Loaded question 50d-7d/5d2/1d3

canoesailor

I have a 50D and am looking to upgrade, the inevitable question is what do I go for.

Is the 7d sufficiently better than the 50D to be worthwhile considering?
Would the 5D2 be a better choice and why?
A 1D3 would only be an option if I could find a good used one would that be worth going for or would a new 5D2 be better?

My most used lens is a ef100-400 L which takes superb pics on puzzled pauls 1D3 but doesn't seem entirely suited to the 50D.

I take a wide variety of subjects - wildlife, landscapes, dog, sailing boats, canoeing and anything else that takes my fancy, including macro.

Any advice will be much appreciated.

John

ziggy53

You seem pleased with the results you got with the Canon 1D MKIII, so that would seem the surest bet. The 1D MKIII has a (potentially) better AF section than either the 7D or 5D MKII, and the 1D MKIII retains some crop camera advantage for wildlife, where the 5D MKII might seem pretty short with the EF 100-400mm, f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM (vs either the 7D or 1D MKIII.)

If you don't use the long end of the 100-400mm so much, the 5D MKII does work well for many subjects with that lens. The 5D MKII has the slowest AF of the cameras discussed, but it's not horrible for most subjects. Sports and some fast moving wildlife might (probably) be a problem.

If you can swing it, hold onto the 50D and use it along with the 1D MKIII or 5D MKII. The sum of a 2 camera setup can be more than any of the cameras individually.

ThatCanonGuy

Is it just a coincidence that the 3 bodies you mentioned each have a different sensor size?:D

Is the 7d sufficiently better than the 50D to be worthwhile considering?

Yep. It's about the same build quality(I think). Better AF, bells & whistles like video. Oh, did I mention the 8fps?

Would the 5D2 be a better choice and why?

It does have better image quality, due to the FF sensor. It'd be great for landscapes, but not very good for wildlife: the FF sensor gives you less reach than the other 2, and the slow AF.

A 1D3 would only be an option if I could find a good used one would that be worth going for or would a new 5D2 be better?

It could be a good option. Of course, it's less resolution than your 50D, but that probably won't be a problem. 10fps is a big step up from 6.5

Advantges of 7D: Most reach, great for wildlife.
Advantges of 5DII: Great IQ, amazing for landscapes.
Advantges of 1DIII: It's a compromise between the other two. You get wider than the 7D for landscapes, & more reach than the 5DII for wildlife. Plus, it's weathersealed, so it can get wet on your canoe trips.:D It's built like a tank, it feels so substantial and tough in your hands. It's heavy, but you'll get used to it.

Actually, another option would be to keep your 50D and get some great lenses. The 50D isn't outdated, and it's a very good camera. And Ziggy makes a great point, it's always good to have 2 cameras.

canoesailor

ThatCanonGuy wrote: »

Is it just a coincidence that the 3 bodies you mentioned each have a different sensor size?:D

Yep. It's about the same build quality(I think). Better AF, bells & whistles like video. Oh, did I mention the 8fps?


It does have better image quality, due to the FF sensor. It'd be great for landscapes, but not very good for wildlife: the FF sensor gives you less reach than the other 2, and the slow AF.


It could be a good option. Of course, it's less resolution than your 50D, but that probably won't be a problem. 10fps is a big step up from 6.5

Advantges of 7D: Most reach, great for wildlife.
Advantges of 5DII: Great IQ, amazing for landscapes.
Advantges of 1DIII: It's a compromise between the other two. You get wider than the 7D for landscapes, & more reach than the 5DII for wildlife. Plus, it's weathersealed, so it can get wet on your canoe trips.:D It's built like a tank, it feels so substantial and tough in your hands. It's heavy, but you'll get used to it.

Actually, another option would be to keep your 50D and get some great lenses. The 50D isn't outdated, and it's a very good camera. And Ziggy makes a great point, it's always good to have 2 cameras.

Thanks
I should have mentioned that fps rate is the least of my considerations, I mostly use 3.2fps on the 50D.

I have just sold a canon ef400 which produced no better results than the 100-400 and was less versatile.

I thought the results from the 50D were quite good until I compared them with PuzzledPaul's 1D3, pics taken at the same time on the same day and using the same lens (he borrowed my 100-400) were significantly poorer from the 50D.

I am leaning towards Ziggy's solution but I'd like to try a 5D2 first, the 7D worries me because I've heard some of the same complaints as where made about the 50D - particularly in reference to noise.

Some people say they've tried the 7D and gone back to their 5D2's and others say they have both and prefer the 7D, There doesn't seem to be a conscensus of opinion.

In the days of film, I had an F1, there was no dispute, it was simply the best Canon made.

John T

divamum

ABSOLUTELY worth it to me. I had a 50d for a short while before going to the 7d, and the 7d has exceeded it in every way for me. Faster and configurable AF, better high ISO, handling is great, love the custom functions, more croppability. It was definitely worth the investment for me.

These were taken at ISO 4000 using a 7d. Is there more noise than there would be on a 5dII? Yes, of course. But given the horrible lighting conditions (see the other, colour shot in post #4 of that thread for a sample), it was pretty amazing to me that a crop camera could deliver that.

Also, highly recommend reading THIS POST (#29) from Richy on the 7d vs 5dII, how they handle noise, take processing and generally work in "real life" situations. My experience with the camera has been pretty much exactly like his.

The FF 5dII is of course a marvellous camera, but if you don't need the superhigh ISO performance of the 5dII (which is "phenomenal" compared to the 7d's "very good") or don't particularly hanker after FF, then the 7d is a solid choice.