Huh? I've not seen people say this. I know loads of photogs using the 7D for these situations. I've shot my friend's 7D and I'd have no problem using it. Is a 5D (or other cameras) better for these types of shots? Sure but I'd hardly say the 7D is a bad choice. And, again, I'm not seeing, "overwhelming advice given everywhere," saying this.
There are lots of examples of the 7D in low light-high ISO settings and it does just fine. Also lots of examples of portraits shot with a 7D and the look fine as well. Again, not saying it's the BEST camera out there but it's not a POS.
Maybe I am just exposed to a higher volume of "advice" than most. I'm a co-leader of the largest group on Facebook for "Photog Shootout" in southern California, one of the most active members of the school, and a FORMER participant in many other online communities including DPR which can definitely get ugly. So, I'm just speaking from personal experience....
Here's the deal: I shoot mostly portraits and low-light theatre. I'd love a 5dII for its high ISO ability. Top of my list of Canon choices.
I don't have the $2500 to spend on it (ok, it's dropped a bit recently, but it's still usually over 2K)
The next best choice - FOR ME - was a 7d.
I've been really happy with it, and it has significantly outperformed my Xsi and 50d in low light. I wasn't happy shooting the xsi over 800, or the 50d over 1600 and even those were diasppointing; I regularly shoot the 7d at 2000 and have been entirely happy with the results. It's not as good in low light as a 5dII would be, but since I can't afford the 5dII, it's a moot point. If I were making my entire living at this, I could justify investing in the 5dII, or even one of the 1d's, but I'm not and I can't. So I made what I feel was the best choice within the limtations of budget.
Having the built-in flash controller is pretty nice, too ;D
Exactly. The 7D is such a well-rounded camera, I'm just surprised that people don't recommend it more often. I too shoot a variety of different things, including theater, weddings, portraits, and lots of other stuff. I do just fine with a crop sensor, and I actually prefer it because it is a bit lighter and has much better focus point spread. The focus points being all over the viewfinder is really something special, especially for Nikon since I can link spot metering to the AF points when things get REALLY nuts.
All in all I guess I'm just that guy who always recommends something other than the most common. I CONSTANTLY see people dismissing the 1.3x crop bodies and opting for the 5D mk2, because they think they absolutely must have that tiny extra bit of ISO performance and DOF. When for a wedding photojournalist, a uesd 1D mk3 is such a better idea than a new 5D mk2, and I think a 1D mk3 is the same price if not less now! So I constantly find myself telling people to check out the 1D mk3, or the 7D, and they always end up thanking me later. (Usually part-time shooters who yes, maybe do a little portraiture or low-light photography, but usually find themselves shooting misc stuff that really does benefit form better autofocus and overall speed...)
Just my opinionated opinion, of course. All we're doing is giving advice here, not writing a constitution. ;-)
Maybe I am just exposed to a higher volume of "advice" than most. I'm a co-leader of the largest group on Facebook for "Photog Shootout" in southern California, one of the most active members of the school, and a FORMER participant in many other online communities including DPR which can definitely get ugly. So, I'm just speaking from personal experience....
I guess you are more, "informed," then so what's your point?
I hang out in lots of the same places most photogs do. I've not seen the complaints you're saying you're seeing (not saying you're not seeing them). There is nothing wrong with a 7D for these things and LOTS of pros use them with great success. Doesn't mean a 5D wouldn't be better (I never said that). However, to (essentially) say everyone says don't use it for these things just isn't true regardless of what volume of advice you're exposed to or what you're a co-leader of, etc.
Also, I have no idea what equipment you have (or don't have) experience with. Have you shot with a 7D before? If so, and you still come to this conclusion, that's fine. However, if you've never shot with one, how can you talk like you know it's not good for these things?
I guess you are more, "informed," then so what's your point?
I hang out in lots of the same places most photogs do. I've not seen the complaints you're saying you're seeing (not saying you're not seeing them). There is nothing wrong with a 7D for these things and LOTS of pros use them with great success. Doesn't mean a 5D wouldn't be better (I never said that). However, to (essentially) say everyone says don't use it for these things just isn't true regardless of what volume of advice you're exposed to or what you're a co-leader of, etc.
