Printable View
Hi, I'm currently using a 7d for all my wildife photography, but I'd like to possibly upgrade especially as I find the 7D struggles with noise in low light conditions and living in the UK - that's quite a bit.
what are the thoughts on the 5D Mkiii as an decent upgrade option? I know you lose the crop sensor but would I benefit I quality from the upgrade over my 7D. Ultimately I'd like to get the 1DX but that pushing the finances a bit. What would you advise?
Thanks
Hi Simon- For fun, I would try out the new 70D. Take a card into a store and shoot a few images and various ISO levels. The price is right, it has a decently fast shutter rate, and it seems to be built very well. I do not know anything about how it AF other than the new dual-pixel system it has which makes focusing in Live View fast and responsive (though not that useful for bird photography). Regarding your comment on the crop sensor on the 7D, what you are actually loosing is not that but pixels on subject if you went with the 5DIII. At 20MP, 1.6 crop, the 70D puts more pixels on subject than any current Canon model which is great if you are often in focal-length limited situations.
If you care about IQ get the 5D3 or a used 1D4. both are a HUGE upgrade.
good luck
Thanks Arash. Image quality is paramount for me so that will be my route I think.
I'm not really interested in the 70d as I'm also after the build quality.
Hi Simon,
If you like to shoot action or shoot in rain/snow I'd pick used a 1D4 given its speed and ruggedness. If you have less emphasis on action 5D3 is a great choice too.
best
Hi Simon
it will give better IQ over all but you do lose a lot of reach that even the 5d III files cant pull back.
Here in the UK we really have a hard time getting the reach as birds are so shy .
I went from a 500f4 +7d to a 1dx and 600f4 mkII yet still have reach problems ,i almost want a 70d but will hold of untill (hopefully ) a 7d mkII comes along .
Rob.
If you are mainly a bird and wildlife photographer, I am with Arash but would pick the Canon 1D4 which is what I have been using for 2 years. You can pick them up used for a good price and maybe still find some new ones out there.
If reach is an issue and you want rugged build quality, I'd go with the 1D Mark IV. If AF performance is of utmost importance, I'd go 5D Mark III. As far as high ISO performance goes, you're splitting hairs when you compare the 5D3 to the 1D4.
I own a 7D and although the IQ is good (see Daniel Cadieux's pictures here) it is no match for the 5D III (or 1DX). Neither is the 70D.
You will see a huge difference with the 5D III (the only camera even slightly better at high ISO is the 1DX).
Also not: With the 5D III (and 1D IV, 1DX) you can use a Canon 2x III on any f4 telephoto lens. It is very good. I have recently photographed a captive eagle owl with my 4/600L IS II + 2x III at a 1/60s and the images are very sharp (on a 1DX with ISO 3200). Of course proper technique is necessary and the owl didn't move.
The 7D cannot autofocus with a 2x III on a 4/500, 4/600 or 4/300. The 5D III can. This is nice when you need the focal length.
Markus
Some folks commenting above seem to have first-hand knowledge of the 70D. It is described as having inadequate image quality and inadequate build quality (I'm paraphrasing). At the risk of highjacking the thread, could you all explain how you came to these conclusions and what is the evidence. TIA.
Not that DXO is the end all when comparing cameras but they clearly show the 70D sensor score to be below both the 5D3 and 1D4 http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cam...(brand3)/Canon as far as build quality goes the 1D4 is built like a tank the 5D3 and 70D are probably about the same which is inferior to a 1D series body and I do not need to hold or ever see a 70D to know that to be true.
Simon,
There are many reasons one might want to upgrade the camera body, as noted above, but the 7D is actually a superb low light camera. Above people talk about reduced reach using cameras with larger pixels. Those larger pixels collect more light because they are collecting from a larger angular area for a given lens (e.g. your 500 f/4). But to gain back those pixels on subject, people then add a TC. But the TC magnifies the light more so those pixels see a smaller angular area (much like the 7D without a TC), so people compensate with the TC by exposing longer. Well, think of the 7D as a camera with a built in TC and expose longer and you'll have noise close to that with a camera with larger pixels and a TC. The other way to look at this problem is manage your pixels and effectively choose your pixels on subject in post processing, trading noise for spatial detail. The attached image is an example of this.
The image in the left, made with a 7D and the center image, made with a 5DII were made at with the same lens, same exposure time, same f/ratio and same ISO. The 7D image appears noisier, but has more pixels on the subject. To scale to the same pixel size of the 5DII pixels, I enlarged the 7D image by 1.35x using cubic spline, then binned 2x2 pixels (that is average every 4 pixels). The result is the binned pixel covers the same angular area, same pixels on subject and actually has better (lower) noise than the 5DII image (because the 5DII sensor is slightly less efficient). The 7D is very slightly more efficient per square micron than a 1D4 (I have posted those results on BPN in the past), and about the same efficiency as the 1DX and 5D3 sensors. The large differences people observe in their images between these cameras is pretty much entirely due to pixel size. Learn to manage pixel area (one needs an image processing program that bins; photoshop does not), and one can do the trade of pixels on subject and noise without having to purchase new cameras.
Of course, as noted above, there are other reasons to upgrade, including better AF, frames per second, build quality, etc, but noise really isn't one in the current crop of Canon sensors (except the 1DX is outstanding in low fixed pattern noise at high ISOs).
The image here is in my series on exposure and digital cameras:
http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/index.html#exposure
Another illustration of the superb low light capability of the 7d is shown in this astrophotography image of the Hoersehead nebula, one of the fainter nebulae in the sky, typically requiring hours of exposure, yet this 7D image is only 15.5 minutes, and with no noise reduction:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries...d-bin4x4s.html
Roger
No need for empirical evidence -- let's just assert something is true!Quote:
I do not need to hold or ever see a 70D to know that to be true.
John
Seriously I have own or shot with the following Canon cameras, 20D,30D,40D, 50D, 7D, 5D2, 6D, 1D3, 1D4, 1DX I know it does not have the same build quality as a 1D camera and so does everyone else who has every held a 1D camera just as I know that a Corvette is faster then my Ford even though I have never driven a Corvette. My reply on retrospect was flippant and slightly condescending but correct the 70D does not have the same build quality as a 1D camera and no I have never held one but I am as confident in that statement as I am that my Ford Fiesta will not beat a Corvette in a race:S3:Quote:
Originally Posted by John Guastella
I use both 7D and Mark IV. I could use all the newer cameras. IDX for low light hide work. A perfect camera for that.
IMO the all around birding camera is the ID IV. It is a catch all. Canon just does not make a good birding camera IMO.
I have used all the **D series cameras plus 7D and 1D MIII.
Now I use a 1D MIV and I'm super happy with it. I
still have the 7D as a backup but virtually never use it.
I just shot a few frames at ISO 3200 of a small critter just to try it.
I was amazed how clean the image came out.
So far I stopped at ISO 1600 with the 1D MIV but I will be more daring in the future and will go up to
ISO 3200 if I need the speed in low light situation.
My advice is: get a new or used 1D MIV.
