Quote:
Originally Posted by druu
I see. You're right about that. So no difference when pixel peeping, i suppose the only upgrade would be depth of field control here (is the high iso performance on the 7d2 better than an old 5d3?)
I think it's high time i sold my 5d3 as well...
|
I moved from the 5D3 to the 7D2 primarily because of the 10-fps. and the higher pixel-density. I shoot lots of bird-in-flight, focal length limited, even at 700mm, with a 500mm with a 1.4x TC attached.
Up to ISO 1600, the 5D3 and 7D2 are roughly equivalent, but the 5D3 starts pulling away at ISO 1600.
If you don't shoot BIF, then the 5DsR is a better upgrade than the 7D2. It's got almost one stop more dynamic range, with the advantages of full-frame combined with high pixel-density. Alas, the large 80MB Raw files limit shooting rate to 5-fps, which is a drag for BIF. I carry my 7D2 with the 500mm and the 5DsR with the 70-200/f4L IS. I have my wides in a vest, so I can shoot landscape if the opportunity presents itself.
Both are roughly equivalent, with the right lenses, at ISO 1600 and below. For general usage, I prefer the 5DsR, but when I need 10-fps, then the 7D2 takes the lead. I'd say that dynamic rage of the 5DsR and the 5D3 are really close, but the SR gets the nod. The resolution is what separates them and would be the reason to consider and upgrade. If you print large occasionally, then the SR is the way to go, but the III prints really well up to 50" at 240-dpi. AF systems are the same, both very good.
Dave