7D 7D + accessories or 5D Mark II without many acessories?
- Thread starter nho
- Start date
nho
Well-known member
what are the differences between the two though?
DavidBeier
Veteran
I second this. The flip screen and manual audio pretty much back the 60D the superior choice for video and think of what kind of extra accessories you can grab with that spare $800 (or spare $1700 if you were goin got go with the 5Dii).
None of us have any idea when these bodies will be obsolete. Canon may announce a new line at the end of the year which will have a much better codec, no more moire issues, and XLR inputs. I think it's much smarter to spend more money on good lenses and supporting gear which can carry over to your next camera.
nho
Well-known member
visually, though, how does it compare to the mark ii? how much will I be losing out on if I go with a 60D rather than a mark ii?
David W. Jones
Veteran
What do you need to do your job at hand properly?Just a camera body and lens, or do you need a tripod, monitor, manual lenses with follow focus, extra batteries, extra memory cards, filters, audio recorder, mixer, microphones, headphones, boom, case? Budget accordingly.
I don't think that matters. He's using the camera for video and 60D is the best Canon DSLR for video.
jambredz
Veteran
WhiteMonkey
Well-known member
7D + 6 inch HD monitor, prime lenses, support system, tripod, light kit, matte box for filters, follow focus just to name a few. The 7D handles highlights better than the 5D. The 5D has better shadow resolution. They are both crippled by 4:2:0 color compression.
You've got to think about sound and post. Both can get very expensive. At the bare minimum a quadcore running a 64bit operating system with 8 gigs of RAM. Adobe has a nice production suite, Mac or PC, Vegas, FCPX, your choice.
"What do you need to do your job at hand properly?"
You've got to think about sound and post. Both can get very expensive. At the bare minimum a quadcore running a 64bit operating system with 8 gigs of RAM. Adobe has a nice production suite, Mac or PC, Vegas, FCPX, your choice.
"What do you need to do your job at hand properly?"
nho
Well-known member
I'm not worried about post production, I've already got all that covered. I suppose what I will need to invest in regardless of the camera would be a steadicam, follow focus, lenses, possibly a mattebox, and sound equipment. I already have a monitor, tripod and editing suite from my previous rig.
Unless you plan a theatrical release for your video work (in which case, you might want the 5D mkII), I would go with either the 7D or the 60D - the files are indistinguishable from both cameras. The choice comes down to either a preference for working with hdmi external monitors (choose the 7D) or working with the 60D's flip out screen. Given that we can expect something new from Canon at some point this year (which all of us hope will deal with the whole aliasing/moiree debacle with these cameras) you might even want to spend less and buy a T2i/550D and run magic lantern on it as a stop-gap move. All your accessories should be compatible with your next upgrade, especially if you buy 'L' glass.
my 02
my 02
DavidBeier
Veteran
Basically it comes down the the 5Dii having a slightly bigger sensor. 5Dii has a full frame and 7D/60D has an APS-C sized one. That means lenses will have a 1.6 magnification on the 7D/60D/T3i and you'll have a bit easier time getting a shallow DoF if that's your thing (though it's not a huge difference as the 7d/60D still has a sensor/DoF the size of a RED or Super 35mm film). The 5Dii also has slightly better low light performance thanks to a larger sensor. Resolution is the same (both downsampled) and the 7D/60D actually seems to handle over exposure a bit better. I guess my feeling is that if working in low light or a shallow DoF is super important, I'd rather take the extra cash and use it to get a very fast lens with a low aperture.
Don't see why the 5Dii would be any better for theatrical. In theory, the 7D is perhaps best for theatrical as it's the only one that can send an uncompressed HD signal out of the HDMI out and thus bypass some of the H264 compression.
my 02
Don't see why the 5Dii would be any better for theatrical. In theory, the 7D is perhaps best for theatrical as it's the only one that can send an uncompressed HD signal out of the HDMI out and thus bypass some of the H264 compression.
my 02[/QUOTE]
I believe you're stuck with the red record dot, and there are reports of artifacts on the 7D hdmi output too - which is why no-one uses an external recorder with them. General concensus seems to put the full frame 5D ahead of the 7D on IQ if you're projecting onto a cinema screen. I think you'd have a hard job choosing between the two for regular broadcast work, though.
my 02[/QUOTE]
I believe you're stuck with the red record dot, and there are reports of artifacts on the 7D hdmi output too - which is why no-one uses an external recorder with them. General concensus seems to put the full frame 5D ahead of the 7D on IQ if you're projecting onto a cinema screen. I think you'd have a hard job choosing between the two for regular broadcast work, though.
5dII , APS-C sensor might be close to super35mm 4:4 frame cropped to 16:9 but i woud prefere a choice to have shallow dof and ability to close the lens, on APS-C f2.8 on 35mm 28mm have to deep focus for my taste and perspective is too wide when close.
I dont get people talking about super shallow, its not that eveyone with 5d must shoot wide open.
I dont get people talking about super shallow, its not that eveyone with 5d must shoot wide open.
Last edited:
WhiteMonkey
Well-known member
check out the Zacuto shootout. They evaluated the 5D and 7D alongside Arri Alexa and Red. It's interesting to see the differences between the cameras.
From the first installment, I can say the 5D handles the shadows better but the 7D handles the highlights better with a nice balance of light and dark exposures across the image. There's more difference to the two sensors besides dof.
You'll also see how nice the F35 and Alexa are. I blame the poor apparent softness of the image from the Canons to the 4:2:0 color compression. Am I wrong?
From the first installment, I can say the 5D handles the shadows better but the 7D handles the highlights better with a nice balance of light and dark exposures across the image. There's more difference to the two sensors besides dof.
You'll also see how nice the F35 and Alexa are. I blame the poor apparent softness of the image from the Canons to the 4:2:0 color compression. Am I wrong?
I will repeat myself: How many times you have watched hollywood (shot with super 35mm sensor) movie and thought there should be shallower DOF in the scene? I'm sure never. Super shallow DOF is for stills and even with portrait photography you rarely use f1.2-1.8 because a) the DOF is so shallow the persons nose and hair will be out of focus and b) the lenses are way sharper on 2.8->.
Also when thinking the future, it's better to use camera with similar sensor size to super 35 in case you one day have change to work with one (Film, Arri, RED, whatever). You know exactly what mm will give what FOV and DOF and you don't have to use calculator to find what lens to use with super 35 camera so it looks like *mm in 5D.
Last edited:
DCTBradJohnson
Active member
Just got done shooting a two day commercial in the middle of a natural disaster zone. For some reason the art department chose the Canon 5D and 7D to shoot the spot on. The 7D spent half of our exterior day and studio day overheated (yes firmware is up to date), and twice the camera completely quit and lost irreplaceable interview footage. The 5D didn't overheat nearly as bad, but using it in conjunction with an external monitor drove me crazy... having to pull the cable to focus assist, bizarre disconnections for no reason...
If you're shooting amateur stuff any of the bodies have pros and cons, no one builds on the features and has them all included, and I really don't see much difference in image quality. If you need something that you can use in a professional atmosphere I'd move away from the Canon's, when you have two days and a busy schedule the camera should not delay or hamper your production. Remember these were made for taking stills, and working with one in a time sensitive professional environment shooting emotionally intense subject matter for huge name clients is not at all what they were intended for, and never will be.
If you're shooting amateur stuff any of the bodies have pros and cons, no one builds on the features and has them all included, and I really don't see much difference in image quality. If you need something that you can use in a professional atmosphere I'd move away from the Canon's, when you have two days and a busy schedule the camera should not delay or hamper your production. Remember these were made for taking stills, and working with one in a time sensitive professional environment shooting emotionally intense subject matter for huge name clients is not at all what they were intended for, and never will be.