Canon 5D, 7D, or something else?

May 11, 2011 1:09 PM

For video and still shooting, should I get Canon 5D, 7D, or wait for something new?

I need an all-purpose device that can do video and still image shooting.

Highest image quality is a priority for me. I've loved what I've seen from the Canon 5D and the 7D -- not sure I could tell the difference in a blind taste test, they both look great. I love the idea of interchangeable lenses and plan to invest in some decent glass to start (maybe a $500 1.4 lens).

I was all ready to buy either the 5D or 7D and then some filmmaker friends told me to "wait for the new Sonys or Panasonics". Should I?

I also really love the compact size of the Canon 5D and do not want to buy a big "breadbox" camera the size of the Panasonic HVX or EX1 or equivelent.

I understand I am losing the capability for XLR-sound in, but I have a portable sound recording device that I would rather use for it when I need to.

Are there other compelling reasons to wait for the new Sonys or Panasonics? Are there other cameras coming out? If I wait, I don't want to wait more than 3 months.

A friend also mentioned that it is super-difficult to keep what you want in focus with the 5D because of its full-frame sensor, so you have to keep an eagle eye on that and it can get frustrating if you don't have Director of Photography sensibilities in the blood.

For what it's worth, the camera I got the most mileage out of previously was Sony's A1U. Absolutely loved the video I got from that; it was barely-passable for still images but I took plenty anyway. I loved how small and inconspicuous the camera was so basically I'm looking to "level-up" and get something similarly small and run-and-gun but with much better image quality.

posted by meadowlark lime to Media & Arts (15 answers total)

Obvs. it's the 5d Mark II (but I'm sure you're just shorthanding...). There's rumors of the 5D Mark III coming out later this year, but with the tsunami, I can't help but wonder whether that's realistic, especially considering how long it took them to roll out the Mark II. I wouldn't trade my 5DMkII in for another camera other than the Mark III, but the 7D has much of the same guts (but smaller sensor, which might be better for you). I don't shoot video, though--just stills for me.
posted by Admiral Haddock at 1:27 PM on May 11, 2011

I check this site out for impending refreshes. I don't think it's reliable at all, but it's food for thought. A stopped clock is right twice a day, no?
posted by Admiral Haddock at 1:31 PM on May 11, 2011

There's a whole world out there of Canon firmware hacks for making movies. Were I in the market for movie making SLRs, that would sell me right there.

I have a 5dmkII that I use almost exclusively as a still image shooter. The low light performance is nothing short of amazing. I can't imagine how much this device opens up the world of moviemaking, especially backed by Canon's stable of lenses.
posted by notsnot at 1:32 PM on May 11, 2011

From the filmmaker's point of view, many feel the Panasonic m43 cameras (especially the GH1 with the hack) produce better video than the Canon. You might look into the GH1 (which is hackable) or the GH2 which replaced it as possible replacements. Of course, the stills on a FF are going to be better, though the GH1 does take nice pictures, but the image quality is good.
posted by JMOZ at 1:32 PM on May 11, 2011

One advantage of the 7d over the 5dII: 60fps video. Comes in very handy if you ever want to do super slow-motion with software like Twixtor. Recording in 30fps just isn't enough info to interpolate good slow-motion.
posted by the jam at 1:33 PM on May 11, 2011

I don't think anything new is coming from Panasonic: the GH2 is still pretty new. Sony doesn't have anything better than the GH2 at present, that fits your criteria (i.e. both video and still), and nothing on the immediate horizon. Generally speaking, the Panasonic GH2 is considered the best VDSLR out there as far as video. That leaves Canon - and yes, there are rumors of a 5DMkIII being imminent, but this being Canon, you just don't know... while it seems the timing would indicate an update is imminent, Canon has a history of dragging their feet on updates in general. There's also the Nikon D7000 to consider. The only reason to wait would be for Canon coming out with the 5DMkIII, otherwise, I'd go for the GH2. One thing about the GH2, is that you have a very wide selection of lenses, but must get some adapters; considering that when you buy a DSLR, you are really buying a lens system, there's a certain amount of lock-in that can happen investment-wise, so don't look just at the bodies in making your decision - that's also why I like the GH2, I can use a variety of lenses and the body itself is under $1K... it's easier to switch down the road, should you want to, so it keeps your options open.
posted by VikingSword at 2:36 PM on May 11, 2011

The 5D MK II is still a phenomenal camera. I reckon you can tell the difference between the images from that and the 7D.

I can only speak as to Canon cameras. If you want to do both, I'd suggest the 5D MKII. If you're doing video 90% of the time, I'd say the 7D. Or maybe even the 600D, for maximum cost-saving fun.

If you end up with a full-frame, the 50mm 1.4 is a great lens but very fragile. I've had to have mine serviced twice. Definitely get a lens hood and leave it on all the time, if only to protect from impacts from the front.

If you get a crop-sensor, then you probably want the 28mm 1.8, though I'm sure someone will disagree with me on this.
posted by Magnakai at 2:52 PM on May 11, 2011

Response by poster: Starting to think of the 60D / GH2 might be the best option for me . . . you say the video compares with the 5Dmk2? If I spent less on a single camera I'd feel more free to upgrade later.
posted by meadowlark lime at 3:10 PM on May 11, 2011

Skip the 60D. It sits awkwardly between the cheaper-but-basically-as-good 600D and the better-built 7D. Hell, get the 550D over the 600D if you don't need a flip screen.

Personally, I would go for 7D. The 7D has much better build quality than its cheaper brethren, and it uses CF cards, as opposed to SD cards, which is an improvement. However, the 550D would be an excellent budget option, and with the excess money you could buy more sound equipment or glass or whatever.

I can't speak for the GH1/2s, but they have excellent reputations.
posted by Sticherbeast at 3:45 PM on May 11, 2011

I imagine the reasoning behind waiting for Sony has to do with rapid autofocus during video capture. The Sony A55 focuses pretty quickly and I imagine the imminent release of the A77 (July announcement, October release) will add beyond stellar image quality.
posted by maulik at 3:51 PM on May 11, 2011

You're going to have a lot more options for lenses going Cannon vs Sony or Panasonic.

The 5D mkII is a phenomenal camera if you put a non-kit lens on it, and nicer glass will definitely pay off.

While the tech in consumer grade digital cameras have sort of settled out, it hasn't yet in the pro/prosumer grade cameras. New features are being added to cheaper lines and quality is still improving. This is both why someone might say "wait 'till" and why there's no point in waiting if you need a camera now. It will be superseded by something before long. That will keep happening for years to come. In the meantime, while you wait, you still have no camera. Buy one now. Given the popularity of the mkII, if the mythical mkIII comes out in the next year and you want to upgrade there will likely be a strong secondhand market to buy your mkII body.
posted by Ookseer at 8:27 PM on May 11, 2011

Best answer: OK, here is my take on it, after doing a lot of research:

If you are going to be recording sound separately, than the canon DSLR's are a good option, as long as you understand that they have several limitations. The moire/aliasing on these cameras can ruin a shot if you don't know what you are doing. The 10 minute limit on record times is a bummer some times. There is no auto focus. The audio sucks (but you are using a separate recorder, so that shouldn't be an issue)

The newer waves of cameras are theoretically going to improve on the Canon cameras by offering more video camera features (such as auto focus). As far as image quality goes, I don't know how the non-canon DSLR's handle moire (rainbow artifacts in areas of very high detail), but that could be important depending on what you shoot.

Here are my takes on the current Canon DSLR's:

5Dmkii-Good choice if photography is your #1 concern and video is #2, but the full frame sensor does make it harder to pull focus, and the quality of the video is going to be no better than the other cameras, so you'd be better off buying something else and putting the money saved into good lenses.

7D-This camera is the best choice for video ONLY IF you are using a nice and large HD monitor to view your footage while filming. It is the only canon DSLR that can output HD to an external monitor while filming. If you are not using a large external monitor, than you won't see any improvement on the video side over the other cheaper cameras

60D-A couple of features here are great for video, including the swivel screen and the histogram in video mode (you can't see it while filming, but it's great to help in getting the right exposure). The LCD is really great looking, so if you are using the built in screen for monitoring while filming, it will look very good (and if you add in a viewfinder, it will be easy to work with)

T2i/T3i-The video quality is just as good as the other cameras, but you lose a lot on the photography side in terms of operation. The T3i gives you the swivel screen, which is really nice.

Since you mentioned both photography and video, I would suggest the 60D. The T2i is really a consumer grade photo camera, and if you feel like you want to take photo's like a professional, you will start to hate some of the limitations. The 60D is a far superior photo camera.

The only reason I would suggest a 7D over the 60D is if you have a large HD monitor that you are going to use while recording. I was on a film set recently where they used a 37inch TV to monitor, and it worked great. If the stuff you are doing is not going to have this, though, the 60D is a better choice for video.

As for lenses, if you get the 17-55 2.8 IS, that would be a very good choice to start with. The IS makes a huge difference if you are handholding the camera. These DSLR's are really shaky unless you have a proper shoulder mount or put them on a tripod. You won't often want to go under f2.8 while filming anyways, otherwise you end up with someone's eyes in focus, but their nose and ears out of focus. A lot of people are shooting like this right now, and it just looks very amateurish. With the IS you can get good usable footage handheld even with longer lenses (I use a 70-200 f4 IS for video and can use it at 200mm while handholding it)
posted by markblasco at 10:33 PM on May 11, 2011

5D is terribly out-dated, and an upgrade is highly due. Right now, of these Canon cameras, the 7D is the best purchase.
posted by Goofyy at 1:48 AM on May 12, 2011

I should also mention that some of the lenses for micro 4/3 (e.g. GH2) are optimized for video with silent autofocus and continuous aperture. I have the Panasonic 14-140 f/4-5.8, and it's a beautiful lens for still photos and video and supports continuous autofocus during both. (It's only drawback is that it's not the fastest glass I've ever seen.) You can also use very inexpensive (< $50 each) adapters to use virtually any lens system (i.e. Canon, Nikon, Pentax, c-mount, etc.) with the GH2, though all except m43 lenses will, of course, be manual focus and aperture.

Someone more familiar with the Canon cameras will be able to tell you if they support autofocus in video. If not, you might be just as well-off using the Canon lens of choice on a GH2 if you're unhappy with the available GH2 lenses.
posted by JMOZ at 10:51 AM on May 17, 2011

Response by poster: Thanks for everyone's useful input.

I've marked markblasco's answer as Best simply because I followed his advice exactly: Canon 60D with a 17 - 55 f/2.8 lens.

Shot with it a bit so far, photos and video, and so far it seems pretty darn good. I look forward to learning more about it.

Bonus question: can anyone recommend specific blogs / forums to learn tricks particular to this camera and/or lens?
posted by meadowlark lime at 3:45 PM on May 18, 2011