7D/5DmkII?

samrvogel

samrvogel

Active member
As I did my research before purchasing my T2i, I looked a lot at the 7D. However, I didn't really bother looking at the 5DmkII, as I just assumed (stupidly) that since it was the 5d instead of the 7d it was obsolete. However, I decided to do some more research for fun and I realized that the 5dmkII is much more expensive that the 7D. Did the mkII come out after the 7D? What make it's better/more expensive? Bigger/better senor? More options/manual settings? I'm sure this is a rookie question but I've been wondering it for a while and I'd like to figure it out once and for all. Thanks.
 
5dm2 came out before the 7D. It has a larger full frame sensor and has better low light sensitivity than the 7D. However, the 7D has a faster rolling shutter. It's really personal preference. Having shot on both, I think the APS-C sensor in the 7D, which is closer to actual 35mm frame size used more popularly for motion film is the best of all worlds. The one big complaint I hear mostly is that some people want ultra wide, and if you want that, the 5D is the way to go. I shoot with a Tokina 11-16mm wide (F2.8) and I am happy with that.

I own a 7D myself after testing both, but have now moved on to the AF100 (which is designed for video not stills and uses the same sensor size as the GH1 or GH2).

If you are looking at the T2I, I'd suggest also looking at the GH2. If I were buying something less than the AF100, it would be the GH2. I think it's pluses outweigh the minuses compared to even my 7D. But like anything, this is an opinion and others might not agree.
 
This is how much you see from the same distance with 5DII and 7D/t2i APS-C sensor and 50mm lens on both cams
ff_vs_apsc-545x722.jpg


schowek3.png
 
I actually own a T2i, but I just went through that whole Thread battling between the GH2 and the T2i/7D, and as you said it seems to all come down to personal preference. I love my T2i, and with a new lens/mic/dolly system I'll be set for a while... however if I was in the camera buying mode again I would definitely take a look at the GH2. In my wildest dreams I'll own an AF100 one day... *drool*
 
wow, I didn't realize the crop factor was so bad. I'm considering purchasing a Nifty Fifty... but I feel like if I want to get anything besides super close up shots I'll have to go too far back (cause it crops to like 80mm?)... Would I be better getting a 30mm f/1.8 as opposed to a 50mm f/1.4?
 
Totally understand. I saved for quite a bit to get the AF100 and I am very happy with it. Coming from the 7D, I was very happy with the 7D minus the colored moire. I love the feel of the 7D, as the GH2 is very small. Regardless, enjoy shooting on your T2I! We used one to shoot a music video and it worked well. And VERY NICE LCD on the back, better than the 7D even. :)
 
My 30/1.4 Sigma on my 7D is my absolute favorite lens I have ever used. I know, it's a Sigma, but wow, it looks nice and has a great feel on the APS-C.
 
Rick Burnett said:
Totally understand. I saved for quite a bit to get the AF100 and I am very happy with it. Coming from the 7D, I was very happy with the 7D minus the colored moire. I love the feel of the 7D, as the GH2 is very small. Regardless, enjoy shooting on your T2I! We used one to shoot a music video and it worked well. And VERY NICE LCD on the back, better than the 7D even. :)
Click to expand...

the GH2 is not an option for me because of the lack of 25p, but the AF100 (101) is something I'm considering. I'm currently looking for something to better than the HMC151 to match the 7D/5D2 combo for the unattended camera. Since you have the 7D, how does the AF100 match? Since I'm always in low light conditions (churched and receptions) low light performance is also very important! The ability to set the white balance by K values (so all cameras are exactly the same) is something I'm no longer willing to do without. It makes matching cameras so much easier in post!

In terms of the O/P, since I have both 7D and 5D2 I can talk about why I like or dislike each one for quite some time, but in the end I take the 5D2 over the 7D when ever the light is low enough to need more than ISO1250. This is really where the larger sensor comes in to it's own.
 
So far, it seems I can get about the same low light performance out of the AF100 as the 7D. That said, the noise is just different, and there are a million settings that affect the noise very much. Also, I think the AF100 stays cleaner at higher ISO. I've actually seen usable ISO3200 footage whereas on my 7D I wouldn't go over ISO2000 EVER. Actually, I think in everything I released, the max I went is ISO1600, and I tried to limit that.

The ONLY complaint I have with the AF100 is some of the controls. No 1:1 zoom for focus which the 5x and 10x zoom on the 7D is AWESOME for setting focus. Also, you have to select only 3 ISO you want to use at a time and select them with a switch. I really want them to add this to the dial in the back. Outside of those two things, everything else is great.

If you do get one, the curves in the camera are VERY different than the 7D to me. You are going to have to reprogram yourself in exposing a scene, at least to me, in knowing how far you can push the image up or down.
 
samrvogel said:
In my wildest dreams I'll own an AF100 one day... *drool*
Click to expand...

I have been a Panasonic user for 6 years now, and I love their products. I started out with the DVX100, moved to the HVX200 and the HPX170 and loved my footage. However, after seeing comparisons between 5D footage and AF100 footage I would buy a 5D (or a 7D) over an AF100 any day. I have done some work with the 5D starting in October of last year and the quality of the image is just amazing. Not to mention the versatility of the camera. I noticed that your signature says you're a film student. When you start getting bigger work and expanding your portfolio, contacts, and clientele you might appreciate more and more the ability to shoot professional video and change to shooting professional quality images (with super shallow depth of field) within seconds. Not to mention the ability to put the camera (literally) anywhere.

I noticed that you said you have a T2i. It's a wonderful camera and a great start to shooting some good looking footage. I would say stick with it and if Panasonic comes out with a revolutionary camera, good for them and consider the switch. Otherwise I would suggest staying with the brand of DSLR that everyone is hiring freelance DP's to use.

Obviously all of this is my opinion and you need to figure out what works for you. So you can just disregard all that if you don't agree, haha. :P
 
Chris S. Alexander said:
I have been a Panasonic user for 6 years now, and I love their products. I started out with the DVX100, moved to the HVX200 and the HPX170 and loved my footage. However, after seeing comparisons between 5D footage and AF100 footage I would buy a 5D (or a 7D) over an AF100 any day. I have done some work with the 5D starting in October of last year and the quality of the image is just amazing. Not to mention the versatility of the camera. I noticed that your signature says you're a film student. When you start getting bigger work and expanding your portfolio, contacts, and clientele you might appreciate more and more the ability to shoot professional video and change to shooting professional quality images (with super shallow depth of field) within seconds. Not to mention the ability to put the camera (literally) anywhere.

I noticed that you said you have a T2i. It's a wonderful camera and a great start to shooting some good looking footage. I would say stick with it and if Panasonic comes out with a revolutionary camera, good for them and consider the switch. Otherwise I would suggest staying with the brand of DSLR that everyone is hiring freelance DP's to use.

Obviously all of this is my opinion and you need to figure out what works for you. So you can just disregard all that if you don't agree, haha. :P
Click to expand...

I totally agree with everything you said. In my 2 years as a film student ive been using hvx 100's and i love them, but i still love the ability to shoot juat as high quality footage (debatable, i know, but in my opinion it can be) with a photo camera body. I feel i can be more creative with my shots as im not trying to position a huge camera in a weird angle. I think after i buy a nice lens and some other prosumer products Ill really love the camera.
can anyone give me any ideas on the lens i posted above??
 
I own a 7D and an AF100 and I can tell you FIRST hand that the AF100 smokes the 7D in footage. The AF100 resolves more detail, has less moire/aliasing, and has less rolling shutter. The jello effect of the skew is almost non-existant which is pretty good. In fact, the read/reset is on par with the Red One at full resolution. Even further, shooting 60fps VFR at 1080p is ABSOLUTELY better than the 7D 720p60, which suffers from the worst moire/aliasing I have seen on practically most cameras.

The rainbow aliasing alone on the 7D is horrid. It makes any slightly off angle high contrast content look like someone smeared oil on it. For VFX work, it's horrible to work with. Further, the AF100 holds more chroma detail in the shadows as well whereas the 7D it just disappears to black.

Don't get me wrong, I shot with the 7D for a year and still own it. It has been a lot of fun to shoot on, but I am tired of losing shots due to colored moire that is VERY hard to fix in post. When shooting in city situations where LOTS of high spatial frequency content are all around and the fact you cannot see the moire in camera at all, it makes it tough. Also, if you want to to do handheld work, the jello really limits what you can do, whereas the AF100 give you a lot more freedom.

I will say, I do wish the AF100 was a little smaller, because I really used the size of the camera to my advantage, but the AF100 is pretty light and can be make lighter. I'm not saying the AF100 is perfect, but given I *know* my 7D VERY VERY well, I can tell you, I tested everything on my AF100 with regards to my 7D. In fact, I can make my AF100 so clean that the limitation becomes the 8-bit encoding and not the noise. The AF100 wins for me.
 
samrvogel said:
wow, I didn't realize the crop factor was so bad. I'm considering purchasing a Nifty Fifty... but I feel like if I want to get anything besides super close up shots I'll have to go too far back (cause it crops to like 80mm?)... Would I be better getting a 30mm f/1.8 as opposed to a 50mm f/1.4?
Click to expand...

I originally purchased a 60mm lens to go with my T2i. The quality of the shots and the color was great, but I was getting really irritated every time I tried to get a shot, because I would literally have to stand at the end of another room just to get a medium shot of a person.

I finally wound up selling my 60mm and getting the original kit lens for two reasons:

1. It's 18-55mm, so I can do wide shots OR I can get almost the same length as my 60mm.

2. It has IS, which is amazingly helpful when shooting with a stabilizer, as compared to locking it down on a tripod.

While I have noticed a bit of difference in the quality of the shots (mostly in the sharpness), the mere fact that I can actually shoot indoors or on my stabilizer is a Godsend.

Most of the time, I wind up using the 18-55mm at midway (24mm) to get slightly wider shots without the wide-angle distortion being rampant. I think a 30mm would probably be a nice purchase. I would strongly recommend finding something with IS (especially if you plan on doing more skate park vids). It helps a lot in regards to rolling shutter/jello effect.
 
Rick Burnett said:
I own a 7D and an AF100 and I can tell you FIRST hand that the AF100 smokes the 7D in footage. The AF100 resolves more detail, has less moire/aliasing, and has less rolling shutter. The jello effect of the skew is almost non-existant which is pretty good. In fact, the read/reset is on par with the Red One at full resolution. Even further, shooting 60fps VFR at 1080p is ABSOLUTELY better than the 7D 720p60, which suffers from the worst moire/aliasing I have seen on practically most cameras.

The rainbow aliasing alone on the 7D is horrid. It makes any slightly off angle high contrast content look like someone smeared oil on it. For VFX work, it's horrible to work with. Further, the AF100 holds more chroma detail in the shadows as well whereas the 7D it just disappears to black.

Don't get me wrong, I shot with the 7D for a year and still own it. It has been a lot of fun to shoot on, but I am tired of losing shots due to colored moire that is VERY hard to fix in post. When shooting in city situations where LOTS of high spatial frequency content are all around and the fact you cannot see the moire in camera at all, it makes it tough. Also, if you want to to do handheld work, the jello really limits what you can do, whereas the AF100 give you a lot more freedom.

I will say, I do wish the AF100 was a little smaller, because I really used the size of the camera to my advantage, but the AF100 is pretty light and can be make lighter. I'm not saying the AF100 is perfect, but given I *know* my 7D VERY VERY well, I can tell you, I tested everything on my AF100 with regards to my 7D. In fact, I can make my AF100 so clean that the limitation becomes the 8-bit encoding and not the noise. The AF100 wins for me.
Click to expand...


If anyone was to read this post, you would think the Canon 7d is a horrible camera. Many many people know how to work around ALL of these problems and deliver a beautiful image. I'm more than sure I can find a better looking 7d video than an Af100 one.


It truly bothers me when people go this route, No One is denying the Af100 is a great camera, but just because you had problems and did not master the 7d that does not mean that others haven't.

Finally the 7d cost about $1400 compared to a $5K video camera
 
life4eva said:
If anyone was to read this post, you would think the Canon 7d is a horrible camera. Many many people know how to work around ALL of these problems and deliver a beautiful image. I'm more than sure I can find a better looking 7d video than an Af100 one.
Click to expand...

Considering the difference in how long they have been out, yes, you can probably find more good 7D video than good AF100 videos. That being said, if you gave someone both cameras and had them go out and shoot a variety of different things, you would have more problems with the 7D than you would have with the AF100. It is just a better camera. It also costs about 3 times as much, so if it wasn't a better camera, no one would buy it.

The fact is, with the canon DSLR's, there are certain shots you just cannot do due to the problems with the sensor. I'm sure the next set of cameras from canon will address this, and in a few years we won't have to worry about rainbows across any detailed footage, but for right now, as good as they may be, they still have very significant flaws.

I used my 60D the other day to film my son playing with some toys, and he was wearing a striped black and white shirt. Watching the footage afterwards, it is almost unusable due to the rainbow effect. I've got footage of him in the same shirt on my HFS100 camcorder, and it looks fine.
 
life4eva said:
If anyone was to read this post, you would think the Canon 7d is a horrible camera. Many many people know how to work around ALL of these problems and deliver a beautiful image. I'm more than sure I can find a better looking 7d video than an Af100 one.


It truly bothers me when people go this route, No One is denying the Af100 is a great camera, but just because you had problems and did not master the 7d that does not mean that others haven't.

Finally the 7d cost about $1400 compared to a $5K video camera
Click to expand...

And you know what? It is in certain situations. Sure, if I control what is in front of the camera 100% and eliminate everything that causes the aliasing/moire in the camera to ruin the shot then it does produce wonderful video. That, however, is easier said than done. Shooting on the 7D does limit what you can shoot, and worst of all, is if you aren't using an external display or downloading the footage and checking it for aliasing/moire in the image, you don't catch it. I do VFX work as well, and I can tell you that rotoscoping aliased edges is a nightmare for me. Especially with all the color contamination from the rainbows that get caused on those edges.

Sure, for things like music videos we've been able to shoot enough footage to get a good final product that we've delivered for television airing, it still annoys the hell out of me when the amp cabinet fabrics have rainbows in them. Or, the clothing the artists are wearing comes in and out of the spatial frequency where they start to rainbow color. Or how about what happens on a fret board and guitar strings? I am not going to tell a musician he can't play his guitar in the video. I shoot and shoot to try and get the right combination that is the least offensive. And worst, trying to shoot at 720p on the 7D which is useless really. The aliasing is that bad. For the most part we had given up on using it.

Or what about shooting an urban scene with buildings and AC units at various distances. Straight lines on window sills or decorations on the building. Cars going by with grills. All of these things are an absolute pain to deal with. The beauty of using the 7D for me was in the size of it as well, but slapping an LCD monitor on it that can resolve 1080p is cumbersome just adds to the list of work arounds I have to deal with. It slows me down, adds another battery I have to deal with, and of course more cost.

I consider myself a master at using the 7D, as I know it inside and out. That doesn't mean I am a master at cinematography in the least, but that's not the point. I know where the camera fails. The problem is, do I really want to have my artistic concepts limited by the capabilities of the camera? If I want to do a ultra wide deep focus shot in a city, it can be almost impossible to get a shot that doesn't have rainbows on a pan. Or the roof of a house where the shingles look horrible. If the entire scene is supposed to be in focus, say for an action sequence, then I am really stuck. When everything in a shot looks amazing except the rainbow on a dense pattern, it really upsets you because you are now having to change a beautiful scene for a hardware limitation.

It really bothers me when people don't tell the whole story about the limitations of any camera when they compare them. For me moire is a huge issue, and the fact the 7D has a slower read/reset time has made me lock down more shots that I've wanted to with longer focal lengths.

I personally wish Canon had taken the 7D sensor and gone the route of what Panasonic did with the AF100. But Canon's problems with rainbow moire is ALL through their line. I have an HV30 and even it does the same thing on fine detail.

But none of this changes my opinion. I'd take the AF100 over the 7D any day, and I own them both. While they both CAN make beautiful images, the AF100 has less limitations on what kinds of images you can capture. It allows me to be more dynamic with the camera, it allows me to capture more color and detail in lower exposed areas of an image, and it has no rainbow more and less aliasing/moire. These are all great things for me.

I'll even take this a step further in that I've stopped recommending ANY Canon cameras for video until they fix these problems that are STILL HERE after even the release of the t2i and 60D. I recommend people check out the GH2 IF (and only IF) they are not concerned with still images. If they want the best of video AND stills, I recommend any of the Canon. If they want stills only, I find the Nikons to me do a better job for the price, which is why I didn't sell my D90. I think it works WORLDS better than my 7D for stills (and astrophotography).

I've also been pretty impressed with some of the things coming out shot on the AF100, especially 'A Verse for Dying' short and the music video Phillip Bloom just posted a few days ago. Given it's been what, a month, that the camera came out? When the 7D came out all we had was the carnival video and a few other shots. Give it time. The AF100 shoots different than the 7D.

We are even finishing up our web series with the 7D just because I am waiting on the birger mount and the rest of the series was already shot with the 7D. Our combined views on our series is over a million hits. I think we know how to use the 7D.

And if you are curious, I think part 3 shows how far we've come. I did all the 3D visuals and at least half of the shooting. I did all the 3D compositing as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMrwNz24j_g

I think it shows that you can get good shots, but, if you pay attention, there are many scenes where the flak jackets and different portions of the outfits have rainbows on them. Part 4 has some VERY WORSE scenes we are working around (its not released yet). There was a shot of Otacon on the couch that we removed ALL color from (the codex scene) because it was THAT BAD and we never saw it in the camera. Also, the bottom edge of the television in the coffee shop has some pretty bad aliasing. True, not all of it is noticeable to most people. But WOW that couch was horrible and would have been.

For people starting out, ANY of these DSLR cameras are great. That way, you can put your money into your lenses. But, people need to know what they are getting for a $1.5k camera. They need to know the limitations and in this case, if they want to produce better images, there is another option out there for more. If people are already on a low budget, going back to do pickup shots or pay actors again is not always a great option. We learned the hard way since I was a 7D early adopter. Wouldn't change it for the world though. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top