Also, I have no idea what equipment you have (or don't have) experience with. Have you shot with a 7D before? If so, and you still come to this conclusion, that's fine. However, if you've never shot with one, how can you talk like you know it's not good for these things?
* I've shot with (but have not owned) every Canon and Nikon camera since the D1X and the 10D. I'm a Nikon shooter but I just recently shot a wedding with the 7D and 5D mk2 side by side.
* You're right, it's a fallacy to say that EVERYONE poo-poos the 7D and only recommends the 5D mk2. But lots of people ARE quick to dismiss any crop sensor camera in favor of a full-frame camera.
* It may not be so much the advice given, but the pre-conceived notions held by those SEEKING advice- I can absolutely say that 80-90% of the time I get asked about cameras by someone SEEKING advice, they come to me with a fear of crop sensors that often leads them to buy the wrong camera.
* So, whether or not a blanket of 7D nay-saying is publicly visible, I think we can all agree that a stigma, whether real or imaginary, still exists among those who consider themselves "serious" portrait or low-light event shooters.
I've owned the 5Dc, 7D, and 5DII all together, and have found the following:
1) The 5Dc has the best optically sharp IQ of the 3, due to the weaker AA filter. I really enjoy files through ISO 3200 from this camera, and is still a great value for the $1K mark.
2) The 7D starts to match the 5Dc in regards to ISO at 3200 and then walks away at the higher ISOs. I love the versatility of the 7D with proper glass.
3) The 5DII obviously beats both of these at all ISOs by a stop or so, but at higher ISOs, the difference becomes less. If you shoot raw on both, then zero out the NR in DPP on both, then convert to JPG and compare, the difference becomes less noticeable as compared to the 7D. The NR values that Canon buries into the raw for the 5DII and the 7D shows that Canon makes the lum. noise reduction more aggressive on the 5DII, but is more aggressive with the chroma reduction on the 7D. In all 4 high ISO noise reduction values, there are still noise reduction going on in DPP when you convert to JPG, unless you zero these out.
When I was done, I ended up selling the 5DII because I could not justify $2K in equipment that had a stop or less better ISO quality, and fewer of the features I needed from the 7D.
Top As, star crossed lovers, rivalry for the hand of the virgin, sword fights, thrown gauntlets, shoot outs... mmm high operatic drama! Even the 40D has a cameo role! I love that!!
Hmm...if you're only going to buy 1 Camera....then i would go for 5DMkII.
If you are planning to buy another body later on down the line.....then a 5D and 60D 'at this time'. I think
the latest cropped Canon is better spent (bang4buck) on a 60D then a 7D. With that said, 5DMkIII is likely here next year. If you buy the cropped
now, then you can get a newer fullframe later. If you're more into stills, i would lean more on a FF. If you're more into video, its a bit more even
but i personally would still go FF even though it doesn't have all the video features of the 60D/7D. Hope this helps.
IMO, a serious hobbyist or above, should have at least 2 bodies (Cropped and FF). I'm even thinking maybe 3 with the micro 4/3 sensor, but can't
exactly justify that just yet.
Hmm...if you're only going to buy 1 Camera....then i would go for 5DMkII.
If you are planning to buy another body later on down the line.....then a 5D and 60D 'at this time'. I think
the latest cropped Canon is better spent (bang4buck) on a 60D then a 7D. With that said, 5DMkIII is likely here next year. If you buy the cropped
now, then you can get a newer fullframe later. If you're more into stills, i would lean more on a FF. If you're more into video, its a bit more even
but i personally would still go FF even though it doesn't have all the video features of the 60D/7D. Hope this helps.
IMO, a serious hobbyist or above, should have at least 2 bodies (Cropped and FF). I'm even thinking maybe 3 with the micro 4/3 sensor, but can't
exactly justify that just yet.
There is a $400 difference between the 60D and 7D, and the feature sets of the 7D is well worth that for many folks. I wouldn't expect a 5DIII until a year from now, the next announcement will be all around the 1Ds MKIV, and they would not also release a 5DIII.
7D, 70-200L IS, 17-55 IS 2.8, 150 2.8 macro, 12-24, 100-400L, 85 1.8, 50 1.4
* I've shot with (but have not owned) every Canon and Nikon camera since the D1X and the 10D. I'm a Nikon shooter but I just recently shot a wedding with the 7D and 5D mk2 side by side.
* You're right, it's a fallacy to say that EVERYONE poo-poos the 7D and only recommends the 5D mk2. But lots of people ARE quick to dismiss any crop sensor camera in favor of a full-frame camera.
* It may not be so much the advice given, but the pre-conceived notions held by those SEEKING advice- I can absolutely say that 80-90% of the time I get asked about cameras by someone SEEKING advice, they come to me with a fear of crop sensors that often leads them to buy the wrong camera.
* So, whether or not a blanket of 7D nay-saying is publicly visible, I think we can all agree that a stigma, whether real or imaginary, still exists among those who consider themselves "serious" portrait or low-light event shooters.
=Matt=
Fair enough.
This makes much more sense. There is, however, a difference between saying something like the 7D is no good for this type of work versus a crop sensor (in general) is not. There is a perception (based in reality) crop sensors aren't as good as FF for this type of work. That perception is changing lately from what I can see (again, based in reality) as today's crop sensors get better and better. I don't see the crop sensors getting to be as good as a FF for this type of work anytime soon--if ever.
With all of that said, if money were no object, I'd use a 5D to shoot portraits, weddings, etc and a 1D for my sports shooting (although a 7D does a fine job with sports just not quite as good as a 1D from what I can tell).
Glad we have all of this settled...enjoy your weekend.
This makes much more sense. There is, however, a difference between saying something like the 7D is no good for this type of work versus a crop sensor (in general) is not. There is a perception (based in reality) crop sensors aren't as good as FF for this type of work. That perception is changing lately from what I can see (again, based in reality) as today's crop sensors get better and better. I don't see the crop sensors getting to be as good as a FF for this type of work anytime soon--if ever.
With all of that said, if money were no object, I'd use a 5D to shoot portraits, weddings, etc and a 1D for my sports shooting (although a 7D does a fine job with sports just not quite as good as a 1D from what I can tell).
Glad we have all of this settled...enjoy your weekend.
The issue is FF and crop will both progress but when crop sensors can do better high ISO work than the original 5D (I don't have much 7D experience but the D7000 looks to be there) when is enough enough? Same goes for resolution.
The issue is FF and crop will both progress but when crop sensors can do better high ISO work than the original 5D (I don't have much 7D experience but the D7000 looks to be there) when is enough enough? Same goes for resolution.
Enough for me is native 24x36 images that's my set-for-life res (I do a lot of artwork)
Enough for me is native 24x36 images that's my set-for-life res (I do a lot of artwork)
Tell me about it.....then we get into optics being the limiting factor, I wonder what the top primes can actually resolve for detail. Maybe I need to take that 100+ MP APS-H Canon for a spin and find out
MF lenses are cheating though.....bigger and well amazing. Has anyone tested the resolution limits of top 35mm glass?
From what I understand glass is leagues ahead of sensor resolution, not by any tiny portion either (think multiples) I have a 5D MKII, and it takes 12x18 @300DPI natively, and glass is already way ahead of it ( I don't remember exact numbers but I remember reading a technical lab test and sharp lenses were like... 3x or 4x the resolve power of any sensor) If its already that far, a 42MP 24x36 isn't going to be limited by any lens by any means any time soon... any!
This makes much more sense. There is, however, a difference between saying something like the 7D is no good for this type of work versus a crop sensor (in general) is not. There is a perception (based in reality) crop sensors aren't as good as FF for this type of work. That perception is changing lately from what I can see (again, based in reality) as today's crop sensors get better and better. I don't see the crop sensors getting to be as good as a FF for this type of work anytime soon--if ever.
With all of that said, if money were no object, I'd use a 5D to shoot portraits, weddings, etc and a 1D for my sports shooting (although a 7D does a fine job with sports just not quite as good as a 1D from what I can tell).
Glad we have all of this settled...enjoy your weekend.
Very true. I guess what most people overlook is the fact that just because FF will always be better than crop, that doesn't mean with each generation crop sensors get better and better and have risen to standards that would make most every hobbyist very happy...
Thanks for everyone's thoughts - though the thread did seem to spend most of its time on tangents.
Thought I would let you all know, I bought the 5DmkII today. I know it wasn't on the initial roster, but I got a great deal at my local store and I am SOOO happy about it. I added the 24-105 f4L and the 70-200 f4. Life is good.
Well, if I could expense a second system.....
It would be a 5DII, 24-105 and nifty fifty. At the moment, I love the E-30, love the Pen but see Olympus is becoming irrelevant in the DSLR market. I don't need sports performance (but the 5DII is doubtless good enough for me if I ever need it for this). I'd love to see a full frame Pen like concept that is vaguely affordable (i.e. doesn't have a red dot and demand manual focus).
Enjoy your new kit. Enjoy your older kit, and don't look back in anger (as a song from my part of the world puts it)......
Thanks for everyone's thoughts - though the thread did seem to spend most of its time on tangents.
Thought I would let you all know, I bought the 5DmkII today. I know it wasn't on the initial roster, but I got a great deal at my local store and I am SOOO happy about it. I added the 24-105 f4L and the 70-200 f4. Life is good.
Comments
~giggle~
Total threadnap (but a good-humoured one)
I haven't thought about that scene in years, but you made me go and find it on youtube....
"he said Jehovah"
/threadnap
Exactly. The 7D is such a well-rounded camera, I'm just surprised that people don't recommend it more often. I too shoot a variety of different things, including theater, weddings, portraits, and lots of other stuff. I do just fine with a crop sensor, and I actually prefer it because it is a bit lighter and has much better focus point spread. The focus points being all over the viewfinder is really something special, especially for Nikon since I can link spot metering to the AF points when things get REALLY nuts.
All in all I guess I'm just that guy who always recommends something other than the most common. I CONSTANTLY see people dismissing the 1.3x crop bodies and opting for the 5D mk2, because they think they absolutely must have that tiny extra bit of ISO performance and DOF. When for a wedding photojournalist, a uesd 1D mk3 is such a better idea than a new 5D mk2, and I think a 1D mk3 is the same price if not less now! So I constantly find myself telling people to check out the 1D mk3, or the 7D, and they always end up thanking me later. (Usually part-time shooters who yes, maybe do a little portraiture or low-light photography, but usually find themselves shooting misc stuff that really does benefit form better autofocus and overall speed...)
Just my opinionated opinion, of course. All we're doing is giving advice here, not writing a constitution. ;-)
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
I guess you are more, "informed," then so what's your point?
I hang out in lots of the same places most photogs do. I've not seen the complaints you're saying you're seeing (not saying you're not seeing them). There is nothing wrong with a 7D for these things and LOTS of pros use them with great success. Doesn't mean a 5D wouldn't be better (I never said that). However, to (essentially) say everyone says don't use it for these things just isn't true regardless of what volume of advice you're exposed to or what you're a co-leader of, etc.
Also, I have no idea what equipment you have (or don't have) experience with. Have you shot with a 7D before? If so, and you still come to this conclusion, that's fine. However, if you've never shot with one, how can you talk like you know it's not good for these things?
Facebook Fan Page
Blog
* I've shot with (but have not owned) every Canon and Nikon camera since the D1X and the 10D. I'm a Nikon shooter but I just recently shot a wedding with the 7D and 5D mk2 side by side.
* You're right, it's a fallacy to say that EVERYONE poo-poos the 7D and only recommends the 5D mk2. But lots of people ARE quick to dismiss any crop sensor camera in favor of a full-frame camera.
* It may not be so much the advice given, but the pre-conceived notions held by those SEEKING advice- I can absolutely say that 80-90% of the time I get asked about cameras by someone SEEKING advice, they come to me with a fear of crop sensors that often leads them to buy the wrong camera.
* So, whether or not a blanket of 7D nay-saying is publicly visible, I think we can all agree that a stigma, whether real or imaginary, still exists among those who consider themselves "serious" portrait or low-light event shooters.
=Matt=
(5D mk2 and 35 f/1.4 L... SOOC JPG...)
(7D and 17-55 EFS...)
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
1) The 5Dc has the best optically sharp IQ of the 3, due to the weaker AA filter. I really enjoy files through ISO 3200 from this camera, and is still a great value for the $1K mark.
2) The 7D starts to match the 5Dc in regards to ISO at 3200 and then walks away at the higher ISOs. I love the versatility of the 7D with proper glass.
3) The 5DII obviously beats both of these at all ISOs by a stop or so, but at higher ISOs, the difference becomes less. If you shoot raw on both, then zero out the NR in DPP on both, then convert to JPG and compare, the difference becomes less noticeable as compared to the 7D. The NR values that Canon buries into the raw for the 5DII and the 7D shows that Canon makes the lum. noise reduction more aggressive on the 5DII, but is more aggressive with the chroma reduction on the 7D. In all 4 high ISO noise reduction values, there are still noise reduction going on in DPP when you convert to JPG, unless you zero these out.
When I was done, I ended up selling the 5DII because I could not justify $2K in equipment that had a stop or less better ISO quality, and fewer of the features I needed from the 7D.
My 7D vs 5DII High ISO comparison on POTN
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=930196&highlight=mini-review
5DC at 3200 example
7D at 3200 example
7D at 6400 example
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
If you are planning to buy another body later on down the line.....then a 5D and 60D 'at this time'. I think
the latest cropped Canon is better spent (bang4buck) on a 60D then a 7D. With that said, 5DMkIII is likely here next year. If you buy the cropped
now, then you can get a newer fullframe later. If you're more into stills, i would lean more on a FF. If you're more into video, its a bit more even
but i personally would still go FF even though it doesn't have all the video features of the 60D/7D. Hope this helps.
IMO, a serious hobbyist or above, should have at least 2 bodies (Cropped and FF). I'm even thinking maybe 3 with the micro 4/3 sensor, but can't
exactly justify that just yet.
There is a $400 difference between the 60D and 7D, and the feature sets of the 7D is well worth that for many folks. I wouldn't expect a 5DIII until a year from now, the next announcement will be all around the 1Ds MKIV, and they would not also release a 5DIII.
Fair enough.
This makes much more sense. There is, however, a difference between saying something like the 7D is no good for this type of work versus a crop sensor (in general) is not. There is a perception (based in reality) crop sensors aren't as good as FF for this type of work. That perception is changing lately from what I can see (again, based in reality) as today's crop sensors get better and better. I don't see the crop sensors getting to be as good as a FF for this type of work anytime soon--if ever.
With all of that said, if money were no object, I'd use a 5D to shoot portraits, weddings, etc and a 1D for my sports shooting (although a 7D does a fine job with sports just not quite as good as a 1D from what I can tell).
Glad we have all of this settled...enjoy your weekend.
Facebook Fan Page
Blog
The issue is FF and crop will both progress but when crop sensors can do better high ISO work than the original 5D (I don't have much 7D experience but the D7000 looks to be there) when is enough enough? Same goes for resolution.
Enough for me is native 24x36 images
Tell me about it.....then we get into optics being the limiting factor, I wonder what the top primes can actually resolve for detail. Maybe I need to take that 100+ MP APS-H Canon for a spin and find out
MF lenses are cheating though.....bigger and well amazing. Has anyone tested the resolution limits of top 35mm glass?
From what I understand glass is leagues ahead of sensor resolution, not by any tiny portion either (think multiples) I have a 5D MKII, and it takes 12x18 @300DPI natively, and glass is already way ahead of it ( I don't remember exact numbers but I remember reading a technical lab test and sharp lenses were like... 3x or 4x the resolve power of any sensor) If its already that far, a 42MP 24x36 isn't going to be limited by any lens by any means any time soon... any!
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Thought I would let you all know, I bought the 5DmkII today. I know it wasn't on the initial roster, but I got a great deal at my local store and I am SOOO happy about it. I added the 24-105 f4L and the 70-200 f4. Life is good.
http://www.jonathanswinton.com
http://www.swintoncounseling.com
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
It would be a 5DII, 24-105 and nifty fifty. At the moment, I love the E-30, love the Pen but see Olympus is becoming irrelevant in the DSLR market. I don't need sports performance (but the 5DII is doubtless good enough for me if I ever need it for this). I'd love to see a full frame Pen like concept that is vaguely affordable (i.e. doesn't have a red dot and demand manual focus).
Enjoy your new kit. Enjoy your older kit, and don't look back in anger (as a song from my part of the world puts it)......