5D/7D comparison

It's all good, clay. No flame wars here. Just making sure people are getting the right information i this thread is all.

According to Tramm, work on ML for the 7D is progressing, so soon we should have all of the things you mention above on the 7D as well.

So, all things being equal when ML for the 7D is out, you're left with…

- Better low-light performance on the 5D
- Full-frame format (or as you say "1:1 focal distances") on 5D
- 30p, 24p and (maybe, but doubtful from what I understand) 60p
- $1000 more expensive (give or take)

Take ML away from the 5D (or add it to the 7D, either way), and the choice is a lot less obvious. And if the 5D ends up NOT having 60p as an option, that would make it a non-starter for me.

From extensive shooting with the 7D, the low-light capabilities are more than enough for my needs, though others will probably want more. I can't imagine what the low-light performance of the 1DMkIV will be like. But at $4500, it better be good.

And as for the focal length issue, as many have said this seems to only matter if you come from a full-frame photography background. With zoom lenses ranging from 10-200mm on the 7D, I never have a problem getting the framing I want with the 7D.

Both are pretty amazing cameras, no doubt. But having used both for video, I'm not entirely convinced that (ML aside) the 5D is worth the extra grand. (Again, this is strictly for video. No doubt the 5DII full-frame is better for stills.)
 
yoclay said:
The 5D has/will have: 30p, 24/25p and we still don't know about 720@60p. It may well have this too.

So besides better low light behavior and 1:1 focal distances the 5D has with ML:
* Peaking
* Custom cropmarks bitmap file
* Live histogram while recording
* Time remaining estimate indicator
* Automated focus pulls!
* Focus stacking
* HDR exposure bracketing
* Lens data (hyperfocal distance, DOF, etc)
* Audio monitoring can be turned off during clip review
* Internal mic can be used
* Output audio volume control

+ HDMI OUT without the letterbox for greenscreen, blackmagic, etc > next up in ML 1.7

But I guess the 7D is fine too, if you like that long lens kind of commercial look.:happy:

Just having a bit of fun here, no flame wars please!:bath:
Click to expand...
OK, so the 24p firmware for the 5D will be released sometime next year. Tramm Hudson is working on Magic Lantern for the 7D, which probably will also be released next year. So next year, these frame rate and Magic Lantern arguments will be moot.

As far as the focal length thing goes, it's only relevant if you are used to full-frame photography. If not, then it's not really an advantage at all. The 7D's APS-C sensor is very close to Super 35mm and Academy 35mm in size, which makes it more ideal for approximating the film look than the 5D. Shallow DOF isn't everything. Focal lengths have a direct effect on image compression, and if you're not using the kinds of focal lengths that professional 35mm productions are using, then your images will definitely look different due, in no small part, to the image compression.
 
ydgmdlu said:
Brilliant. Thanks.


I wouldn't buy the Beachtek precisely because I realized, from the beginning, what you're saying. It should be common sense. But ROCKMORE wanted an easy solution.


Not exactly.
Click to expand...

Best quality, least complications to get there.
 
The problem with focal lengths for the 7D is that when you get into the wider angles, you are in trouble. We are talking primes here. Almost no zooms compare at this level for sharpness and especially contrast. Now, in order to get even a reasonably wide angle, with a fast aperture in a prime, you are going to spend a fortune, far more than the price difference between a 7D and a 5D. It's the glass that matters.

Currently all of my lenses are f1.4 in matching sets of Canon L and Contax Zeiss T* series.

The closest equivalent to a standard wide (we are not talking even really wide here - a 35mm photo lens) would be about a 21mm. Find me a lens even that wide which is faster than f2.8, as sharp and not a fortune. We are not even talking about WIDER angles than a standard 35mm photo field of view here !

When you look at a range of lenses for a cinema package they almost always cover the wides in a way that most photo lenses cannot currently do on a 7D.

As long as the lenses aren't cinema lenses, the argument that a 7D has a cinema size sensor is meaningless. Even RED knows they will have to create a smaller set of primes to cover their non FF cameras.

PL mount lenses on the 7D. Definitely. Great, bring em on.

Otherwise, the closest you are going to get to an equivalent Cinema look is on the 5D with the lenses that were made for full frame.




ps> For the Beachtek, I say just LISTEN to the tests which Jon Fairhurst made in FIVE different configurations and then decide. Your ears will know the truth.
 
Last edited:
....but it still doesn't change the fact that FF looks "different" from professional 35mm productions.

Pick your poison. :)
 
As I've always said, it depends on what you shoot as to whether one camera is a better choice than any other.

The fact of the matter right now is that, if you need 24p or 60p, the 5DII is not even a consideration, as it doesn't shoot those frame rates. If you can deal with converting 30p to 24p, great. Lensing has nothing to do with it for me at the moment. I need the camera to shoot 60p and 24p, and I need that now, period. The 7D does this, the 5D does not.

You obviously like/need/want to shoot with fast primes at wide angle. I, on the other hand, use high-quality "L" series (mostly) zooms at f2.8 or slower. Most of what I shoot is outdoors, run-and-gun, documentary-style stuff. I don't need (or even want) DOF any shallower than the 7D can give me. So, for me the 7D is the "better" camera.

Now, once the 24p update is available for the 5D, the landscape will be different for me, which is why I just swapped my second 7D for a 5DII body.

This is where all of these "compare this camera to that camera" threads collapse. How "good" a camera is ends up being defined by how well it meets certain needs. And everyone's needs seem to be different. The best anyone can do is to look carefully at what and how they shoot, and find the camera that addresses those situations best, even if (gasp) it's not an HDSLR.

--SM

yoclay said:
The problem with focal lengths for the 7D is that when you get into the wider angles, you are in trouble. We are talking primes here. Almost no zooms compare at this level for sharpness. Now, in order to get even a reasonably wide angle, with a fast aperture in a prime, you are going to spend a fortune, far more than the price difference between a 7D and a 5D. It's the glass that matters.

Currently all of my lenses are f1.4 in matching sets of Canon L and Contax Zeiss T* series.

The closest equivalent to a standard wide (we are not talking even really wide here - a 35mm photo lens) would be about a 21mm. Find me a lens even that wide which is faster than f2.8, as sharp and not a fortune. We are not even talking about WIDER angles than a standard 35mm photo field of view here !

When you look at a range of lenses for a cinema package they almost always cover the wides in a way that most photo lenses cannot currently do on a 7D.

As long as the lenses aren't cinema lenses, the argument that a 7D has a cinema size sensor is meaningless. Even RED knows they will have to create a smaller set of primes to cover their non FF cameras.

PL mount lenses on the 7D. Definitely. Great, bring em on.

Otherwise, the closest you are going to get to an equivalent Cinema look is on the 5D with the lenses that were made for full frame.
Click to expand...
 
Ian-T said:
....but it still doesn't change the fact that FF looks "different" from professional 35mm productions.

Pick your poison. :)
Click to expand...

How? I think it looks far closer to 35mm productions than most of the stuff I see coming from other cameras out there.

Granted none of us have the millions and the means that those productions have, but when the 5D's start showing up on 35mm sets as they have recently I think that kinda indicates that people believe they can match pretty well...

I definitely have picked my poison, and it looks like it's not about framerates, but rather aliasing, which all of these cameras seem to have. :violent5:
 
stephenmick said:
So, for me the 7D is the "better" camera.
Click to expand...
Which, once again, hammers home the point -- there is no absolute "better". There is only "better for a given circumstance."

Which is why, every time someone asks "which is the better camera", we always start off with "what do you intend to shoot with it?"

There's no absolute "better" -- there's only better for a specific job. If you need 720/60p, a GH1 is "better" than a 7D, and either of them are a million times better than a 5D, because the 5D doesn't even offer that. If you need PAL/NTSC switchable, a 7D is better than both of them, because they don't offer it. If you need hyper-shallow-DOF at wide-angle, the 5D blows the others into the weeds.
 
yoclay said:
The linked post states that it is inaudible in the recording.
Click to expand...


The link also states "I still hear a bit of noise but this is removed easily with post processing." Could this be a result of the 20Hz tone generated?

Also sounds like you need to buy an I-phone and a Zoom H4N to try it out. True or not?
 
Last edited:
If you listen to the tests done by Jon Fairhurst with the Beachtek as I related before you will find that the Beachtek always has a bit of noise in the high end, with or without ML, etc. which is why I consider it useless. This whole methodology is not as efficient as the other solutions. However, I think if you are going to go down that road, why pay +$300 for it? If you need XLR input's buy a good pre-amp like the Juicedlink (It's a lot cheaper) and make your own pilot tone. At least when ML rolls around for the 7D you will have a coherent piece of equipment. Or buy an H4N (It sounds great and very practical) and get Pluraleyes. As to more specifics, you will have to ask the original poster for it.
 
yoclay said:
How? I think it looks far closer to 35mm productions than most of the stuff I see coming from other cameras out there.
Click to expand...
The problem is that if you pay attention, you'll notice that in the vast majority of shots in major 35mm productions, the DOF is not anywhere near as shallow as what FF does.

I definitely have picked my poison, and it looks like it's not about framerates, but rather aliasing, which all of these cameras seem to have. :violent5:
Click to expand...
Then why didn't you go with the GH1? :)
 
GH1 has a comparable amount of aliasing. But what it doesn't do, that the Canon does, is insert color distortion into the aliasing. But the GH1 definitely has almost as much aliasing as the 7D does, it's just sometimes less noticeable because it doesn't draw attention to itself by turning the edges orange and purple.
 
yoclay said:
The problem with focal lengths for the 7D is that when you get into the wider angles, you are in trouble. We are talking primes here. Almost no zooms compare at this level for sharpness and especially contrast. Now, in order to get even a reasonably wide angle, with a fast aperture in a prime, you are going to spend a fortune, far more than the price difference between a 7D and a 5D. It's the glass that matters.
Click to expand...
Are you not familiar with what focal lengths are most commonly used in professional 35mm productions? As Kholi will tell you, cinematographers rarely use lenses wider than 24mm. (Example: David Cronenberg said that A History of Violence was almost entirely shot with one 27mm lens.) 18mm seems to be the limit; 18mm is the widest setting on the RED zoom lenses. Even for full-frame lenses, anything faster than f/2.8 for wider than 24mm is both rare and very expensive.

You could get the Nikon 14-24mm, the Canon 16-35mm, or the Tokina 11-16mm, which are all pretty legendary for image quality (roughly prime-quality) and acceptably sharp wide open at f/2.8. The Tokina is cheap at $600.


Currently all of my lenses are f1.4 in matching sets of Canon L and Contax Zeiss T* series.

...

When you look at a range of lenses for a cinema package they almost always cover the wides in a way that most photo lenses cannot currently do on a 7D.
Click to expand...
That's not an argument for what one needs to achieve the "film look." The truth is that professional 35mm productions are almost always shot between f/2.8 and f/5.6.

As long as the lenses aren't cinema lenses, the argument that a 7D has a cinema size sensor is meaningless. Even RED knows they will have to create a smaller set of primes to cover their non FF cameras.

...

Otherwise, the closest you are going to get to an equivalent Cinema look is on the 5D with the lenses that were made for full frame.
Click to expand...
What seems quite clear to me is that motion pictures are not your background.

BTW, the RED Pro Primes, which were released several months ago for the RED One (which also has an APS-C sensor), come in only the following focal lengths: 25mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 100mm, and 300mm. Obviously, nobody seriously working in cinema cares much about wider lenses or "full-frame equivalents."
 
Last edited:
 
LOL, seems alot of people are confused. I think for most of you guy's, it would be better to find a good zoom, and just go out and shoot. Experiment, try out different stops, settings, etc. More important is the content. The viewer isn't going to care less if you have a little bit more of shollow DOF than the other guy. I mean, do you ever hear "I think that shot has more blurry background than the other dude's shot", from a viewer. Heh, I've been shooting for 25 years, and I don't really notice or care if the shot is more, or less DOF. I DO care if I'm watching a compelling story. That goes for prime TV or screen.

Also, if you want some primes, hit ebay. I've bought several Nikons,etc. for my 5D. The Nikon to Canon adapter works great. And you'll save ALOT of money and have shots just as sharp as a Ziess or anything else. I also bought an adapter for my old Hasselblad lenses for the 5D. Pretty sweet pic.

I tried the 7D. The 5D has a little better pic, and a load of available lenses.

JohnnyD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top