From 7D to 1DIV - Yeah or Nay?

To add or not to add that is the question!

I have now returned to Oz after an amazing six months in South America - I am slowly (oh so slowly) working through a ton of images and teasing myself into CS5.

I have enjoyed shooting with the 7D and the 5DII - and, yes I know, good photographers take good pictures with almost any camera body.

Having said that it is time to make a decision whether to add the 1D4 to my kit (I have already bought the L-plate :) ).

Those of you that had/have the 7D and have also purchased the 1D4 is there a significant ($5,000 worth) in the features of the 1DIV as compared to the 7D?

What is pushing me mostly towards the 1D4 are the technical articles and some commentary on other sites that the 1DIV offer a better autofocus system and less noise at higher ISOs; is that what you have found?

Thanks for helping me to decide :confused: whether or not to spend $5,000.00. :D

Jay,
I had looked at the 7D but bought the Mark IV. It works fine alongside my 1D Mark II. The pricing decisions cannot be quantified. A reasonable price from one person may be a bit too much for another person.

If you are travelling for 6 months a year, better to have the best equipment available. We only live once. So If you think that you came across one moment, where the Mark IV would have helped in nailing the image better than the 7D, then it is worth buying it.

Cheers,
Sabyasachi

Hi Jay,

From an image quality perspective, shooting in a focal-length-limited scenario, the images are very similar quality-wise. The 1D Mark IV with a 1.3x crop sensor requires heavier cropping than the 7D. This amplifies the noise level making it similar to the 7D with a 1.6 crop sensor. With that stated, if you are filling the frame using the 1D Mark IV, the image quality will be superior to the 7D. It's only when moderate cropping is required that images are similar quality-wise, with the Mark IV having slightly less resolution but slightly less noise.

Also, I prefer the 1.3x sensor for birds-in-flight since there is a lesser chance of clipping a wing out-of-frame.

From an autofocus perspective, the Mark IV is definitely more responsive and has greater flexibility with regards to focus options compared to the 7D. My only complaint with the Mark IV is less than stellar autofocus in low-light, low-contrast scenarios. I recently had this happen attempting to photograph an Elf Owl at dusk. It was under harsh conditions, but not impossible conditions and I expected better results from the Mark IV.

Even though I have a few minor complaints with the Mark IV, it is vastly improved from the Mark III (both resolution and autofocus) and comparing it to the 7D, I prefer to use the Mark IV.

Most of the time I have the 7D attached to my 400mm f/5.6 lens for overhead flight shots and the Mark IV attached to my 600mm f/4 for all other options. Both are great cameras, but the Mark IV gets more use these days than the 7D.

Alan

Jay,
If you already have the plate, you definitely should get the camera. All kidding aside, I have many cameras and nearly always choose to take the Mark IV despite the other choices. (I use both Nikon and Canon and have many lens choices as well.) I typically use the 800mm or 600 and also carry the 400 5.6. I love the image quality and the responsiveness of the Mark IV. The more I use it, the more I like it. When I first bought it, I was just as likely to use another camera as I was to use the IV. That's not been true for the last couple of months. One thing I've noticed but rarely read about is the evaluative metering system seems to be right on for a much greater percentage of shots than it is for any other camera I've used. I do less exposure compensation with it.

Great comments, I own both bodies as well. Tend to use the MKIV due to the IQ and focus technology but miss the 7D's crop factor. Like Alan, I carry the 7D and strap the MKIV to my 500MM. Since you already own the 5DII, this is a hard one. What is the opportunity cost of the MKIV purchase. Moreover, could you purchase a lens instead (e.g., 400MMDO, new 70-200 MM 2.8 II etc.) - just giving another perspective. Let us know what direction you take - good luck.

The Mark IV is better than the 7D at ISO 1600 and above, especially when cropping. AF on the Mark IV is quite good, but so is the AF on the 7D. I like the ease of switching between the different AF modes on the 7D, and am a big fan of the 7D's spot AF feature. Although the build quality of the 7D is good, the Mark IV is a big step up. I use and enjoy both bodies, but if I had to choose one it'd be the Mark IV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay Gould

Thanks for helping me to decide :confused: whether or not to spend $5,000.00. :D

---

C'mon Jay, yeah of course, even from somebody who don't shoot Canon. Now go spend the money :)

Where I am Canon is having an instant rebate on many things. $1,000 instant rebate on a 500!

Jay I borrowed a MKIV for a few weeks last year and though a great camera it is not worth the $5000 compared to the 7Ds $1800.

I love my MKIII as we have come to know each other real well and with the 5DMKII (which is a mind blower) and 7D I feel no need for a MKIV.

By the way the 5DMKII on the 500 f/4 is something else again and the 7D shines on the 500 as well.

Glad you are back in one piece mate.

Jay
Agree with Doug, Allan and the other posts
Own both - but use the MK4 most of the time

Having said that - most of the above posts refer to using the Mk4 with a 500mm or 600mm lens and the 7D with a 400mm lens. I seem to recall you bought the 300mmf2.8

If you buy the Mk4 - your question will become which camera to sell, as i don't think you truly need all three

I'd suggest testing a Mk4 with your own lenses against the 7D and 5D Mk2 and decide for yourself

Jay - If I did this for a living and could depreciate the camera I would go with the Mk IV. I have the same set up as you (7D/5DMKII) and these bodies give me all the capabilities I need. Earlier in the year I tried to buy a MKIV but I couldn't find one. So I said the **** with it. Camera bodies these days are nothing more than a computer attached to a lens. Given the advancement of this technology in a short period of time spending $$$ on a body should be considered carefully.
After giving up on the MK IV, and having some money to burn, I purchased a Zeiss 21mm plus some rather substantial Singh Ray filters. I"m having quite a bit of fun with the new toys.

Jay,

I do not use cameras as cropping tools, preferring to fill the in-camera frame to make the most of the composition as viewed. My preference for better weather resistance, overall camera strength, ability to AF at f/8, faster AF acquisition and more continues to lead me to the 1D series. That said the 7D is a fine camera in its own right. If you need the AF at f/8 and faster acquisition it may be for you, but I am sure you can make fine images with your equipment. The camera is only as good as the operator.

Best from Bozeman,

Chas

I have and enjoy both. Overall, the MkIV is a better camera than the 7D. Is the MkIV worth that much money over the 7D? It depends on personal needs and your rating of the differences. Among others, the MkIV has better high iso performance and more fps. I find the 7D an amazing camera for the price and the better Canon deal so far. To me, there is a bigger gap between the 50D and the 7D than between the 7D and the MkIV. If I had to re-do it again, I would probably be very happy with the 7D only, as for sure both cameras outperform my skills. Giulio

With the prices being what they are I am buying a second 7D and am looking at a 800 f/5.6 from Hunts which will AF with my MKIII with the 1.4X TC.

I am very happy with my 2 MKIIIs (one brand new in the box after I decided against the MKIV and nought the last new MKIII from my dealer for $3200)

I will end up with 2 X 7Ds, 2 X 1D MKIIIs and 2 X5D MKIIs

Overdoing it You bet! but that gives me 3 systems to carry on my bike and 3 systems with the big glass for the car,

You only live once.

I like your attitude Chris!

Jay- One aspect of acquiring the mark IV for me was the relative longevity of the body, not just in terms of shutter life (which at 300,000 I will never exceed I'm sure) but also in the rotation of the 1D bodies which seems to be about 3 years. I am committed to keeping my mark IV for 5 years which means I will not be trading in as quickly as I did with my 40D and 50D. This is probably a completely fatuous argument but it helped me shell out the bucks!

Regarding the mark IV, one thing I have noticed is the combination of 16 megapixels and low noise, which allows significant crops while maintaining excellent image quality (so long as you get everything else right). I have not owned a digital camera that comes close to what the mark IV can do in this regard. This is important for me because I tend at this stage not to use setups or blinds and am therefore often farther away from my subjects than might be ideal. The exception of course is my annual 6 week soujourn to Falklands, South Georgia, Antarctica and Chile, where a 70-200 mm or 400 mm lens is all I feel I need, and then I find myself backing up a lot- your experience too I'm sure.

John, My wife and myself also plan to end our days in those parts foreign that you mentioned.

I served in the Falklands and South Georgia and desperately wish to return there as well as a visit to St Helena andTristan da Cunha where my Father spent three years.

Slightly off topic, i'd like to ask if you are setting your Tracking sensitivity to a bit on the slower side,or leaving it at zero in the middle meaning faster than to the right, just curious if you are doing it on both the MK IV and the 7D.
Thks don

DECISION: A 1DIV will be purchased - thank you all for your comments. I am now going to create a discussion thread: Have 1D4; which to sell: 7D or 5DII. :D

No need for a new thread Jay. KEEP THEM ALL!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay Gould

DECISION: A 1DIV will be purchased - thank you all for your comments. I am now going to create a discussion thread: Have 1D4; which to sell: 7D or 5DII. :D

---

Sell the 7D !!