A 5D mark 3 is not a good alternative to a 7d!!

Absolutely everything depends on your actual needs.

The capabilities of cameras continue to improve over time, although it looks to me like the rate of improvement has slowed considerably.

Here's the thing: while the cameras have been getting better, the needs of photographers have probably not been changing all that much. Instead, the additional capabilities remove various crutches that were previously used to achieve acceptable results (e.g., the use of flash instead of high ISO).

As a results, the natural question has to be raised: how much is enough?


The 5D3 is unquestionably better than the 7D in terms of high ISO performance. It had better be, because it's both full frame and newer technology that comes at a substantial price premium. But that's not the real question that has to be answered.

The real question that has to be answered is: is the 7D good enough for someone's needs? Only that person can answer that question, but as cameras improve, the lower end will fulfill the needs of ever larger numbers of people.


Some people simply have to have the best they can get their hands on, no matter how good or bad that might be, usually for irrational reasons. For the rest, though, there's a point at which a camera's capabilities are simply going to be good enough.

I suspect the 7D is right at that point for most people.

va_rider wrote in post #15882992
Well, I'll give you that... if someone only has the money for a 7D, then in that price range, the 7D is the best Canon camera you can get with a crop sensor, fast AF, and good burst speed...

But, given the extended budget, the 5d3 is an excellent alternative to the 7D... wicked fast AF that's programmable to suit your needs, excellent noise handling/low light capabilities, and a respectable burst rate...

Given an even larger budget, a 1Dx would be an amazing alternative to the 7D.

There are many alternatives for the 7D... depending on your budget... If someone was on the fence, and had enough room in their budget, I'd definitely recommend the 5d3 over the 7D.

Depends on what they shoot. If they are focal length limited, like for bird or animal photography, then maybe the 7d camera is the better option.

I upgraded from a 7D and for me the difference is big enough to justify it.

I have 2 7d's and 1 5d iii and both have their good and bad points.
love them both for what they can do.

jaomul wrote in post #15882974
Point being if someone has a budget and asks about a 7d, the 5d3 is not a good option

Sooo...your argument is based on budget constraints?

That's true of just about any kind of product. Buy what you can afford, and don't even think about something that's out of your price range.

But that doesn't mean there isn't value in the more expensive product, for those who can afford it. Believe it or not, there are a lot of people who can afford, and find value in the 5DIII.

Besides...EF lenses aren't necessarily unreasonably expensive. ie, you can snag a 50mm 1.8 for less than a $100 bucks.

Wow. Those of you who decided to throw in insults abour using full frame lenses and ability and 7d defending. I have used a 5d3. I have full frame lenses. I have owned a 1ds and I do own a 7d and 5dc.

The 5d3 is without doubt the best camera I have used. It is without doubt superior to my 7d for the type of stuff I do. No questions there. I am not bashing it or praising the 7d. My point simply was there is no point recommending a camera in the 5d3 (or 1d4) price range to someone enquiring about upgrading to something in the 7d price range.

This is the equipment talk section on a forum. I would hope I never try to put someone down here for an opinion.

h4ppydaze wrote in post #15882981
Canon does need to release a new sensor though. The 7d sensor is so far behind in tech that it's embarrassing hat they're still using it in new camera bodies.

Someone should tell all those people producing wonderful photographs with 7D's that they need to dash them on concrete and update to something better.

fotoworx wrote in post #15885708
Someone should tell all those people producing wonderful photographs with 7D's that they need to dash them on concrete and update to something better.

Both of you are correct, of course.

Canon is behind Nikon as regards sensors. And the 7D is a fantastic camera regardless of where Canon's sensor tech is relative to Nikon's.

Nikon continues to improve their camera line. The D7100 looks to be a fantastic all-rounder, just like the 7D is. Canon needs to continue to improve their line as well in order to be competitive.

But Canon doesn't need to be competitive with Nikon in order for someone to be able to get fantastic results from the 7D. Frankly, I regard the 7D as a classic at least as noteworthy as the 5D, because it gets very nearly everything right. Where Canon winds up relative to Nikon will not change that.

fotoworx wrote in post #15885708
Someone should tell all those people producing wonderful photographs with 7D's that they need to dash them on concrete and update to something better.

I just meant that it's embarrassing that canon hasn't put out a new sensor... Really it's sad that the R&D cycle was this long on revamping their crop sensor, keeping n mind what the competition is doing.

I know people are producing beautiful work with 40d, 50d, 7d, d300, etc but that doesn't mean the cameras aren't a bit outdated.

h4ppydaze wrote in post #15885734
I just meant that it's embarrassing that canon hasn't put out a new sensor... Really it's sad that the R&D cycle was this long on revamping their crop sensor, keeping n mind what the competition is doing.

I know people are producing beautiful work with 40d, 50d, 7d, d300, etc but that doesn't mean the cameras aren't a bit outdated.

Fortunately as regards the 7D, it's really only the sensor that's a bit outdated, and even then it's not horribly so (with the sole exception of dynamic range, a problem that exists throughout the entire Canon line).

95flhr wrote in post #15883105
I own both, and both have their positives and negatives.

I love my 7D for bird photography and sports where light is great.
I love the 5D3 for portraits, lower light photography, and landscapes.

It's an Apples to Oranges comparison between the two.

Same shoes here, own 7d and 5d3. And feel the same way.

The apples and oranges comparison is apt. This was never intended as a compare one to the other. I stand by my original point that advising a 5d3 to someone who can only afford a 7d is pointless.

jaomul wrote in post #15885849
I stand by my original point that advising anything to someone who can only afford something else is pointless.

Fixed for ya

So your point being?

kin2son wrote in post #15885852
Fixed for ya

So your point being?

I am not sure what this means???-

My point was emphasizing the original post from this thread I started

I have no idea why people keep banging on about noise levels in camera bodies. I quite regularly ramp up to ISO6400 in my 7D and i'm happy with the shots. If you are exposed properly then using a high ISO in fact helps with a lot of things.

Arguments for and against are usually started by spec sheet fan boys who love to drool over specs over a fappuccino all day. They very rarely take pictures and when they do its all OMG the noise in this camera is soo bleeaauurghhh IMA get me a 5D mkiii and solve all my problems.

No... just take more pictures, enjoy it and be thankful that you have a camera. There's kids out there with P&S wishing they even had an 1100D and there's folk on here daily moaning about a Pro crop sensor body like a 7D?

It's 4 years old and it's still kicking ass.