1d3 for 7d or 5d2?

[P. Chong]

I have been trying to get out of the Canon system...have the 1d3 plus a whole range of L lenses(17-40L, 85L, 135L, 100macro, 70-200 2.8L). Managed to sell all the lenses when I moved to MFD. But it appears the 1d3 is not going to sell for what I consider to be a reasonable price, so I a thinking of either keeping it, or swapping it for a 7d+one lens, perhaps 35L or 24-70L, or 5d2 body only.

What do you guys think. If I keep the Canon system...either the 1d3, or switch to 7d or 5d2, main use is for photography for web images. I will use my H3D system for print. Subjects mainly food, and perhaps some street.

 

[fotografz]

Personally, unless you shoot sports or subjects like that, I'd dump it all and move on. Perhaps get something that is the opposite of the H3D in speed, features and portability ... maybe something like a Sony A33 or A55 both of which are very capable, and more fun that a barrel of monkeys. Fairly dinky cameras packed with state-of-the-art technology that really promotes creative experimentation and "take with".

-Marc

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Heck I'd even just go for a Nex5. Incredible sensor, tiny package, ability to use some nice alternative glass.

 

[slrlounge]

If the main use is for photography I would say go with the 5D2, its an amazing camera. (If money is an issue, then go with the 7D)

 

[David Schneider]

I would say the 5dMK2 because that will cover you in those times when you need high (as in 1,200-5,200) iso and it will still give you 3+ frames per second if you need to do some action work. Lightweight body so can pack it with mf gear.

 

[bennettk]

I have used all three cameras. If I had to pick one of the three for general (non-sports) use, it would be the 7D with the 17-55/2.8 or the 24-105/4. Quick comparisons:

Compared to the 1D3, the 7D is much smaller and lighter, almost as fast in handling and focusing, and is less expensive. I suspect high ISO quality is better, though I haven't tested them side by side.

Compared to the 5D2, the 7D is smaller and lighter, handles better (IMHO), is much faster in shooting and focusing, and somewhat less expensive. High ISO quality is similar.

With the 17-55 you get a reasonably small system that produces fine image quality.

(So what did I end up with? The 1D Mark IV, but then I was spending company $$$, not my own.)

 

[lowep]

"Compared to the 5D2, the 7D is smaller and lighter, handles better (IMHO), is much faster in shooting and focusing, and somewhat less expensive. High ISO quality is similar."

Nice surprise to read this. How about IQ. Does the larger & newer full frame sensor on the 5D2 make a huge difference if output is only printed at A3-A4 size? Anything else worth noting in terms of how the older and cheaper 7D stacks up against the 5DMKII or 5D for photojournalism?

 

[Paratom]

I once had a Canon 7d and I was not happy with AF accurancy.
It was very fast but not accurate. Finally I sold it and went back to Nikon. D700 works much better for me in this regard.
While I found the sensor overall to be quite good I also could not confirm that its noise behaviour is as good as ff cameras. Specially as soon as you go in the shaddows or when the image is not exposed exact.

Besides all other points one big difference between the 7d and 5/1d is the size of the viewfinder.
I find dx-viewfinder still somewhat tunnellike compare to ff cameras.
On the other side if you need long reach dx has its advantages.

 

[Paratom]

Just re-read the original thread.
I agree with other here- for some web images and a little street I would just go with a m4/3 or NEX or maybe even a XZ1. Forget my last thread.