7D versus 70D - AF Focus System Differences | ISO Performance | IQ

GregDunn wrote in post #17002834
One thing that a lot of people don't understand about sensors: the 70D has more pixels in the same area as a 7D. Therefore, the pixel full well capacity will be the same or less, meaning the raw signal to noise will be similar.

No doubt Canon has improved the JPEG processing algorithms and processed images may have improvement over the 7D. But the Raw images, as indicated above, are only slightly better if at all - most of the improvement is due to having more pixels which means that you crop in PP or resize and eliminate some noise. Further, it is possible that the pattern of the noise is improved which means that the noise may be less objectionable. But like others, my 7D lives in point expansion mode and the additional AF modes are the reason I chose it in the first place.

This is my potential hold up. How much is actually there in improvement? Most are just saying "It's better" but no review really brings forth any solid details.

TJays wrote in post #17002887
The 70D is a 60D upgrade series, 7D is a 6D upgrade series, two different series of cameras. It's like comparing a 5D III with a 1DX, they have similar parts & features, but not the same. Not saying all these camera's are not good for what they were designed to do or be attractive to the needs of the shooter.
Best wishes with your choice.

No....

Mike55 wrote in post #17003222
The 70D feels like the true upgrade to the 50D, with slightly less build quality.

That is an issue for me. Less build quality. I hated the 60D but if I can get something better I can deal with some problems. But where I shoot I need build quality. The tilt/rotate screen is a gimmic in my world. A gimmic I'd rather not have. And the rear dial/button/whatever they call it sucks I think. Not sure why they took their standard layout from almost every camera and changed it.

This is why the 5D MKIII or 7D MKII seems more interesting to me but have no idea. As said if I can get real world results better I'd consider it.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17004377
Garbage post, is garbage.

The 70D has nearly every feature that the 7D has, the big thing to keep the 7D interesting is the layout (up to your preference) and the different AF modes. Pretty much everything else tips in favor to the 70D.

As for the 7D to 6D... I really don't even think I need to elaborate... that's just a silly assertion.

That isn't really true. The layout is different. The build quality is way off. Some important things to many. But I think I need to just rent one and test it.


And where the heck is the update to the 7D? Canon would seemingly have a slew of new purchases if one was released as I know of many waiting on it holding onto 7Ds...

dinanm3atl wrote in post #17007147
That is an issue for me. Less build quality. I hated the 60D but if I can get something better I can deal with some problems. But where I shoot I need build quality. The tilt/rotate screen is a gimmic in my world. A gimmic I'd rather not have. And the rear dial/button/whatever they call it sucks I think. Not sure why they took their standard layout from almost every camera and changed it.

That isn't really true. The layout is different. The build quality is way off. Some important things to many. But I think I need to just rent one and test it.

And where is it that you shoot that you need more "build quality"? There's absolutely nothing gimmicky about a flip out screen, they're extremely useful and I'm actually thoroughly annoyed that they aren't standard on all DSLR's at this point, including the 1DX.

The build feel may be slightly different between the bodies, but the quality is the same. Weight does not make something "better". A 60D is just as robust as a 7D, the 7D has a bit more weather sealing, but this isn't the case with the 6D, it's just as well sealed. I shoot regularly with a 5D3 and my 6D and I previously owned a 20D, all 3 bodies are just as well built, the 5D and 20D are just heavier and have different layouts.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17007284
And where is it that you shoot that you need more "build quality"? There's absolutely nothing gimmicky about a flip out screen, they're extremely useful and I'm actually thoroughly annoyed that they aren't standard on all DSLR's at this point, including the 1DX.

The build feel may be slightly different between the bodies, but the quality is the same. Weight does not make something "better". A 60D is just as robust as a 7D, the 7D has a bit more weather sealing, but this isn't the case with the 6D, it's just as well sealed. I shoot regularly with a 5D3 and my 6D and I previously owned a 20D, all 3 bodies are just as well built, the 5D and 20D are just heavier and have different layouts.

I'm a motorsports photographer. The 60D and flip out screen felt like cheap rebel line junk. My stuff gets banged around. It gets wet. To say the 60D is 'just about as robust' from my personal experience is far from the truth.

Shot two events with a 60D and immediately sold. If the 70D is anywhere near that it will feel cheap. And as said I am not sure I can give the rear wheel and 'joystick' or whatever they call it another go. Was wondering if there was something there truly and then I might be able to.

The 5D line has the same layout as everything except the Rebel and now 60D/70D. Its easy to go from camera to camera.

dinanm3atl wrote in post #17007454
I'm a motorsports photographer. The 60D and flip out screen felt like cheap rebel line junk. My stuff gets banged around. It gets wet. To say the 60D is 'just about as robust' from my personal experience is far from the truth.

Shot two events with a 60D and immediately sold. If the 70D is anywhere near that it will feel cheap. And as said I am not sure I can give the rear wheel and 'joystick' or whatever they call it another go. Was wondering if there was something there truly and then I might be able to.

The 5D line has the same layout as everything except the Rebel and now 60D/70D. Its easy to go from camera to camera.

Again, had a 20D, now own a 6D and often shoot with my friend's 5D3, never have any real issues with the controls on any of the bodies.

And how a camera "feels" doesn't really tell you how robust it is. I've seen plenty of shots of 60D's and 6D's covered in dirt and still working. I've even taken a rebel out in heavy wet snowfall for an hour and gotten it drenched and it worked fine.

The problem is people have the false assumption that weight is an indication of "quality", it isn't.

dinanm3atl wrote in post #17007147
This is my potential hold up. How much is actually there in improvement? Most are just saying "It's better" but no review really brings forth any solid details.

I have both cameras right here, and I'm not afraid to say the 70D RAW files smoke the 7D RAW files. Jpeg results do not interest me.

Sharpness: 70D by 20%, if not more. Tremendous difference. 7D RAW files are like looking through a slab of margarine in comparison.
Color: 70D by a wide margin.
Focus: Far more consistent across a wide variety of lighting conditions.
Noise: Far superior on 70D at all ISO's. Banding is much better.

Overall, the 70D files are far more malleable.

Build quality doesn't matter much if the sensor delivers noisy, dull RAW files. I shoot in wilderness conditions. Last winter, I was in -40 (without wind chill) temps in Montana along the Rocky Mountain Front. My 6D did fine along with the 7D (although the 7D refused to focus consistently with the same lens combo). Years of shooting the wilderness has taught me that while build is nice, image quality and focus consistency trumps all.

The 70D is not built as tough as the 7D, but it's no slouch, either.

The flip out screen is great in video mode. Also, you can zoom to 100% with your fingers on the touchscreen to check sharpness and skim photos.

I consider the 70D a significant upgrade to the 7D.

Thanks. Sounds like a rental is in order. Run it with my 500mm and 70-200 and see results.

dinanm3atl wrote in post #17007147
This is my potential hold up. How much is actually there in improvement? Most are just saying "It's better" but no review really brings forth any solid details.

There isn't much, other than the increased number of pixels on target. The difference between a poor lens and a quality one is much greater than the difference between sensors these days. Don't be fooled into thinking that just because a sensor is newer and has some whiz-bang new technology it's going to make a noticeable difference in image quality.

YOU have to understand the camera and be willing to post-process the images if you want the best quality - 7D images do require some post-sharpening to look their best, and depending on the lens, perhaps other tweaks in contrast or saturation. Nothing wrong with the camera, just a difference in how the raw files come out of the camera.

I have been wringing out my 5D3, and I'm sure I haven't mastered it yet - but last night I swapped a Canon 24-70 between it and the 7D (both carefully MFA for focus), and the 7D clearly had the sharper and more saturated images after processing. Does that mean the 7D has a better sensor than the 5D3? Of course not. It means my post-processing favors the 7D at this point. Mind you, the images were excellent, but I'm sure I can do better.

Put the best lens you can afford on any current camera, learn to exploit its behavior and you will probably get more for your money than pursuing the body-of-the-month.

GregDunn wrote in post #17008200
There isn't much, other than the increased number of pixels on target. The difference between a poor lens and a quality one is much greater than the difference between sensors these days. Don't be fooled into thinking that just because a sensor is newer and has some whiz-bang new technology it's going to make a noticeable difference in image quality.

YOU have to understand the camera and be willing to post-process the images if you want the best quality - 7D images do require some post-sharpening to look their best, and depending on the lens, perhaps other tweaks in contrast or saturation. Nothing wrong with the camera, just a difference in how the raw files come out of the camera.

I have been wringing out my 5D3, and I'm sure I haven't mastered it yet - but last night I swapped a Canon 24-70 between it and the 7D (both carefully MFA for focus), and the 7D clearly had the sharper and more saturated images after processing. Does that mean the 7D has a better sensor than the 5D3? Of course not. It means my post-processing favors the 7D at this point. Mind you, the images were excellent, but I'm sure I can do better.

Put the best lens you can afford on any current camera, learn to exploit its behavior and you will probably get more for your money than pursuing the body-of-the-month.

You just said the reason new bodies are still attractive though... sure, you can get good detail out of 7D images, but it takes a lot of work. In my experience the newer bodies require a lot less PP work to get great files from. Even the jump from my T2i to EOS M was noticeable, the RAWs were easier to work with from the M.

The shots I've seen in the high ISO threads from the 70D are very good and far better than anything I could get from my T2i or EOS M. There's a lot more to high ISO performance than just luminance and color noise, from what I've seen the 70D files are easily more detailed and accurate for color than those from the 7D.

I always kind of scratch my head about how a swivel screen is a deal breaker. It's not like it has to be used. There are plenty of reasons to like or dislike a camera, but that one always puzzles me. My new car has a CD player in it even though I only ever use my iPhone for music. I wouldn't rule out a car just because it has a CD player in it. To each his own I guess...

GregDunn wrote in post #17008200
I have been wringing out my 5D3, and I'm sure I haven't mastered it yet - but last night I swapped a Canon 24-70 between it and the 7D (both carefully MFA for focus), and the 7D clearly had the sharper and more saturated images after processing.

There is something very wrong with your 5D3 if the 7D raw files look better.

I watched this topic before pulling the trigger on the 6d.

I have used a 7d before and was going to this until everyone says 70d. so i tested the 7d and 70D as a shop last nigh. both autofocusing where lightning fast and really what i was looking for. 70d somehow just feels better (milli-milli seconds quicker) than the 7d. feels snappier i guess is the term. But the 7d build feels more high end. 7D is also a bit expensive for a 5yr old body. 70d articulating screen seems plasticky.

But when i touched the 6D.. just felt like heaven hahaha! my two cents worth

The AF on the 70d in low light when their is no direct source of light to focus on, struggles. In a trip of a few hundred pics only a few do I have to manual focus, sometimes the lighting was so bad, I couldn't, so hard to blame the camera.

I just wanted to chime in here concerning my new 70D. I ordered mine from Amazon two weeks ago and it is flawless.

The sharpness, noise handling, and color is the best I've seen in a crop RAW file. Much, much sharper than 7D. Focus seems to be superior, too.

Again, this was ordered via Amazon U.S., sold by Amazon,. Maybe they have a good batch.

DriveHard wrote in post #17016209
The AF on the 70d in low light when their is no direct source of light to focus on, struggles. In a trip of a few hundred pics only a few do I have to manual focus, sometimes the lighting was so bad, I couldn't, so hard to blame the camera.

Maybe set a trigger or flash up top to use the focus assist beam on?

Mike55 wrote in post #17009075
There is something very wrong with your 5D3 if the 7D raw files look better.

No, when you have sufficient exposure on the sensor and more pixels on target with the 7D, it's not at all surprising. The 7D sensor is quite a bit more densely populated (pixel pitch 4.3 vs. 6.25 microns) so the data / unit area is about 10% better than the 5D3. With the same lens on each, there will be more resolution in the 7D images since the subject will be larger in the frame. If you don't underexpose, the 7D will give quite a good account of itself.

I use the 7D where I have control over the lighting (hence, no need to lift the shadows) and the results are comparable. In some cases, the 7D does look a little better because when using an EF lens, the loss of quality at the edges is notably less.

If you fill the 5D3 frame with your subject (which means a longer focal length), or are forced to underexpose your images, you're handicapping the 7D. These are situations where I do use the 5D3, and it does a great job.

For those who are worried about more post-processing effort on the 7D: I don't see that much extra work is needed, but if you use Lightroom or Photoshop, build an action to handle it on import and the added time required is negligible.