# Thinking of a new body, want your opinions



## pjn0629 (Mar 16, 2015)

What's currently in my bag:

40D
24-70/2.8
70-200/2.8 IS
50/1.4
Sigma 30/1.4
Nikon 105/2.5 on an adapter ring (don't knock it, it's a great piece of glass)
430 EX
Fuji x100s

So, I'm starting to feel the age of my 40D ever since i got the fuji, IQ is so much better with the fuji, and it practically sees in the dark compared with my 40D, but when I have the light, or I'm shooting something that moves (ie. my 6 month old puppy, or bike racing) I bust out the 40D for the autofocus. 

I've been watching the price of the 5Diii come down lately, and also been eyeing the 7Dii. The fuji gives me hope for a crop sensor to produce great results, but I also find that the crop makes me feel like my lenses are a bit long, especially when I shoot cyclocross and can get in close to the action anyway. 

I guess i'm considering staying APS-C and getting a 7Dii and a ultrawide lens, or moving to full frame... 

Should i get a 5Diii? wait for a mark iv? get a 7Dii and a super wide angle? 

I know i won't get any resale out of the 40d, so i can always just keep it around, or sell it for $200 or whatever i'll get for it just to get it out of the house and keep my girlfriend from yelling at me about it. 

pricewise - just try and keep me from getting yelled at by the gf


----------



## candc (Mar 16, 2015)

considering that you have all full frame lenses you should get a full frame camera. the 5diii is at a decent price point nowadays.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Mar 16, 2015)

If you can afford 5D Mark iii now, there is no reason to wait.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 16, 2015)

I've had five or six 40D's and they were wonderful, but the 5D MK III is in a different class. As many complaints as I see about the 7D MK II, I'd suggest a 5D MK III.


----------



## Jules (Mar 16, 2015)

Hi,
I guess it will depend on your type of photo ... Landscape or sports ... 
Speaking of my own experience, just swapped from 40D (5 years) to 7DII end of last November, and i'm loving it (3k pics): coupled with 70-200 2.8 IS II, it makes a great combo ... I quite often shoot 800 and up to 3200 ISO (inside shots or for using the 2x extender) and results are quite good compared to the unusable soup of 40D at that level.

What i especially like on 7DII compared to 40D are the following:
- higher usable ISO and increased resolution
- 65 points with great user control to choose and compose in one touch (cf. below point, for sports but also macro with 100 2.8 L Macro and 24-70 4 L in its macro position)
- super high speed and silent speed all customizable
- customization (menus, lots of buttons can be customized, easy access to autofocus options and presets, focus points, ...); lever on back joystick is pretty convenient and also customizable (use it for ISO)
=> classic settings I am getting so used to is to be able to go with a push of thumb/finger from classical one shot to AI Servo and point extension/zone setting with focus avoiding obstacles for sport with high speed, or in some other cases to finetuned focus point composition with AI Servo for Macro jewelry/fine art macro, all while looking thru the viewfinder
A few reasons i didn't want to jump to 5DIII and FF (yet):
- reach (i got a 2x ext on the 70-200)
- speed (birds, sports ... and kids!)
- my 10-22 that i love
- price (preferred to upgrade glass) 
- integrated flash for quick flash fill without bulky external flash to carry/install ...
- fancy gadgets on 7DII (gps, higher customization degree ...)

For UWA, you might try the 10-22 : have a look at the forum's images, it's a lovely lens, a few people deem it close to L quality (one that i didn't want to leave to my goddaughter if changing to FF!), you just have to be careful not to get your feet in the pics !
Regarding the 40D, why don't you try to give it to your gf ? Put the 50 1.4 on it, and you will be happy of the nice portraits she takes of you  My ex had a 550D and she always wanted to get my 40D ... (now i'll give it as an upgrade to my goddaughter after she trained on my old 400D)

But on the other end if budget is not an issue with you, get 5DIII and one of the 16-35 ...


----------



## pjn0629 (Mar 16, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I've had five or six 40D's and they were wonderful, but the 5D MK III is in a different class. As many complaints as I see about the 7D MK II, I'd suggest a 5D MK III.



Honestly, I've never felt that the FPS on the 40D was limiting in any way shooting Bike racing (nor the autofocus for that matter) But given that the 5D iv is on the horizon, and supposedly going to be significantly faster, and i'm not in a rush, and could afford either.... on the UWA... 24mm is wide enough for a while, eventually maybe i'll go for something crazy wide, but not itching for crazy landscape shots.


----------



## Zv (Mar 17, 2015)

5D3 is the most well rounded camera with excellent IQ and a decent frame rate. The only reason to go with the 7D2 is if you prioritize fps over IQ. 

Don't wait for the 5D4 - Canon aren't in a rush to release this yet so you could be waiting a while. That could be a year or so worth of quality shots you could be taking with the 5D3 in the meantime.


----------



## FTb-n (Mar 17, 2015)

I bought the 70-200 f2.8L IS II for my 60D, then migrated to the 7D, and ultimately the 5D3 (then a second 5D3 and 24-70 f2.8L II). Get the 5D3.

The 70-200 is a great lens on crop and a fantastic lens on full-frame. Images are sharper, DOF is thinner with great subject isolation, and the focal range is more useful for events and indoor sports (at least court-side). Plus color depth is deeper and it has higher useful ISO. I think you'll find that the IQ from your 24-70 will have more pop to it as well.

I would jump at the 5D3 at these prices. The 5D4 may be $500-1000 more and maybe 8 months away to availability -- or more. I can't say if the mystery specs of the 5D4 will be worth the wait. I would expect it to be a tempting upgrade. There's no point in introducing it if it isn't. But, I also think that there will be a market for 5D3 at $2000-2500 for some time to come.

My need is heavy on sports and in low light. I'm currently weighing the 1Dx with it's falling prices or waiting for the 5D4. I'm guessing that the 5D4 won't have the dual DIGIC's and a chip dedicated to focus tracking. While I think the 5D3 is underrated as a sports body, there are times when tracking a rapidly moving and spinning figure skater can challenge the AF system. I'm trying to figure out if the 1Dx's EOS iTR is noticeably better at tracking subjects and at doing so in low light (or under spotlights). The next questions is whether this will be in the 5D4. Logic suggests that a 5D4 would be somewhere between the 5D3 and the 1Dx for tracking sports. Don't know if any of this will affect your thought process, but I thought I'd toss it out there.


----------



## rpt (Mar 17, 2015)

I have both. For low light the 5DIII is better. If you do not need the 10fps or the focus on video, 5DIII is the one for you. However if you can wait till the third or fourth quarter, it may make sense to look at what the 5DIV has to offer.


----------



## chasinglight (Mar 17, 2015)

Over the past couple years I have bounced around through several bodies. The t2i, which is a great value for the money (or was) and was the camera that ushered me into photography. I then upgraded to the 7D, which was chocked full of great features and superior ergonomics and build quality, but while I loved the features and ergonomics I never really loved the image quality, I actually think the t2i had an edge on it. Additionally I was a victim of the hit or miss AF (though it certainly worked well for others). In bright situations with ETTR you could get some great results, but in more challenging situations the files required a lot of post processing.

Two years ago I picked up a refurb 6D at a great price. I was wary about "stepping down" in terms of features and build, but that camera really was a game changer. The IQ is fantastic and the weight savings is actually really nice (who knew).

Meanwhile I hung onto the 7D but never used it because the IQ just didn't come close to the 6D, even for air shows and the little bit of wildlife I shoot. So recently I sold it, but wanted to have a real go at having 2 bodies that I could use without feeling I was sacrificing IQ. I was attracted to the "mini 1dx" that is the 7d2, but from everything I have seen the IQ would still be closer to the original 7D than the 6d so I was considering another 6D, but ended up picking up a 5D3 during the price drops. Last weekend I shot 2 days at an air show, an atlas V rocket launch ( at night), and a few museums. The 5D3 definitey has an edge in AF tracking over the 6D. The IQ is largely the same as the 6D.

So my suggestion would be, pull the trigger on full frame whether it be the 6d or the 5d3. I don't have hands on experience with the 7d2, but everything I have seen leads me to believe that while it is a very capable camera it suffers from the same affliction the original 7d did; detailed images that require a lot of Post Processing to clean up.


----------



## Tabor Warren Photography (Mar 17, 2015)

Zv said:


> 5D3 is the most well rounded camera with excellent IQ and a decent frame rate. The only reason to go with the 7D2 is if you prioritize fps over IQ.
> 
> Don't wait for the 5D4 - Canon aren't in a rush to release this yet so you could be waiting a while. That could be a year or so worth of quality shots you could be taking with the 5D3 in the meantime.



I can't quite think of anything more to add than what Zv said. I think you would benefit best from a 5Diii. I would not hesitate to buy from the grey market providers mentioned by Canon Rumors or Canonpricewatch.com, watch for a $1,999 deal and jump on it. All four of our 5Diii's were grey market, and I have zero complaints.

I hope this helps!
-Tabor


----------



## NKPhoto (Mar 17, 2015)

I have a 7D MK II, a 6D and a 5D MK III. I shoot landscape, wildlife and a lot of indoor high school sports in low light. I have 12000 clicks on the 7D MK II, 9000 clicks on the 6D and 82000 clicks on the 5D MK III. If I could only have one camera, it would be the 5D MK III without question. It is sharper than the 1 DX (18 mp vs 24 mp), has a better focusing system than the 6D and much better noise performance than the 7D MK II. It is a hard combination to beat and definitely a workhorse all around great camera!


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Mar 17, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I've had five or six 40D's and they were wonderful, but the 5D MK III is in a different class. As many complaints as I see about the 7D MK II, I'd suggest a 5D MK III.


Don't wait, get the 5D3. Nowdays the price is so attractive and you'll get full potential of your FF lenses.
I moved from the 60D to 7D to 5D3 and it has been a continuos improvement in IQ and ISO performance.


----------



## lolo0476 (Mar 17, 2015)

Hi, something i'm looking too is autofocus that is better in low light on 7DII.
It can focus with -3Il, -2 for 5D Mk3
7D2 can focus with f8 lens too. 5D3 tu f5.6 (correct me if i make a mistake).


----------



## Random Orbits (Mar 17, 2015)

lolo0476 said:


> Hi, something i'm looking too is autofocus that is better in low light on 7DII.
> It can focus with -3Il, -2 for 5D Mk3
> 7D2 can focus with f8 lens too. 5D3 tu f5.6 (correct me if i make a mistake).



5DIII autofocuses with f/8 as well.


----------



## pjn0629 (Mar 17, 2015)

NKPhoto said:


> I have a 7D MK II, a 6D and a 5D MK III. I shoot landscape, wildlife and a lot of indoor high school sports in low light. I have 12000 clicks on the 7D MK II, 9000 clicks on the 6D and 82000 clicks on the 5D MK III. If I could only have one camera, it would be the 5D MK III without question. It is sharper than the 1 DX (18 mp vs 24 mp), has a better focusing system than the 6D and much better noise performance than the 7D MK II. It is a hard combination to beat and definitely a workhorse all around great camera!



I guess I am looking for an all-around workhorse... I can't really say that I do any one type of photography more than another, except that maybe landscape is lowest on my priority list (as i'm most likely to cram my x100 in a jersey pocket on my bike to get to where i'd want to take any real landscape shots) And given my purchase history... I bought the 40D in 2007 I don't think i'd be selling the 5d iii for a 5d iv, i kind of like to have one camera, and really get to know it inside and out. the 6.5 fps on my 40d is plenty fast for bike racing, although 10 would be nice, frankly that's a lot more data and throwaways to deal with than at 6. 

Also, I think I need to continually remind myself that I don't do this for a living, and I don't necessarily need the latest toys. Only thing I'll mention is, I took a behind the scenes shot at a race last year, of one of my girlfriend's teammates setting up her bike, and their sponsor asked for a higher quality version for their product catalog, and my shot didn't make it due to lack of resolution/noise... which was kind of a bummer


----------



## Dylan777 (Mar 17, 2015)

candc said:


> considering that you have all full frame lenses you should get a full frame camera. the 5diii is at a decent price point nowadays.



+1...BIG improvement in IQ


----------



## ksgal (Mar 17, 2015)

Either the 7DII or the 5DIII will be a substantial upgrade in image quality. 

Me, I like the extra FPS in a burst (7DII) for over fences and I'll take that over a a bit of improvement in image quality. But if you are very rarely using the fps - Id also vote for a 5DIII - but either will make you very happy. 

The 70D uses almost the same sensor as the 7DII, and is 500-700 cheaper. Could buy that and the ultra wide suggested. But the 5DIII is a stunning camera for the price right now.


----------



## pjn0629 (Mar 17, 2015)

ksgal said:


> Either the 7DII or the 5DIII will be a substantial upgrade in image quality.
> 
> Me, I like the extra FPS in a burst (7DII) for over fences and I'll take that over a a bit of improvement in image quality. But if you are very rarely using the fps - Id also vote for a 5DIII - but either will make you very happy.
> 
> The 70D uses almost the same sensor as the 7DII, and is 500-700 cheaper. Could buy that and the ultra wide suggested. But the 5DIII is a stunning camera for the price right now.



I like the idea of 10fps, but I haven't felt that I've ever really needed it. the 6.5 with my 40D has gotten me the shot i'm looking for ~85% of the time, which is plenty considering that I'm not getting paid for this... they're about the same size/weight/price... low light on the 5D is better but 7D is faster... as i've said 40D isn't too slow to do what I want, so it's kind of a tough decision... also going back to normal focal lengths would be nice too


----------



## Geek (Mar 17, 2015)

I'm kind of like you! I have a 40D that I purchased back in 2007 and have bought some decent glass along the way, 24-105 F4 L and the 70-200 F2.8 L II. I'm very eclectic in my photography, landscapes, portraits, vacations, etc. The 40D is a great work horse and I've taken and still take a lot of great pictures with it. I take the 40D out riding ATV's when I don't want to risk taking the new camera and and better lenses with me.

Late last year, I finally decided to upgrade. I considered the 6D and the 5D mark III, but finally chose to stick with the APS C sensor and purchased the 7D mark II. Got one of those deals from B&H where I got a CamRanger to go with it for free when I purchased the 7D mark II and EF-S 18-135 STM lens kit. The 18-135 STM is the only EF-S lens that I own so I was not influenced by my lens collection.

For me, since I was used to the framing that I got from my lenses on an APS C sensor and knew that I would spend less money by sticking with the crop sensor. I seem to use the longer end of my lenses more often than the shorter and realized that I would have to buy longer lenses to achieve the same framing on a full frame camera.

I have been amazed at the low light and IQ improvement of the 7D II over my older 40D. Before the full frame "purists" dutifully flame me and put me in my place, I don't believe that it is as good as the full frame alternatives. But for me with my budget and style, I believe that upgrading to the 7D II was the best choice. I am still overwhelmed by the 7D II autofocus system, but am learning as I go and smiling all of the way.

While the 7D II is billed as an action and wildlife camera, it does make a good general purpose camera too.

It's not an easy choice! Just wanted to share a little from someone that didn't choose to go full frame and a little of my fuzzy logic that influenced my decision.


----------



## FTb-n (Mar 17, 2015)

Geek said:


> Before the full frame "purists" dutifully flame me and put me in my place, ...


"Convert" is more accurate. When I got my 7D, I was amazed at what it could do. But, after a year of cleaning the noise from low light sports in post, I began to consider FF. I didn't want to. It costs too much. But, then I took the plunge with a 5D3...and I'm amazed at what this FF body can do.

Still, the 7D2 has me intrigued with it's improved AF tracking system. I agree that it would also be a fine upgrade from the 40D.


----------



## pjn0629 (Mar 18, 2015)

FTb-n said:


> Geek said:
> 
> 
> > Before the full frame "purists" dutifully flame me and put me in my place, ...
> ...



I think i'm leaning towards the 5Diii, especially with my current glass... I went and plotted lens on the x-axis, dxo's percieved megapixels on Y, and a series for each body to compare... IQ on the 5D is in a league of its own compared with the 40D and 7Dii by their metrics... And in decent light I doubt I'll be able to tell much of a difference between the AF systems other than frame coverage


----------



## FTb-n (Mar 18, 2015)

NKPhoto said:


> I have a 7D MK II, a 6D and a 5D MK III. I shoot landscape, wildlife and a lot of indoor high school sports in low light. I have 12000 clicks on the 7D MK II, 9000 clicks on the 6D and 82000 clicks on the 5D MK III. If I could only have one camera, it would be the 5D MK III without question. It is sharper than the 1 DX (18 mp vs 24 mp), has a better focusing system than the 6D and much better noise performance than the 7D MK II. It is a hard combination to beat and definitely a workhorse all around great camera!


I shot a lot of indoor sports with the 7D ISO 3200-4000 and found myself constantly cleaning noise in post. My upgrade to the 5D3 was huge. I routinely shoot between 3200 and 6400 with just a little noise reduction preset on import in Lightroom -- but not enough to loose detail like with the cleanup of the 7D images.

Still, the AF sometimes misses on the 5D3 when tracking fast moving erratic subjects. I've assumed that I need a 1Dx to overcome this. But, just today, I looked at both the 1Dx and the 7D2. Both are impressive, but the price of the 7D2 makes it extremely attractive relative to its features. I know that both are better at tracking subjects than the 5D3. The question for me is with low light performance. 

Can I shoot the 7D2 in RAW at 6400 without requiring lots of cleanup and suffering a loss in detail? 

How much of the 7D2's ISO improvement is in the sensor versus the DIGIC 6 in-camera JPG conversion? (Meaning, is there much noise improvement in the RAW images?)


----------



## rpt (Mar 19, 2015)

FTb-n said:


> Still, the AF sometimes misses on the 5D3 when tracking fast moving erratic subjects. I've assumed that I need a 1Dx to overcome this. But, just today, I looked at both the 1Dx and the 7D2. Both are impressive, but the price of the 7D2 makes it extremely attractive relative to its features. I know that both are better at tracking subjects than the 5D3. The question for me is with low light performance.
> 
> Can I shoot the 7D2 in RAW at 6400 without requiring lots of cleanup and suffering a loss in detail?
> 
> How much of the 7D2's ISO improvement is in the sensor versus the DIGIC 6 in-camera JPG conversion? (Meaning, is there much noise improvement in the RAW images?)


I have not bothered to do a back to back low light comparison of both but the 7DII is noisier than the 5DIII. My earlier comparison of the 7DII with 5DIII involved my 100-400L but as it turns out the lens has issues and is out for repairs. I am waiting for its return to do the final compare. However, due to the smaller photon collectors, you will see a difference at 3200 and beyond. In good light there are hardly any focus misses. I think may be a couple out of 930 odd that I shot at a bird sanctuary last month in the span of two hours. It was between 8:00 am and 10:00 am.


----------



## deleteme (Mar 22, 2015)

I'm always thinking of a new body but whenever I get to the mirror I know I will get no trade-in value. :-[


----------



## Danzq (Mar 22, 2015)

FTb-n said:


> NKPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > I have a 7D MK II, a 6D and a 5D MK III. I shoot landscape, wildlife and a lot of indoor high school sports in low light. I have 12000 clicks on the 7D MK II, 9000 clicks on the 6D and 82000 clicks on the 5D MK III. If I could only have one camera, it would be the 5D MK III without question. It is sharper than the 1 DX (18 mp vs 24 mp), has a better focusing system than the 6D and much better noise performance than the 7D MK II. It is a hard combination to beat and definitely a workhorse all around great camera!
> ...



I have a 7d2. Love it.

Noise levels for me get a bit too much to handle after ISO 3200 so I try my best to stay below it.

-Dan


----------



## Ruined (Mar 22, 2015)

pjn0629 said:


> FTb-n said:
> 
> 
> > Geek said:
> ...



I have found DXO's data to be suspect and/or not applicable to real world applications. But full frame will work better in the dark than crop.

Also couple of things:

* For sports, the 7D2's autofocus is better than the 5D3's. 

* 5D3 has a problem with AF points not illuminating in AI servo mode (they remain black instead of blinking red) which is not fixable via firmware. This may be a big problem for your type of usage.

* Thus, I would either get the 7D2 or if you want something that can "see in the dark" waiting for the 5D4 might be your best bet.

The Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II can be gotten rather cheaply used these days, perhaps that might be wide enough? Though frankly for your conditions it sounds like the 24mm f/1.4L II would be a better bet - but I assume that is not wide enough.


----------



## FTb-n (Mar 22, 2015)

Ruined said:


> * 5D3 has a problem with AF points not illuminating in AI servo mode (they remain black instead of blinking red) which is not fixable via firmware. This may be a big problem for your type of usage.


For what it's worth, I consider AF point illumination in AI SERVO to be a "nice to have". I don't think it's absence has affected my own use.

I shoot mostly kid sports using AF Case 2 and 6, then bias the first shot toward "in focus" more than "release shutter". It won't fire if not in focus. In practice, there are very few times when it won't lock on and fire. And, when it doesn't lock on, it's noticeable in the view finder (at least with 2.8 lenses). If it looks sharp in the viewfinder and fires, I know it's in focus.

The problem that I occasionally run into is losing focus while tracking erratic movements. I suspect it may have difficulty with some jerseys or figure skating attire that lacks contrasting elements. This is where I would expect the 7D2 and the 1Dx to shine. My dilemma is that I'm not entirely certain if this is due to not using the right AF Case and not fine tuning it properly or if I'm pushing the limits of the 5D3.

I should probably rent a 7D2 and/or 1Dx to get a true comparison and to see if either solve my lost focus issue.


----------



## pjn0629 (Mar 23, 2015)

Ruined said:


> pjn0629 said:
> 
> 
> > FTb-n said:
> ...



I have no doubt that the 7DII would be a rockstar for shooting cycling events, I'd even go so far as to say that it might even be overkill since my 40D keeps up just fine, and I only brought my Fuji to a crit yesterday, and got some nice shots of my girlfriend's race (not painface close-ups, but just nicely composed/focused shots of the peloton that actually tell a bit about what's going on in the race... not bad for mirrorless/fixed lens)

16-35 is on the list, but I don't do much landscape, so that'd end up being a "normal" lens, and I bet i'd get a ton of use out of it on a crop body. 

You're also right about a 24 1.2 being a great option, I kind of got the Fuji for that reason alone, it's a 23mm f2.0 and it's got jaw dropping quality and low light performance when compared with my 40D, plus the whole camera is smaller than that 24 lens would be. for "normal" shooting, i find myself reaching for the fuji more and more these days. 

Given that the 40D handles the specific sports that I shoot just fine, I don't think I'd really notice the difference between the 5D3 and the 7D2 under the shooting situations I'm going to find myself in. 

I don't need it to "see in the dark" per se, but being able to push 1/500s in shade without a strobe wouldn't hurt. 

My main thing is that all of my lenses are designed for full frame, and I think I'm "wasting light" by using a crop sensor... ie. crop design lenses are focusing all of the light into the effective space for an APS-C sensor, so the result would be more photons in that area given the same amount of available light than a full-frame lens that's gathering the same amount of light, but spreading it over a larger area. 

But, given that what I'm shooting is generally well-lit, I don't NEED the low light performance to be 1 stop better, since anything I get now will be like 4-5 stops better than the 40D

The thing that really throws me off with the DxO stuff is their perceived megapixels metric, I plotted the same batch of lenses, on two cameras with similar starting resolutions, and the 5Diii looks to be far and away the better option, looks to be in a league by itself where the 7Dii is an improvement, but not a mind-blowing one over my 40D.


----------



## ksgal (Mar 25, 2015)

I went from a 50D to the 7DII. The difference is mindblowing, IMHO.

You probably wont ever need to shoot at 16,000 (sixteen thousand) iso. But if you have to, you can with a 7D mark II. See below photo, SOOC no processing other than resizing the Jpg. 

I think you will find situations where you need more reach - and not having to pay $$$ for a longer focal length lens may be the ticket.

I am totally drooling over the 5DIII and can't wait to get one.. but my 70-200 has more reach with my 7D2, I can get decent anywhere in the arena with it. I suspect that I'll be using the 7D2 more often for action, and 5D3 for portrait, how it is intended, but the 7D2 does everything (portrait and sports) and I don't regret it for one second. The pair together is going to be the ticket for me. Each able to carry on as a backup for the other if the need arise, but able to use them where they perform best by having both. 

JMHO but I wouldn't let anyone tell you a 7D2 cant take portraits.  That is all about the light. 

1/800 
F 3.5
iso 16,000
70mm


----------



## pjn0629 (Mar 25, 2015)

ksgal said:


> I went from a 50D to the 7DII. The difference is mindblowing, IMHO.
> 
> You probably wont ever need to shoot at 16,000 (sixteen thousand) iso. But if you have to, you can with a 7D mark II. See below photo, SOOC no processing other than resizing the Jpg.
> 
> ...



Only thing is... I can get to within ~3 feet of my subjects on a regular basis, I'm not reach limited, so I don't get much of an advantage out of a crop sensor for "reach"


----------



## ksgal (Mar 25, 2015)

Then certainly the 5D III will meet all your needs 

Better get one ordered before March 28th!


----------



## FTb-n (Mar 25, 2015)

This has been a fascinating thread for me. The 5D3 set a new bar for my expectations of image quality. Sometimes I push its AF tracking to its limits with action shots and I often wonder if the 7D2 or the 1Dx will up my keeper rate. My wish list has included a 1Dx for both frame rate and color-based AF that <i>should</i> overcome the occasional tracking issues that I have with the 5D3. It also includes the new 100-400 for outdoor sports.

The 7D2 is an intriguing option. It should track as well as the 1Dx. When matched with my 70-200, it's a cheap alternative to the 1Dx/100-400 combo. But, I can't get past the drop in IQ. Since I often live between ISO 3200 ans 6400, the 7D2 remains one stop "dirtier" than the 5D3 in the noise department. Plus, full-frame bodies resolve sharper than crop as the link below will show:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=972&Camera=963&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=972&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

In addition, FF has better color depth and offers narrower DOF. My advice to the OP remains the same. Get the 5D3. For me, as attractive as the 7D2 is, I just can't get past the drop in IQ for indoor sports. The 1Dx remains on my wish list.


----------



## pjn0629 (Mar 27, 2015)

Jules said:


> Hi,
> I guess it will depend on your type of photo ... Landscape or sports ...
> Speaking of my own experience, just swapped from 40D (5 years) to 7DII end of last November, and i'm loving it (3k pics): coupled with 70-200 2.8 IS II, it makes a great combo ... I quite often shoot 800 and up to 3200 ISO (inside shots or for using the 2x extender) and results are quite good compared to the unusable soup of 40D at that level.
> 
> ...



I want to keep it under 2k... and damn you for mentioning the 10-22... add that to the better ISO performance (i'm assuming it'll be usable up to ~ISO 5000 like my x100s), and it suddenly becomes a great option, at roughly the same price as the 5d... but with a slightly wider wide end (since i won't be getting any lenses anytime soon with the 5D route) and 10fps... which seems overkill for bike racing, but i really like the idea of. 

One other thought - if i do the 5Diii, it'll presumably hold value better than a 7Dii and i can sell it in a year or two and get a 5Div


----------



## Zv (Mar 27, 2015)

The 5D MkIII should hold its value well as will the 7D MkII but only because it's still really new. I reckon the 5 series just ages better! I had my 5D MkII for two years and sold it very quickly and easily for just $200 less than what I originally paid. My 7D lost me $300 + and took ages to sell. 

Getting a 5D MkIII now is a great idea as they have come down in price but not so drastically. When the MkIV is announced there will be a fair amount of people looking to buy used MkIII's and I'll be one of them. The demand will be there so no need to worry if you have to upgrade quickly.


----------



## pjn0629 (Apr 2, 2015)

Zv said:


> The 5D MkIII should hold its value well as will the 7D MkII but only because it's still really new. I reckon the 5 series just ages better! I had my 5D MkII for two years and sold it very quickly and easily for just $200 less than what I originally paid. My 7D lost me $300 + and took ages to sell.
> 
> Getting a 5D MkIII now is a great idea as they have come down in price but not so drastically. When the MkIV is announced there will be a fair amount of people looking to buy used MkIII's and I'll be one of them. The demand will be there so no need to worry if you have to upgrade quickly.



I hate to throw a wrench into the discussion, but I was just perusing eBay... and a 1Div looks to be a blend of the 5Diii and 7Dii.... 1.3x crop, 10fps, 16mp (seems enough to me on the fuji x100s I have) Anyone have any thoughts on the 1D iv? Used ones on ebay are like $1600... fits right between the 5D and 7D pricewise too. Only thing I wouldn't be looking forward to is the added weight/size... but then again I have the fuji when I want something small to carry around...


----------

