[toni-a]

Hi all,

with all my camera bodies dead, I have reasons to do my postponed upgrade now

my choices:

7D --> seems till now the obvious choice:

very versatile has everything I need (except the big and very bright viewfinder) I already have the lenses.



5D MK II, only advantage: full frame, 7D has the wireless capability, better autofocus, less bulky lenses, add that I need to get some new lenses and personally I prefer EFS 17-55 over the 24-105.



I am really stuck in the middle of nowhere:



I shoot mainly people/portraits and I need a performing viewfinder the 1D/1Ds series are too bulky 5D isn't reactive enough.

If the 7D had the 1D viewfinder my choice would have been obvious <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[genotypewriter]

[quote name='toni-a' timestamp='1293276800' post='5177']

Hi all,

with all my camera bodies dead, I have reasons to do my postponed upgrade now

my choices:

7D --> seems till now the obvious choice:

very versatile has everything I need (except the big and very bright viewfinder) I already have the lenses.



5D MK II, only advantage: full frame, 7D has the wireless capability, better autofocus, less bulky lenses, add that I need to get some new lenses and personally I prefer EFS 17-55 over the 24-105.



I am really stuck in the middle of nowhere:



I shoot mainly people/portraits and I need a performing viewfinder the 1D/1Ds series are too bulky 5D isn't reactive enough.

If the 7D had the 1D viewfinder my choice would have been obvious <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[/quote]

Since there's no question here and it's just a reflection let me also share my thoughts... there are guys like you who fabricate requirements in just the right way so you won't have a camera to buy and can spend your time lamenting with you money nice and warm in your pockets.



The 5D2 and the 7D are both cameras that are capable of producing far better images than what you have in your gallery. So if I were you, I'd stop whining, flip a coin and buy one and start shooting.



GTW

[Guest]

How many lenses do you have? To me, it sounds like you want a Nikon D700. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



Anyhow, even though I don't agree with GTW about the whining and fabrication part, I'd agree about his suggestion to not agonize about it too much and get a body that's suitable, even if not perfect, for your application. 7D sounds good to me, and as you said, you have the lenses.

[Brightcolours]

I very much agree with genotypewriter here. Lots of assumptions and "requirements" which are not based on fact or experience, but more look like specturbation.



Portraits, people mainly. And the 5D would not be good for that?? That just is nonsensical. Its AF system is very good and very fast, the "reactive" remark is not right.



The 60D would be fine too. VERY fast AF, no D700 can keep up there. People/portraits usually do NOT need 19/30/40/50 AF points... Even a 7D seems overkill for you, toni-a... it is a very capable camera.



So, yes, get a 60D, a 7D, a 5D or whatever your specsheet lust will demand, but just about any camera will do fine. And a 5D a bit more fine than the others due to its bigger and high res. sensor.

[Guest]

Just remember the camera will not magically make your images better. There is a property to digital that (for me) makes it more difficult than film (as oppose to slide). This has to do with DR and the fact that shadows are much harsher (or to me appear harsher) than it did with film. There are many situations when I used film and a fill flash was not really necessary where as now with digital I find it more critical (or regret not using one when I examine a recent set of beach pictures).



Further because I've not really learned the art of post processing (yet) I find the colour and tone range of digital not as pleasing as film. Last but least due to how the sensor act to the angle of light lens and lens design is more critical.



Having said that the one thing that make FF appeal to me is DOF control; I did recently pick up a 5d2 and have used it but a bit (about 40 images so far) with old c/y lenses I have. I should probably post a couple of the images.



Anyways I am currently using an XSI with 16-85 and 5D2 with c/y lenses and I think I will stick with that for a bit. I could never see myself getting a 70D or 60D. I simply do not understand how they will improve things over the XSI (I'm not taking BIF (bird in flight) images and those are much heavier cameras than the XSI.



Currently the only camera that peaks my curiosity is the GH2 (but if I were to seriously consider it I would have to sell one of the current cameras; and to be honest I only use 1 at at time so two is probably over kill for as little photography I do these days).

[toni-a]

If I don't post pictures online this doesn't mean I don't have any.



I don't sell my pictures I just shoot for the pleasure, I don't need the ultimate quality that exists (and that woud be vastly outdated in a year). I was looking for someone who had a personal experience with 5DMKII and 7D and could tell me how both cameras react in true life to help me with my decision.

I am for the 7D for the time being untill proven otherwise.

BTW I tried the 5D MKII and was not quite impressed with its autofocus, merely same capabilities as my 30D,anyone could about the 7D ?

[bryan conner]

What is it that you require of auto focus that your 30D could not deliver?

[Rainer]

[quote name='toni-a' timestamp='1293276800' post='5177']

5D MK II, only advantage: full frame,

...

I shoot mainly people/portraits and I need a performing viewfinder the 1D/1Ds series are too bulky 5D isn't reactive enough.

If the 7D had the 1D viewfinder my choice would have been obvious <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[/quote]



I do not really get your point ... the 5D viewfinder is not only bigger than the one

of the 7D ... it is also brighter ... doing mainly portrais is a clear indication for me,

that the 5D is the obvious choice ... but ymmv



just my 2cts ... Rainer

[genotypewriter]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1293369100' post='5206']

specturbation

[/quote]

It's like when one fantasises about the impossible, what's possible doesn't cut it... so they go back to fantasising...

[wojtt]

I believe AF shortcomings, if there are any at all with the 5D, can be dealt with proper technique like using the central Af point and reframing instead of using peripheral af points; I used a borrowed 5D (mark I) in the studio once and I didin't notice any shorcomings in AF performance - just different ergonomics compared to what I was used to..



Anyways I also support the view that for people shooting - a full frame, together with way better viewfinder is better suited, mainly becouse of better DOF control (and also higher ISO capability, comes in handy at times).



Anyways, nothing like trying it out for yourself, even with an old 5D mark I, to see whether it fits your needs and expectations (which I strongly advice before parting with the cash <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />