login info join!
Forums > Photography Talk > Canon 7D vs 5DIII Search   Reply
Photographer
London Fog
Posts: 6,770
London, England, United Kingdom


Yes ok it's a dumb thing to ask, but apart from FF and crappy video, tell me why the 5D eats the 7D?

Let's hear all the reasons?
Feb 12 13 05:58 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
GCobb Photography
Posts: 15,894
Southaven, Mississippi, US


It's got to be the crappy video.  All HD video is crappy.
Feb 12 13 06:02 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
London Fog
Posts: 6,770
London, England, United Kingdom


GCobb Photography wrote:
It's got to be the crappy video.  All HD video is crappy.

Fail!

Next

Feb 12 13 06:05 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Dan K Photography
Posts: 5,445
STATEN ISLAND, New York, US


Nothing as the 7D is the ultimate camera. Or so I get the impression thanks to a British user of this site.
Feb 12 13 06:08 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
1k-words-photograpy
Posts: 351
Leesburg, Virginia, US


To answer the question as posted you'd have to be pretty familiar with both. I have 2 5dIIIs so I can only tell you that side of the question. Hell I've never even held the 7D.

I do have a buddy who has me second shoot his weddings and he believes I have better autofocus and better low light performance.
Feb 12 13 06:09 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
sunn fotography
Posts: 263
Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China


better low light~~ actually 5d3 is way better than 7d. noise start showing in ISO 800 on 7d. and 5d3 start showing in ISO 2000.
Feb 12 13 06:19 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Navid
Posts: 44
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


first 5D III has a way better performance at low light situations, second it is more compatible with new line of Canon radio wireless flash system, also for a non-reversible shooting like wedding, having 2 memory slot is saver.
Feb 12 13 06:31 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Marin Photography NYC
Posts: 7,187
New York, New York, US


Just my two cents. I think the 7D is more for sports and outdoors. The  5D is more for portraits, low light conditions like weddings and indoor events. I have a 5D and I have used the 7D and they have the same set up. The 5D has more features and a more extensive menu. As far as any technical differences, I have not gone into that kind of detail...
Feb 12 13 06:31 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Srefis Limited
Posts: 960
Asheville, North Carolina, US


You should compare a 7D Mark III to a 5D Mark III

.... See what I'm saying? Once they come out with a 7D Mark II it may or may not be better than the 5DMIII

Not fair to compare a digital camera from 2009 with a pro camera from 2012.
Feb 12 13 06:39 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Art Provocative
Posts: 226
Sydney, New South Wales, Australia


sunn fotography wrote:
better low light~~ actually 5d3 is way better than 7d. noise start showing in ISO 800 on 7d. and 5d3 start showing in ISO 2000.

way better is an understatement. 5D3's capability in low light is incredible, especially paired with a great lens.

Feb 12 13 07:00 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
mac13photography
Posts: 28
New York, New York, US


Srefis Limited wrote:
You should compare a 7D Mark III to a 5D Mark III

.... See what I'm saying? Once they come out with a 7D Mark II it may or may not be better than the 5DMIII

Not fair to compare a digital camera from 2009 with a pro camera from 2012.

+100

not sure why this wasn't the first answer given.

Feb 12 13 07:11 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
HHPhoto
Posts: 911
Atlanta, Georgia, US


Srefis Limited wrote:
You should compare a 7D Mark III to a 5D Mark III

.... See what I'm saying? Once they come out with a 7D Mark II it may or may not be better than the 5DMIII

Not fair to compare a digital camera from 2009 with a pro camera from 2012.

Good point.  I think the 7D was better than the 5D and 5D MkII overall.   The 5d Mark III is very probably better overall than the 7D, which as stated above, is not a fair comparison.  Neither model was best in every way.  That will likely be true when the 7D MkII arrives, if ever.

Feb 12 13 07:14 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Phil Drinkwater
Posts: 4,758
Manchester, England, United Kingdom


A FF will always do much better in low light... and it does.
AF on the 5d3 is more accurate and has more points.
Higher resolution.
Better screen.
Better video.
Better jpeg engine.
Dual card slots (I'm pretty sure the 7d only has one).
Better auto ISO settings.
And probably a bunch of other little bits.

