Canon 5d3 v Canon 7d2 images

I am considering buying these two cameras, since the image quality on my 50d and 5d2 is noticeable, nothing to do with my photography.

Are there any noticeable differences in the quality of the images or are they the same?

Don't know about the 5D3 but I can tell you there is a big difference with the 50D and the 7DII - mainly in hi ISO and how much the RAW files can be manipulated in post. I will still use my 50D but the 7DII is a big step up.

As to FF or crop, you'll have to decide for yourself which is better for your work. For me, the decision was between a 6D and a 7DII. Since the 50D (which I still love) is a bit older, I thought I should first get the best crop available and then decide if I needed (or wanted) a FF. If I were you and had money available for a 5DII, I'd buy the 7DII and a lens which would really use the 7DII to advantage (probably the 100-400 MKII).

rgs wrote in post #17561656
Don't know about the 5D3 but I can tell you there is a big difference with the 50D and the 7DII - mainly in hi ISO and how much the RAW files can be manipulated in post. I will still use my 50D but the 7DII is a big step up.

As to FF or crop, you'll have to decide for yourself which is better for your work. For me, the decision was between a 6D and a 7DII. Since the 50D (which I still love) is a bit older, I thought I should first get the best crop available and then decide if I needed (or wanted) a FF. If I were you and had money available for a 5DII, I'd buy the 7DII and a lens which would really use the 7DII to advantage (probably the 100-400 MKII).

Really have no need for that lens at the moment, I do enjoy the odd wildlife, but my life is far too hectic, and I feel it's about to get more hectic

RichSoansPhotos wrote in post #17561658
Really have no need for that lens at the moment, I do enjoy the odd wildlife, but my life is far too hectic, and I feel it's about to get more hectic

I just meant that's what I would do. Your needs are bound to be different.

Like stated the 5D3 and 7D2 are like night and day for low light and noise. The 5D3 is much cleaner and my go to body for that shooting. Not to say the 7D2 can't do an admirable job but if you enlarge or crop a lot you will see more noise in the 7D2. You can easily produce clean 11 by 14 prints if correctly exposed. A little underexpose is more forgiving with the 5D3. Both and 7D and current 7D2 are light hungry.

For image sharpness both are great. I use both depending what I'm shooting. Not sure which one I'd give up but I'd have no trouble adapting either to any situation if I had only one.

I have a 70d and a 5d3. The sensor on the 70d is much like the 7d2 and I assume the great photos taken with the 70d are basically the same as the great photos with the 7d2. But shooting sports photos with both my cameras with the same lens does give you a different looking photo. The best way I can describe it is the 70d photos are sharper at web size viewing. They are not actually sharper, it is just that they look like they have more contrast or something. The 5d3 on the other hand is just creamier.

Processing the 70d in Lightroom, I don't even touch color noise levels, they seem do to nothing to that cameras photographs. With the 5d3, there is some sort of noise in the photos that requires a little color noise reduction. The 70d needs a little more luminance noise and also seems to need more adjustment with the basic first panel levels.

Which is best? I like both looks. For portraits, the 5d3 without question. Scenes with multiply riders in them, I kind of still like how the 70d looks.

Rich, if I am able to correctly recall what sort of images I have seen you posting (low/mixed light performing arts) Owning both and having shot different kinds of subject for which both are at their best, i can tell you the 5D3 is the camera for you.


It was like, made for you!
that's no joke.

The 7D2 is awesome for a lot of things. I've been shooting it a lot for action and wildlife. I love it in good light, it is a big step up from say a 50D in low light, but it's got nothing on the 5D3.
Likewise, the 5D3 AF is just superb and seemingly without any modifiers or hiccups. The 7D2 is not without it's learning curve or idiosyncrasies.

The 7D2 is good for a lot of things, excels at some, but the 5D3 excels at more and is good at literally everything.
It truly excels at performing arts. coupled with the right glass it would be hard to beat at any price.

I own both cameras. At lower ISO they are pretty much the same to me in that I'm not a pixel peeper and NR is very effective on the 7D2. As you climb the ISO ladder however there isn't much of a contest. The 5D3 is the clear winner. I use the 7D2 for wildlife and the 5D3 for everything else.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17562039
Rich, if I am able to correctly recall what sort of images I have seen you posting (low/mixed light performing arts) Owning both and having shot different kinds of subject for which both are at their best, i can tell you the 5D3 is the camera for you.


It was like, made for you!
that's no joke.

The 7D2 is awesome for a lot of things. I've been shooting it a lot for action and wildlife. I love it in good light, it is a big step up from say a 50D in low light, but it's got nothing on the 5D3.
Likewise, the 5D3 AF is just superb and seemingly without any modifiers or hiccups. The 7D2 is not without it's learning curve or idiosyncrasies.

The 7D2 is good for a lot of things, excels at some, but the 5D3 excels at more and is good at literally everything.
It truly excels at performing arts. coupled with the right glass it would be hard to beat at any price.

nqjudo wrote in post #17562057
I own both cameras. At lower ISO they are pretty much the same to me in that I'm not a pixel peeper and NR is very effective on the 7D2. As you climb the ISO ladder however there isn't much of a contest. The 5D3 is the clear winner. I use the 7D2 for wildlife and the 5D3 for everything else.

It's when I have to shoot from the mixer desk, all I need to do is snap on my TC and 70-200mm lens that calls for the need of a crop camera

I can say from side-by-side comparison (I took both of them to a tournament last month) that my 5D3 and 7D2 differ by about 1 stop in noise level at higher ISOs. It's important to note that if you underexpose drastically - 3-4 stops - the 5D3 will do better at shadow recovery; but that's not a good thing to do with either camera if you can possibly avoid it. Given adequate exposure (ETTR always!) they're surprisingly close; and if you don't have a long enough lens to match the pixels on target of the 7D2, it might actually surpass the 5D3 for detail. It's my preferred body for wildlife or astro work.

I use portable lighting when allowed. giving me the ability to manage my exposure, and the 7D2 has largely taken over from the 5D3 for my event shooting. I'm now holding the 5D3 back for situations where I need its strengths, like available-light and portraits; it will still get plenty of use but I can balance out my shutter clicks to make both cameras last longer!

I gather from you reply that you feel that a full frame camera will loose you too much reach, is that correct?
My photography is very focal length limited and I am already using the longest Canon production lens, however I find that the "Crop Factor" is somewhat overrated. There is certainly a difference but it is not what the numbers would suggest, and the high ISO capabilities, of full frame, far outweigh the minor crop advantage for my uses. Perhaps yours?

I also have both and use the 7Dmk2 solely for wildlife and sports when I need the reach and the 10fps for sports. The 5Dmk3 for everything else

johnf3f wrote in post #17563260
I find that the "Crop Factor" is somewhat overrated. There is certainly a difference but it is not what the numbers would suggest

I understand what you are saying, but, of course, the crop factor is exactly what the numbers suggest. It just isn't what you thought it was suggesting..

For a lot of people it is enough of a difference to be worthwhile.

Like gqllc007 I have both bodies and his comments are the same as I would make. The 7D mkII is the one I go to for BIF, the focusing ability is awesome and combined with the reach of the crop factor sensor it leaves the 5D mkIII behind. I use it with my 400mm f5.6 and my 500mm f4.
For everything else then the 5D mkIII is the one to go for. The IQ brilliant.
Haven't checked out the comparison for macro yet, thought I've been told that the crop factor element makes the 7D mkII the one to use.

If you add a 1.4x TC to the 5D3, there is very little to gain in the reach factor. You do lose a stop of light however, so depending on your lens and what you are shooting, that may be an issue.

Taking a 5D3 image and cropping then resizing to the same result as the 7D/7D2, the results are inferior to the crop body. However adding the 1.4x, the results are very nearly equal, and sometimes perhaps better with the FF, depending on what you are shooting.

I just wanted to point out that you can nearly equalize the "reach" advantage of the APS-C by actually adding real reach with a 1.4x on the FF.