Canon EOS 7D vs. 5D MarkII : Who should buy the 7D?

Canon 5d Mark II vs Canon 7D
Which is right for you, the Canon 7D or the 5D MarkII?

The Differences That Matter

The first difference worth mentioning, of course, is the price tag…. about $900 difference, if the current prices listed are any indication (7D at about $1599 at Amazon and the 5D Mark II at about $2,299.99). Since we’re looking at a couple of cameras that have the build quality for professional use, with magnesium alloy bodies, full HD video capabilities, top notch processors, and some of the most advanced CMOS sensors around, we can expect professional quality results from either camera. In fact, comparing the columns of features for the two cameras reveals that the vast majority of them are identical.  Something must justify the price difference, though.

Most obviously is the CMOS sensor difference, the 5Dii being a 21M pixel, full frame sensor, and the 7D being an APS-C size holding about 18Megapixels. The 7D has dual Digic4 processors, whereas the 5Dii has only one. Probably as a result of this, the new arrival boasts burst speeds about twice as fast as the 5D. There are many other minor differences (and perhaps a few significant ones), but I think that these are the most important to consider up front.

Pixels and Sensor Size

The practical difference between 18 and 21 Megapixels in terms of raw size is minimal.

The practical difference between 18 and 21 Megapixels in terms of raw size is minimal.

If all other things were equal, the pixel count between the 7D and 5D Mark II would not be a significant factor in choosing one camera over the other. I’ve illustrated the file size difference (left) with images scaled to the dimensions of each camera’s output, but just by looking at the numbers we can get a pretty good idea of how things would stand. The difference is about an inch in on each axis… not a big deal.

But of course, it’s not quite that simple. Since the 7D’s sensor is considerably smaller than that of the 5D, its receptors are also smaller and more densely packed. Traditionally, dense receptors have produced more digital noise than their larger counterparts, especially during long exposures which generate more heat. Canon has done a good job of controlling digital noise with their efficient sensors and processing in the past, and although the 7D produces relatively little digital noise, it still falls a bit short of the performance of the 5D Mark II, which has been so highly praised for its ability to produce low noise images in nearly any lighting situation. A variety of ISO comparisons are available across the internet, including mine, here, if you’d like to see how subtle the difference is.

Much more importantly, though, is how the sensor size effects resolution. Many photographers have already noted that the receptor density of the Canon 50D has already matched (in resolution) what we used to achieve with slow 35mm film. Indeed, on the 50D, the sensor density is roughly 213 pixels per millimeter, a density that would produce a 39 megapixel image on full frame sensor such as the 5D series. The 7D takes this development even further, with around 233 pixels per millimeter, at which resolution a full frame sensor would produce a 46.7 megapixel image.

Why do these numbers  matter? Because at this resolution, the image quality is frequently limited by  the lens rather than the sensor.  Even at the 15 megapixels of the Canon 50D (and certainly at the 18 megapixels of the 7D) the sensor will usually have the resolution to capture all of the detail that the lens can resolve, including the flaws in the lens performance such as chromatic aberration, corner softness, diffraction, and any manufacturing flaws; adding additional megapixels will only serve to increase file size, not detail. The same thing can be achieved with good up-sampling software, such as onOne’s Genuine Fractals.  Furthermore, since the sensor is smaller than a full frame dSLR’s, the image will have to be enlarged proportionately more to achieve the same size print… which will also enlarge the flaws from the lens. An excellent article about this effect in the Canon 50D with photographic examples can be found on the Luminous Landscape.

In order to reap any benefit from the increased resolution of the 7D’s sensor, photographers will need to use the best lenses and their best technique. Some of Canon’s “L” lenses and a few lenses from the Pro lines of other manufacturers (such as Sigma, Tokina, and Tamron) will produce quality results, but even those lenses will need to be used properly. The photographer will need to determine the optimum aperture for each lens (at which it produces the highest resolution across the full frame) before being limited by diffraction by the aperture leaves. Furthermore, tripods and remote (or timed) release will be crucial.

Another important difference due to sensor size is the depth-of-field (DOF). In general terms, the larger the sensor or film, the shallower the depth of field. The difference in DOF between a Canon APS-C sensor and a full-frame is slightly more than 1 f-stop (ie; if a 5D Mark II is using a 200mm lens and a 7D is using a 125mm to get an equivalent field of view, the 7D has to shoot at f/1.8 to get DOF as shallow as the 5D has at f/2.8). Depending what you shoot, having greater depth of field can either be a drawback or a benefit: it can be great for photographers who want as much in focus as possible, a nuisance for photographers wishing to separate their subject from a blurry background.

Who Should Buy the Canon 7D, then?

From the previous section, you might be under the impression that I would not recommend the 7D, but that’s not the case. The issue depends entirely on the photographer’s shooting style. The speed of the 7D, coupled with its new AF system and large, bright viewfinder, make it an excellent choice for sports photographers and other journalists for whom the increased (1.6x) magnification are a benefit. Wedding photojournalists may be included in this group. These photographers, who regularly hand-hold their shots and reproduce them in forums that do not necessitate the highest resolution, are not effected by the lens resolution limits.

Art and Landscape photographers, on the other hand, may benefit from the better overall resolution of the 5D Mark II. Since these photographers typically shoot for the highest resolution, with heavy tripods and excellent technique, they will notice the better image quality from the 5D, but also will get the most out of a 7D if they happen to use one.

The 7D is the best choice if you…The 5D Mark II is the best choice if you…
shoot lots of action: sports, journalism, events.shoot landscapes, macros, or fine detail work.
don’t mind getting extra depth of field.prefer shallower depth of field and traditional perspective.
frequently shoot telephoto.use full frame, wide angle lenses.
usually shoot hand-held shots.usually use a tripod or studio strobes.
expect to buy the best quality lenses and use them at their optimal settings to get the most from you sensor.use a wide range of full frame lenses.
believe that speed, responsiveness, and good resolution are most important to you.believe that excellent resolution/best image quality and good speed are most important to you.

 

Video Features

The 5D Mark II is ultimately better for video if you’re willing to put some work into it, by doing things like using firmware side-cars (eg, Magic Lantern), upgrading to the most recent Canon firmware, and using some less than user-friendly video controls along with film industry hardware add-ons.

The 7D is better for the casual video user due to its ease-of-use. It has a dedicated video record button, for example, and the same resolutions and frame rates as the 5D Mk II.

If you’re interested in the video capabilities of the 5D Mark II and the 7D (and Rebel T2i), please follow this link to my related article on the subject: Video Features of the Canon EOS 5D Mark II and Canon EOS 7D.

Please Comment! I’m always interested to hear whether my readers find the articles interesting, useless, or otherwise… and more importantly, I’d like to hear your opinions and additional information, even if it’s just  a tidbit. THANKS!

299 Comments

  • Sunil HH says:

    With 70D and 6D also out, which is the best among these 2, In terms of video and Image Quality

  • Sumer says:

    Hey!

    Its been 4 years that I’ve been using my 1000D. I shoot aquarium fishes.
    But now when magazines have actually started liking and buying my pictures, I seriously need a better camera. I cant go beyond ISO100 in my 1000D as it produces a lot of light (its 4 years old and has been taking photos continuously since then).
    I also am in birding. Also planning for a 100-400.
    So based on your wonderful explanation, I totally get that 7D is my thing.
    I was just wondering that – If I take a shot from 5D and crop it to the size of 7D’s sensor, and compare it with the image taken from 7D, will they both be the same (image quality ?) ? Or 7D will have better or lower quality? Considering the fact that even if the 7D has smaller sensor, the pixels are very closely clamped in it’s sensor! I hope my question made sense.
    One more thing- This might sound silly but since I’m an International student doing my grad here, I dont know if I can really get discount while buying a camera if I wait for thanksgiving sales! Or chances getting a good deal in cameras is very rare and I should go ahead and buy it anytime?