However the 7d is years old now and due an update. It will likely pull back some of those points when it's updated, but it'll never be better at high iso, like the FF camera will never be better at reach.
Feb 12 13 11:55 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
4point0
Posts: 687
Los Angeles, California, US


Low

Light

Performance
Feb 13 13 08:29 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
London Fog
Posts: 6,770
London, England, United Kingdom


Dan K Photography wrote:
Nothing as the 7D is the ultimate camera. Or so I get the impression thanks to a British user of this site.

That was a bit uncalled for, don't ya think?

Feb 13 13 01:22 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
London Fog
Posts: 6,770
London, England, United Kingdom


Leaving aside low light performance and video (which IMHO is an utterly and entirely useless feature on a DSLR) and 6000 AF points, which no-one will ever use...

How's the scorecard looking now?
Feb 13 13 01:24 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
London Fog
Posts: 6,770
London, England, United Kingdom


Phil Drinkwater wrote:
A FF will always do much better in low light... and it does.
AF on the 5d3 is more accurate and has more points.
Higher resolution.
Better screen.
Better video.
Better jpeg engine.
Dual card slots (I'm pretty sure the 7d only has one).
Better auto ISO settings.
And probably a bunch of other little bits.

However the 7d is years old now and due an update. It will likely pull back some of those points when it's updated, but it'll never be better at high iso, like the FF camera will never be better at reach.

True to a degree, but the lowly 7D holds up surprisingly well against my D800, even when using the ultra, ultra sharp Nikkor 50mm 1.8 on the behmoth!

I guess it's the awesome L lenses that help!

Feb 13 13 01:27 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MC Photo
Posts: 4,144
New York, New York, US


London Fog wrote:
Leaving aside low light performance and video (which IMHO is an utterly and entirely useless feature on a DSLR) and 6000 AF points, which no-one will ever use...

How's the scorecard looking now?

Leaving aside MP, how does the 7D hold up against the D800? Extremely well, right?


The thing is, you can't leave those things aside.

Feb 13 13 06:02 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Images by Flap
Posts: 13
Cherry Hill, New Jersey, US


Over all I believe the advantage to the 5d m3 is the low noise at higher iso than the 7d and more auto focus points and more mega pixels, and the two card slots.

The 7d has a crop factor probably something like 1.6 making telephoto or any ef len even longer but it can use the ef-s lenses as well at stated mm.

when I got my 7d the 5d m2 was out and I believed that the 7d was a better camera, but now with the 5d m3 I would have trouble deciding whether to invest more money on the ff.

really either camera is a very capable camera and I am sure you would be happy with either one.
Feb 13 13 06:31 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
London Fog
Posts: 6,770
London, England, United Kingdom


flap the jack wrote:
Over all I believe the advantage to the 5d m3 is the low noise at higher iso than the 7d and more auto focus points and more mega pixels, and the two card slots.

The 7d has a crop factor probably something like 1.6 making telephoto or any ef len even longer but it can use the ef-s lenses as well at stated mm.

when I got my 7d the 5d m2 was out and I believed that the 7d was a better camera, but now with the 5d m3 I would have trouble deciding whether to invest more money on the ff.

really either camera is a very capable camera and I am sure you would be happy with either one.

I am very happy with the 7D!

Feb 14 13 06:27 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Armando D Photography
Posts: 571
Houston, Texas, US


after awhile, when I'm comparing cameras "what to buy" I look at Dynamic range and Color bit'

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-5 … S_7D/specs

weird how they both have the DR range, but the color bit goes to the 5d MK III. When i load up the raw / arw file is  something I do notice in the image when I load it up in lightroom' (canon 5d mkii/7d user / sony a99)
Feb 14 13 02:20 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
4point0
Posts: 687
Los Angeles, California, US


London Fog wrote:
Leaving aside low light performance and video (which IMHO is an utterly and entirely useless feature on a DSLR) and 6000 AF points, which no-one will ever use...

How's the scorecard looking now?

You can't leave out low light performance when comparing the 7D and 5D mark iii. If you need it it's worth every penny of the $1600 vs. $3500 difference.

Feb 14 13 07:20 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mask Photo
Posts: 1,398
Fremont, California, US


GCobb Photography wrote:
It's got to be the crappy video.  All HD video is crappy.

crappy enough to produce broadcast-quality video, sure.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/13/cano … ale-direc/

Feb 14 13 07:59 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Phil Drinkwater
Posts: 4,758
Manchester, England, United Kingdom


London Fog wrote:
Leaving aside low light performance and video (which IMHO is an utterly and entirely useless feature on a DSLR) and 6000 AF points, which no-one will ever use...

How's the scorecard looking now?

I use all of the AF points. Most people with the camera do.

The 7d is a good camera. The 5d3, for most applications, is a better camera. That's reflected in the price.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get to.. Aren't you happy with the 7d? If not, change it. If so, there's no need to try to validate your decision..

Feb 14 13 11:30 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Neil Snape
Posts: 9,467
Paris, Île-de-France, France


Nothing wrong with the 7D. A lot is very right except the price with the 5DIII.

The AF now works exactly as it should, is really fast and just works. Like most others I poured over reviews before deciding, and of course wanted the Nikon D800.

Yet I have to say the MKIII is in the end the right camera, files are more reasonable in size, IQ is very good, AF is perfect for my spray and pray technique, and the higher ISO quite nice.

I wouldn't say it is worth upgrading though unless you really need the extra touches on a FF.

IF they come out with a 7D II soon that is good for me as I can buy a used one cheap, and shoot close ups with the 100mm macro for times when I'm too close.
Feb 14 13 11:48 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
John Fisher
Posts: 1,882
Miami Beach, Florida, US


http://www.johnfisher.com/images/1tatiana8300fs.jpg
Tatiana Likina (MC2) on Virginia Key with the EOS 5D Mark II


Interesting, I have the EOS 7D and the EOS 5D Mark II in my bag and they are wonderfully complimentary cameras. By that I mean that as a professional I have to have at least two cameras with me at all times, but in this case one of the cameras is more than just dead weight when I'm on a job. While the cameras are similar to operate, use the same batteries, chargers and CF cards, they do perform different functions when you need them to.

The EOS 5D Mark II was the highest resolution DSLR at the time of it's introduction, and it still puts more pixels on the subject than the EOS 7D when the shot is identically framed. And while you might not be interested in the video, the EOS 5D Mark II introduced high end video to the DSLR market, and it has become a revolution. Last year, one of the Academy award winning documentaries was shot exclusively with the EOS 5D Mark II, and many major motion pictures and TV programs have included scenes shot with the EOS 5D Mark II and the EOS 7D. I don't believe any other camera manufacturer can make that statement (although they most certainly will in the future). Finally because the EOS 5D Mark II is a full frame camera, an 85 mm lens is an 85 mm lens, a 70-200 f2.8 is still a 70-200 f2.8, and most importantly, a 24 mm t/s lens is still a 24 mm t/s lens. This is a big deal to us "older" folks. (I prefer the term "experienced", but at my age "old" is more accurate.)

The EOS 7D? Faster shooting speed (significantly faster, 8 frames per second as compared to 4), more adept auto focus system for tracking things moving at a significant speed, and finally a higher pixel density across the image so you really do get more reach with that 70-200 f2.8L IS II lens. Subtracting out the crop and adding back the higher pixel density, compared to the EOS 5D Mark II, my 70-200 f2.8 is more like a 100-300 f2.8 when it's mounted on my EOS 7D. That f2.8 is a big deal when it comes to the auto focus system, and when you price out an EF 300 mm f2.8L IS lens, it's punches a bigger hole in your wallet ($6,800!!!) than just putting an EOS 7D in your bag. Now, a 24 mm lens (which we typically use for architecture) just sucks on the 7D, but who cares? I have the EOS 5D II for that!

So there you go, one backs up the other. I can put either in my hand and begin shooting without a second thought about how the camera operates (other than finding the power switch!). They share batteries, CF cards, and chargers. (Actually the charger thing is a big deal to me. Because I have both cameras, and they both have grips attached, being able to charge two batteries at the same time is surprisingly useful. And when I'm on the beach shooting, having the EOS 7D available with it's longer focal lengths is a big deal. Also, because the 7D was a lot cheaper when I originally purchased it than the 5D II, aaaah, I don't worry about it as much in the sun and sand. Hate to admit it, but it's true. If one of my assistants wants to borrow one of the cameras for an important shoot, and I'm drunk enough to consider it, they always get the 7D, never the 5D II.

http://www.johnfisher.com/images/1emma6460fs.jpg
Emma Litova at South Point with the EOS 7D

But you asked about none of this! (To bad, I have a cold, I can't sleep, so I type.) Your question (if you were really asking one which I doubt) is about the EOS 7D compared to the EOS 5D Mark III. While the extra reach of the 7D is still a very important issue (like really important), the other things switch sides. Clearly the auto focus system on the 5D Mark III is superior in every way to the EOS 7D, and the 5D Mark III shoots at a full six frames per second which is a lot closer to the 7D and probably makes that a wash. The 5D Mark III is much newer technology, uses two cards for recording images, and has improved video capabilities (I know, you don't care, but some people, a lot of some people, really do care.) I still have no idea what Canon was thinking not dropping a higher mega pixel chip into the 5D III, we know they are out there and have been in testing for a long time now.

This is not idle chatter for me. I am really thinking about buying the new EOS 5D III, but what camera to sell? Keep the 5D II? I won't get as much for the EOS 7D (probably $500 less, if I get the price I have to get to make the purchase of the Mark III possible.) But if I keep the 5D Mark II, what do I have? Two redundant cameras (okay, one is supposedly better, but really? Auto focus has never been an issue for me, the EOS 5D II has a perfectly fine auto focus system for what I do.)

I guess I will put them both on Craig’s list and let the market decide. Which ever one sells first (at my price) is gone, and the other will remain in my bag as a back up. But the real issue is why am I considering this at all? Yes, I know the 5D III is the latest whiz bang from Canon, but really? No real increase in megapixels, and I have to spend around two grand to upgrade even taking into account selling one of the other cameras? (I would have to buy another battery, and a battery grip, as well as the camera. Canon in it’s infinite wisdom can’t seem to make a camera that takes the same grip as it’s predecessor.) But for what? A better auto focus system? Really? Like the previous system was so bad that only about 99.5% of my pictures were in perfect focus? (Note I didn’t say 99.9% were perfect, just in perfect focus!) My assistant (actually two assistants, I’m paying someone too much) has a 5D III, he keeps putting it my hand and saying: “isn’t it great!” I push the button a few times and remark, yeah, it’s a ............... a camera. I’m sorry, I keep thinking $2,000, and the same megapixel count? Still, eventually some stupid AD will ask if I have the new Mark III, and I can’t just say, well......... my assistant has one! (Really, what’s your assistants name?)

Sigh, I’m so cheap I squeeze nickels until the buffalo makes rude noises. But things are good, so..............

John
--
John Fisher
900 West Avenue, Suite 633
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
305 534-9322
http://www.johnfisher.com
Feb 15 13 03:43 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Jewett
Posts: 2,455
al-Marsā, Tunis, Tunisia


I've shot a lot of fashion with the MII; and I currently use the 7D and the MIII together right now.  I am a full-time professional photographer shooting commercial/fashion work overseas.

I had the 7D and the MII at the same time.  I found myself reaching for the 7D more...simply because the auto focus on the MII drove me nuts.  The IQ of the MII was a bit more pleasing (it seemed to do better with micro contrast among other things), but most of my clients simply could not tell the difference between processed files from the two cameras.

However.  When I was shooting fashion shows, you could certainly see the difference in focus.  Unbelievable difference.  The 7D allowed me to get images I would have missed before .  The IQ on a missed shot is 0. smile

That said, if I was doing tri-pod work, it was always the MII.

