7D11 vs 5D3 and 1DX (1 Viewer)

Dave Williams · Dec 7, 2014

I guess it's still early days but has anyone got a 7D11 and either a 1DX or 5D3 ?
I'm interested to hear your opinion of image quality on the 1.6 crop vs the FX bodies especially when the image is cropped.
One pre release tester stated his 1DX stayed in the bag now.Having recently returned from a trip where I couldn't take a big lens to most places the 1.6 crop might have been the answer with my 70-200mm or 300mm plus the 2.0x TC.

johnf3f · Dec 8, 2014

Hi Dave, it will be interesting to see what opinions are offered here.
The 7D2 struck me as a very nice camera to handle/use but I haven't had the opportunity to try one properly yet! As you know I am a fan of larger sensors and have found that whilst you do loose a little reach, it is not close to what the 1.6 crop would suggest. Perhaps the 7D2 will improve a little on this.
Andy Rouse is making very positive noises about his, but I do know another pro who is returning his to canon as he feels that it is not up to his (mainly sports + wildlife) needs. Perhaps he is over critical? What I can report is that when we were shooting alongside each other I was able to maintain 1/1000 sec at F8 and usable ISO on my 1DX (the light was poor!) and he was struggling at F4 on a lens with half the focal length. It would appear that, though much improved, the ISO performance of the 7D2 may be limiting compared to some cameras. I suppose it's all down to one's personal needs.

Robert L Jarvis · Dec 8, 2014

And you should add, the depth of one's pocket. Not every one has a gold mine pocket.

Dave Williams · Dec 8, 2014

Robert L Jarvis said:
And you should add, the depth of one's pocket. Not every one has a gold mine pocket.

I know it's very easy to overlook that not everyone is in the same position financially and I appreciate that I am fortunate to be so but it's been hard earned, well planned and comes at a time when in life's soccer match I am well in to the second half so I might as well enjoy it now !

David Whitaker · Dec 8, 2014

I have just got a 7D2 along with a grip but I am not expecting it to be more than a backup for my 5D3. Like the 7D before it, its Achilles heel is a pixel pitch of hardly more than 4 microns. With such minute photocells, any shutter and mirror box vibrations along with lens movements are magnified on the sensor to such a degree that image blur results. The more glass that you pile in front the worse things get. You have only got to look at a table of DSLR specifications, all of the performers have a pixel pitch of 6 microns or more. In strong lighting conditions with little atmospheric interference I would expect the 7D2 to perform alongside the 1Dx and 5D3 when using long lenses. In poor overcast winter light when there are fewer photons flying around for those under sized 7D2 photocells to catch there will be no contest. Or maybe there might be. I had a play with mine in the garden this afternoon in what was quite frankly ‘dipped headlight’ lighting conditions. At 3200 iso in AV mode @ f5.6 I was surprised just how well it performed. It even managed to stop blue tits @ 1/125 some of the time. Playing with a tad overexposed shot of a male blackbird in Lightroom afterwards the amount of feather detail and lack of noise in the shadow area under his breast was outstanding. Focus on perched birds was spot on every time.
Whilst on the image blur rant I think that most of if not all of the complaints about soft focus and lack of contrast are nothing more than blur. For all I know the guys out there who are complaining, are holding the camera with a 500mm attached in one hand whilst riding a unicycle. I’ve seen some very good images produced by the 7D2 but all in strong light.
I have always thought the 7D a difficult camera to use successfully. Your technique has got to be spot on and you have to accept its limitations. The same will be true of the 7D2.

David

Dave Williams · Dec 8, 2014

That's very interesting David.
My technical knowledge is zero but I have always felt that the lesser number of pixels on a full frame body still managed to appear superior to those on a crop body. I presumed the pixel is bigger so could be cropped or blown up more and not have the image distorted as much as on a smaller pixel.
Whereas the 7D2 might not perform as well as the 5D3 in poor light I have a feeling it may well beat it in every other aspect if wildlife is your preference.That said higher ISO does give opportunities for higher shutter speeds or greater DOF so it is very significant.
When it comes to the 1DX I expect the 7D2 should fail to out perform in anything other than reach, weight and price but I am interested to hear opinions of areas where owners think it comes close.
Dave

dabut101 · Dec 8, 2014

Saw a guy last week with a 7d2 500 f4 and x2 converter using it in very poor light snapping short eared owls and seeing the results was very impressive

GYRob · Dec 8, 2014

Well at the moment I leave the 1dx at home these 2 shots taken with the 7d mk2 600f4isLmkII +2xtc mkIII Lensmaster RH-2 the sun was on the way down but I got 1/2500 f8 iso 800 . 1920mm

They may not be pin sharp but I do think they are better than what the 1dx would give at 1200mm as even these are quite a crop .

Rob.
Edit Perhaps the Full frame will give a better idea .
Rob.

njlarsen · Dec 9, 2014

I read a rant the other day about the effects of sensor generation often being more important than the sensor size.

Niels

Egret · Dec 9, 2014

I am becoming ever more convinced that the effort I put into considering the merits of equipment would be better spent taking pictures!

Dave Williams · Dec 9, 2014

GYRob said:
Well at the moment I leave the 1dx at home these 2 shots taken with the 7d mk2 600f4isLmkII +2xtc mkIII Lensmaster RH-2 the sun was on the way down but I got 1/2500 f8 iso 800 . 1920mm

They may not be pin sharp but I do think they are better than what the 1dx would give at 1200mm as even these are quite a crop .

Rob.

Does the 7D2 have exposure compensation in manual settings Rob ? I never did see an answer elsewhere.

What's the FPS like in silent mode ? How silent is it ? As good as the 5D3 ?

I expect the build and feel is similar to the 5D3. The one thing that is certain is it won't be anything like the 1DX or any of the 1D series. They are built to last for centuries.

GYRob · Dec 9, 2014

Dave Williams said:
Does the 7D2 have exposure compensation in manual settings Rob ? I never did see an answer elsewhere.

What's the FPS like in silent mode ? How silent is it ? As good as the 5D3 ?

I expect the build and feel is similar to the 5D3. The one thing that is certain is it won't be anything like the 1DX or any of the 1D series. They are built to last for centuries.

Hi Dave
Manual Is all I ever use M on the dial so any compensation is done by me SS/AV/ISO so I don't see how you could have any EC if it did then it would not be Manual ( well that's how I see it Dave )

It is indeed as quiet as the 5D3 and not bad at all in normal FAR quieter than the 1dx .it give's 4fps in quiet mode, I would rather have 6 but its just about enough when the action is close .

No not like the 1dx but it does feel nicely made I don't even have a grip on it either and that's a first for me as I have always had a grip on my other cameras 5dmkIII /7d c.

For the price your getting quite a chunk of a 1dx and I go along with what Roy says above .

Rob.

HokkaidoStu · Dec 9, 2014

Dave Williams said:
Does the 7D2 have exposure compensation in manual settings ? I never did see an answer elsewhere.

Only if you are using Auto ISO.

David Whitaker · Dec 9, 2014

GYRob said:
Well at the moment I leave the 1dx at home these 2 shots taken with the 7d mk2 600f4isLmkII +2xtc mkIII Lensmaster RH-2 the sun was on the way down but I got 1/2500 f8 iso 800 . 1920mm

They may not be pin sharp but I do think they are better than what the 1dx would give at 1200mm as even these are quite a crop .

Rob.

Nice but I think that your 1Dx’s better dynamic range would have done a much better job controlling the whites. Full frame sensors these days are so good at capturing detail these days you don’t need to fill the frame. Let the subject breathe and let’s see the pictorial quality of the image.

Re the Short-eared Owl guy, I would not treat images on the back of a camera as any more than a guide. I’m sure that we have all looked at the back of the camera and gone home thinking that we have captured something special only to find on the computer that it’s nothing like as sharp as you had first thought.

I would say that quiet shutter mode on the 7D2 is as good if not quieter than that on the 5D3. I thought that the fast shutter mode was the quietest on any Canon DSLR that I have used. Another nice touch on the 7D2, you can alter the frames per second rate between 2 and 10. (Quiet max 4 fps) I used to run my 1D3 at less than max fps in the vain hope that it would actually take the time to stay focused on the subject that I’d pointed at.

dabut101 · Dec 9, 2014

David Whitaker said:
Nice but I think that your 1Dx’s better dynamic range would have done a much better job controlling the whites. Full frame sensors these days are so good at capturing detail these days you don’t need to fill the frame. Let the subject breathe and let’s see the pictorial quality of the image.

Re the Short-eared Owl guy, I would not treat images on the back of a camera as any more than a guide. I’m sure that we have all looked at the back of the camera and gone home thinking that we have captured something special only to find on the computer that it’s nothing like as sharp as you had first thought.

I would say that quiet shutter mode on the 7D2 is as good if not quieter than that on the 5D3. I thought that the fast shutter mode was the quietest on any Canon DSLR that I have used. Another nice touch on the 7D2, you can alter the frames per second rate between 2 and 10. (Quiet max 4 fps) I used to run my 1D3 at less than max fps in the vain hope that it would actually take the time to stay focused on the subject that I’d pointed at.

hi david
my viewing was based on pics posted to the web and the birds were very distant probally 100 yards minimum

Roy C · Dec 9, 2014

Dave, I guess it comes down to if you are going to be reach limited with 600mm on a full frame. Obviously the 1Dx is the dog's bollocks of Canon Cameras but cropping to the same FOV as a 1.6 cropper you are left with just 7 Mb - As far as yielding fine detail in a bird goes this is never going to compete with the 20 Mb of the 7D2. There are of course other things to consider not least the high ISO noise levels.

Roy C · Dec 9, 2014

GYRob said:
Hi Dave
Manual Is all I ever use M on the dial so any compensation is done by me SS/AV/ISO so I don't see how you could have any EC if it did then it would not be Manual ( well that's how I see it Dave )

Rob, I think Dave forget to mention Ev comp in Manual when using auto ISO. Up to now the 1DX has been the only Canon Camera with this facility. This is something I would really like on my 5D3 as I am a great fan auto ISO for birds that are likely to be in varying light levels.
p.s. from what I can gather the 7D2 does have this facility.

graham catley · Dec 9, 2014

Roy C said:
Dave, I guess it comes down to if you are going to be reach limited with 600mm on a full frame. Obviously the 1Dx is the dog's bollocks of Canon Cameras but cropping to the same FOV as a 1.6 cropper you are left with just 7 Mb - As far as yielding fine detail in a bird goes this is never going to compete with the 20 Mb of the 7D2. There are of course other things to consider not least the high ISO noise levels.

Never sure what people have come to think they should expect from a cropped image: my first digiscoping camera was a Nikon 880 with a massive 2MP sensor and I have 10x8 prints done from that which are perfectly acceptable images with feather detail: if you are only using pics on the web you don't need a 18MB file as 180kb will do so it maybe comes down more to hype than practical usage. I also have a lot of bird pictures with very little surrounding the bird that are effectively useless with regard to composition while other shots of birds fighting or lifting off have missing wing tips as I have in effect been too close so something else to consider: as an excercise try forming a portrait format magazine image from a landscape bird image you have taken leaving room above and below the bird for text and see how big the bird does not need to be in the frame.

Roy C · Dec 10, 2014

graham catley said:
Never sure what people have come to think they should expect from a cropped image: my first digiscoping camera was a Nikon 880 with a massive 2MP sensor and I have 10x8 prints done from that which are perfectly acceptable images with feather detail: if you are only using pics on the web you don't need a 18MB file as 180kb will do so it maybe comes down more to hype than practical usage. I also have a lot of bird pictures with very little surrounding the bird that are effectively useless with regard to composition while other shots of birds fighting or lifting off have missing wing tips as I have in effect been too close so something else to consider: as an excercise try forming a portrait format magazine image from a landscape bird image you have taken leaving room above and below the bird for text and see how big the bird does not need to be in the frame.

I never said anything about needing to fill the frame with the bird or even having the bird big in the frame, it is down to the individual as to how big they want the bird in the frame - some like looser crops whereas others like a tight crop (I personally prefer a looser crop with a nice composition and showing some of the habitat but that's just my preference).
All I am saying is that IF you want/need to crop a shot from a FF Camera like the 1DX or 5D3 to the same FOV as a 1.6 crop Camera like the 7D2 then the full frame crop will not yield as much detail as the crop Camera. It could be that the FF crop will yield adequate detail for your needs and that's fine but there seems to be a general conception that shots from full frame Cameras can be cropped a lot heavier than an crop cameras and still retain the same amount of detail - this is just not true. Yes the FF cams will produce cleaner images but IF you need to rely on cropping your images a lot then the 1.6x cropper is the way to go IMHO.
I have had a 5D3 for about a year now and love it but because I am not prepared to lug around a big/heavy lens I have all but given up bird snapping as my lightweight 400mm lens on the full frame is just too short, I do occasionally use a 1.4x tc with it but that has its drawbacks/limitations of course. If I ever do get back to bird photography I will almost certainly get a 7D2 as that is a far better option than cropping from my 5D3 IMO.

MiguelM · Dec 10, 2014

If it was as simple as a matter of cropping vs resulting megapixels then crop would always win. But it is not. Camera shake will be more of a problem with a crop camera and even more so when the subject is not well-lit. The loss of light plus higher iso noise will make one use lower shutter speeds which increase the probability of camera shake. So to me, crop has many negatives.

I read somewhere that someone made tests and calculations and concluded that the "real world reach gain" is not 1.6 but 1.19 when considered all factors (sharpness, micro contrast, etc). I don't know if it is correct or not but I can't prove if it is or if it isn't.

7D11 vs 5D3 and 1DX (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

johnf3f

Robert L Jarvis

Well-known member

David Whitaker

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Gallery Moderator

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

occasional moderator

David Whitaker

Well-known member

Occasional bird snapper

Occasional bird snapper

Well-known member

Occasional bird snapper

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread