Canon 7D Mark II vs Canon 5D Mark II or Mark III
Discussion
Need a little help choosing a camera. We need a camera for studio shots of large products, outside shots of cars and also video. The video would be of cars moving and possible studio/garage how too type videos.
So far from my very limited knowledge of camera's I have these on the short list:
Canon 5D Mark II £600 2nd hand
PROs - Good camera, wireless connectivity and good video
CONS- No video audio input and tops out at 24fps, not sure if the auto focus is good enough for video of action shots?
Canon 7D Mark II £809 Brand New
PROs - good video
CONS- No wireless connectivity
Canon 5D Mark III £1200 2nd hand
PROs - Ticks all the boxes, audio in for video, wireless connectivity, good for video
CONS- £600 more than the Mark II
At the moment the 5D Mark II seams the best value for money. £600 more for the Mark III for audio input, when we are not 100% sure how much we might use it.
Not sure a 5D2 has got wireless connectivity? I'd have thought to was too old for that.
Out of the other two the 5D3 is undoubtedly the daddy but as you say a good chunk more expensive and you'd need full frame lenses which again are generally better but pricier.
Do you have somebody who knows what they are doing to take the shots, organise lighting, do post processing etc etc? That's probably a bigger concern than the actual hardware
Out of the other two the 5D3 is undoubtedly the daddy but as you say a good chunk more expensive and you'd need full frame lenses which again are generally better but pricier.
Do you have somebody who knows what they are doing to take the shots, organise lighting, do post processing etc etc? That's probably a bigger concern than the actual hardware
None of them have focus worth talking about for video. Well the 7dmk2 might with STM lenses but how fast are the cars moving?
What are the shots going to be used for? tbh they are all ~20mp and will deliver good results used properly.
5d3 will be the best in low light, 5d2 next, 7dmk2 last.
5d2 is by far the oldest and clunkiest, very slow operation, fps and poor buffer.
Not a lot between the 7d2 and 5d3 I think apart from sensor size and a few fps. Do you need low light or shallow dof?
What are the shots going to be used for? tbh they are all ~20mp and will deliver good results used properly.
5d3 will be the best in low light, 5d2 next, 7dmk2 last.
5d2 is by far the oldest and clunkiest, very slow operation, fps and poor buffer.
Not a lot between the 7d2 and 5d3 I think apart from sensor size and a few fps. Do you need low light or shallow dof?
Save your money and frustrations. A 5D2 for studio stills, and a video camera for anything that moves. Digital SLRs just don't cut it unless you've a focus puller employed. Even a very cheap camcorder will leave the most expensive DSLR in its wake when it comes to autofocus tracking for video.
Save your money and frustrations. A 5D2 for studio stills, and a video camera for anything that moves. Digital SLRs just don't cut it unless you've a focus puller employed. Even a very cheap camcorder will leave the most expensive DSLR in its wake when it comes to autofocus tracking.
I've not used my 7D ii for video so can't comment about focus issues however I did have a 70D which was superb at tracking cars on a track. It wasn't too shoddy for stills either. It also had wireless but not sure about audio although you can definitely plug a mike into it I think magic lantern was needed for actual audio controls.
Edited by jurbie on Sunday 27th December 11:51
It looks to me that both the 70D and 7D Mark II are good for video as they have "Dual Pixel CMOS AF delivers full-time continuous autofocus (with phase detect at every pixel in framing area) for video"
The 70D and 7D Mark II look very similar? Same sensor? The 70D has wireless connectivity but the 7D doesnt. Im not sure I really understand what makes the 7D Mark II better than the 70D unless your shooting stills of something very fast?
I should explain why I think we want wireless connectivity, we want to be able to view pictures on a large screen as they are taken in our studio. Maybe we dont need wireless for this or understand it functionality?
oh and also I should add that the most important thing is the quality of studio shots of larger products. We have tried a few cheaper SLR cameras and there sensors are just not up to quality pictures of something like a race seat. The video is a secondary requirement, if we are going to be investing in a camera it'd be good if it could also do at least average quality video for youtube.
Thanks for the help!
The 70D and 7D Mark II look very similar? Same sensor? The 70D has wireless connectivity but the 7D doesnt. Im not sure I really understand what makes the 7D Mark II better than the 70D unless your shooting stills of something very fast?
I should explain why I think we want wireless connectivity, we want to be able to view pictures on a large screen as they are taken in our studio. Maybe we dont need wireless for this or understand it functionality?
oh and also I should add that the most important thing is the quality of studio shots of larger products. We have tried a few cheaper SLR cameras and there sensors are just not up to quality pictures of something like a race seat. The video is a secondary requirement, if we are going to be investing in a camera it'd be good if it could also do at least average quality video for youtube.
Thanks for the help!
Edited by AnimalMother on Monday 28th December 12:04
AnimalMother said:
jurbie said:
I'll be in your neck of the woods over the next few days with my 7D mk II (and a 1d MK4). Drop me a PM and I'd be happy to come out and play if it gets me away from the mother in law for a few hours.
Thats great! You still around, we are near Pwllheli.Regarding the wireless issue, whilst more convenient it's easy enough to shoot tethered and the software that comes with camera will do it very easily. I would imagine that for your studio shots the camera will be fairly static so there would be no worries about getting tangled up and seeing the camera or laptop end up on the floor.
AnimalMother said:
oh and also I should add that the most important thing is the quality of studio shots of larger products. We have tried a few cheaper SLR cameras and there sensors are just not up to quality pictures of something like a race seat.
Just my opinion but I'd have thought lighting was the most important thing followed by lenses followed by the camera DibblyDobbler said:
AnimalMother said:
oh and also I should add that the most important thing is the quality of studio shots of larger products. We have tried a few cheaper SLR cameras and there sensors are just not up to quality pictures of something like a race seat.
Just my opinion but I'd have thought lighting was the most important thing followed by lenses followed by the camera Saying that my mate who shoots products professionally has just got a 5ds and loves it. but he has half a mil dollars of lighting too..
jurbie said:
Unfortunately I'm back home now but I get over a couple of times a month if you want to set something up in January although it'll probably have to be a weekend. I might be able to squeeze in a Friday afternoon depending on other commitments.
Regarding the wireless issue, whilst more convenient it's easy enough to shoot tethered and the software that comes with camera will do it very easily. I would imagine that for your studio shots the camera will be fairly static so there would be no worries about getting tangled up and seeing the camera or laptop end up on the floor.
Regarding the wireless issue, whilst more convenient it's easy enough to shoot tethered and the software that comes with camera will do it very easily. I would imagine that for your studio shots the camera will be fairly static so there would be no worries about getting tangled up and seeing the camera or laptop end up on the floor.
RobDickinson said:
Tethered shooting is the normal option in studio
Thanks for the explanation!DibblyDobbler said:
Just my opinion but I'd have thought lighting was the most important thing followed by lenses followed by the camera
We are able to take great shots of small items. But no mater how much different lighting we try we cant repeat it with larger items. On large items we have trouble getting the entire product to be sharp, in focus and not have any bright spots, maybe you'd call that flare. I think your right and its down to the lens, maybe focal length? Which leads me onto my next question. :-) What lens should we get. Im under the impression we should have at least two lens, one all rounder and one specifically for studio product shots. Again our main concern is larger products. Also ease of use, maybe a macro lens?
Im thinking we should get:
24-105mm f/4L as an all rounder
Then either a 50mm f/1.4 or a 100mm f/2.8 Macro lens for studio shots?
Edited by AnimalMother on Tuesday 29th December 10:16
If you are doing product photography then you might want to consider a longer lens in order to get better compression, so that the shape is reproduced more accurately (so the part of the product nearest the front doesn't look artificially larger than the parts further back).
Assuming your lighting is sufficient then a 70-200 f4 might be just the thing. If you can run to a Canon L series (second hand, and you won't need image stabilisation with a tripod which will help keep the price down) you will be able to get some good sharp pictures.
Assuming your lighting is sufficient then a 70-200 f4 might be just the thing. If you can run to a Canon L series (second hand, and you won't need image stabilisation with a tripod which will help keep the price down) you will be able to get some good sharp pictures.
AnimalMother said:
DibblyDobbler said:
Just my opinion but I'd have thought lighting was the most important thing followed by lenses followed by the camera
We are able to take great shots of small items. But no mater how much different lighting we try we cant repeat it with larger items. On large items we have trouble getting the entire product to be sharp, in focus and not have any bright spots, maybe you'd call that flare. I think your right and its down to the lens, maybe focal length? Which leads me onto my next question. :-) What lens should we get. Im under the impression we should have at least two lens, one all rounder and one specifically for studio product shots. Again our main concern is larger products. Also ease of use, maybe a macro lens?
Im thinking we should get:
24-105mm f/4L as an all rounder
Then either a 50mm f/1.4 or a 100mm f/2.8 Macro lens for studio shots?
Interesting you say it's not 'sharp and in focus' - are you getting enough depth of field (perhaps a smaller aperture - eg f11 upwards) sorry if I am teaching you to suck eggs...
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff