"Real world" 5d2 vs 7d comparison

There have been some really well done 5d2 vs 7d comparisons posted here, esp by Teamspeed, but I decided to do one of my own.

This is a simple comparison done in a way that I actually use my cameras. My favorite shooting is done outdoors (landscapes, nature, etc.), so that's how I did my test.

By the way, Ben J. posted a nice landscape comparison here a while back if you haven't seen it....
https://photography-on-the.net …638&highlight=l​andscaping

How my comparison was done.....

5d2, 70-200 f/4 @ f/4, ISO400, 113mm, 1/250s... VS... 7d, 70-200 f/4 @ f/4, ISO 400, 75mm, 1/250s...(should have been 120mm on the 5d2 but I was eye-balling the composition so give me break )

Why f/4? I often use this lens wide open outdoors so its important to me how it performs wide open on each camera.

I took 4 shots with each camera and chose the best one from each. Shot RAW, processed in LR with the same settings. Default NR and the same sharpening....

I warmed up the WB on the 5d2 shot to make the WB equal; I've noticed that the 7d definitely produces warmer images than the 5d2...


5d2 image....

I'm thinking of upgrading from my old 20D and you've pretty well made up my mind on a 5D2.

This is another one I found interesting. The 7d has the advantage when your FL limited, but not as much as I would have thought.

200 f/2.8 prime with 1.4X on the 7d and 5d2...

(Exif intact)....

7d, full sized image....

5D mk2 image looks "sharper" and "cleaner" both times! Or is that just me?

5dmk2 wins in all of the photos.

This is where I just wonder how I can like my 1dmk3 or ever buy a 7D.

Simple photo shoot with my 4 year old ballet "show" I used the 1dmk3 with 70-200 f/2.8ISmk2 and 5dmk2 with 24-70L. I absolutely was disappointed in the 1dmk3 files. I understand this is a 7D thread but according to many people slightly prefer the 1d3 files over 7d.

If we all simply printed all of our files I think this would reduce alot of this body vs. body threads.

Clearly in this type of photography the 5dmk2 is without a doubt better than the 7D. On the other hand the compromise of better AF the 7D rocks but with less IQ for moving subjects. I will say I've used my old 5d to shoot casual niece's soccer games and the IQ and keeper rate were excellent but didnt have the spray and pray capabilities.

Another thing is post processing capabilities. The stronger you are in post the better your output overall. If SOOC files are better it makes the post easier.

I look at wider aperture portrait files from my 1dmk3 with 85L and 5dmk2 with 85L and I find the 5dmk2. The winner is clear in every category and its always the 5dmk2.

even without the 100% crop, I can see visually the 5D2 sharper and crisper.

5D2 wins hands down.

glad i made the switch.

but wait for someone to chime in and tell me i'm imagining things.

I would like to say that these results are interesting but they're not because I already knew the 5dii was superior even when cropped . I think the choice shouldn't be between iq/sharpness but more so how you're going to use the camera. If you shoot portraits or landscapes where speed and lightning quick AF is a must then the 5dii shouldn't be your choice between the two as long as you have the proper glass to do it justice. If you need the quick AF and shoot something where the 1.6x would help for distance to the subject you usually shoot IE: sports, recitals, birds then the 7D or a 1d3 would be my choice over the 5dii. When the 5diii comes out then the decision will be more difficult.

edit- high iso also comes in to play as I prefer my 5dii files over my friends files over iso 800

lightning quick AF on 5D II .... bwahahahaha....just shoot me now.

^ haha good catch. went to bed at 2 after a night of drinking and up at 6am for work so I'm still currently waking up I corrected what I meant to say. It's amazing how much 2 letters can throw off a whole paragraph.

(we all secretly know the 5dii has lightning quick AF but don't want others to catch on so we tell them it's slow )

maverick678 wrote in post #11736956
lightning quick AF on 5D II .... bwahahahaha....just shoot me now.

Center AF point? Absolutely.

The advantages of the 5DMKII both in high ISO noise handling and detail retention is a well established fact.

versedmb

exact same results as i got when i tested. I concur 110%. 5d2 is a killer camera for the money and if you need speed, then its a 7D. In my mind, a 5d2 and 7d combo covers the bases,,,unless you want to step up to a 1DmkiV. I think it has an advantage with High iso and of course speed over the 5d2. Ive read nicksons information about the 1DmkIV as well as a few other that also support his point of view. I honestly dont see a 5d3 anytime soon, especially when canon is going to upgrade the 1Ds. so i think the 5d2 is going to stay put in the line up for another 18 months.

Again, its all what you need your camera to do for you. 5D2 is tough to beat.

I hardly ever used a center AF point. Everything is in Servo outer points.

nicksan wrote in post #11737051
Center AF point? Absolutely.

The advantages of the 5DMKII both in high ISO noise handling and detail retention is a well established fact.

I'm glad I left 7D aside for a while. Thanks for pictures.

One thing I want to make clear here - I'm certainly not trying to bash the 7d - its an amazing camera and in some ways I like using it more than the 5d2. The 7d allows me to get shots that the 5d2 would definitely struggle to get. IQ is meaningless if you can't get the shot or if its oof.

I'm just praying for a 5d3 with 7d AF.

I find it amusing at just how many "5DII v 7D" type threads there are, given how different the cameras are, and that they each have their own areas of excellence and weakness. I feel that both make great all round cameras, and that the choice of either should be based on picking the one that has its strong points in the area that is of most interest to the individual.

If I had bought a 7D I have no doubt that I would be really happy with it, but as a lot of my photography at the moment is portrait based, I chose a 5DII. During those times when I am shooting sports, I have to accept that my choice of camera isn't the best tool for the job, but it still provides me with acceptable results so I am happy to make those compromises.