shooting the moon

All posts tagged shooting the moon

Reader Comments – Canon 5D Mark III vs 7D

Posted by Snob on May 15, 2014
Posted in: Camera, canon 5D mark III, Reader Comments, Reviews. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , . 4 Comments

I recently got a question from a reader regarding my post titled Canon 5D Mark III vs 7D. Rather than let these conversations get buried in the comments section I will do my best to reply as a new post.

That post has been the subject of much debate, many questions and discussions. However I would like to keep this post focused on this question I received, because I think it is representative of the question on a lot of people’s minds when they approach the subject with me.

FROM ZAMANI:

Hi Bryan, great post. I own a 5D2 and have been using that for my wedding and portraiture but was considering getting the 7d or the 5d3 for action work. I have to admit I was biased towards the 5D3 based on everything I read so I rented the 7D to try it myself with a 200mm 2.8 prime and it was terribly sharp and accurate with the football game I shot. I do prefer the shallower and slightly more pleasing depth of field I get from full frame cameras though.

Im wondering what your feelings are on the Nikon D800 and the D600 and their 36 and 24 megapixel offerings as well as the crop factor that those cameras offer in DX mode. I am a Canon shooter but have considered purchasing a Nikon D800 for those features.

Thanks Zamani [and all who’ve asked similar questions].

The sort version of this post is, for any kind of action, I would pick the 7D over the 5D3 any day, all day. Believe it or not 6fps on the 5D3 is a deal breaker. Compared to the 8fps on the 7D, that extra 2fps translates into more than twice the usable shots and a 100+% success rate over the 5D3. In practice, the AF on the 7D is faster and much better suited for action. The 7D’s Dual processor architecture with one processor dedicated to AF guarantees your shot every time. The 5D Mark III is hit-or-miss as soon as your subject as much as starts dancing around – there go half your shots. Your 5D3 shots may be at lower ISO, they may have less noise than the 7D shots, they may have higher dynamic range, but what good are they if they are out of focus or simply missed that split second magical moment you wanted to capture? The only camera system that does it better than the 7D is the 1Dx. So unless you have $7000 to drop on a 1Dx, your best bet is the 7D which is amazingly still a bargain till this day. Buy a refurbished or used one for under $1000. They are built like a tank and are virtually indestructible. Here’s a fun video by DigitalRev that illustrates this:

Now as for the D800 it appears Nikon essentially took an APS-C sensor and scaled it up to the size of a full frame sensor. Let’s take a look at the approximate numbers for pixel density below:
  • Canon 5D Mark III Sensor: 23,400,000P/864mmsq = 27083.33 Pixels / mm squared
  • Canon 7D Sensor: 19,000,000P/333.27mmsq = 57010.8 Pixels / mm squared
  • Nikon D800: 36,000,000/864mmsq = 41666.7 Pixels / mm squared (approximations)
  • Nikon D600: 24,000,000/864mmsq = 27777.7 Pixels / mm squared (approximations)

So the D800 sensor has a pixel density somewhere between the 5D3 and the 7D. The D600 has a pixel density almost identical to the 5D3. I would expect the D600 will yield an image with quality more comparable to the 5D3 and the D800 will yield slightly better than that from a 7D assuming they all used the same optics. However I have always said, in practice the sensor almost doesn’t matter anymore these days because the technology is just that good regardless of the manufacturer. The D800 will suffer a bit from some of the challenges 7D owners faced when it was released – the higher pixel densities will easily reveal more of the optical flaws in every lens from chromatic aberration to distortion to focus inconsistencies. I recall a lot of 7D owners complaining about having to adjust their focus when in fact this probably had to do with the flaws in the optics of their lenses.

