Canon 7D vs 5D MKII?

[An Exception]

Stop pixel peeping, get off DXO and take some pics ffs. Are you printing shots for billboards or something?

Who cares about mathematical equations and 100% image crops if you are not doing photography professionally.

I'd take real world user experience over the DXO and DP labrat tests anyday of the week simply because it means more to me.

A. I'm a real world user
B. Why don't YOU go out and take some pics
C. You must be a bit naive to take the subjective opinion of some 'random real world' user over controlled/scientific tests.
D. Why get an F 1.2 lens if your not doing photography professionally, why get a full frame camera if your not doing photography professionally, why get a DSLR if your not doing photography professionally.
E. How do you make an informed decision if you remain ignorant?

I think you need to understand some people enjoy learning and delving into the dark depths of their hobby/semi profession and find the fruits of that understanding useful. If you don't care about 100% crops and facts etc. as they are insignificant to you, don't assume they are insignificant to everyone.

 

[Columbo]

A. I'm a real world user
Obviously

B. Why don't YOU go out and take some pics
Check my Flickr

C. You must be a bit naive to take the subjective opinion of some 'random real world' user over controlled/scientific tests.
Those 'random' real world users you are talking about are the users that continuously contribute outstanding images to this and other forums. Rojin, Clown, Wegde, Ksanti and others all take varied shots with a number of differing styles in different situations. Would I take their advice over someone shooting a set-up chart in a temp controlled room. Too bloody right I would.

D. Why get an F 1.2 lens if your not doing photography professionally, why get a full frame camera if your not doing photography professionally, why get a DSLR if your not doing photography professionally.
What I'm talking about is the comparison you made of the 35mm on 2 different bodies. Unless printing or viewing at huge sizes the difference is going to be nothing to the point where that comparison is useless.

E. How do you make an informed decision if you remain ignorant?
So because I and others don't jizz all over the DXO or DP websites everytime they stick up a new review, that makes us ignorant? Really, just....

 

[reygjabla]

Looks to me like the OP has been enlightened thoroughly now as to which camera to choose.

 

[An Exception]

Those 'random' real world users you are talking about are the users that continuously contribute outstanding images to this and other forums. Rojin, Clown, Wegde, Ksanti and others all take varied shots with a number of differing styles in different situations. Would I take their advice over someone shooting a set-up chart in a temp controlled room. Too bloody right I would.

I understand all that perfectly, but the only way you could possibly argue that full frame cameras don't give sharper images through using more of the imaging circle is if you print and display every full frame image at 1.5x the size (for each side ie 2.25x area) of a crop camera. You magnify/crop a full frame camera's image 1.5x less to get to any given display size and as such apparent sharpness is 1.5x greater.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/full-frame-advantage.htm

I know it's uncle Ken but I've seen the same sort of results in my shooting. I did a couple of tests with my dad's ancient and awful Sigma 70-210 on my 5D wide open vs a new Tamron 70-300 stopped down to f/8 on my dad's d5000 and the 5D + awful lens walked all over the d5000 for sharpness.

What do you do when one cancels the other out... think for yourself perhaps?

 

[alexthecheese]

OK guys, I'm pretty much set on the 550d now. Will be playing on my mates this weekend to make sure. I think it's probably for the best - I could get the 5D mk2, but the missus wants me to have it for my birthday and my finances wouldn't allow me to get the 5d mk2 by then. There's also the other valid reasons of this being my first DSLR etc. etc...

Can someone knock me up a first lens to get? Looking at the EF-S range, the only Canon one that stands out is the 17-55mm, at 2.8. That's £660~.

There is the alternative, which my mate at the weekend had on a 7D, of the Sigma 17-70mm 2.8-4. That seems to offer the best value - but having just read the review of it on www.the-digital-picture.com, it doesn't seem to be that great after all.

Any suggestions on lenses to buy as a first all-rounder to then be added to?

 

[An Exception]

5D Mark I
Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 or Sigma 24-70 2.8
50mm 1.8

 

[Rojin]

OK guys, I'm pretty much set on the 550d now. Will be playing on my mates this weekend to make sure. I think it's probably for the best - I could get the 5D mk2, but the missus wants me to have it for my birthday and my finances wouldn't allow me to get the 5d mk2 by then. There's also the other valid reasons of this being my first DSLR etc. etc...

Can someone knock me up a first lens to get? Looking at the EF-S range, the only Canon one that stands out is the 17-55mm, at 2.8. That's £660~.

There is the alternative, which my mate at the weekend had on a 7D, of the Sigma 17-70mm 2.8-4. That seems to offer the best value - but having just read the review of it on www.the-digital-picture.com, it doesn't seem to be that great after all.

Any suggestions on lenses to buy as a first all-rounder to then be added to?

The Canon 17-55 f2.8 is the best EF-S standard zoom that you can buy, although you do pay the premium price for it. The Tamron 17-50 non VC and the latest Sigma 17-50 OS are both viable alternatives that are well liked. I had the Tamron and it was excellent value for money, the Sigma has OS though. Further down the line if you start looking at primes, have a really good look at the Sigma 30mm f1.4, this was by far my favourite lens on a crop body.

 

[alexthecheese]

5D Mark I
Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 or Sigma 24-70 2.8
50mm 1.8

I'm wary of buying the 5D as it's obviously going to be 2nd hand and I won't get a warranty with it or understand if I'd be getting hold of a good one. I would appreciate the video recording aswell.

The Canon 17-55 f2.8 is the best EF-S standard zoom that you can buy, although you do pay the premium price for it. The Tamron 17-50 non VC and the latest Sigma 17-50 OS are both viable alternatives that are well liked. I had the Tamron and it was excellent value for money, the Sigma has OS though. Further down the line if you start looking at primes, have a really good look at the Sigma 30mm f1.4, this was by far my favourite lens on a crop body.

Maybe it'll have to be the 17-55mm f2.8 then - it does seem to be miles ahead of the other competitors - the newer Tamron 17-50 with VC performs worse than the older one it seems, but it's only the newer one that I'll be able to get hold of.

I think I'll stop looking at it all now as it's giving me a right headache.

 

[alexthecheese]

Errr... what about the D5100 guys? Similar price, around £50 more, but has a much better sensor according to DXO Mark (sorry to bring that up ).

It's shy of a couple of megapixels to the 550d, but has much lower noise according to that website and goes up to 25600 ISO, even though that looks terrible.

The lenses for Nikon look to be markedly more expensive though, and there doesn't appear to be a 17-55mm equivalent - the ones in that kinda range seem to have worse f/stop thingies and the best one is about a grand.

This shows it to be better...

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon_EOS_550D-vs-Nikon-D5100

 

[An Exception]

Yes the sensor is way better, but tbh I don't really get the impression you understand what's important in photography/equipment and why, so I don't think you will recognise good advice when you see it, else why would you ever get a 550d over a 5dmki for what you plan to do?
Video you say? well you do realise you need to manual focus, it's nothing like using a camcorder. Warranty? You can buy them with warranty.

You were also looking at a 7D, when a D7000 is better (for what your likely to use it for) and cheaper.

As for a 17-55mm 2.8, I think you have to be nuts to spend £660 on a crop only lens...

Edit:
Prices now seem to have reversed, the 7d seems cheaper than the D7000.

 

[alexthecheese]

Err well yes, that's kinda why I'm here really - I don't know what I am looking at. For whatever reason I started looking at Canon, as my mates have them, and continued to do so. Should I be apologising? I thought I'd keep my ramblings in one thread, rather than creating lots.

Would the 17-55m 2.8 keep its value? I'm confused as I've come from the 7D/5D2, to the 550d/7D, now I'm 550d/5100. Appreciate I'm all over the shop.

If the 5d1 comes with a warranty then fair enough, though I would like the video though.

The Nikon 5100 has automatic focussing in video mode, which is another reason to get that for my video 'needs', but then if I ask the same question, what lenses should I look at if I were considering a 5100, what response am I going to get? or ?

 

[jonneymendoza]

err. my 400d did me proud today in a large hall with not good lighting down southbank royal festival.

shooting 1600. Just had a look at the shots now and they are not that noisy. i can only imagine a 5d3 shooting at 6400 that will look comparable to a 400d 1600.

i also used my 430ex flash occasionaly too and produced some good effects. Their was lots of poeple with 60d's and other Nikon equivalents but most using kit lenses and no external flash.

Kit lens would have been perfectly fine at close range shots but you need a external flash of some sort.

In the hall though my 70-200 outshined and i got some fantastic shots from midway across the freaking hall(its a quite a large hall!) and shot 200mm F2.8!!

love that lens.

Point? Its all about the person behind teh camera. give me ANY cheap Tele lens and i can do the business!

 

[alexthecheese]

err. my 400d did me proud today in a large hall with not good lighting down southbank royal festival.

shooting 1600. Just had a look at the shots now and they are not that noisy. i can only imagine a 5d3 shooting at 6400 that will look comparable to a 400d 1600.

Do you mean that against me worrying about the 5100 sensor vs the 550d sensor?

 

[James J]

Err well yes, that's kinda why I'm here really - I don't know what I am looking at. For whatever reason I started looking at Canon, as my mates have them, and continued to do so. Should I be apologising? I thought I'd keep my ramblings in one thread, rather than creating lots.

Would the 17-55m 2.8 keep its value? I'm confused as I've come from the 7D/5D2, to the 550d/7D, now I'm 550d/5100. Appreciate I'm all over the shop.

If the 5d1 comes with a warranty then fair enough, though I would like the video though.

The Nikon 5100 has automatic focussing in video mode, which is another reason to get that for my video 'needs', but then if I ask the same question, what lenses should I look at if I were considering a 5100, what response am I going to get? or ?

Autofocusing on the d5100 can be heard in the video though. Know this from experience.

 

[Columbo]

It's also slower than erosion for anything that moves faster than a slug.

If all of your friends shoot Canon, then would it not makes sense to go for a Canon so you you could swap / borrow lenses and accesories easily?

 

[James J]

It's also slower than erosion for anything that moves faster than a slug.

If all of your friends shoot Canon, then would it not makes sense to go for a Canon so you you could swap / borrow lenses and accesories easily?

I guess that question isn't aimed at me

 

[Columbo]

I guess that question isn't aimed at me

Doh...fail

 

[alexthecheese]

Yeah, I would like to borrow their lenses, but I know they're tight gits and wouldn't let me.

After reading reviews of the Nikon 5100, it does seem to be the most appealing so far, in the price range that suits me best, but the lenses don't seem to offer the range that the Canon do.

The equivalent 17-55mm Canon lens that Nikon offer is £1060 compared to £660 for the Canon.

Maybe I've still not grasped all this.

 

[Rojin]

Well you sort of have, Nikon currently offer some very nice camera bodies especially with the D800. However you may find that the Canon lenses suit your needs more... It's all a conspiracy! The DR performance of the D800 is excellent, however personally I'm happier with the Canon lens range so I'll be sticking with my 7+ year old camera.

 

[D.P.]

TBH, the lens range isn't that different. All the usual suspects are covered on both system with similar lenses or similar qualities at similar prices. Some of the Nikon glass is sharper, some of the Canon L is sharper, Sometimes Nikon is more expensive, sometimes Canon is. Nikon offers unique lens like the 14-24mm which Canon has no equal (and Nikon has offered a 200-400mm f/4.0 for 20 years or more and Canon still hasn't released theirs). Canon do have more money to spend on lenses and have updated most of their line while Nikon still has a few older designs waiting to be replaced, but then you can't use old lenses on new Canon bodies, while almost every Nikon lens in the last 50 years works on a new Nikon body.


The Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 is one of the Nikon oddballs being more expensive than the Canon and doesn't have VR. However, the Nikon is a professional quality lens and built like a tank. The Tamron and sigma 17-50mm lenses tend to make good substitutes at lower price points.

I don't really see lens choice as an argument to choose one over the other unless you have a specific requirement.