Canon dSLR: 7d vs. 1d2 vs.... ahh!

aperture.photo

Hello all- I've been poring over these forums for several months now, and every time I think I've come to a decision about which body I should get, I read another post and reconsider.

Here's my situation: I am a high school senior with a growing local photo business. I shoot sports for my high school, event portraits (my school's formals, etc.), receptions and parties, and of course landscapes. I've used a 450d since I started (and sometimes borrow friends' 40/50d), and I've gotten some great images but I just need more of everything...

-for sports, better AF, more FPS, and low-light (I shoot night football and basketball, which are a nightmare- 450d is tough at 800ISO and useless at 1600)
-for events, better low-light and AF
-for landscape, more megapixels

Weather sealing and HD video would be nice but arent game-breakers.

That said, here are my options... I'd like to spend under $1500.

1. Used 30/40/50d- a step up in everything, maybe not worth the cost of upgrading. New 60d doesnt seem much better than 50d

2. used 5d classic- better lowlight, but not much better AF or FPS for sports. Also, lose some reach w the full frame, but for events and portraits the IQ would be nice

3. used 1d2/2n- the AF and FPS would be great for sports. Lose MP but thats not big. Not sure how the low-light compares to the XXds above or the 7d below, and how good this would be for landscape/event

4. new 7d- I'm leaning towards this. lots of MP, FPS, and i hear good AF. Low-light and IQ better than the others (except 5d, for events?)

Essentially, would I be lacking for any types of the shooting I'm doing with the 7d? It seems like the jack of all trades.

Thanks so much... any insight is appreciated.

stirinthesauce

I'll throw a wrench in.

What about a used 5d (for portraits and landscapes) and a used 40d (action/sports and events). That would run around 1500, give you a bit more versatility and a extra body (in case one fails). If you search diligently, you could even go 5d and 1d2 which would be ideal (in my world) for versatility. However that might stretch that 1500 budget by 100-200 up.

TheCheesehead

I just bought a used 1D2N for 9 hundo and it's great for well lit sports, outdoor portraits.. Tried it for hockey @ 1600 and it blows, too much noise. That said, I only use the NR in PSE8, maybe if I bought better NR software it would be OK. I plan on getting a 5D also someday.

gecko0

Another point of view: Warranty vs. cost of repairs for the used models. If you spend $xxx on a used body, are you able to cover repairs if needed? Obviously this is more of a CYA, but if you go 7D, you'll have a warranty along with all its benefits. Peace of mind.

Cameron

I'd vote for the 7D. It's going to be an upgrade in each of your categories AND it adds video functionality. The high-ISO performance of the original 5D and the 7D are fairly comparable and the 7D has much better auto-focus and higher FPS, something that would be valuable for sports shooting.

TheCheesehead's suggestion has merit, especially if you don't have regular access to a backup body.

If you're looking for ONE camera that will improve upon what you have in every area (within your budget), go for the 7D.

NeilL

You can't put the 30D in the same class as later bodies. The 40D was an order of magnitude improvement on it. Surely you know this??!!

Neil

bbeck4x4

I just ordered a 7D from canon, it is the customer loyalty program, it's refurbished with a 90 day warranty. 1-866-443-8002
40D - $559.20
50D - $719.20
7D - $1119.20
5D MkII - $1679.20

+ your local tax

all you need to qualify is a broken canon camera even a film camera qualifies.

divamum

Holy Cow - canon loyalty is now doing the 5dII for that price? I think I need to hope my xsi breaks...

ETA: although a 5dII probably is a less appropriate camera for the OP's needs than the 7d, given the sports-shooting. I have a 7d which I love - it really is a great all-round camera, and the AF is wonderful.

Matthew Saville

The 7D is hands-down Canon's best camera that has ever MSRP'd for less than $4,000. Of course you could buy a used 1D mk3 for almost the same price as a new 7D, but the 7D is just so versatile, I can't pass it up.

It's got the resolution for landscapes, and unlike any 1-series, the battery grip is optional which any go-light adventure photographer will appreciate.

It's got the FPS and good enough AF for sports, in fact the gap in technology advancements might put the 7D almost on par with the 1D mk2N...

It's got the ISO for low-light photography, as long as you have the right lenses or come prepared with a flash setup. And don't forget that if you get a really big wedding job, you can just rent a 5D mk2 or 1D mk3 for the low-light stuff, or the portraits.

And again, with the right lenses you can get great portraits. If you're a sports and landscape photographer, I'd be willing to bet that you don't mind giving your subjects a little extra distance and privacy when you take their portrait, so a 50 1.4 or 85 1.4 would be great for misc. portraits and headshots. (Thank you Sigma for finally bringing this option to Canon!)

That, and just in general it's nice to have all the very latest in technology. I'm not super crazy about HD video, but it's there if you need it. Mostly what I like about the 7D is it's MUCH better menu system and customizability compared to any previous Canon, oh and the larger LCD is nice compared to the likes of the 1D mk2 and 5D mk1... That, and the little things like the battery life, the pop-up flash commander, and the size / weight saved compared to an FF body, ...it all adds up to the best all-around camera on the market today.

And this is coming from a proud Nikon owner!

=Matt=

aperture.photo

Thanks all...

@stirinthesauce: I was thinking about this...it's an interesting idea. Though a huge leap over the 450d, I figured the 40d/1d2 wouldnt be that much better for sports than 7d, and 5d not a huge difference for events/landscape...plus, the 7d has the video, the better lcd, and warranty. Also, I haven't seen a 5d for under a grand.

@Cheesehead: I feared this...high ISO quality is pretty important for shooting poorly lit HS football/bball

@gecko0: +1

@CSwinton: +1

@NeilL: I realize this, however, it's still an improvement over the 450d and due to budgetary constraints I have to consider all options. Sure, I realize that the 5d2 is also in a different class than the 5d, but it's out of reach.

@bbeck4x4: Wow...would a broken SD870 IS (a point and shoot) qualify? Those prices are great, but I'd rather not break my 450d

@divamum: +1

@Matthew Saville: Perfect, exactly what I wanted to hear. It seems to have everything except FF, a combination that doesn't yet exist with great AF, FPS, etc. Don't want to wait for and can't afford a 5d3 (!)

Barring a hypnotically convincing argument to the contrary, I will be going with a 7d.

ziggy53

In good light the Canon 7D has excellent AF performance. In low light and indoors the 1D series (starting with the 1D MKII) beats the 7D handily in both AF speed and AF accuracy. The reason is that the 1D/1Ds cameras have a completely different type of AF sensor than does the 7D. The Area-SIR AF is only available on the 1D/1Ds series cameras. The 7D uses a very competent Cross-Type-SIR and it does have dual image processors which helps with AF speed. Unfortunately the 7D does slow AF acquisition in lower light and this does not happen in the 1D/1Ds series cameras. (See the bottom of page 93 in the user manual. http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Owners-Manuals/Canon-EOS-7D-Owners-Manual.pdf)

divamum

If you grope around this forum (might be back a page now, not sure), I posted a shot taken with the 7d @iso 4000 during a theatre shoot. It's far from a perfect shot, but given the conditions and the high ISO, I found it extraordinary for a crop camera. The 5dII would of course have managed it better, but ... well, I don't have one and can't afford one (like you, I"m reckoning it'll be a 5dIII when I can finally migrate to full frame, and hopefully the III will have the 7d's AF, or something similar.... )

I think you'll be verrrry happy with the 7d. I constantly marvel at the AF. I'm sure the 1-series are better, but for a coming-from-consumer-body shooter, it's amazing to me that any AF is that accurate and that fast. If I do my job properly, it just *works*.

ETA: Found it - here's that thread. The SOOC shot in post #4 is actually a better indicator - I overprocessed the b&w now that I look at it again.... As I say, far from a perfect shot, but not too shabby for an underexposed shot from a crop camera taken in baaaaad conditions!

mercphoto

I would be hard pressed to recommend buying a used consumer grade body (i.e. 30/40/50D). To me its a maintenance gamble. Though my dad still uses my old 20D, my current 40D has had two shutter box replacements. And normally I would not hesitate to recommend a used 1-series, they are just built like tanks. I bought a used 1D Mark II myself many years ago and never had an issue. And, it is an extrordinary camera. But I do think a 7D would be a better choice over a used 1D Mark II -N.

denisegoldberg

aperture.photo wrote: »

@bbeck4x4: Wow...would a broken SD870 IS (a point and shoot) qualify? Those prices are great, but I'd rather not break my 450d

Call Canon and ask them. I was under the impression that they would accept any broken (Canon) camera, but it's a free call to find out. The 7D was recently added to this program and there may be additional requirements for the 7D and the 5D MkII.

--- Denise

divamum

I believe that each submitted camera is eligible for specific replacements, so you have to call them and see what they offer at what prices .... Also, it's worth comparing their Loyalty Program prices to current best prices for refurbs etc elsewhere - sometimes there's not that big a savings so if there's a longer warrantee from (for instance) Adorama, that's sometimes a better bet.

OP, fwiw, I got my 7d refurb'd from Adorama at a very favourable price at the time and have been 110% happy. Came with a 1-yr warrantee through them, as well (although I haven't needed it at this point).

Stella7d

Matthew Saville wrote: »

The 7D is hands-down Canon's best camera that has ever MSRP'd for less than $4,000. Of course you could buy a used 1D mk3 for almost the same price as a new 7D, but the 7D is just so versatile, I can't pass it up.

It's got the resolution for landscapes, and unlike any 1-series, the battery grip is optional which any go-light adventure photographer will appreciate.

It's got the FPS and good enough AF for sports, in fact the gap in technology advancements might put the 7D almost on par with the 1D mk2N...

It's got the ISO for low-light photography, as long as you have the right lenses or come prepared with a flash setup. And don't forget that if you get a really big wedding job, you can just rent a 5D mk2 or 1D mk3 for the low-light stuff, or the portraits.

And again, with the right lenses you can get great portraits. If you're a sports and landscape photographer, I'd be willing to bet that you don't mind giving your subjects a little extra distance and privacy when you take their portrait, so a 50 1.4 or 85 1.4 would be great for misc. portraits and headshots. (Thank you Sigma for finally bringing this option to Canon!)

That, and just in general it's nice to have all the very latest in technology. I'm not super crazy about HD video, but it's there if you need it. Mostly what I like about the 7D is it's MUCH better menu system and customizability compared to any previous Canon, oh and the larger LCD is nice compared to the likes of the 1D mk2 and 5D mk1... That, and the little things like the battery life, the pop-up flash commander, and the size / weight saved compared to an FF body, ...it all adds up to the best all-around camera on the market today.

And this is coming from a proud Nikon owner!

=Matt=

This is exactly why I chose the 7D!!

I recently rented the 5dm2 for a day and was in love with it's IQ, but was surprised at how s-l-o-w it was compared to the 7d! I've been suffering from FF envy, but after using the 5dm2 for a day, it only helped reconfirm that the 7D was the right choice for me!! I'm hoping the 5dm3 will be the best of both worlds.

rpcrowe

I agree with Neil

NeilL wrote: »

You can't put the 30D in the same class as later bodies. The 40D was an order of magnitude improvement on it. Surely you know this??!!

Neil

I shoot with both the 30D and 40D and the 40D is a damn site better camera. I am probably going to upgrade the 30D to a 7D in the forseeable future.

NeilL

rpcrowe wrote: »

I shoot with both the 30D and 40D and the 40D is a damn site better camera. I am probably going to upgrade the 30D to a 7D in the forseeable future.

Yes, you're right, rp! It doesn't make sense to lump them together in a poll. The 40D was at the time of its release as exciting as the 7D is now, and it is still an exciting camera even in the context of today's choices. I'm sure you'll be over the moon with a 7D. I probably won't get a 7D because I would really like to give my lenses a chance to meet their match, so to speak, with a FF version of the 7D, should something like that show up.

Neil

ThatCanonGuy

Get the 1DII
Please read my post before making your purchase.:D
I'll put in a vote for the 1D Mark II.

Fisrt, let's look at the advantages of a 7D:
1.6 crop factor, extending the reach of your lenses.
18 MP, so plenty of resolution and cropping ability.
All the latest bells and whistles, e.g. Live View, electronic level, etc.
Higher ISO capabilities than the 1DII. I usually max out at 800 on my Mark II, using 1600 when I absolutely need to. I hear the 7D can go much higher.

However, the Mark II definitely has advantages over the 7D:
Better AF. With my 70-200L, the AF is super-fast and super-reliable.
The 1.3x crop factor is a compromise between the 7D and 5D. You'll get more reach than full frame, and better image quality than the 7D.
Build quality. The 1DII feels like it's made of pure Unobtanium. Seriously, with a 1D and a solid L in your hands, you feel like you can take on any photo assignment.
I've heard it said that the 1D files are a lot more manageable in PP than the 7D's are. I'd have to agree, as I've never used a 7D but am very happy with my Mark II files.

The only thing I don't like about my Mark II (besides the not-so-high ISO capabilities) is that I find that the images start to get soft when I crop them, due to "only" 8MP.

So, for half the price of a new 7D, you can get a used 1DII. Unless you need super-high ISO or crop a lot, the Mark II is a no-brainer to me. Here's one from a fellow Dgrinner:
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=180589

NeilL

richy wrote: »

I wish

Canon engineers have anonymously stated a fast fps ff camera is technically difficult for them (possibly its just tough to get past marketing as it would be harder to justify a 1d and 1ds line), stating reasons such as mirror performance and ghosting which are both plausible (just because nikon can doesnt mean canon can as their systems are technically different and there could be intellectual property issues as well).
The best bet is either a 1ds3 or 1d4. Either would give low or no crop, fast or very fast fps and killer af. Or get a d700 which is pretty much what you describe (barring a 'relatively' low pixel count). I honestly cant see canon putting even 7d level af in the 5d3 as it would kill 1ds sales so badly. I already bought a 5d2 over a 1ds3, improving the af would rule out any need for a 1ds4. Just my thoughts :)If they do I'll have two right away, would be awesome!

Yep, it ain't gonna happen without a struggle - philosophical, marketing and technical! But heck isn't that what the future's for!D

Neil

ThatCanonGuy

I'm sure the 5D files are the most versatile, due to FF. I think 7D files are malleable to some extent(never used one though), I'm just saying the 1D's are probably moreso because of the bigger sensor.
EDIT: Richy, I reread your post, so you think the 7D files are more verstile than the 5D's? That's surprising. Are you talking about the 5D I or II?

ThatCanonGuy

It can be a headache choosing the right one

Totally.
I have heard that the 5D's shadows are hard to push. I've never used a 5D, though. I also hear the 7D can be a little soft at times, at least compared to the 5D, thus requiring more sharpening than the 5D. Have you ever experienced this?

NeilL

richy wrote: »

The 5d2. There is \ was a mosaicing issue with the 7d which went away with lr3 (and was probably only an issue with dpp and lr2) but I do find the 7d to respond better to being pulled about. The 5d2 required perfect exposure (which we should all aim for anyway) but didn't tolerate any underexposure. I wouldn't take what I'm saying as gospel, it wouldbe very hard to quantify, its just a feeling. I know I can pull up a 7d file 2/3 of a stop without noise whereas a 5d2 starts to look poor \ noisy when you try and pull shadows to any degree. Could just be me, could just be my 5d2. I figured the 7d would be less tolerant, it certainly does have some noise, but thats another thing. The 5d2 noise admittedly is less, but its very inorganic and unnatural looking at doesn't remove as well as the 7d which seems to have more 'random' noise rather than banding or blocking. All are amazing cameras in their own way, and thankfully we do have great choices available to us. It can be a headache choosing the right one

Very interesting and significant post, Richy, thanks! Especially for someone like myself who puts images through the equivalent of twenty washes and fifty tumble dries, followed by a hundred steam presses. Of course I use the most conservatives methods, and when I absolutely insist my 40D files come through brilliantly. So, your remarks here are very relevant to my considerations for an upgrade. The files must be able to handle the editing I put them through.

Neil

ThatCanonGuy

At 8fps directly into the sun it nailed the AF on every shot in the sequence.

Wow. The 1DII doesn't seem to AF very well directly into the sun, at least on my 70-200L. Just my experience, I haven't done any testing or anything.

One thing I do when considering a camera is find raw files from each camera (one review site in particular is great for them! not sure if its ok to mention it here) and print them all at 8x10 at the most commons iso's I use. Virtually all of my work ends up printed so it is the most natural choice for me as a medium to judge quality. I write the details of each on the back, mix them up and see which passes QC. I usually then print 11x14 or larger just to make sure. The proof normally is in the pudding One you are happy the IQ meets your standards its down to the af \ crop and price to make up the final choice.

Great idea.

the 7d would be ~45mp if it were full frame, that canon managed an 18mp apsc camera that can deliver IQ that good is astounding.

Never thought about that, that's impressive.

We shot commercially and weddings on 10d's and 20d's so its important to keep that in mind. Those cameras didn't get junkier with time, new stuff just got better.

Ha, I remember those days. Sometimes I forget that a 10D can actually take good photos.:D A friend of mine (amateur) uses a 20D and some EF-S's and gets great results.

divamum

richy wrote: »

The 7d is softer by nature \ design. My work flow involved having separate sharpening and nr plugins for the 5d2 and 7d in lr3. The 7d needs more sharpening & nr but it takes it more gracefully. The 5d2 just needs you to always err on the side of overexposure because lifting exposure in post leaves nasty almost square patterns in shadows. I could just have a duffer, but I have seen others say the same about it. The plus is that you can pull 1 - 2 stops of blown highlights back on both cameras, the 5d2 more so than the 7d, so overexposing isn't a problem.

Both are stupidly good cameras in their own way, although not perfect, for the low cost they rock. The 5d2 AF gets way more criticism than it deserves. There are times when I may have made statements about it not being able to focus on a barn from 10 feet away, but these days I think it was more my technique \ lack of skill causing issues. Centre point af is incredibly reliable, with outer points you need to remember to put them over a pattern they can see (they aren't horizontally and vertically sensitive) and theyre pretty good. Nothing like the 7d however. That camera scares the bawls off me. I had some kids do a jump (yeah tacky I know but they were great sports and it was fun) on the beach with the sun setting behind them, using a 24-105 , 7d & 430exII. At 8fps directly into the sun it nailed the AF on every shot in the sequence. Considering none of it is really top of the line gear I was impressed.

Oh the other reason the 7d can be soft. 1/focal length doesn't seem to cut it. It does require faster ss \ better technique but at that pixel density I'm not shocked. As medium format digitals increased in res from 20-30-40 and now up to 80mp they have required better technique at each increase. Pain in the ass but it makes sense.

Most of the 7d's IQ issues were a software fix, the 5d2 just seems to have an issue related to its sensor design that causes very unnatural looking noise. Its also worth realising that the 7d would be ~45mp if it were full frame, that canon managed an 18mp apsc camera that can deliver IQ that good is astounding. It probably gives up 1.5 stops of iso performance but also makes up at least half a stop of that in how easy the noise is to clean up.

The 1d2 is an awesome camera,the AF is a huge selling point as is the build quality. I could have bought two 1ds3's and a 1d3, I didn't because frankly I didn't need them. The 5d2 exceeded all my requirements so there was no need to look elsewhere. The op needs to look at their maximum requirements and see where they find the most value. A used 1 series may deliver the best value, if 8mp is enough and you don't need some of the shiny toys on the newer cameras then you would be mental to spend money on the newer camera (other than for tax reasons), but if you need higher res, I would discount the 30d, its down to the 40d and 7d. If you don't need thin dof or quality L ultrawides , the 7d is a great choice over the 5d. Its just more versatile. If money is an issue 2x40d is an interesting choice compared to 1 7d. The 40d was a very solid performer, IQ was great (better than the 50d) and 10mp is pretty decent.

We shot commercially and weddings on 10d's and 20d's so its important to keep that in mind. Those cameras didn't get junkier with time, new stuff just got better.

One thing I do when considering a camera is find raw files from each camera (one review site in particular is great for them! not sure if its ok to mention it here) and print them all at 8x10 at the most commons iso's I use. Virtually all of my work ends up printed so it is the most natural choice for me as a medium to judge quality. I write the details of each on the back, mix them up and see which passes QC. I usually then print 11x14 or larger just to make sure. The proof normally is in the pudding One you are happy the IQ meets your standards its down to the af \ crop and price to make up the final choice.

Nominate the above for 7d Post of the Year clapclap

(Also, for the record your experience w/ the 7d pretty much exactly mirrors mine - particularly in re 1/focal length and LR3 NR - which is encouraging since you have a lot more experience and skill than I do! )

claudermilk

I went through the 7d vs 1D Mk II (N in my case) debate. I voted the 7D and have not regretted it for a moment. The 7D is an amazing camera. While it does not have the 1D 45-point magic AF, what is does have is close enough for me. I have used a 1Ds Mk II and feel the 7D is darn close.

I could have done without some of the bells & whistles; video is for video cameras IMHO, and I could have done with a few less MP in exchange for even more improved IQ, but the MP race is a demanding mistress.

Truly the 7D seems more akin to the pro-level 1D series than to the prosumer level xxD series. The price point is a nice bonus; I managed to get mine for about what I paid for my new 20D back in the day.