5d2 or 70d? what would you choose?

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16830980
The 5D2 is about 3/4 to 1 stop better at higher ISOs,

Than the 70D?

Not a chance in Hell. The 7D was a match for the 5D mk II at the image level, and the 70D is better than the 7D.

Keith R wrote in post #16852352
Than the 70D?

Not a chance in Hell. The 7D was a match for the 5D mk II at the image level, and the 70D is better than the 7D.

You are most assuredly confused.

amfoto1 wrote in post #16830491
For action/sports shots with the kids, the 70D is a better choice. It's AF system, frame rate, and the "extra reach" of a crop camera are better for that purpose.

The 70D has a 19 point AF system, with all 19 the better/faster "dual axis" type. 5D/5DII both have 9-point AF system, while 6D has an 11-point, and all three only have a single "dual axis" type point at the center. All the rest of their AF points are slower "single axis" type. So, 70D will be far better acquiring and tracking moving targets. (Note: 5D/5DII have 6 "hidden" Focus Assist points that can be used optionally, but aren't shown in the viewfinder. Enabling these essentially makes the spot metering circle in the center act like one bit AF point. Two of the "Assist" points are dual axis type, but the "Assist" points only work in AI Servo. And, for low light shooting, the 6D's center point is able to focus about 2 stops lower light than any of the points in any of the other cameras.)

For macro, a FF camera can be good because they tolerate smaller apertures better (because you end up enlarging their images less), but you won't really see much advantage unless you are making very large prints from your images. 70D's articulated LCD screen can be an advantage for some macro photography... none of the FF cameras have that.

FF Fanboyz and Fangirlz are everywhere these days! But today's crop sensor cameras come awfully close in image quality and croppers have a number of advantages. Crop cameras can use all EF and EF-S lenses, while FF cameras are limited to EF only. In general, lenses for FF are bigger, heavier and more expensive. Compare an EF-S 10-22mm for a crop camera with an EF 16-35/2.8 II for FF. Or, compare an EF 300/4 IS for a crop camera, with an EF 500/4 IS II for FF.

The ideal thing to do is use both formates.... each for it's own strengths.

If you shoot a lot in low light and/or make really big prints from your images, FF might be right for you.

But if you shoot a lot of action/sports and/or the largest you ever print is 13x19", even 16x24" or so, you'll likely be better off keeping the crop sensor camera.

As to those "disappointed" by the IQ of a crop camera... stop pixel peeping. Be realistic about the final use of the image. Even if you make huge prints, you won't be looking at it at 100% magnification after you're done editing it.

You tell me... Which of the folllowing images was shot with a FF camera and which with a cropper? (The same lens and filter were used for both images.)

Maybe a higher magnification detail from each image would help?

Or maybe not.

Great post.

Keith R wrote in post #16852352
Than the 70D?

Not a chance in Hell. The 7D was a match for the 5D mk II at the image level, and the 70D is better than the 7D.

Certainly not, and I had compared multiple bodies to multiple bodies. We already went through this in past posts, and my own mini-review. If you would like, you can pick apart that review by finding it in my mini-reviews link below. The 7D is not a match for the 5D2 in raw at high ISOs, it is off by a stop or more, depending on copy variation.

I sold my 5D2 after getting Sony a7R; otherwise I'll not even considering 90D to replace 5D2.
Call me whatever you like.
I'm truly done with any crop bodies.

CollegeKid wrote in post #16852372
You are most assuredly confused.

no, he is not.
just get over it.

this flamewar between crop and FF cameras are always absurd, because most of people can´t get the absolute maximum IQ possible from FF anyway in most situations... All in-lab tests are not showing anything, when the biggest problem is the photographer himself. These tests are only good for pixel-peepers and slaves of their own gear )


I can succesfully ruin/degrade any picture from FF or crop simply by choosing wrong exposure setting, miss the focus or doing bad post-production... These issues are widely quite common and even if there is a slight FF advantage, human error/bad lenses for example can erase them completely.

When i bought 5dmkIII i was so proud and excited... but soon i started to notice that my pictures weren´t improving because of new very expensive camera, but because of me and my intensive practice in taking photos. FF camera actually made me to learn... The fact that any talented photographer could made a picture with similar IQ even with their cheap rebels almost made me cry '(and my wallet)... but i did get over it afterall and I recommend to anyone to do the same, stop glorifying the FF sensors and underestimating crop sensors...

FF has still few advantages, which crop sensor never beat by it´s nature. Crop sensor never get such narrow DOF from f/1.2 lenses on wider FOV. Be happy.

amfoto1 wrote in post #16830491
<snip>

Hermelin wrote in post #16852416
Great post.

+1!

OP, FWIW, I would choose the 70D. I am no pro, not even close. The 70D's plethora of newer and improved features (AF system, FPS, flippy screen, touchscreen, live view AF, accurate and fast video AF, etc, etc - many of which seem like gimmicks until you actually use them) over the 5D II, not to mention the better processor, make the 70D a no-brainer IMHO.

If the question were 5D III vs. 70D + glass, that would be a tough decision but I'd likely go with the 5D III, it's just too good of a camera. However, when it's a question of 5D II vs. 70D, it's a simple decision - the 70D, hands down.

Though again, I'm no pro. The 70D's image quality is superb for my uses; I haven't even been able to properly tap all its potential. Maybe you can out-shoot the potential of any APS-C camera and the sensor really does make that much of a difference to offset all of the great benefits the new tech of the 70D has to offer. However, I'd wager for most people -especially me personally- that's not the case.

palad1n wrote in post #16852585
no, he is not.
just get over it.

this flamewar between crop and FF cameras are always absurd, because most of people can´t get the absolute maximum IQ possible from FF anyway in most situations... All in-lab tests are not showing anything, when the biggest problem is the photographer himself. These tests are only good for pixel-peepers and slaves of their own gear )

There is no flame war, and in this case, there is no reason for any opinions to be given.

Take camera X and camera Y, shoot the same exact exposures, make sure there is no noise reduction on the files at all, and compare the end results using the same conversion software/version. Very scientific, and whatever opinion a person has one way or another doesn't matter. The end results are mathematical.

The flame wars start when people use different images from different cameras from different points in time and try to compare them to prove a point. That is very unscientific.

Also FF doesn't provide thinner DOF than a crop, that is again inaccurate at face value. The very act of the person trying to keep the same framing on a FF vs a crop is what causes the visual change in DOF (focal length differences and/or distance to subject).

There is no war here, everything can be measured mathematically, removing any opinion from the situation, as long as comparative samples are controlled when taken.

70d has problems with the autofocus and lenses under f2.8

enginyr wrote in post #16852642
70d has problems with the autofocus and lenses under f2.8

Some do, not all, so it isn't a model-wide issue.

Vertigo1 wrote in post #16830695
The same site ranks the 6D above the 5D3 - tells you everything you need to know about the value of their ratings tbh.

It has very valid comparison points and it depends on which factors are most important to the buyer. After owning the 5dii, I would never consider the 5d iii, but that doesn't mean it isn't the perfect camera for others. Just not for me.

This site helps to look at the advantages/disadvantag​es to each and every camera.

michgirl wrote in post #16852655
It has very valid comparison points and it depends on which factors are most important to the buyer. After owning the 5dii, I would never consider the 5d iii, but that doesn't mean it isn't the perfect camera for others. Just not for me.

This site helps to look at the advantages/disadvantag​es to each and every camera.

The 5D3 is so unlike the 5D2. The 5D2 was a warmed over 5D (same basic AF, etc) but added movie mode, more resolution, and slightly better ISO. That is what upset people so much when it was announced and then hit the street. That is when people really started asking for a rebel-style FF. There is a much larger gap between the 5D2 and 5D3, the 5D3 has more in common with the 1DX than the 5D2, and is what the 5D2 probably should have been.

Now with the 6D, Canon did something interesting. They spread the 6D across the 5D and 1D line a bit by shrinking the size down to be smaller, removing some features, but improving the AF to be better than the 5D2 and improving the ISO a bit to be better than the 5D3, all the while reducing the cost. It is a 3 level hybrid, if I were to draw out the models by features, functionality, and performance.

This is not an exact rendition, because there are also features the 6D has that the 5D3 doesn't, and it is hard to draw up all the touch points between the 5D and 1D line to make up the 6D.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16852672
The 5D3 is so unlike the 5D2. The 5D2 was a warmed over 5D (same basic AF, etc) but added movie mode, more resolution, and slightly better ISO. That is what upset people so much when it was announced and then hit the street. That is when people really started asking for a rebel-style FF. There is a much larger gap between the 5D2 and 5D3, the 5D3 has more in common with the 1DX than the 5D2, and is what the 5D2 probably should have been.

The reason I said I wouldn't want the 5d iii is because my biggest complaint with the 5d ii was its weight. And I have no shame in saying it was probably over my head with many of the features. The 5diii is probably even more complicated. And expensive. I would never pay that much for a camera. This is my hobby, not my livelihood.

The 6d is lighter and easier to use. Period. The image quality is absolutely stunning to me. It is the perfect camera for me. And I love it. I tried the 70d, it wasn't for me. I like a full frame, so even though the 6d has been dubbed as a "Rebel Full Frame", its fine with me. I liked my Rebel T1i, so I like my 6d even more.

michgirl wrote in post #16852813
The reason I said I wouldn't want the 5d iii is because my biggest complaint with the 5d ii was its weight. And I have no shame in saying it was probably over my head with many of the features. The 5diii is probably even more complicated. And expensive. I would never pay that much for a camera. This is my hobby, not my livelihood.

The 6d is lighter and easier to use. Period. The image quality is absolutely stunning to me. It is the perfect camera for me. And I love it. I tried the 70d, it wasn't for me. I like a full frame, so even though the 6d has been dubbed as a "Rebel Full Frame", its fine with me. I liked my Rebel T1i, so I like my 6d even more.

Sure, that makes sense, I have followed your voyage through the Canon line up. My info was more to help others that don't now the differences between the 5Ds. There is, coincidentally, yet another thread on that very topic.

I threw this together, and I am sure I will upset some, and I probably have some boxes in the wrong place, but I would love to see camera ratings this way. It's just me though. I probably should have more metric lines on there too, but this is a good start. I ran out of vertical room on the slide.

Staggered boxes mean they basically occupy the same ranking, very close touching boxes mean they are obviously very close. I had to leave room in certain spots because we do have the SL1 as an extreme for size, and the discontinued APS-H line for "reach", if somebody wanted to add other cameras to this.