    Thanks,
    Waiting for your reply.

    • Hi Sumer,

      Sorry for the delay, it’s been a busy week :)

      The 7D’s sensor has a much higher pixel density than the 5D, you’re right. Cropped, an image from the 5D would be much lower resolution and a much smaller file, but it would have appreciably less noise. It would probably appear a bit softer, because of how the anti-aliasing filter on the sensor works. In most instances, I’d prefer the 7D… and especially for birding.

      Unfortunately, higher-end SLRs don’t usually go on sale around the holidays. There are discounts offered now and then throughout the year, and the ones around Thanksgiving are not usually any better… though sometimes you can get stuff bundled along with the camera (memory cards, filters, etc). I probably wouldn’t bother waiting :)

      Good Luck!

      – Matthew

  • danielle says:

    Hi Matthew,

    I am thinking of buying my second DSLR. I currently own a Canon Rebel XSI & am thinking about upgrading to a 7D or 5D Mark II.
    I like the idea of using a full frame sensor. I really want the video capability but it isn’t the main reason for upgrading.
    I don’t mind having to buy new lenses with it or anything, but I am very passionate about photography and would eventually like to do some freelancing. :)
    I am wondering if the extra cash for the 5D Mark II would be worth the quality of the photos in the long run.
    I have been doing some real estate photography with a Sigma 10-20 mm. I also love portraits & landscape.
    I do a lot of editing with these photos afterwards as well.

    thanks,

    danielle

    • Hi Danielle,

      Like a lot of photographers these days, I shoot with both: full frame and APS-C, depending on the subject and situation. With careful processing, you really should be able to get excellent image quality from the 7D or a full frame (the Canon 6D should also be in the running :) ), but in low light, full-frame has a distinct advantage.

      A full frame camera can give you better image quality in the long run, as long as you use the right lenses, technique, and processing.

      You might consider renting a Canon 6D or 5D Mark II for a few days, doing some heavy shooting with your current camera and the full frame, and then process the images, and see how much difference you see with your workflow.

      – Matthew

  • Ryan says:

    Hi Matthew,
    Thanks for the wonderful writing comparing the 2 cameras in the first place but I have a few questions that I’m hoping you can answer. I’m trying to upgrade from the Canon EOS rebel t2i and have been interested in the EOS 5d Mark ii. My main goal is to try to capture a lot of landscape, sky, and low light to very low light images. Is the EOS 5d Mark ii a good camera for me? Or should I consider the 7d, which would be my other choice? The price difference is really what is making me stop and consider this so much.
    Thanks
    Ryan.

    • For landscapes and low-light, there’s really a significant advantage to 5D Mark II, or of course, you might consider the newer Canon 6D, which also has very good low-light performance. The megapixel count difference is minimal… not really significant.

      Of course, for low-light photography, the lens is really at least as important as the body, if not more so. If you were doing night landscapes / starscapes, you’ll really have a huge advantage with a lens like a Sigma 35mm f1.4 , or the Canon 28mm f/1.8 over something like a standard variable aperture zoom.

      – Matthew

      • Ryan says:

        Alright thank you so much for the quick response. I’ve been doing much research on the EOS 6D today and am pretty impressed with it.
        Thanks again,
        Ryan

  • Deniro says:

    Hello

    I have been reading through all of this and I gained a slight understand on what camera is best and lenses etc. However I am going into documentary style filming and I have been battling myself on deciding whether to get the Canon 7D or 5D Mark II. But from reading your responses you mentioned that the 60D is much better for movie style yet 5D Mark II was used in Iron Man 2 and Avengers. And I am trying to get the best quality which then leaves into the stress on picking the correct or most effective lenses. I Defo Need Help Lol

    • Hi Deniro,

      Again, let me stress that I’m not really into film/video , I pretty much prefer photographs. So, I may not be the best person to talk to. That said, The 60D is probably better for video than the 7D (because of the Magic Lantern firmware), but it is also available for the 5D Mark II. Ultimately, the 5D will probably be better; it is more commonly used for professional video work, and it has the larger sensor and better low-light performance. But they’ll both work well.

