7D vs. 60D vs. T2i

I have the T2i and like the photos I get. I have been considering a camera upgrade, and wonder if I will be able to get more from one of these bodies.
I generally shoot family photos, but occasionally shoot sports, travel and architecture.
My question is general, but I wonder if I would get visibly better low light performance from any of these bodies over my T2i.
What are the photographic advantages that would justify the new costs?

Well, I don't have any of the actual bodies, so all I can do is toss out some generalizations and then some "from what I've heard" things. And, it'd be hard to go into a lot of deatail about the individual bodies, but others can fill in the blanks!

And, I can't give any report on the differences of low light performance. I've heard good things about the 7D, that basically it's as good as it gets for a Canon "crop" camera, but beyond that I don't know how it would differ from, say, the 60D or the T21/T31...

So, on to other things! The first thing right off the bat that you would notice is the size difference with the 60D and/or the 7D. Now, some people like the Rebel "compact" size, but to some folks it's just too "small" for their grip and that can make a difference if you are out to "practice photography" -- you should have gear that you are comfortable using. In fact, some people get a Rebel and then right off the bat put on a camera grip. But others go for and stick with the larger bodies, and then some get a grip for them as well for things such as portrait-oriented shooting (and with some grips improved battery use).

There is another thing the larger sizes give, and that is more "space" for both a larger viewfinder, a larger rear LCD, an LCD at the top for a quick view of your settings, and more accessible controls, especially a rear dial for things like Exposure Compensation, quick aperture control (if shooting Manual), quick menu use, things like that.

Now, all of those are true for both the 60D and the 7D. There is one other thing that is important to mention, and that is AF performance. The bigger cameras as a rule are designed to give better AF performance. This won't mean a lot with some types of photography, but for some it will.

And here, there are differences between the 60D and the 7D -- the 7D has been designed to give superior AF poerformance over the 60D/xxD class -- the 7D could be considered a "professional" crop camera in a lot of ways. It also has improved weather sealing, and between those two features, it has become a "favored" body for many sports, wildlife and birding shooters.

But, as far as I can tell, the 60D is great for an all-purpose day-to-day camera.

Some people criticize the 60D because the body is made of a strong plastic instead of the metal found in the 7D and the other xxD bodies, but I haven't heard stories of people having problems with the 60D bodies as such. Maybe some will have stories, but actually I have heard folks say they like the lighter weight.

In all, I'd say you can't go wrong with either body (or, for that matter, a 50D). But, if sports and/or low light shooting are important to you that might lean you toward a 7D. Of course, getting a 1DMkIV is out of the running!

If you want to upgrade from a 550d to a 7 or 60 for better images, wrong move. They all share the same sensor. Upgrade for ergonomics and features. All 3 cameras will give you basically the same IQ. More FPS, weight, features, weather sealing, etc- these are the things to upgrade to one of those bodies for.
Digital Rev 7d vs 60d vs 550d: http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=ET0idevzGRE

It looks from what I saw in the review, that I won't be getting a whole lot more with the other two crop bodies.
I wish the 5DII were a little less expensive.

Well, it's true that the current ff bodies to get an edge with low-light IQ, but still, you have to ask yourself what are the most important things, what are they worth to you, and of course how much you can afford!

Get a used 5dc.

I have a 5D II and a T2i. I've been using the crop more than the 5D lately because I find myself shooting macro, or looking for reach...bugs, birds, kid's sports, etc. I disagree that the move to full frame is an automatic upgrade.

The biggest gap is the T2i to 7D. My opinion - the T2i's significant missing features are 19 cross-type points for sports / things that move, the FPS for things that move, and flash sync for separating the body and flash (the 7D and 60D have built in masters, the T2i doesn't even have a port).

The other difference is size. I struggle a bit with the smallness of the T2i when I have to make adjustments...everythi​ng from the location of the rear focus button to the process of on-the-spot adjustments (such as changing focus points).

I agree with other posters in that there's no significant image quality jump (once you get past the limitations mentioned above).

If you are looking to spend money to get better pics, spend it on glass, no Canon EOS camera built in the last 3 or 4 years takes bad pictures.

To clarify a few comments made by others above (like BrickR's):

- The 7D is the heaviest of bodies short of the 1D series
- The 7D has the largest viewfinder and 100% out of all croppers
- The 7D has more configurability and dedicated video switch (ergos)
- The 7D has the most AF points short of the 1D series (19)
- The 7D has the fastest framerate short of the 1D series (8fps)
- The 7D has the most advanced AF short of the 1D series

So there are some major differences even between the 60D and 7D that need to be called out. IQ will be nearly the same, it is these other features that really differentiate the 7D.

There might be other things you can do, than buying another camera...

First thing with any camera is do all you can to avoid underexposure. If you have to increase exposure during post processing, that will always amp up any existing noise in the image.

Depending upon what you use now and how you use it, you might get better high ISO performance out of your camera using a different workflow and image editing software.

For example, both Lightroom 3 (currently V 3.5 actually) and Photoshop CS5 are quite a bit better handling high ISO noise than their predecessors. In the past, with earlier versions of those I'd usually use Canon DPP to handle high ISO images. It worked better than LR2 and CS4. I seldom need to do that now, thanks to the improved noise handling in the two Adobe softwares which saves me a lot of time. (I haven't used Elements, but I imagine it's the same because I think it uses the same ACR or Adobe Raw Converter.)

A separate NR-specific software/plug-in such as Neat Image or Nik DFine might work even better.

I have also heard, but not really proven, that it helps to restrict your camera to using only the "full" ISOs, not the interpolated thirds stop ISOs in between. Most Canon models you can set in the menu or in a Custom Function that ISO only operate in full stops (100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200, 6400, 12800, etc.) Again, I haven't tested this theory myself. I've been in the habit of using only full stops of ISO anyway... it just makes manually changing ISO faster, and I leave shutter speeds and apertures variable in one-third stops, so still have plenty of ability to make very precise settings.

From your post I don't know much about your skill level, specific needs or what gear you have available, but different there are some other things that can help, that you may or may not be aware of or have available:

Depending upon what you have avail., lenses might help, both with I.S. and with larger apertures. WIth static, inanimate objects, I.S. (or the third party equivalent) can help by making possible slower shutter speeds, even handheld, which in turn allow you to keep the ISO set lower.

This goes hand in hand with practicing shooting techniques to improve one's own skills at handholding slower shutter speeds... And using monopods or tripods when possible.

Of course, I.S. and all the skill in the world holding a camera steady can't do much to help with subject motion. For that you still need to keep the shutter speeds up, so a larger aperture lens might help. Zooms max out at f2.8 plus tend to be pretty pricey, large and heavy. Many primes with larger apertures are a lot more affordable, if not as convenient. For example,the inexpensive 50/1.8 gives you 1.333 stops more light than even fastest zoom covering that focal length. OTOH, that lens and many other primes don't have I.S. and a larger aperture means shallower depth of field, too, so it depends a lot upon what you're shooting.

One more possibility... With really high ISO images that are noisy, sometimes it works great to convert them to black & white during post processing. The noise will then look like film grain, which can be a positive rather than a negative, or at least is a lot less detracting from the image. Other monochromatic conversions such as sepia or split-toning might work too.

There are limits and we all have differing ideas about what's acceptible, but I find I can get ISO 3200 out of my cameras that use the same sensor and processor as yours, before noise gets problematic (IMO). For comparison, I'll use my 5DII to ISO 6400.

Regarding camera to camera comparisons and comments....

Interesting... just the opposite... when I shoot macro I'm more likely to use 5DII. It allows smaller apertures and renders a smoother OOF background. Also, macro shots often lend themselves to really big prints, which the 5DII is superior at doing. And, the 5DII's slower AF performance is no hindrence to me, since I normally manual focus macro shots anyway. But, yes, for sports and when I want "more reach" I'll use 7D instead, both for it's better AF tracking ability and it's crop.

Frame rate isn't a really huge thing to me... I try to avoid using a lot of fast bursts simply because I already spend too much time sitting at a computer editing images. A well timed single frame can often be better than "spray and pray" anyway. 5DII and Rebel series cameras give similar frame rates. 50D's 6 fps and 60D's 5 fps aren't really all that different from 7D's real world frame rates. 7D slows down to allow for metering and focusing, anyway, plus will slow when some of the image enhancing features are enabled. You only get the max frame rate consistently when using an adequately fast shutter speed (I'm guessing 1/250 or faster), overriding AF priority, and by "fooling" the camera into not metering the scene (it continues to try to meter even in M mode, and will slow frame rates to do so).

I do think there's less "shutter lag" with 7D. This might be due to the shutter release button, which is similar to what's used on the 1D series. Haven't measured this, and the other cameras are pretty darned responsive too, so the difference is a few milliseconds. That might make a difference when shooting fast action sports, but it's pretty hard to quantify.

T2i/T3i both have 9-point AF, but only the center point is the more sensitive cross-type. They also use a penta-mirror setup, so their viewfinders aren't quite as bright.

60D, 50D, 7D and 5DII all have "true" pentaprisms that make them a bit brighter, but add to cost, size and weight. The 7D's in particular, seems to add a lot of weight in order for the camera to offer a full 100% viewfinder. In fact, the 7D is a wee bit heavier than full frame 5DII!

5DII's AF is similar to T2i/T3i: 9-points and only the center one cross-type. However, unique to the 5D series, it has 6 hidden "expansion/assist" points right around the center point, that can be enabled to help but only work in AI Servo and are not cross-type. You can't see the expansion points in the viewfinder. Also, for some reason the 5DII's AF manages to work, even if pretty slowly, about one stop lower light than 7D and 50D (haven't compared to 60D, but it's AF is so similar to 50D I wouldn't expect it to be any different).

With 60D, all 9 points are cross-type. In the real world, this just makes for a bit more flexibility composing and setting up shots.

60D lacks a PC sync socket, such as is used to fire studio strobes via a sync cord. Of course, more an more people are going to wireless transmitters/triggers of some sort anyway, so this might not matter.

