Now, I had hoped for the 7D to match the 5D in terms of Image quality but of course that was not being fair. So I expected it to be about 80% of the quality.

Overall, from the trip and further use of the camera, I must say I am pleasantly happy with the 7D as it performed as I had expected and in some cases better than I dared hoped.

Bottom line for me – is that these are tools for different needs. They are not replacements for each other. Just as motorcycles cannot be as comfortable as cars, cars cannot go where motorcycles (esp dirt bikes) can go.

For earning money from photography – the 5D2 is the money earner (watch and jewellery photography) but the 7D is meant for pure enjoyment of animal/zoo and travel. These, it does very well – so much better than the 5D2.

Check out my Bali photographs at http://harrytanphotography.com – I wonder if anyone can distinguish the 5D2 and 7D images?

as a non technical photographer I have come to these conclusions of the two.

7D
1) Great for outdoor animal shots
2) Great for indoor shots with a speedlite under ISO 400

5D
1) Great indoors with no flash up to ISO 2000 for family christmas gatherings etc,,
2) Great image quality for getting that extreme sharpness in the eyes and features you focus on

I love the 7D when I am outside no questions asked and for fast moving objects in the daylight

I love the 5D for any shot where I need extremely sharp detail. The pixels blend so much better in hi contrast scenes or low light scenes such as light halo’s etc. I also find the FF sensor gives a better perception when shooting a hill or steep background for some reason.

The 5D is very very slow and almost unacceptable for a camera in that caliber compared to the 7D but as far as Image quality I can vouch for a night and day difference in Image quality. If you have a 52 inch quatron TV hook your HDMI cable up to it and the camera and you will see the difference.

Appreciate the thoughts and efforts that went into this, but in part there are flaws. All of these comparisons come down to, in part, how the images are processed and the tools that are being used to process them. DPP, for example, will add softening, before you ever get a chance to work on an image. This is evidenced by the fact that most all other RAW processors will give you more detail in a 7D RAW file than DPP will. With that detail though does come a penalty associated with the 7D.. what you talk to when you mention “cramming” pixels. Too many people took the same processing methods they used with other crop bodies and just blindly applied them to the 7D, which is a mistake. I reworked every single ISO NR and Sharpening algorithm I had (using LR – especially since LR 3.3 vastly improves NR/Sharpening). The 7D is a VERY different crop camera from its prior siblings… That’s true in terms of the new focusing methodologies and image handling. I would say that the 5DMKII broke very little new ground (doesn’t mean it’s bad) whereas the 7D broke new ground on many fronts.

I believe part of your comparison was grounded in that aspect… comfort with the old vs. maximizing the new. To be sure there are differences in the two, and the 7D does have flaws (vertical banding at ISO 100 in the shadows) but given the proper workflow, it will hold its own against the 5DII very nicely. I won’t argue some of the obvious benefits of FF DOF, etc., but even those can be “minimized” with a change in distance to the subject and insuring you use good glass on the 7D. The point is that EVERY camera has difference characteristics vs. another.. let’s not even start the differences in Canon vs. Nikon for example. The differences between the 5DII and 7D are not “night and day”. There are times with a 5DII will have a natural advantage being FF over crop, and the same holds true for the 7D over the 5DII in certain circumstances, but “night and day”.. no.. Understand the camera in your kit, learn how to post process to maximize it potential and those differences begin to fade. I’ve seen some absolutely horrid comparisons on NR between the two where the author obviously knew NOTHING about NR/Sharpening and what impacts they had on each other. It took all of about 5 minutes to take what they claimed was an example of how “poor” the 7D was at 1600 and show them the same image (processed through LR) that made their attempt look silly.

The bottom line for me was that the 7D was the more versatile of the two bodies. I knew going in I would miss “some” aspects of FF, but everything else I gained made the 7D the better choice to have in the bag. To say the 7D can’t do weddings or portraits, etc. just isn’t accurate. It can and it does them very well… but it does require you do them differently than the 5DII. If you are willing to learn and exploit that, you are rewarded greatly… stay with only what you knew in the past, and yes, you can and will see some of the “day and night” you feel you see.

Again, appreciate your efforts.

Jay S.

Can I show you comparisons ? No , I sold the 7d because I hated the images. You keep coming to the point about prints, not everyone makes prints of the sizes you are discussing. My photos are often used in sizes larger than 15ft wide.

I know you aren’t picking on this. I know it was posted on DPReview and lots of people had opinions on it. I know you are constantly singing the 7ds praises on the forum there, again fine by me. We all have different opinions on it so we’re obviously not going to come to any agreements. Lots of other DPReview people fixated on the “he wouldnt be able to tell the difference in a print” thing as well. I’m not sure why, I think theres a lot of cameras you wouldnt be able to tell the difference with at that size, not just these 2. But I print bigger, and I often have to crop in. These things make a difference.

I have also seen the Imaging resource samples before I’m not sure what to say really. The sample you posted seems to have both images processed differently.

I guess just let people download their own versions and make a comparison base on their own viewing of the RAW files as this example you posted seems to be over sharpened on the right hand image.
For everyone who doesnt know this you can get 7d samples here http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E7D/E7DTHMB.HTM

And 5dMKII samples here :http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E5D2/E5D2THMB.HTM

Download the same image for both cameras and make up your own mind. I can see far greater detail in the 5dMKII images. Take a look at the paint brush bristles on the right hand side for example.

So you have no idea which crop came from which.

I’ve found that those on the web who say the 5D2 and 7D are very close or equal at low to mid ISO happily back up their claims with photographs. Those who claim there is a “night and day” difference between the two, or that the 7D “looks like garbage”, never have anything to show. With due respect, it seems to be the same case here.

> I have used and owned both cameras and I sold the 7d because I was not happy with it’s quality in a range of shooting situations.

I have used both and ended up purchasing the 7D for my own personal use because I never saw a difference in prints up to 30″ when shooting up to about ISO 800. I did find the 7D required a bit more post work, but the end result was the same. None of my personal comparisons were in the studio, btw.

> Not all photos are created equal so judging this point by a single in-studio photo is pointless.

Perhaps you would like to show some comparisons which you believe aren’t pointless?

> If you want the opinion of someone who has used both cameras in a variety of iso and lighting scenarios from overcast days , to flash lit portraits to fog or midday sunshine then you can read what I have to say.

I’ve done the same and came to a completely opposite conclusion, especially when the test was not pixel peeping but prints.

Why do I care? I guess I get tired of people wringing their hands over what should be an easy purchasing decision (i.e. Lucas, Rahul). Over the years in both photography and audio I’ve seen lots of instances where differences in equipment are hyped beyond reason. I see this same tendency among some photographers when it comes to comparing FF to crop, and specifically these two bodies which so many Canon users find themselves choosing between. I don’t personally consider a difference large until it can be reliably detected by a critical viewer (or listener) in an unlabeled comparison.

When applying optimal post processing to each and shooting at ISO 800 and below, I have found it’s rare that anyone can discern between pixel peeping crops from these two cameras. No one has ever been able to discern between large prints in my experience. At high ISO it does become possible to discern between large prints, so there I would concede there is a clear 5D2 advantage. I would also concede that at any ISO the 5D2 is more forgiving of exposure error.

Re Lucas: the 7D has 1.5-2 stops better high ISO than the 1D mkIIn. I really don’t care for 1D2 images past 800 but will happily use the 7D at 3200. He says he never prints big, but if he does the 7D will make the 1D2 look like it was out of focus (thinking of a 24″ print comparison here). The 7D has passed the Antarctica test with flying colors, so I don’t think build or sealing is an issue.

Re Rahul: the only caution with the 60D is the AF is not really up to dealing with BiF. I’m not saying you can’t nail a BiF shot with the 60D, but the keeper rate and consistency will not be as good as a 7D or 1D/1Ds.

BTW, I don’t mean to pick on your blog post or make it seem like I’m “playing games.” Just tossing my experience into the mix.

Anyhow I went out and bought a very cheap hardly used 30D to fill my backup role – no dust removal only 8MP etc but hey clean well balanced images from the get go – no worries. Until we have the next step change in CMOS development thats me for the APS – C for now…