      – Matthew

  • Mar says:

    I forgot to mention that I did understand that for movie video film 5D mark ii is better than 7D …:)

  • Mar says:

    So between a Cannon D7, D5 mark ii and D5 Mark iii which would you recomend to film movie video? for now I can only afford a D7 or D5 mark ii used, but I will sacrifice and wait to get a mark iii if you tell me there is a significant difference and worth the wait …thanks for all your information here it has been very helpful

    • Hi Mar,

      Before anything else, let me mention that I don’t do much with video, myself. I just dabble a little bit, now and then, so I’m probably not the best person to ask.

      That said, if you’re going to use an APS-C SLR, like the 7D, for video… I’d actually recommend using the Canon 60D instead of the 7D. The 60D can use the unified Magic Lantern firmware, which adds significant functionality to the camera for video (and still photography). It is available for the 5D Mark II, the 60D, and the Rebel Series, but the last time I checked, something in the 7D was blocking development.

      http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/Unified#Are_you_a_musician_or_audiophile.3F

      It’s also worth noting that the sensor size of the 60D is a closer match to Super 35 film, commonly shot in movie cameras… the 5D series are a little larger.

      There are some video related improvements to the 5D Mark III, but I’m not sure that they’d be important to most of us. As you may know, the 5D Mark II has been used to film HD TV shows (House, Hawaii Five-O) and parts of movies like “Iron Man II” and “The Avengers”. If you would be satisfied with the quality of those productions, then you probably don’t need to worry about the improvements available in the Mark III.

      The 5D Mark III does have a headphone jack, which is handy.

      Good luck!

      – Matthew

  • Hello Mattew, i wrote you a few months ago, hope u remember me. I have a Canon 7D with 4 lenses: Canon 17-55, Canon 24-55, Canon 28-135, and Canon 55-250. I do Aerial photography for living. My question is: which of the above lenses will be my best choice? Or which lens will you recommend me to get to improve the image quality? I appreciate your advice. Best regards. Donald Villarreal.

    • Hi Donald,
      Yes, I do remember :) It’s tricky to answer that question, though, since those lenses all have different ranges, and each has its own strengths and weaknesses. For most of the wide angle range, I’d give the advantage to the 17-55 f/2.8; that’s a great lens. The 28-135 is good all around, but not spectacular at any part of the range. The 55-250 is a little better, and is the only choice if you want longer telephoto reach, of course.

      I’m not familiar with the 24-55… perhaps that’s a typo or another brand?

      – Matthew

      • Donald says:

        Hi. Thank you very much for answering. I’m wrong about the lens. It is a 24-85 mm. I kind of like this lens better than the 28-135. The 55-250mm is very good. But I don’t know which of my lenses will do the best job with my camera. Best regards. Donald

        • Ahh, ok. That’s on older lens that isn’t great for full-frame cameras, but on APS-C cameras like the 7D, it’s actually pretty good because of the “sweet-spot” effect (ie, the sensor uses the best part of the image circle it produces).

          In general, I’d prefer the 17-55 where the range overlaps, but there aren’t going to be major differences (except that you’ll have to be careful to correct the chromatic aberrations from the 24-85, they’re strong). Plus, you’ll get more light (and better shutter speeds) with the 17-55.

          Honestly, though, the important thing is going to be your technique, because the vibrations from the plane are going to blur your images quite a bit if you aren’t very careful. You’ll have to make sure that no part of your camera is touching the body of the plane or the window; that will transfer the vibrations directly from the plane to the sensor (unless you have a gyro-stabilizer or something similar). Even a tripod isn’t advised. You’re better off holding the camera in your hands, with your arms acting as shock absorbers. If you have an open window, it’s best not to rest your arms on the frame, since that will also transfer vibrations to the camera.

          And so forth. I don’t do aerial photography, so I don’t know all the tricks :) Good luck!

          – Matthew

          • Donald says:

            Thanks again. One more question. If you where going to do aerial photography, what lens will you use? I normally set the camera on TV, 1/1250, ISO 200 and fly around 1.000-1.500 ft above the ground. I have a couple of dollars I will like to spend on a pretty good lens instead of changing my camera… Best regards. Don

            • I really don’t know. It would really depend on the type of pictures I was trying to take… whether I were trying to capture small details on the ground, or larger mountain panoramas, or something else entirely.

              Since you already have the 17-55 f/2.8, which would be my choice at the wide end, my next choice would probably be a 70-200 f/2.8. Since you’d be shooting from the air, that would have to be image-stabilized, so…

              I’d probably go with the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, or the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC USD. They’re both great lenses. The Canon is amazing, but expensive.

              – Matthew

      • Donald says:

        Hi Matthew, I found a Tamron 18-270 lens for my canon 7D. Is this a good lens? I appreciate your advice. Best regards. Donald

    • Donald says:

      Hello Matthew, hope you are doing fine. I wrote you a few weeks ago I was using a 17-55 lens for my CNon 7D. Last week it fell down from a table and broke… I found a Canon 18-55. Is this a Good lens for my camera? I appreciatte your advice. Best regads. Don.

      • Optically, the 18-55 is not too bad. It’s a decent lens… though it is decidedly entry-level. The major downside, over the 17-55 f/2.8 is that the 18-55 is an f/5.6 at 55mm. This means that it lets in only 1/4 of the light that the 17-55 does, so you’ll have trouble getting fast shutter speeds if the light is getting low.

        That said, when there’s sufficient light, it will be fine.

        – Matt

  • Sonny says:

    Hi Matthew,

    I am confused between 7D or 6D. This is the first time i am going to buy a DSLR after using NEX & Olympus OMD, as they can’t focus on moving subjects accurately because of CDAF.

    Even the Olympus OMD spoiled up my daughter’s 1st B’day party as i didn’t have a nice lens & only shot with kit 12-50 mm lens & had lots of bad photos.

    I have a $3,000 budget.I could buy the following kits for that price :

    1.Canon 7D + Tokina 11-16 f2.8 + New Sigma 35mm f1.4 + Canon 24-105 f4 L.
    2. Canon 6d + Canon 24-105 f4 L + New Sigma 35 mm f1.4.

    Or if could stretch my budget a little bit then another $500 would get 5D Markiii + Canon 24-105L.

    I am not a professional photographer ,as i am an accountant by profession.
    I have 2 kids that i take photos of
    & here in Australia i love taking photos of beaches & family trips to theme parks & zoos.
    I haven’t even started shooting RAW,but would do if required.
    I want to build a system that gives me good photos even if have to spend some time.

    If you could help me to choose or suggest a different set up then it would be great.

    Thanks
    Sonny

    • Hi Sonny,

      That’s a hard choice, without knowing more about your shooting style and interests. As you may have already read, my general advice is: Buy the least expensive camera that will meet your needs, and buy the best lenses that you can afford.

      That said, the trick is to figure out what will meet your needs. The 7D has a better autofocus system and can shoot faster, but the 6D has a better autofocus system than the 5D Mark II and the 60D, and many professionals have used those cameras (including myself) with great success… and the 6D’s 4.5 fps is not bad.

      Where the 6D will excel is when it comes to low-light image quality. If you do a lot of shooting indoors, the 6D may be the way to go. I’ve done quite a bit of shooting with the 60D and 7D indoors, and when I’m not using flash, a large aperture lens is a must… using ISOs higher than 800 has never produced results that I’m satisfied with, as a professional… though some people have different requirements.

