5D MKIII or 7D??? Please advise

17-40 L, 10-22 EF-s (sold now though waiting payment!), 50mm Sigma 1.4, 85mm Sigma 1.4 (ordering as soona s I get the 10-22 payment).

I used to have a fair few lenses, 70-200 f4 l is usm, the 2.8 version as well but I never found myself using them as much as I thought I would.

85mm will be the sweet spot I reckon and the 17mm for my explores and landscapes :D
 
That 85mm sigma lens has some really nice write ups on it so that'll be fantastic as long as you get a good copy on that 5D mk iii. I think I'll pickup the nikon version when funds allow after I've gone back to FF.
 
mrk said:
17-40 L, 10-22 EF-s (sold now though waiting payment!), 50mm Sigma 1.4, 85mm Sigma 1.4 (ordering as soona s I get the 10-22 payment).

I used to have a fair few lenses, 70-200 f4 l is usm, the 2.8 version as well but I never found myself using them as much as I thought I would.

85mm will be the sweet spot I reckon and the 17mm for my explores and landscapes :D
Click to expand...

Very nice, but with all these primes you're going to become a prime whore like Ray :D

Hmmm 17-40 sounds like a good shout as my 12-24mm Tokina hardly ever leaves my 40D these days. But then again a 24-105mm kit lens would give me the equivalent of a 16mm - 70mm lens on my current crop, if I'm working this correctly? SO whilst not UWA, it's not far off!!
 
Last edited:
The 40D is 1.6x crop not 1.5 so it would be a bit out. The 17-40 appears wider on the 5D than the 10-22 on the 40D. In fact BRB doing a test!
 
mrk said:
The 40D is 1.6x crop not 1.5 so it would be a bit out. The 17-40 appears wider on the 5D than the 10-22 on the 40D. In fact BRB doing a test!
Click to expand...

Wow, that will be wide.

The 24-70mm might also be in for a shout 2nd hand, but it's expensive, heavy and maybe a little OTT given the great noise handling of the 5D 3 at high ISO.

I'm going around in circles, diving off in tangents and confusing myself. This is great fun.

Love yours tests, the 40D vs 5D3 burst was good to see :D
 
I've got to admit that while I've taken thousands of photos with the Olympics on since I got my 5DM3, I've not played around too much with the settings.

The Scenarios for the AF I've had a play with. I think those really though are just an extension of the AF Custom functions in previous cameras, however its better because it means you can quickly change a preset depending on what you are shooting.

I believe the auto lighting enhancer is only relevant if you are shooting jpeg.
 
:D It's one of the main reasons I stuck with the 40D for so many years, not many other cameras could match up to it for the burst until now and it had a very capable ISO range for its time (usable up to 1250 given the right exposure.

IMO the 40D was quite a head of its time (2007) and is still very capable today.

Here's a comparison of 10-22 on the 40D vs 17-40 on the 5D, same settings, tripod mounted.


Canon 40D vs 5D MkIII (ISO 3200) by Robbie Khan, on Flickr

Note the tree detail lost on the 40D capture! Also the aperture blades of the 17-40 L are a little insane compared to the 6 of the 10-22.
 
Last edited:
Great stuff Robbie.

Loading up now on the dog slow WiFi.

Leaning towards the 5D3 Kit, possibly the body from ******* and a 2nd hand 24-105 to save ~£150-200.
 
Last edited:
Much better detail from the newer combo (no shock there).

What iso were they both at?

I'm off to sleep now, we can pickup this fun tomorrow! :D
 
3200 :)

The rear LCD must be IPS because the viewing angles are brilliant and there's that hint og IPS "tinge" when moving around it. Blacks are much richer compared to the 40D as well:

5dmk3_LCD_versus.jpg


Edit*
Damn it's late you can tell, got the text the wrong way round!
 
Last edited:
Loving the tests mark even though I'm not a canon user anymore. Its nice to see direct comparisons between products and I'll do something similar with my D300s and a D800 (possible D800E, but we'll see on availability in a months time) and post the results also to see what else truly changes between generations.

I never even realised the screens where that much different. Wonder if the mk ii is the same or different compared to the mk iii. Maybe ray can do a quick shot like your 40D vs mk iii to test?
 
Thanks :D

He's got enough spare bodies so there's no excuse!

I figured it's worth doing as much comparison as possible really. I think I have covered the main differences, maybe some other bits left but one thing I absolutely prefer on the MkIII is the shutter noise, it's just that much more pleasant to hear than the 40D and sounds more mechanical and proper compared to the dampened D800 as well.

I don't know how else to describe it other than it just sounds more professional, it doesn't sound slow even when shooting at 1/30sec whereas on the D800, because it's dampened, I find I look twice at the display to make sure it wasn't at 1/15 instead because it 'sounded' slower.

With the 40D it is different still in that at 1/30 I have to review a photo and zoom in because it's got that direct slap noise it tricks you into thinking perhaps some camera shake occurred as the mirror slapped up and down even though it had not.

You get none of those illusions with the MkIII.


And looking through the viewfinder of the 40D now I think "how the hell did I compose with a VF this small!" :D
 
Use the 17-40 and buy the 70-200 f4. In my book it's sharper than that overpriced 70-300. The image of the canon 5D (mrk) Cleans up Excellently with Topaz DeNoise.
I'll never be able to afford one so I'll stick with my 7D & 50D. I do Birding Nature & Portraits with my 7D, but the MkIII would do far superior Portraits with the right lens on it. My 70-200 f4 does nice Sharp head & shoulder shots.
Good Luck.
 
I'll do the LCD shot tomorrow, but i can tell you now that it is nicer on the mkiii. The image looks almost processed.

As for the shutter noise, it took my a while to get used to, it is almost not mechanical enough! I am used to it now though and try the silent mode mrk, and compare that to your 40D.
 
Oh I prefer it without using silent mode! interesting difference in shutter noise preference though, I guess it is subjective :p

I read in one review they stated the MkIII has a special AR coating on the LCD to allow you to see the display in direct sunlight better too, I certainly found this to be the case and you can see the coating when the screen is off if you look at an angle it glistens a shade of purple.
 
Nice, look forward to seeing the difference. How does the quiet shutter mode work? Does it lock the mirror until you let go of the shutter, so you can move it away and release, or is it something completely different?

I quite like the shutter sound on the nikon D300s, but its very loud compared to a 5D mk ii from what I remember!

Btw, completely random question but does the mk iii come with a flash hot shoe cover? My mk ii didn't.
 
mrk said:
Oh I prefer it without using silent mode! interesting difference in shutter noise preference though, I guess it is subjective :p

I read in one review they stated the MkIII has a special AR coating on the LCD to allow you to see the display in direct sunlight better too, I certainly found this to be the case and you can see the coating when the screen is off if you look at an angle it glistens a shade of purple.
Click to expand...

Would that purple cast ever be mistaken for dodgy white balance though? Although if you shoot in RAW, I doubt it would matter anyway!
 
The mirror goes up in a slightly slower speed i think, you go from 6fps to 4fps by doing that though.

I use silent mode in church and sometimes candids. People don't notice it !
 
You mean 7 fps to probably 5fps! (not timed with silent mode on :p).

James J said:
Would that purple cast ever be mistaken for dodgy white balance though? Although if you shoot in RAW, I doubt it would matter anyway!
Click to expand...

Can't notice it affecting any pictures when the screen is on, which is good :)

Edit*
No hotshoe cover nope.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom