Grant,Ii have learned more from your videos about the 5D MarkIV in 2 hours than all the other videos on UA-cam. Most of these other videos assume that everyone know how to get to the menu that they are on. You explain what buutons gets you there and educate from there. Super stuff!
Excellent video that still holds up in 2023. Thank you so very much. Just picked up a used 5D MKIII to go with my 90D, SL1, and C100 MKII. I’ve wanted a full frame camera for a good price. I was trying to wait on a good MKIV but the MKIII crossed my path from a legit camera shop with a warranty. Thanks again
Thanks Grant! Great video and explains perfectly the difference we would see in the field. I will stay with my my 3 for now, as the image quality is fine for me.
i already have 7d mark 2. but i think it dosnt take sharp picture and for this reason i want to upgrade my body to upcoming 6d mark ii later this year.
Thanks Grant. Very informative and clearly explained. It might appear to be a small upgrade between the two models but I feel those differences you point out could make a big difference for wildlife shooting. Dave
Thank you . I always wondered why I couldn`t use exposure compensation when in manual mode with my 3. It didn`t seem to make sense so I thought it must be me .
Very nice to watch. You seem to have the very best knowledge and patience. But it's obvious that the newer 5D4 is (has to be) better than the 5D3. But thank you very much for your print outs and information
Great video, Grant! I'm thinking about graduating to a full frame (currently have an 80D, which I love) and you've helped a lot with your very informative videos!
Wow, what a thorough detailed review by somebody with real-world experience. I don't like the fact that Cannon has banned third-party lenses for their RF mount so I'm using these dslrs until I switch to Sony
That sounds a good plan. Both the 5D Mark IV and the 5D Mark III produced many wildlife images that are amongst my favourite! They are still good cameras today!
Hi David, advantage to the 5dmk4 in resolution, print size, cropping depth, as well as DPAF Live View and what that enables. Image quality we find the 5Dmk4 is a little ahead, even at high iso, if the output size is equalized with the 1DX. The 5Dmk4 sensor stays cleaner. The 5Dmk4 is much quieter in operation and lighter in weight. In autofocus we find them similar in AF speed though the 1DX holds an advantage when you use an extender. The 1DX holds an advantage in frame rate, buffer capacity, battery life, robust build and weather sealing. For very fast action the 1DX usually yields a higher keeper rate. For us, the lower resolution of the 1DX sensor translates into a more forgiving shooting experience when handhold shooting is the norm, regarding image sharpness. Hope something there helps :-)
Sincere question, I didn't get into digital photography until 2011, how did photographers make a large prints before a high megapixel cameras? I started in the film days and was very reluctant to switch over to digital until said year, because I'm a film snob. I currently use a Nikon D700 and the D750. Obviously on the D750 I don't need to worry about this. However , my D700 only does 12 megapixels and at 300 pixels per inch, I can only get an 11 x 14 in., 11 x 17 would dumb it down to 250 ppi, I believe. Long story short, how would photographers circumvent this? I know this was hardly ever miss you on the Canon side because even the 5D Mark II was 21 megapixels I believe. Anyone is more than welcome to answer, I am only asking because I use my D 700 regularly for weddings still, but when I want to enlarge I can only go 11 x 14. I let my clients know about this ahead of time of course I don't want to get myself in any trouble. However, if there is a way to blow up the D700 files without sacrificing IQ? I would love to know. The reason being is because the colors out of the D700 are unsurpassed by any of the spiritual. or implied successors.
I believe that there are two ways really to do it - One is to reduce the dots per inch of the print resolution, as you said, to 250 ppi, and then I have read some pro photographers mention you can go all the way to 180 dpi without losing much quality. Second way to do it is to upscale the image using an image processing computer program to basically 'recreate' the image at a higher resolution. Many print shops do this using Photoshop, which does a reasonable job of maintaining quality, specially if you dont go over twice the size in upscaling. Adobe Lightroom can also manage this upscaling although with fewer custom options than Photoshop. You can also use a dedicated, image resizing software of which there are both paid options and free ones. Upscaling is most successful and shows least quality loss when starting out with a really sharp original image and also if you start out with maximum resolution...
I think those two cameras are quite similar in their AF capability, but the 1DX feels like it focuses a little quicker especially when using very long lenses or a teleconverter
Grant Atkinson bro m plannning to go for further in my photography under buddget. So choose second hand lens.. which one better canon 300mm f2.8 is orginal + canon 1.4x mark 3 and 2x mark 3 extender or 500mm f4 orginal. Is any big changes if u use extenders? On canon 1dx orginal.
Bro Waterboy, my own choice is to always try and get the lens that does best, without extenders, that fits the focal length I need the most - I only wish to use the extenders when I really need them. Therefore I owned the EF 300L f2.8 IS for a long time but rather switched to the 500f4 because I was seldom close enough with the 300f2.8 and had to always crop my images. The 1.4x extender will slow down the AF a little bit and reduce accuracy a little bit, more noticeable with moving subjects, barely noticeable with static subjects. The 2X extender will make AF quite a bit slower and less accurate and make it much harder to get good moving subjects sharp. The 1dx handles the extenders a tiny bit better than the 5d4 for moving subjects. My choice is the 500f4.
Brother sorry to disturb you again, I have inquired the availability of 500mm second but not found any one under my budget. So please help me to clear one more doubt Canon 1DX original with Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L + 1.4X MIII or 2X MIII V/S Canon 1DX original with Sigma 150-600mm F6.3 Sport Which one you feel better AF, IS, Sharp, and overall decent out put. Your response is really life saver for always.
Thanks Grant! Gona be in SA in 2 days with my new 5d4, going drakensberg, pilanus and grobesdal. What you recomend to bring, my 100-400L mark I or my 300mm L F/4 with a 1.4 kenko pro. ?
Hi Gipukan Yo, so I know the Drakensberg, Pilanesburg, not sure about Grobesdal. However, I would likely choose the EF 100-400L IS for its versatility...
Hey Grant, was thinking the same :) Used it while living in Uganda on my xsi and 7d. Now back in NL to dark for the 100-400 I find thus got a 300mm F/4 to do the kingfishers here. Look up my nick name gipukan to find my flickr pages and my home page is at www.rgphoto.nl
Well, i am sure there will be times on the SA trip when you want the f4 max aperture of the 300f4 but I think you might benefit more from the zoom range on the 100-400, specially as you have a good chance of getting big mammals like rhino, elephants in Pilanesburg. What other zoom lens do you have with you?
www.flickr.com/photos/gipukan/9502771778/ was with my 100-400 among many others. My kit wil be a Samyang14mm, a Helios-44, the EF 24-105Lis a 1.4x converter by kenko and 2 tubes 20mm and 13mm. Will do the Milkyway to and some macro if i find some time :) My home site is www.rgphoto.nl doing Kingfishers here in nl now
Hi Grant!!! thanx for your videos and congratulations for your work!!!!! I know this is an old video, but maybe you can answer me about my doubt... I'm an old school photographer and have been working with film and laboratory from over 20 years. All formats, including cinema films. Almost all my woks are with nature and wildlife. Now i'm giving a break in my work with film and starting to dedicate some time to bird photography. An old passion!!! My main kit is a 7dmk2 + 400mmL 5.6. Now i was wondering about to get a fullframe camera too, and i can find the 5dmk3 for a good price, used. But, i was thinking if, instead of this fullframe, i could buy a Sigma 150-600mm C for while. What do you think? A "bigger" telephoto lens for the 7d2, or a bigger sensor for the canon 400mm (and crop the images)? Thank you very much!!!!!!!!
Hi Helder, glad the video is useful. About your choice, for sure getting a 5Dmk3 is a good idea because that camera will give you better image quality than the camera with the smaller sensor and also better autofocus accuracy. But, it will depend really on how close you are coming to your subjects, which you will already know. If you have to crop many of the images already with the 7D2 then the higher image quality of the 5Dmk3 will become less apparent and even fall away. The Sigma 150-600C is a very good choice (so long as you get one that is sharp- or spend the time to get it sharp) in that you will gain an extra 200mm of focal length which is a big benefit for any bird photographer who cannot get close enough. One thing to consider though would be what light levels you are doing the majority of your shooting in because the Sigma does gather a little less light than the Canon EF 400L f5.6. So you would either need to be happy to raise the iso level on your 7dmk2 somewhat to compensate for the slower shutter speeds you will be able to attain. For some folk it works well to use the Sigma 150-600C but on a Canon full frame body like the 5Dmk3 because that way you can gain back some of the low light capability which is lost when shooting at f6.3? I did post some image quality comparisons on my website between the 5DMk3 and the 7DMk2 www.grantatkinson.com/blog/6d-mark-ii-5d-mark-iv-7d-mark-ii-or-80d-which-mid-range-canon-dslr-for-wildlife-photography Hope something there helps Cheers Grant
@@grantatkinson8108 Hello Grant! Many thanks for the reply!!! I was looking at your website yesterday and reading the camera review. The most complete review I've ever read about it! I really like the 7dMK2 but I have been thinking about buying a fullframe camera as well. I live in Brazil and it is currently impossible to buy equipment in dollars (5 times more expensive). We need to wait for this president to leave, for the situation to improve here. So I can't buy a lighter canon lens now. and even a 5dmk4. But it is possible to find used mk3 in great condition for a good price. I still use 35mm film with a canon camera, so I can use the same lens. I've heard about Sigma's focus and sharpness problems, so I prefer not to take a chance. I have good canon lenses that serve me well for now. Thank you once again!!!!! Best wishes from Brazil!!! regards, Helder
@@heldermartinovsky then so long as you can get close enough to the subject, a used 5Dmk3 ought to offer an upgrade to the 7d2 in a few important aspects, including better background blur to separate the subject and low light image quality :-). Many of the better action images of wildlife that i have managed to capture have been taken with the 5Dmk3.
@@grantatkinson8108 Thanx Grant!!!! I'm doing a lot of research and i have another question to bother you. ehehe. I'm thinking to wait more and get the 5dmk4 maybe next year. and keep my 7dmk2 for while. So i was looking at the 70-200 f2.8 lens to get more light and speed (i have the f4 version). I found the non IS version brand new on the Canon store for the same price of a IS II version used. I'm very worried about getting an used expensive lens, so i was wondering if the IS really makes a lot of difference? as well as, the optical quality of the IS II over the non IS? Thank you very much!!!!
@@heldermartinovsky I think its a good plan to use a lens which is excellent at gathering light like the 70-200f2.8 onto your 7Dmk2. Unfortunately I never owned the non IS 70-200L f2.8. But I do know people who own and use it still today for professional work. I think that image stabilization is less essential in lenses that are less than 300mm in focal length, though still useful for handholding. If you are already using the 70-200L f4 without IS then you won't notice it anyway? I owned the EF 70-200L f2.8 IS, EF 70-200L f2.8 IS ii and now EF 70-200L f2.8 IS iii. I also owned the EF 70-200L f4 and then the EF 70-200L f4 IS. I did not notice big differences in image quality between the f2.8 lenses and they where all quite good.
Very informative. I currently have 7D mark II with 100-400mm II, and now I want a second body for landscape and low light sport. I know 5D4 is better but is it worth the extra money for it as a second body? Should I get 5D4 or the 5D3 (or even 6D) is enough?
If you like the controls and buttons, specifically the AF multicontroller, and the large rear wheel on your 7Dmk2, also the viewfinder/AF button layout, then you may find it easier to shoot and enjoy the 5Dmk4 or 5Dmk3 over the 6D, which lacks some controls or has smaller ones. The 6D and 5Dmk3 also are unable to manage exposure compensation when using Auto Iso. But all of the 6D, 5Dmk3 and 5Dmk4 are stronger performers in low light than the 7Dmk2. The 5DMk4 is the best of all three full frame bodies in dynamic range, resolution and in the lowest light conditions...
I'm in the same boat as Rambo. I came from a T4i and was amazed at the low light capability of the 7D mkII when I purchesed it but I do understand it gets better than that too. It took me forever to get used to the body coming from the rebel but now I don't know how I would ever go back. I DO MISS the flip out touch screen. I can't believe Canon didn't put that on their good cameras till now. I LOVED touching where I wanted to focus in live view! But back to full frame options.. I am looking to add one as a second body sometime by the end of the year maybe. I was thinking a 6D for budgetary concerns. But now you mentioned the buttons and dials being different and that might throw everything off. So now I was thinking maybe I should just sell the 7DmkII and get a5D III or (or IV if I can scrounge up enough money). I guess my question is will I be able to have images that are so clean on the FF sensor that I can enlarge them to the same degree that they are already enlarged on my crop sensor thus negating the need for the 7D all together? (I must say I would miss my 10fps burst! I love my camera and my Sigma 150-600C!)
Grant Atkinson - I agree that 5D4 is the best out of the three; but I am just not sure if it is worth the money since I want it only for the hobby. If I were to make money from the camera, it is no doubt that I will grab 5D4 without question. So for now, I am leaning toward 5D3 and I might end up getting 5D4 by the end of this year if it appears to be a good value for the money.
Just watched Tony and Chelsea's review of the IV and they mentioned that the 7D Mk II was vastly superior with it's AF tracking, 10fps and burst capability for wildlife and bird tracking. I'd love to hear Grant's view on this... If this is true then I really might just get the 6D for some full frame use when I'm not shooting birds or other wildlife with my 7D Mk II.
At the moment trying to decide wether to get a (used) 7Dii or a (used) 5Diii for my Photography, I'm wanting to do multiple styles of Photography (wildlife, landscapes, portraiture, street, etc.) And can't decide on which one to go with, any advice?
If it where me, I would be getting a used 5Dmk3 for those genres of photography. For portraiture it offers the best control over depth of field, for wildlife the better autofocus and better image quality at high iso (so long as you dont crop more than half away), and there is a bigger range of used but high quality wide-angle lenses for full frame Canon sensors for landscape photography than in the EF-S range. The 7D2 holds the advantage in buffer capacity, continuous shooting speed and fine pixel resolution..I have tried to compare them quite extensively here:www.grantatkinson.com/blog/6d-mark-ii-5d-mark-iv-7d-mark-ii-or-80d-which-mid-range-canon-dslr-for-wildlife-photography
@@grantatkinson8108 Thank you. I have already read and looked at that review/comparison, MULTIPLE times, still to no avail, my thick headed and stupid brain questions everything. But your help and response has REALLY helped... I will most probably be going for the 5D Mark III... Mainly for the full frame, and BEAUTIFUL-ness of the camera and images it produces in the right hands. Thank you!
@@jamesdiederichs1382 the 5d3 is still an excellent performer and even compared to Canon's newer full frame cameras, it's really only from iso 3200 and upward that it doesn't quite match them. At lower iso settings it has stunning image quality and several of my favourite wildlife images that I doubt I will beat or even match, are taken with the 5D Mark 3. :-)
Having the printed photographs on your table and for anyone viewing this video is totally pointless, it would be far better if you put them on the wall behind you and zoomed in so that we can judge for ourselves the quality of each.
I love this guy. So easy to watch.
Grant,Ii have learned more from your videos about the 5D MarkIV in 2 hours than all the other videos on UA-cam. Most of these other videos assume that everyone know how to get to the menu that they are on. You explain what buutons gets you there and educate from there. Super stuff!
Excellent video that still holds up in 2023. Thank you so very much. Just picked up a used 5D MKIII to go with my 90D, SL1, and C100 MKII. I’ve wanted a full frame camera for a good price. I was trying to wait on a good MKIV but the MKIII crossed my path from a legit camera shop with a warranty.
Thanks again
I love the lessons on Canon cameras from Grant Atkinson he really is A1 in all his videos. Grant your the best. Keep up the great work thanks : John😊😊
Thanks Grant! Great video and explains perfectly the difference we would see in the field. I will stay with my my 3 for now, as the image quality is fine for me.
I am lucky to have both in my bag :-)
Thanks, Grant. I plan to add a 5D4 to my kit later in the year.
Very clear as always Mark. The Mk4 is clearly a very good option for wildlife photography.
Pretty much the case, :-), though the 5d3 can do the job very well too..
I love you Grant Atkinson
Always love your instruction. They make it easy for me to understand the subject. But now I want to trade in mine for the 4!
Always enjoy your videos Grant, thanks for posting!
Great video. Thanks Grant.
Great video Grant-you do a great job of this!!!-so informative!!
Always a nice clear presentation.
Thanks for the video, Grant. I'll be upgrading from my 7d Mark ii soon so this was very nice info for helping me to make a decision.
Glad it was useful!
i already have 7d mark 2. but i think it dosnt take sharp picture and for this reason i want to upgrade my body to upcoming 6d mark ii later this year.
Full frame sensors definitely hold an image quality advantage :-)
Thanks Grant. Very informative and clearly explained. It might appear to be a small upgrade between the two models but I feel those differences you point out could make a big difference for wildlife shooting.
Dave
Thank you . I always wondered why I couldn`t use exposure compensation when in manual mode with my 3. It didn`t seem to make sense so I thought it must be me .
great video, thanks for sharing this with us!!!
love the way you handling those DSLRs with care....best review comparison of mark 3 and mark 4 till now
Glad it was helpful and thanks for the feedback Naveen Gurram!
Grant Atkinson Always :D
Very nice to watch. You seem to have the very best knowledge and patience. But it's obvious that the newer 5D4 is (has to be) better than the 5D3. But thank you very much for your print outs and information
very good review. thanks.
Thanks Pauline
Thank-you, it's very informative.
Great video, Grant! I'm thinking about graduating to a full frame (currently have an 80D, which I love) and you've helped a lot with your very informative videos!
Wow, what a thorough detailed review by somebody with real-world experience. I don't like the fact that Cannon has banned third-party lenses for their RF mount so I'm using these dslrs until I switch to Sony
That sounds a good plan. Both the 5D Mark IV and the 5D Mark III produced many wildlife images that are amongst my favourite! They are still good cameras today!
Hi Grant! We don't hear from you anymore. Hope you are fine.
Nice video :)
Hi Grant, I recently got the 5d mark 4 coming from the 7d mark2. I have the 100-400 2 and I am having hunting problem with the 5d have you had that?
thanks for sharing , how does the 5dmk4 compare to the Canon 1dx mk1?
Hi David, advantage to the 5dmk4 in resolution, print size, cropping depth, as well as DPAF Live View and what that enables. Image quality we find the 5Dmk4 is a little ahead, even at high iso, if the output size is equalized with the 1DX. The 5Dmk4 sensor stays cleaner. The 5Dmk4 is much quieter in operation and lighter in weight. In autofocus we find them similar in AF speed though the 1DX holds an advantage when you use an extender. The 1DX holds an advantage in frame rate, buffer capacity, battery life, robust build and weather sealing. For very fast action the 1DX usually yields a higher keeper rate. For us, the lower resolution of the 1DX sensor translates into a more forgiving shooting experience when handhold shooting is the norm, regarding image sharpness. Hope something there helps :-)
Sincere question, I didn't get into digital photography until 2011, how did photographers make a large prints before a high megapixel cameras? I started in the film days and was very reluctant to switch over to digital until said year, because I'm a film snob. I currently use a Nikon D700 and the D750. Obviously on the D750 I don't need to worry about this. However , my D700 only does 12 megapixels and at 300 pixels per inch, I can only get an 11 x 14 in., 11 x 17 would dumb it down to 250 ppi, I believe. Long story short, how would photographers circumvent this? I know this was hardly ever miss you on the Canon side because even the 5D Mark II was 21 megapixels I believe.
Anyone is more than welcome to answer, I am only asking because I use my D 700 regularly for weddings still, but when I want to enlarge I can only go 11 x 14. I let my clients know about this ahead of time of course I don't want to get myself in any trouble. However, if there is a way to blow up the D700 files without sacrificing IQ? I would love to know. The reason being is because the colors out of the D700 are unsurpassed by any of the spiritual. or implied successors.
I believe that there are two ways really to do it - One is to reduce the dots per inch of the print resolution, as you said, to 250 ppi, and then I have read some pro photographers mention you can go all the way to 180 dpi without losing much quality.
Second way to do it is to upscale the image using an image processing computer program to basically 'recreate' the image at a higher resolution. Many print shops do this using Photoshop, which does a reasonable job of maintaining quality, specially if you dont go over twice the size in upscaling. Adobe Lightroom can also manage this upscaling although with fewer custom options than Photoshop. You can also use a dedicated, image resizing software of which there are both paid options and free ones. Upscaling is most successful and shows least quality loss when starting out with a really sharp original image and also if you start out with maximum resolution...
Thank you so much! I am willing to use a paid for option.
I think this is one of the better paid resizing programs:
www.on1.com/products/resize10/
Brother is 5d m4 is better than 1dx m1. Mainly focus speed fast af and tracking the subject.. i dont bother Fps.. hope get ur replay soon..
I think those two cameras are quite similar in their AF capability, but the 1DX feels like it focuses a little quicker especially when using very long lenses or a teleconverter
Grant Atkinson bro m plannning to go for further in my photography under buddget. So choose second hand lens.. which one better canon 300mm f2.8 is orginal + canon 1.4x mark 3 and 2x mark 3 extender or 500mm f4 orginal. Is any big changes if u use extenders? On canon 1dx orginal.
Bro Waterboy, my own choice is to always try and get the lens that does best, without extenders, that fits the focal length I need the most - I only wish to use the extenders when I really need them. Therefore I owned the EF 300L f2.8 IS for a long time but rather switched to the 500f4 because I was seldom close enough with the 300f2.8 and had to always crop my images. The 1.4x extender will slow down the AF a little bit and reduce accuracy a little bit, more noticeable with moving subjects, barely noticeable with static subjects. The 2X extender will make AF quite a bit slower and less accurate and make it much harder to get good moving subjects sharp. The 1dx handles the extenders a tiny bit better than the 5d4 for moving subjects. My choice is the 500f4.
Grant Atkinson appriciate your quick response big brother..
Brother sorry to disturb you again, I have inquired the availability of 500mm second but not found any one under my budget. So please help me to clear one more doubt Canon 1DX original with Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L + 1.4X MIII or 2X MIII V/S Canon 1DX original with Sigma 150-600mm F6.3 Sport Which one you feel better AF, IS, Sharp, and overall decent out put. Your response is really life saver for always.
Thanks Grant! Gona be in SA in 2 days with my new 5d4, going drakensberg, pilanus and grobesdal. What you recomend to bring, my 100-400L mark I or my 300mm L F/4 with a 1.4 kenko pro. ?
Hi Gipukan Yo, so I know the Drakensberg, Pilanesburg, not sure about Grobesdal. However, I would likely choose the EF 100-400L IS for its versatility...
Hey Grant, was thinking the same :) Used it while living in Uganda on my xsi and 7d. Now back in NL to dark for the 100-400 I find thus got a 300mm F/4 to do the kingfishers here. Look up my nick name gipukan to find my flickr pages and my home page is at www.rgphoto.nl
Well, i am sure there will be times on the SA trip when you want the f4 max aperture of the 300f4 but I think you might benefit more from the zoom range on the 100-400, specially as you have a good chance of getting big mammals like rhino, elephants in Pilanesburg. What other zoom lens do you have with you?
www.flickr.com/photos/gipukan/9502771778/ was with my 100-400 among many others. My kit wil be a Samyang14mm, a Helios-44, the EF 24-105Lis a 1.4x converter by kenko and 2 tubes 20mm and 13mm. Will do the Milkyway to and some macro if i find some time :)
My home site is www.rgphoto.nl doing Kingfishers here in nl now
Saw some great bird images on your site..from Uganda, many of them..
Hi Grant!!! thanx for your videos and congratulations for your work!!!!!
I know this is an old video, but maybe you can answer me about my doubt... I'm an old school photographer and have been working with film and laboratory from over 20 years. All formats, including cinema films. Almost all my woks are with nature and wildlife.
Now i'm giving a break in my work with film and starting to dedicate some time to bird photography. An old passion!!!
My main kit is a 7dmk2 + 400mmL 5.6. Now i was wondering about to get a fullframe camera too, and i can find the 5dmk3 for a good price, used.
But, i was thinking if, instead of this fullframe, i could buy a Sigma 150-600mm C for while. What do you think? A "bigger" telephoto lens for the 7d2, or a bigger sensor for the canon 400mm (and crop the images)?
Thank you very much!!!!!!!!
Hi Helder, glad the video is useful. About your choice, for sure getting a 5Dmk3 is a good idea because that camera will give you better image quality than the camera with the smaller sensor and also better autofocus accuracy. But, it will depend really on how close you are coming to your subjects, which you will already know. If you have to crop many of the images already with the 7D2 then the higher image quality of the 5Dmk3 will become less apparent and even fall away. The Sigma 150-600C is a very good choice (so long as you get one that is sharp- or spend the time to get it sharp) in that you will gain an extra 200mm of focal length which is a big benefit for any bird photographer who cannot get close enough. One thing to consider though would be what light levels you are doing the majority of your shooting in because the Sigma does gather a little less light than the Canon EF 400L f5.6. So you would either need to be happy to raise the iso level on your 7dmk2 somewhat to compensate for the slower shutter speeds you will be able to attain. For some folk it works well to use the Sigma 150-600C but on a Canon full frame body like the 5Dmk3 because that way you can gain back some of the low light capability which is lost when shooting at f6.3?
I did post some image quality comparisons on my website between the 5DMk3 and the 7DMk2 www.grantatkinson.com/blog/6d-mark-ii-5d-mark-iv-7d-mark-ii-or-80d-which-mid-range-canon-dslr-for-wildlife-photography
Hope something there helps
Cheers
Grant
@@grantatkinson8108 Hello Grant! Many thanks for the reply!!! I was looking at your website yesterday and reading the camera review. The most complete review I've ever read about it!
I really like the 7dMK2 but I have been thinking about buying a fullframe camera as well.
I live in Brazil and it is currently impossible to buy equipment in dollars (5 times more expensive). We need to wait for this president to leave, for the situation to improve here.
So I can't buy a lighter canon lens now. and even a 5dmk4. But it is possible to find used mk3 in great condition for a good price. I still use 35mm film with a canon camera, so I can use the same lens. I've heard about Sigma's focus and sharpness problems, so I prefer not to take a chance. I have good canon lenses that serve me well for now.
Thank you once again!!!!!
Best wishes from Brazil!!!
regards,
Helder
@@heldermartinovsky then so long as you can get close enough to the subject, a used 5Dmk3 ought to offer an upgrade to the 7d2 in a few important aspects, including better background blur to separate the subject and low light image quality :-). Many of the better action images of wildlife that i have managed to capture have been taken with the 5Dmk3.
@@grantatkinson8108 Thanx Grant!!!! I'm doing a lot of research and i have another question to bother you. ehehe.
I'm thinking to wait more and get the 5dmk4 maybe next year. and keep my 7dmk2 for while. So i was looking at the 70-200 f2.8 lens to get more light and speed (i have the f4 version).
I found the non IS version brand new on the Canon store for the same price of a IS II version used. I'm very worried about getting an used expensive lens, so i was wondering if the IS really makes a lot of difference? as well as, the optical quality of the IS II over the non IS?
Thank you very much!!!!
@@heldermartinovsky I think its a good plan to use a lens which is excellent at gathering light like the 70-200f2.8 onto your 7Dmk2. Unfortunately I never owned the non IS 70-200L f2.8. But I do know people who own and use it still today for professional work. I think that image stabilization is less essential in lenses that are less than 300mm in focal length, though still useful for handholding. If you are already using the 70-200L f4 without IS then you won't notice it anyway? I owned the EF 70-200L f2.8 IS, EF 70-200L f2.8 IS ii and now EF 70-200L f2.8 IS iii. I also owned the EF 70-200L f4 and then the EF 70-200L f4 IS. I did not notice big differences in image quality between the f2.8 lenses and they where all quite good.
Very informative. I currently have 7D mark II with 100-400mm II, and now I want a second body for landscape and low light sport. I know 5D4 is better but is it worth the extra money for it as a second body? Should I get 5D4 or the 5D3 (or even 6D) is enough?
i think its better to wait for 6d mark 2.
If you like the controls and buttons, specifically the AF multicontroller, and the large rear wheel on your 7Dmk2, also the viewfinder/AF button layout, then you may find it easier to shoot and enjoy the 5Dmk4 or 5Dmk3 over the 6D, which lacks some controls or has smaller ones. The 6D and 5Dmk3 also are unable to manage exposure compensation when using Auto Iso. But all of the 6D, 5Dmk3 and 5Dmk4 are stronger performers in low light than the 7Dmk2. The 5DMk4 is the best of all three full frame bodies in dynamic range, resolution and in the lowest light conditions...
I'm in the same boat as Rambo. I came from a T4i and was amazed at the low light capability of the 7D mkII when I purchesed it but I do understand it gets better than that too. It took me forever to get used to the body coming from the rebel but now I don't know how I would ever go back. I DO MISS the flip out touch screen. I can't believe Canon didn't put that on their good cameras till now. I LOVED touching where I wanted to focus in live view! But back to full frame options.. I am looking to add one as a second body sometime by the end of the year maybe. I was thinking a 6D for budgetary concerns. But now you mentioned the buttons and dials being different and that might throw everything off. So now I was thinking maybe I should just sell the 7DmkII and get a5D III or (or IV if I can scrounge up enough money). I guess my question is will I be able to have images that are so clean on the FF sensor that I can enlarge them to the same degree that they are already enlarged on my crop sensor thus negating the need for the 7D all together? (I must say I would miss my 10fps burst! I love my camera and my Sigma 150-600C!)
Grant Atkinson - I agree that 5D4 is the best out of the three; but I am just not sure if it is worth the money since I want it only for the hobby. If I were to make money from the camera, it is no doubt that I will grab 5D4 without question. So for now, I am leaning toward 5D3 and I might end up getting 5D4 by the end of this year if it appears to be a good value for the money.
Just watched Tony and Chelsea's review of the IV and they mentioned that the 7D Mk II was vastly superior with it's AF tracking, 10fps and burst capability for wildlife and bird tracking. I'd love to hear Grant's view on this... If this is true then I really might just get the 6D for some full frame use when I'm not shooting birds or other wildlife with my 7D Mk II.
Do you feel the colors are the same on both cameras?
I did not find much difference in the colours at all, especially at iso levels up to iso 3200.
Good night
At the moment trying to decide wether to get a (used) 7Dii or a (used) 5Diii for my Photography, I'm wanting to do multiple styles of Photography (wildlife, landscapes, portraiture, street, etc.) And can't decide on which one to go with, any advice?
If it where me, I would be getting a used 5Dmk3 for those genres of photography. For portraiture it offers the best control over depth of field, for wildlife the better autofocus and better image quality at high iso (so long as you dont crop more than half away), and there is a bigger range of used but high quality wide-angle lenses for full frame Canon sensors for landscape photography than in the EF-S range. The 7D2 holds the advantage in buffer capacity, continuous shooting speed and fine pixel resolution..I have tried to compare them quite extensively here:www.grantatkinson.com/blog/6d-mark-ii-5d-mark-iv-7d-mark-ii-or-80d-which-mid-range-canon-dslr-for-wildlife-photography
@@grantatkinson8108 Thank you.
I have already read and looked at that review/comparison, MULTIPLE times, still to no avail, my thick headed and stupid brain questions everything.
But your help and response has REALLY helped... I will most probably be going for the 5D Mark III... Mainly for the full frame, and BEAUTIFUL-ness of the camera and images it produces in the right hands.
Thank you!
@@jamesdiederichs1382 the 5d3 is still an excellent performer and even compared to Canon's newer full frame cameras, it's really only from iso 3200 and upward that it doesn't quite match them. At lower iso settings it has stunning image quality and several of my favourite wildlife images that I doubt I will beat or even match, are taken with the 5D Mark 3. :-)
Hi...sir
Having the printed photographs on your table and for anyone viewing this video is totally pointless, it would be far better if you put them on the wall behind you and zoomed in so that we can judge for ourselves the quality of each.
Thanks for the feedback, will do that on the next one