I currently have a 7D with 24-70L, 100 IS L, 135 2.0L, 200 2.8L, 400 5.6L and want to add a full frame body. Is the MarkIII worth the extra $1200 over the MarkII. I could pick up a nice wide angle lens for the difference. Your input is much appreciated. Thanks.

If you need the AF, yes. If not, probably not.

I was thinking (that can be dangerous) that I would use the 7D when I need quicker focusing. Realistic?

Not really for me.

I never had issue with 5D mk II AF.
I don't really use files beyond ISO 6400.

For the money of new 5D mk III, one might consider pay another $1000 more for used 1 D IV.

Do you use mostly the center AF point? If so, 5D2 is great. If you like to use outer points, do you mostly shoot low ISO in good light? 5D2 might be the perfect choice.

I like using a variety of AF points, shooting in tough light conditions, and I like framing to minimize cropping, so AF on 5D2 drove me nuts.

s23chang wrote:
Not really for me.

I never had issue with 5D mk II AF.
I don't really use files beyond ISO 6400.

For the money of new 5D mk III, one might consider pay another $1000 more for used 1 D IV.


A used 1D Mark IV does not cost $1000 more than a 5D Mark III. The price is about the same.

The 7D is a very different camera from the 5D2 and 5D3. Use the 7D for wildlife and some sports.

Do you photograph wildlife? Sports? Architecture?

You are two posts into this thread and you still haven't said what your primary genres of photography are. It makes a difference to recommendations for lenses and cameras. You might even be advised to sell the 7D and buy two 5D2s. Do you need two cameras? Do you need a backup? Do you charge money? Do you go to must-get once-only events where your reputaton is on the line?

All of those issues are key to choices and you have said nothing about them. They would be a good place to start.

Yes, the 5D III was worth the cost. I use the AF capabilities for BIF, nature, sports, etc.

I also like that it can focus at F8 now with non-reporting TC, and will have firmware for native focus at F8 with Canon TC's. A trick the 5D II cannot do.

The silent shutter feature is very nice; along with the GPS capability.

I would consider the 6D over 5D II. then 5D III if you need the focus capabilities.

As others have said it depends what you want to use you camera to shoot. If you do landscape and macro say, 5D II loses nothing really, but if you want to do some action work, or even weddings, 5D III is a huge step up in AF performance. It's a nicer camera to use in every way, but IQ is basically a wash except at high ISO where the 5D III pulls a lead from around ISO6400.

I wanted to use my FF for more than static or slow moving subjects so jumped on the 5D III, but only because I could get it at a very very good price through work, otherwise I would be still using 5D II and waiting until I could get a SH 5D III for well under $3K.

claymiller wrote:
I currently have a 7D with 24-70L, 100 IS L, 135 2.0L, 200 2.8L, 400 5.6L and want to add a full frame body. Is the MarkIII worth the extra $1200 over the MarkII. I could pick up a nice wide angle lens for the difference. Your input is much appreciated. Thanks.

Have you considered the 6D?

Pixel Perfect wrote:
As others have said it depends what you want to use you camera to shoot. If you do landscape and macro say, 5D II loses nothing really, but if you want to do some action work, or even weddings, 5D III is a huge step up in AF performance. It's a nicer camera to use in every way, but IQ is basically a wash except at high ISO where the 5D III pulls a lead from around ISO6400.

I anted to use my FF for more that static or slow moving subjects so jumped on the 5D III, but only because I could get it at a very very good price through work, otherwise I would be still using 5D II and waiting until I could get a SH 5D III for well under $3K.

+1

if you are a pro, the dual memory card slots are an essential in my opinion.

Great questions. I am an amateur. I shoot birds, sailing, family, some architecture and nature shots. We are starting to do some traveling and I love shooting different stuff. I have gotten to the point with my 7D that I can come up with some pretty good shots but it has taken a lot of experimenting. I have not considered the 60D. I had a 40D and traded for the 7D. I like to use the outer focusing areas to frame shots and create blur in other areas of the frame.The 1D series seems really large and awkward but could probably get used to it. A good used 1D Mark IV is within reach financially. The 1D X is not. I am thinking that I will go for the 5D MarkIII and keep the 7D for the extra reach. 50 years from now I will be dead and my photos will be part of my legacy. No one will care how much I spent (other than my kids that will get less!). Cheers!

Keep the 7d and pick up a 5d2. Spend the rest of your cash on lenses or tripods, filters etc... The 7d is great for moving subjects or when added reach s needed and the 5d2 is great for portraits, landscapes and travel. That is what I have and could not e happier....well maybe a d800e would make me happier, but I am waiting to see where Canon goes in this front.

Isn't the build quality of the 5D3 way better than the 5D2 as well?

Dustin Gent wrote:
Isn't the build quality of the 5D3 way better than the 5D2 as well?

It's better sealed including card door, has a nicer grip and finish, but not much different under the skin. 5D II also was magnesium-alloy body. 5D III is basically same as 7D build.

To me its worth it - better build, AF, iso - YMMV

I had a 7D and sold it for a 5DIII. For me, the 5DIII is a vastly superior camera for several reasons. The autofocus on the 5DIII is incredible whereas the 7D's autofocus is simply good. Sure the 7D has 8fps, but shooting sports I rarely got 8fps that were all in focus. The 5DIII gives me frame after frame of crisp in-focus action shots so I can "cherry pick" the frames with the right composition. The IQ on the 5DIII is fantastic especially at higher ISOs--the 7D's is very good. The 5DIII files take post processing well and have much less noise than the 7D files, especially if you underexpose the files. With the 7D, I had to be more careful to nail the exposure or deal with the extra noise. The 5DIII is a great all around camera. Having said that, if I mainly shot sports, I would get a 1DMkIV or a 1DX, but not a 7D. Good luck with whatever you choose.

Reliable AF, dances adroitly w/ fast primes, croppable/workable & flexible range @ high ISO. Your call. But I came from a 5d (and they cost abt the same @ intro) so whatta i know abt a 5D2? Reckon a thimbleful.

I'm thinking you might need to add a few hundred to your current upgrade estimate.