You can add an ST-E2 module to any modern Canon to get wireless flash control that's in some ways better than the built-in version. For one, ST-E2 uses IR to communicate, rather than visible flashes of light from the built-in flash. Also, the built-in flash can overheat with continuous use, and will shut down to protect itself. ST-E2 won't do that, and can control more off-camera flashes.

Problem with all of Canon's wireless off-camera flash control is that it uses IR/light communication... This limits flash setup to line-of-sight, which can be a problem positioning the flashes. The flash's receiving panel has to be facing and able to "see" the camera's transmitter, and vice versa. A radio trigger doesn't have this limitation, would allow much more flexibility positioning the flashes.

There are a few advantages of the 7D over the T2i that I consider important...

First: The two control dials (main on top and quick control at the rear) system makes it easier for me to select various shooting parameters...

Second: The top LCD makes checking and setting my camera parameters easier and more convenient...

Third: The three user selected modes allows the photographer to choose pertinent shooting parameters, register these as a user selected mode and then select all of the parameters with a single twist of the mode dial. This is far faster and can be more accurate since the choice of parameters can be selected in advance rather than during the heat of fast shooting...

Note: The 40D and 50D also share the above advantages. Although the 60D has both the top LCD and the two dial system, the 60D has reduced the number of user selected modes to a single one. This is, IMO, a step back in shooting convenience...

The 7D has the advantage over the T2i when it comes to viewfinder size (30% larger) and brightness (pentaprism vs. pentamirror), a much faster burst rate (8fps vs. 3.7fps), significantly shorter shutter lag (131 vs. 252 ms), longer battery life (800 vs. 440 shots per charge) and a faster maximum shutter speed (1/8000 vs. 1/4000 second)...

The advantages of the T2i (aside from price) are: the smaller size and weight but, those are also disadvantages for some photographers like me who like the larger size of the 7D...

I don't think there would be a significant quality difference in the shots that the T2i can nail down but, the improved focus capability of the 7D and increased burst rate may allow a photographer to nail more fast action shots...

If the price differential between the T2i and 7D is important in that only the lower price would allow you to purchase better glass, the T2i might be the better choice. However, if you can afford both the 7D and top-line glass, you might be far better of choosing the 7D. I absolutely love my 7D with the 70-200mm f/4L IS lens. That is a terrific combination which I use in tandem with a 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens on a 40D.

NOTE: Although I love my 7D, if the 60D were the only "upgrade" to the 50D, I would be shooting with a pair of 40D cameras or a 40D and a 50D. I am quite happy with the 40D as my second camera in the shooting tandem. Heck, I shot with a 30D and 40D for years. See my China galleries below on smugmug...

artyH wrote in post #13225569
I have the T2i and like the photos I get. I have been considering a camera upgrade, and wonder if I will be able to get more from one of these bodies.
I generally shoot family photos, but occasionally shoot sports, travel and architecture.
My question is general, but I wonder if I would get visibly better low light performance from any of these bodies over my T2i.

They all have the same sensor. There is some debate whether the more expensive ones with this sensor do better noise reduction in software (thanks to more processing power) but I doubt it's the case and even if it is you could do it in dpp if you shoot raw.

artyH wrote in post #13225569
What are the photographic advantages that would justify the new costs?

The autofocus on the 7d just rocks. Anything that moves will greatly benefit from it. I also like the changed control layout and a whole bunch of other things.

Architecture shots probably won't benefit from your upgrade but as said moving things such as sports or kids running around will benefit from either the 60d or 7d. I have the t2i and a 50d. The 50d has the same focus system as 60d and it is brilliant. The 7d is supposed to make this system look slow. If you shoot an awful lot of fast moving the 7d is your best option but to be honest you won't miss much with 5 plus fps and the 9 cross point autofocus. Photo quality from an upgrade will probably be in the amount of keepers you get as opposed to actual image quality ability

TeamSpeed wrote in post #13228533
To clarify a few comments made by others above (like BrickR's):

- The 7D is the heaviest of bodies short of the 1D series
- The 7D has the largest viewfinder and 100% out of all croppers
- The 7D has more configurability and dedicated video switch (ergos)
- The 7D has the most AF points short of the 1D series (19)
- The 7D has the fastest framerate short of the 1D series (8fps)
- The 7D has the most advanced AF short of the 1D series

So there are some major differences even between the 60D and 7D that need to be called out. IQ will be nearly the same, it is these other features that really differentiate the 7D.

you have convinced me to figure out some way to upgrade in 1 more year... i love my t2i but photograph my kids soccer games and night hockey games... and i use video too..
but i have pics of a kid in soccer on a break away to our keeper... i got the kick pic.. and the keeper already caught, lying down and the player rolling over him.. all in 2 pics.. faster camera would have yielded a few more in there and made an awesome set!!!!!!

The 5Dc is such a classic, very "film like" images that hold up to a lot of post processing very well. The 60d files have almost the same quality - especially the noise pattern at high iso. See Imaging Resource http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/CO​MPS01.HTM