full-frame sensor would. As John notes, a smaller sensor doesn't change the behavior of the light coming through the lens. If it's a great full-frame lens, it will be great on a crop-frame camera too. The only issues are the ones I already mentioned that pertain to the loss of the outer portion of the image: wide-angle lenses seem less wide, and fisheye lenses seem less fishy.

ziggy53

Malte wrote:

I think I got that using fullframe capable lenses wouldn't worsen the results of the crop sensor. I suppose I was asking the other way around, won't the crop sensor worsen the results of fullframe capable lenses?

When using a smaller sensor than the optics are made for, you have to get light going through the lens hitting outside of the sensor, right?

Malte

The normal answer is that since a crop camera is using the center portion of the image, and since the center portion is generally the sharpest, using a FF lens on a cop body is simply using the "sweet spot" of the lens and the results may be better than using the same lens on a FF camera.

However a FF camera generally has larger photo-sites and that means they require less resolving power to produce the same image quality, compared to a crop camera of the same pixel count.

Both arguments are rather over-simplified, and exceptions abound.

As far as the FF lens and a larger projected image circle, if the camera body is properly designed, with things like flocking and light absorbing matte black paints, the results from a crop body should be no worse than using the same lens on a FF body. A crop body and a FF body from the same manufacturer will generally have the same sized mirror box.

jmphotocraft

I will probably be replacing my 1DIIN with a 7D (II?) next year. I also have a 5DII. I use my 5DII for almost everything, and the 1D just for sports. I don't do BIF.

When I get the 7D, I won't be buying a 17-55/2.8IS. I'll just use my 24-70L on it when I need a shorter lens, and put up with the effective 38mm wide end. I think that is the only drawback to owning this pair of cameras together. Otherwise, you'll have a great combo to cover everything. You just won't have complete redundancy. For me this will be ok because in a pinch the 5DII can do sports and the 7D can do low light, but neither quite as well as the other.

When Canon finally builds a D700 beater (1D AF in a FF body with 8-10fps and about 16-18mp... the mythical EOS 3D??), I'll have one of those.