Now that I have the MIII, the 7D never gets used unless I am shooting birds or something and I want the reach.  The MIII really is a wonderful piece of equipment, and it's the first body that has simply gotten out of my way while I am shooting.  Now I think about poses, light and lenses.  I never worry about focus, IQ or ISO.

In a couple weeks, I'll be shooting a fashion show with it, and this week I am doing food photography with the same body.  In the past, I would have split these two jobs between the 7D and the MII.

Until you have used a MIII day in and day out, full-time, you simply cannot appreciate the difference between it and the other two bodies.  For me, and the way I shoot, if something happened to the MIII, I would do whatever it took to replace it.

With the MII about 60% were keepers, with the 7D 85% are keepers, with the MIII 97% are keepers (same lenses).  But, that's just for me.  Other people have vastly different results, and I suspect there really is that big of difference in HOW people shoot.  I suspect I am bad at follow-through, maybe I am moving the camera too soon after pressing the release (hand-held).

YMMV.  Just my experience.
Feb 15 13 08:48 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
CaliModels
Posts: 2,487
Los Angeles, California, US


I know a photographer that's getting great results with a 5D.  He shoots indoors and outdoors.  Fast autofocus and his photos sharp.
Feb 15 13 01:58 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
London Fog
Posts: 6,770
London, England, United Kingdom


Sorry guys, this wasn't meant to be a criticism of the 5DIII in any way (I can't imagine how that camera can be criticised) but more so a plug for the wonderful 7D, it really is such an awesome crop camera. Every time I use it, especially in the studio, it just puts such a smile on my face, from the feel of it, the accuracy and speed, and of course the stunning clean looking images!

That said, I tried out a 5DIII in the studio yesterday, and I have to say, it felt so great to work with. It may even be the best DSLR that Canon has ever made, so well thought out and very, very similar in layout and feel to the 7D.

I am so, so, so tempted (may just go ahead and do it) to get the 5DIII, it looks and seems to be such fantastic camera in every way possible, such a vast improvement over the 5DII, so much so, that you'd never know the two were related.

Well done Canon!
Feb 15 13 03:45 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MarcMarayag
Posts: 77
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada


upgrade to full frame big_smile and dont turn back haha

i upgraded from a 60d and i enjoy it very much

especially the improved af
Feb 15 13 06:49 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
AspirationImages
Posts: 184
Sydney, New South Wales, Australia


London Fog wrote:
apart from FF .. tell me why the 5D eats the 7D?

No other reason is required (if you interest is shooting people).

Feb 15 13 08:12 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Green Grape
Posts: 286
West Paterson, New Jersey, US


7D is a toy compared to the 5DM3

Don't compare the two.
Just buy it.
Feb 15 13 08:20 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Beautifully Soft Focus
Posts: 529
Peoria, Illinois, US


This is like comparing Corvette zR1 to a Camaro zL1 they are both hot sport cars. The Camaro is more user friendly and most sport car folks can drive it. The Vette is another level ... for real drivers with racing experience who know how to push it to its limits and can get the most out of it, other  buyers are are just posing.  In fact Chevrolet recommend a driver training course to zR1 buyers.

That's the best way I break it down for ya. The 5D M3 is for serious professionals who have logged some serious hours with a pro level camera wink I found this out two week ago when I shot with the 5D M3 for the first time. It has so many features, menus, and setting that you can change one and spend an hour just trying to undo what you did sad Put in on full manual and you will get humbled wink  I thought since I was a Canon shooter I could just pick it up and be just as good and better than with my 60D, since I had shot the 7D with no issues . WRONG! sad

My advise rent a 5D M3 read the owner manual or maybe take a training class on how to use it ... then shoot with it with a patient pro model who can help you learn how to use it wink by being a pro while you figure things out ... Friends & TFs will have long since bailed on ya.

Be easy,

Alvin

BTW my avi shot with the 5D M3 everything else in my port 60D or SXi
Feb 15 13 08:54 pm  Link  Quote 
  Search   Reply