If you are planning on acquiring a camera system like the D800 or 7D, then I suggest you plan on acquiring the best possible lenses that money can buy – Canon L Mark-II revision lenses or the Nikon equivalents if you go with a D800. The 5D3 or D600 will be more forgiving and yield crisp images with less than premium lenses.
Now I must say I have never used the D800 and perhaps I should get one and try it out. However the only reason I would not go for a camera system like the D800 has to do not with image quality or whatever else the pixel-peepers whine about. It has to do with other features I actually consider more important to everyday shooting. The Nikon interface has always seemed too cumbersome compared to Canon’s 1-click layout. 4fps is just not good enough. It seems Nikon made this compromise in exchange for higher megapixels. 4fps is digital rebel speed which while good enough for most is painfully slow for anyone half serious about photography. Unless your D800 is pretty much only for shooting landscapes and other stills, this will be a big issue over time. I can barely tolerate the 6fps of my 5D3, but then again I may have been spoiled by the 7D.
I’m sure the D800 is a great camera no doubt. The fact is few need 36MP images and when I need 36MP or more, I simply pan my scene and extract more specific detail and clarity than can be achieved in one shot. I do this all the time with my 5D3 and 7D. I really don’t think there is a burning need for high MP bodies as much as the need for sharper higher resolution optics. The D800 might be a more economical proposition for someone trying to break into the Medium Format (Hasselblad) commercial domain, but not much importance in the traditional SLR domain. The D800 feels like the DSLR that wanted to be a Hasselblad and in so doing, forgot how to be a DSLR. I like that Canon consistently takes notice of these important details. They revised their top lens optics soon after the 7D hit the market as well as dramatically improved the usability and features in their cameras. Each new Canon body I’ve bought has made my life as photographer much easier and much more successful to that end. There are many reasons the 5D3 still gets top ratings and it’s has little to do with Megapixels.
So I get it. Canon is the 800 pound gorilla and Nikon felt they need to set themselves apart with the D800 but I feel in doing so they missed some very important details that matter to those who actually use these pro cameras as tools and not trophies. I just don’t think it was a good gamble.
The biggest reason I chose to invest in Canon is for the L-lenses. I buy one, it’s built to serve me the rest of my life. I’ll probably own 10-20 bodies over that period so I don’t base my choices on what bodies are currently on the market.
I hope this answered your question.
Cheers.

Reader Comments – Canon 5D Mark III vs 7D

Posted by Snob on July 24, 2013
Posted in: Camera, Reader Comments, Reviews. Tagged: , , , , , , , , . 12 Comments

A while ago I got a question from a reader regarding my post titled Canon 5D Mark III vs 7D and have been meaning to write down further thoughts on the subject.

That post has been the subject of much debate, many questions and discussions. However I would like to keep this post focused on this question I received, because I think it is representative of the question on a lot of people’s minds when they approach the subject with me.

FROM DOUG:

Hi Bryan,

I was quite interested in your post about shooting the moon with a 7D versus a 5D mark 3. I hope that you don’t mind a question from an amateur about the two cameras.

I’m considering upgrading to the 5d from the 7d. I enjoy photography (mostly pictures of the family for the family). I’m strictly a hobbyist, but really enjoy it. It’s for fun, not for money.

On the various websites, so many people like the 5d compared to the 7d, but I wonder if there is an echo factor (as you allude to in your post). Given that you have the two cameras, do you prefer one or the other? For a semi-serious hobbyist, do you think that it’s worth the upgrade?

(Note that I’m not asking you to decide for me. I’m old enough to make my own decisions. However, I really enjoyed your post, like the way you think and am very interested in your opinion.)

Thanks in advance for taking the time to read this. If you don’t have the time to answer, it’s absolutely not a problem.

Regards,
Doug

Thanks Doug [and all who’ve asked similar questions].

After making the transition myself over the last year, the short version is: Stay with the 7D. Here are my thoughts in broad stroke.

The 5D Mark 3 does not provide enough of new features (that are critical to your shooting style) to justify the expense of an “upgrade”. Like the 7D, the 5D Mark 3 is even more so a purpose built imaging device (camera) that is better suited to performing highly specific shooting tasks, and it does what it’s designed to do exceedingly well – arguably better than any other SLR. The problem is the 5D Mark 3 is more specialized than the 7D in many respects that may make it less relevant to you and your shooting style. The 7D is more versatile than the 5D Mark 3 hands down. The built in flash, wireless E-TTL transmitter, high burst mode and trendsetting ergonomics make it still very relevant till this day.

One thing I very quickly learned from owning/shooting both bodies simultaneously is that both cameras are more complementary peers rather than vertically related. That is, the Canon pro bodies are designed to complement each other and not necessarily supersede each other. Gear heads and spec sheet readers all around will sing otherwise all day long, but the fact of the matter is they have no clue what they are talking about (other than a spec sheet) and more often than not, have never owned or used a 7D or 5D Mark 3, let alone simultaneously.

Here’s an interesting thought. After the highly successful 7D, the 5D Mark 3 really just looked a bit superfluous. I for one picked the 7D over the 5D Mark 2 when I was upgrading from my Rebel XT, because it just made more sense. Don’t get me wrong, the 5D Mark 3 does produce a superior image thanks to is newer sensor tech, but when we’re talking about these pro bodies, the delta in image quality really starts to shrink, especially in the hands of a photographer who knows what they are doing. The Canon 6D is even more proof that the 5D Mark 3 does not really offer very much new capability over the 7D other than it’s full frame sensor (which is only really  relevant to certain shooting styles). As such the Canon 6D is basically the full frame companion for the 7D owners out there, because it really does not make sense to shell out close to $4000 for what the 5D Mark 3 offers over the 7D.

While in Paris, I recently used my 5D Mark 3 for what I would otherwise use my 7D for – general walk around photography. This only further hit home my point about the 7D being a more versatile and on-the-go camera system. Especially when coupled with the best lenses money can buy, which leads me to my next point.

If you don’t use the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM and the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II lenses on your 7D, then chances are you don’t really need to “upgrade” your body. You have yet to maximize your 7D’s full potential. I say this because these are the only two lenses that I know can match the 7D in every aspect of what it was designed to accomplish. These two lenses cover all your important focal lengths, are extremely versatile and flexible when coupled with the 7D, can actually keep up with the 7D’s super fast AF system, have large constant apertures for low light photography coupled with 3-4stops of Image Stabilization respectively. The combo packs an undeniably powerful punch and leaves very little that a photographer cannot accomplish – and for a relatively affordable price.

But the most important feature of these two lenses is their extremely high resolution and optical performance. Nine out of ten lenses simply cannot render image details sharper than the high pixel densities of the 7D sensor. This became painfully evident after Canon released the 7D, as suddenly images seemed softer, even with L lenses. Remember the 7D was the first 18MP APS-C SLR to hit the market. Since then Canon has been steadily revising it’s top lenses to increase their resolution and optical performance. I suspect this is the reason we will not being seeing any super high megapixel cameras from Canon anytime soon – it doesn’t make sense to add megapixels when the lens won’t resolve enough detail to take advantage of the increased resolution. These two lenses I mentioned are the best all around lenses money can buy  – that you will actually use. One is always mounted to my 7D and the other standing by very close. 🙂 A comparable combination for the 5D Mark 3 will be forbiddingly expensive and yield only marginal gains in overall performance.

If you move to a full frame 5D Mark 3 you will lose versatility, practicality and overall usability. Unless you are an avid and very active photographer, your new 5D Mark 3 will most likely end up sitting in it’s case, because it will feel like too much effort to grab it and go when hanging with family or taking a trip. There is more to an SLR than whether or not it has the latest sensor tech or higher resolution. I definitely recommend using the extra cash you will spend on a 5D Mark 3 and invest in the gear and accessories that will ad more dimension and do more to further your photography – I suggest a good solid Manfrotto tripod, 1 or 2 Canon 430ex speedlite flashes (your 7D can control them wirelessly), an interfit strobies kit, a shotgun mic for when you shoot video, a good high quality camera back pack (90% of the stuff out there is not worth it) and take a few of those trips you’ve been wanting to take for a while.

Thanks for reading All and I hope this helped.

Cheers!