I had both a 5D4 and 7D2, both perform admirably for AF in sports and action, but over time, I found I used the 5D4 more and more and sold the 7D2. The 5D4 is cleaner and JPG results out of camera were superior IMO when I wanted to process images quickly. The AF system is also great.
I then picked up an M50 to provide a 24Mpx crop body when I need a crop body, and also for travel.
I now also have an R6, but miss the 5D4 resolution.
And it will perform better than both the 7D Mk II and the 90D, and will work without limitations with EF lenses.
Oh ok, I guess I was thinking of the rumor that the M is ending next year, or whatever they meant by this being the last year. I didn't really think they'd have M competing, although I'm not sure about that.
How do you know it is better? The Ho link didn't seem to have tested the camera
lighthound wrote:
One correction needed.
I believe the Canon 90D has the highest pixel density sensor of ANY commercially available camera on the market from any manufacture.
I own both the 90D and the R5. The 90D is a fantastic camera with crazy resolution and "artificial reach" but it's been collecting dust ever since I got the R5. The AF capabilities of the R5 are far superior to the 90D which is important to me for what I shoot.
The OP should seriously add the R6 or R5 to his/her consideration for their next camera IMHO. Especially considering shooting basketball games. If for no other reason than getting that amazing AF system.
CyberDyne wrote:
Well, yes, the R5 is my new favorite too, but he was asking about a $1k camera, not a $4k camera
To be pedantic he was asking about a $1,399 7D Mark II and $1,199 90D.
If he is open to the direct mirrorless replacement of the 7D Mark II, the R7, may come out sometime this year like say September between the prices of $1,799 and $1,999.
That's almost 2x the price of the 90D and has not be announced yet.
I doubt that there will be any Canon dSLR announcement from today-onwards.
I would not be surprised that the current batch of 7D Mark II's the last one to be produced.
jedibrain wrote:
All will work and all will benefit from the vastly improved AF systems on the current mirrorless (though the R is not as good as the R5/6).
If those are the V1 lenses (100-400, 24-70, 600), you will be limited to about 8fps mechanical or EFCS, but still able to get up to 20fps with the full electronic shutter.
-Brian
With the exception of the 70-300, all lenses are version 2. I also have the version 1 counterparts.
lighthound wrote:
I haven't bothered buying any new RF lenses. All my EF lenses perform flawlessly on the R5 and many people report their old EF lenses perform even better when adapted to the new RF bodies.
If all your EF glass is ver II then you're all set. The older ver I lenses also work fine but some of them can not reach the full 12 fps in mechanical shutter mode.
Another advantage of the new RF bodies is they offer focus peeking which many folks with old manual focus EF glass seem to really enjoy. Lots of other benefits but I'll leave it at that for now. ...Show more →
I thought about picking up a 90D to use on the 400DO II, the only EF telephoto I still own. However 2 of the YouTube sites I respect- Gordon Laing and Pangolin Wildlife did reviews of the 90D compared to the 7DII and the 90D came up short. They were both critical of the lower number of focusing points in the 90D and both reviewers demonstrated the inability of the 90D to track moving subjects via the EVF.
The EF lenses including the 400DO II work great on the R5 but I wanted a crop sensor body to give me that 640mm f4 equivalent. Now that the R7 appears to be on the horizon I'm permanently holding off on the 90D/7DII.
I'm optimistic the R7 will be more in line with the R5 and R6 in features and performance than with the R.
EverLearning wrote:
a counterpoint to what technic said. Yes, the 7DM2 has a very snappy AF system but, as many on FM have reported (myself included), that AF system is also quite inconsistent. Some feel their experiences with the 7DM2 AF system have been good and don't understand what people are complaining about but there are more than enough comments to substantiate this as a real problem (note: somebody did a poll on FM about this and there was a lot of AF dissatisfaction). From my own personal experience, the AF on the 7DM2 was quite inconsistent with BIF or when using the 1.4x II TC on my 100-400 II.
The OP mentions basketball games. If small birds are not of interest, then the next question is whether it is money that is restricting the OP to considering only the 7DM2 and the 90D? There are a number of good options for a bit more money.
If the OP doesn't plan on shooting much BIF or using a TC on a lens at f/5.6 (so f/8, single point AF), and doesn't need to go above 3200 ISO, then the 7DM2 is a very nice camera.
To clarify the ISO comment, if not looking to make large prints, 6400 ISO is fine. If using Topas Denoise AI, I suspect 6400 ISO would be fine for almost all purposes. i have experimented with TDA on 12,800 ISO shots out of the R5 and have been extremely impressed by the results. YMMV....Show more →
I'm aware of the frequently reported AF inconsistencies of the 7D2, for me that was a factor in not buying that camera (in addition to weight, lack of tilt screen, cost and more limited AF options with 100-400II + TC). I haven't noticed AF problems the few times a used a 7D2, but 'm sure these AF issues are real for some users. Sadly we don't know what the problem is - maybe it's only certain bodies or certain body/lens combo's. So it needs to be tested, but as many others don't seem to have AF inconsistencies there is hope if one buys from a dealer that allows returns within a reasonable time frame.
Lighthound presented some nice swallow BIFs but impossible to judge body performance from this. I have plenty of nice 80D (or even 450D) dragonfly-in-flight shots, all using manual focus. But that doesn't mean MF is great for focus accuracy and tracking Most people seem to agree that 80D/90D is not a good camera for fast BIF and other types of action, if only because of the very limited tracking controls. And its PDAF is REALLY slow, it's running about 1/5 second behind real life which is way too slow for fast subjects; you can still get good shots with sufficient practice but with a fast AF system it should be much easier.
CyberDyne wrote:
Well, yes, the R5 is my new favorite too, but he was asking about a $1k camera, not a $4k camera
The OP did not mention a certain budget he needed to stay within and he opened his post by stating "Haven't been on this board for quite a while". Which suggest, to me at least, that maybe he had stepped away from actively following the current selection of bodies offered by Canon.
I simply offered some insight as to what the latest and greatest Canon bodies are out there that would lend themselves to his type of shooting incase he was not aware of them. It would be irresponsible of me not to have "suggested" he should add one of these new RF bodies to his list for "consideration".
And for clarification, my correction to your post was to simply point out that your statement "the 90D sensor right now has the highest pixel density of any Canon ILC" was not completely correct. When in fact, the 90D has the highest pixel density sensor of ANY commercially available camera on the market from any manufacture. A crown that Canon has proudly worn for some time.
dolina wrote:
To be pedantic he was asking about a $1,399 7D Mark II and $1,199 90D.
If he is open to the direct mirrorless replacement of the 7D Mark II, the R7, may come out sometime this year like say September between the prices of $1,799 and $1,999.
That's almost 2x the price of the 90D and has not be announced yet.
I doubt that there will be any Canon dSLR announcement from today-onwards.
I would not be surprised that the current batch of 7D Mark II's the last one to be produced.
Received a notification yesterday that the Canon 90D is available at Canon refurbs for $1043
2nd or 3rd batch of Canon products tend to have removed any possible bugs encountered by the 1st production batch.
Experienced bugs 2-3x in the past when I bought into the first shipment. That's why I dont bother buying any Canon product until after a price cut 6 months after release.
Like that R5 overheating issue with 8K video. It has slowly improved over the past few months. I think it will be completely resolved by June.
I classify the 7D2 as a "ProSumer" sports camera. It's very capable, and will out perform both the 90D and 5DIV at higher ISO's, which is what you're shooting if you're shooting high school basketball. That said, the camera can easily run to 400k on the shutter (in most cases), so it's not ready for retirement yet.
I shoot high school athletics for MaxPreps so I'm keenly aware of the environment you shoot in, and while I primarily use my R6 (as of late) and my 1Dx2 as my main bodies, I still use my 7D2 to this day in many situations. It's AF is the same as the 1Dx/1Dx2, and while newer technology exists (and I'd recommend the R6 to you in this case), I wouldn't waste your money on a 5DIV or 90D. That's not to say that they are bad cameras, they aren't. However, you don't need pixel count, you need higher ISO capabilities, neither will offer you that. If the R6 is a bit too far out of your budget, then I would only recommend a 1Dx as a replacement. They can be had fairly cheaply these days and it would be the very best replacement for the 7D2. For what you're shooting, a 1Dx is lightyears better than a 90D or 5DIV.
EverLearning wrote:
Wow. That is the first time I have ever heard anybody say that the 7D2 can outperform a 5D4 re noise at high ISO.
OMG! In what parallel universe? I, and many others, have had lots of problems with the 7D2's AF. Snappy? Yes. Consistent? For many, No.
I was about to comment on the ISO thing too. My 5D3 did noticeably better than my 7D2 at high ISO. The 5D4 is even better than that. I also found the 7D2's AF twitchy in comparison. Its like the frame rate outran the AF accuracy, resulting in a lot of unusable frames between the properly focused ones.
Most people seem to agree that 80D/90D is not a good camera for fast BIF and other types of action, if only because of the very limited tracking controls. And its PDAF is REALLY slow, it's running about 1/5 second behind real life which is way too slow for fast subjects; you can still get good shots with sufficient practice but with a fast AF system it should be much easier.