      I don’t recommend the 24-105 on the 7D, for two reasons. First, the optical quality just isn’t good enough to deal with the high pixel density on the 7D’s sensor (I mentioned some of the problems in the article above), and the other is that the zoom range just isn’t very useful… 24mm isn’t very wide, and 105 isn’t very long.

      But lets just start with the body. What are your reasons for considering each?

      – Matthew

      • Sonny says:

        Thanks Matthew,

        I am just a beginner that just likes taking good quality images preferably straight from the camera.
        As mentioned i generally take my camera out on family occasions like B’day parties or beach and theme park visits where sometimes i need to zoom in to get closer.Yeah that’s true that half of those occasions will have moderate to low light.

        I have just read on Canon forums that they are going to launch Canon 70D on 21st March this month, an APSC camera of course.But would that be good enough to go to full frame & if yes then should i be looking for Canon 5d Markiii + (24-105mm L or any cheap prime lens) or 6d with the lens of your recommendation.Or would you recommend to go to APSC with excellent lenses that you recommend.

        As said because i am starting from the scratch so would love to buy a kit that lasts me at least few years.

        I have considered Nikon options too, but i i just simply don’t like Nikon’s out of camera colours.they are simply not pleasing to my eyes as compared to Canon.

        Thanks
        Sonny

        • Hi Sonny,

          It may be worth waiting a couple of weeks to see what the 70D is like. Currently, Canon’s APS-C sensor cameras are lagging behind in low-light performance, using a sensor design that’s several years old. Who knows what the 70D sensor will look like; they may use a sensor like the T4i’s that has integrated phase-detect sensors on it for faster video/live AF. Let’s hope not. Or, they might aim for the best image quality and provide a sensor with better low-light performance and dynamic range.

          My general advice is always to buy the least expensive camera that will meet your needs, and the best lenses that you can afford, so…

          Leaving the 70D out of the discussion for the moment, it sounds to me as though you aren’t going to make especially high demands of the camera body (at least, any good camera body should be able to meet them) except when it comes to noise/low-light.

          With good lenses, a small sensor will handle low light without too much trouble. However, a larger sensor will do better.

          So, I’d probably lean towards the full-frame Canon 6D. The 24-105 f/4 would work well with it, but it’s not the best for low light. You could get a 50mm f/1.4 for low light.

          My preferred kit for general shooting is a 70-200 f/2.8 and a 24-70 f/2.8. Canon’s versions of these lenses are expensive, but Tamron’s are less, and quite good. The Canon 85mm f/1.8 is a good portrait lens (and not very expensive), too.

          When it comes down to it, lens choice is a very personal decision; the lens you choose has to fit your circumstances and shooting style, and artistic vision.

          – Matthew

          • Sonny says:

            Hi Matthew,

            So it looks like 70D has been delayed.So, what would be you suggestion for the
            best body & lens combo under $3000.And do i need a speedlite with the kit as well.

            I would mainly like to cover 24-120mm range, because i am not in wildlife Photography.Would love to do portraits of my family & some landscape photography.

            Thanks

  • Brian says:

    Have been looking at both 5Dm2 & 7D and have read various comparisons. I want to compliment you on your easy to understand, plain language and and yet comprehensive analysis. So often reviewers are more interested in showing how technically accumen they are, getting bogged down in too much detail and lose sight of the important aspects of the products. You don’t do that, kudos.

    “My general advice for photographers, though, is to buy the least expensive camera that will fulfill their needs, buy the best lenses they can afford, and practice as much as possible.”
    —-Great advice

    Looking at some very good used cameras in both models, so the prices are closer and lower now than before so I can afford to buy either. My delimma is I do both indoor creative shots where field of depth is important and outdoor action/event shots. Resolution differences are not important would be negligible for what I do. Soooo, I was wondering in your opinion which one is most versatile? Since the 5Dm2’s strength is studio and the 7D’s strength is outdoor action the real question for me would be to compare which is better covering its weakness. Is the 5Dm2 better at outdoor/event shots (it’s weakness) or is the 7D better at indoor studio? Does that make sense?

    Appreciate your opinion. Thanks!
    Brian

  • Paula says:

    Shot primarily sports, but also some portrait photography have 70-200 2.8 IS Found 7 D for $1200, Mark ii fror $1800 and Markiii for $3200. For the $ and my use 7D the right choice? Just dont want to miss out on the portrait end.. Thanks for your advice!

    • Hi Paula,

      If you primarily shoot sports, the 7D is definitely the way to go. You’ll enjoy the speed and responsiveness of the camera, and you’ll get good use out of the 1.6x crop factor of the sensor (which is something I miss when shooting wildlife or sports with a full frame camera). Of course, if you have the extra money to throw around, the 5D Mark III is amazing in low-light situations, which also makes it great for sports, but it’s a considerable price difference.

      The 7D is great for portraiture as well. You’ll have to use longer lenses, or use slightly larger apertures to get the same shallow depth of field that you would with a 5D, but the difference is modest… it’s still very easy to get nice separation and bokeh. Alfred Lopez (another author here) and I have both used the small sensor with a great deal of success for professional portraiture.

      I see that on Amazon.com, the 7D is $1199 with free 1-Day shipping, which is a great deal, considering what they sold for last year. Worth considering :)

      Good luck!

      – Matthew

      • Albert says:

        You mention several times to purchase the higher grade lens for the 7D, which lens specifically do you recommend? 17-55 2.8, 17-40L or 24-105L? I currently own the 7D but I am on the market for a good all around lens. I typically shot portraits, casual shots and some landscape. What do you recommend?

        • Hi Albert,

          The 17-55 f/2.8 is excellent (Sigma’s is really good too); the 17-40 and 24-105 are not quite as impressive; in fact, the 24-105 has been very problematic for me on a crop sensor camera.

          Any of the 70-200 L lenses would be excellent, and of course, the new 24-70 f/2.8 II, most of the prime lenses.

          If you’re looking for an all-in-one lens (wide to telephoto), you’re going to have to sacrifice some image quality, but the new STM 18-135 is pretty good.

          – Matthew

          • Albert says:

            What type of issues have you experienced with the 24-105 on a crop sensor? Thanks for the insight.
            Albert

            • My main problem was with chromatic abberations that were so bad that they were not correctable. This isn’t an issue with larger sensors because their sensors’ receptors are larger, but for the densely packed receptors on an APS-C sensor, it can be.

              There’s a link to a story about this above : http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/50d.shtml , with regards to a 50D, which had lower resolution than the 7D.

              In some cases, this has improved with ACR and Lightroom improvements, but I still have trouble with some images.

              When it comes to resolution and sharpness, the lens is good, particularly once you’ve done all you can with the CAs.

              – Matthew

  • Chery says:

    HI Matthew

    I am a young filmmaker, i am in the dilemme between spending my money in 5Dor a 7D, I have to tell you , they stole my first 5D. I shoot commercial most of the time in a third world country Haiti. I have some really good L lenses, i have a 50mm 1.4 and  85mm 1.2 and a14/35. please help me making that decision.

    • Hi Chery,

      First, I’m sorry to hear about the stolen camera; I’ve had that happen and it’s always awful.

      It really depends on what your considerations are with the camera. In general, the 5D is the better model for film work, especially with the Magic Lantern firmware. It will give you shallower depth of field (about 1 stop better) and better low-light performance, though both are good. The 5D is obviously more expensive, though, and the 7D also will give you shallow depth of field with the lenses you mention… so it really depends on how important that super shallow DOF is to you.

      I should also mention that I shoot very little video; that’s just not my area… so I may not be able to give you the best advice here.

      – Matthew

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *