Is the 7D or 5D a professional level (wedding photography) still camera?

Bill Pryor · February 20th, 2010, 11:00 AM

To me the advantage of the 5DMKII is, as mentioned above, the ability to get wider angle lenses easier. For really wide on the 7D you have to go to something like the Tokina 11-16, which seems to get great reviews. That 11mm, of course, comes out to look a little wider than an 18mm lens on a "full frame" camera. Plenty wide enough for my needs.

I use the 7D mostly for video, and while I think the bigger chip and slightly higher resolution of the 5DMKII is very nice and can give an even better image, I prefer the chip size of the 7D for video. It's very close to Academy 4 perf 35mm motion picture film, and with those PL adapters coming on the market, a person familiar with motion picture production could go to a rental house and use high end cine lenses and end up in pretty familiar territory.

Also, I would not want even less depth of field than what I have now. I like the control over DOF I get with the 7D, but there have been times when I've had to boost the ISO to get more. An even shallower DOF would be problematic in many cases for me because I shoot a lot by myself and don't have an assistant or follow focus wireless remote system.

If I were a newspaper photographer, a military photographer, or a documentary filmmaker shooting in deserts and jungles, etc., I'd go for the 1DMKIV, naturally.

Jon Fairhurst · February 20th, 2010, 01:35 PM

For control of DOF, the 1D4 would really rock. From what I've seen, you can push the ISO two stops higher with the 1D4 than the 5D2. That means you can narrow the aperture by two stops. Going from f/1.4 to f/2.8 - or f/2.8 to f/5.6 - lets you go for a deep field. You can still dial the ISO down and open the lens wide, if that's what you want.

Still, I'm content with the 5D2 - or at least I will be once we get 24p (and hopefully HD on HDMI and 720p60). If I want a deep field, it's just a matter of adding more light or positioning things for the effect.

Bill Pryor · February 20th, 2010, 03:38 PM

On a recent shoot I was maxed out on all the lights I had at the location. I boosted the ISO o 320 and I'm still amazed that it looks as good as the rest of the footage. Some people are intercutting 640 and say it's good as well. I haven't gone that high.

Jon Fairhurst · February 20th, 2010, 04:29 PM

Even 1250 looks very good. Give it a try.

160, 320, 640, and 1250 are the "sweet" ISOs as far as low noise goes. At 1600, the noise takes a BIG jump.

February 20th, 2010, 01:35 PM	#17
Jon Fairhurst Inner Circle Join Date: May 2006 Location: Camas, WA, USA Posts: 5,513	For control of DOF, the 1D4 would really rock. From what I've seen, you can push the ISO two stops higher with the 1D4 than the 5D2. That means you can narrow the aperture by two stops. Going from f/1.4 to f/2.8 - or f/2.8 to f/5.6 - lets you go for a deep field. You can still dial the ISO down and open the lens wide, if that's what you want. Still, I'm content with the 5D2 - or at least I will be once we get 24p (and hopefully HD on HDMI and 720p60). If I want a deep field, it's just a matter of adding more light or positioning things for the effect. __________________ Jon Fairhurst

February 20th, 2010, 04:29 PM	#19
Jon Fairhurst Inner Circle Join Date: May 2006 Location: Camas, WA, USA Posts: 5,513	Even 1250 looks very good. Give it a try. 160, 320, 640, and 1250 are the "sweet" ISOs as far as low noise goes. At 1600, the noise takes a BIG jump. __________________ Jon Fairhurst

February 20th, 2010, 11:00 AM	#16
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	To me the advantage of the 5DMKII is, as mentioned above, the ability to get wider angle lenses easier. For really wide on the 7D you have to go to something like the Tokina 11-16, which seems to get great reviews. That 11mm, of course, comes out to look a little wider than an 18mm lens on a "full frame" camera. Plenty wide enough for my needs. I use the 7D mostly for video, and while I think the bigger chip and slightly higher resolution of the 5DMKII is very nice and can give an even better image, I prefer the chip size of the 7D for video. It's very close to Academy 4 perf 35mm motion picture film, and with those PL adapters coming on the market, a person familiar with motion picture production could go to a rental house and use high end cine lenses and end up in pretty familiar territory. Also, I would not want even less depth of field than what I have now. I like the control over DOF I get with the 7D, but there have been times when I've had to boost the ISO to get more. An even shallower DOF would be problematic in many cases for me because I shoot a lot by myself and don't have an assistant or follow focus wireless remote system. If I were a newspaper photographer, a military photographer, or a documentary filmmaker shooting in deserts and jungles, etc., I'd go for the 1DMKIV, naturally.

February 20th, 2010, 03:38 PM	#18
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	On a recent shoot I was maxed out on all the lights I had at the location. I boosted the ISO o 320 and I'm still amazed that it looks as good as the rest of the footage. Some people are intercutting 640 and say it's good as well. I haven't gone that high.