# What camera is best for me... Canon 5D mkii or the 7D



## AshD_UK (Mar 28, 2011)

Hi everyone, I've just started out in the tv/film industry and looking to buy a camera that gives great quality video and also a good picture quality as I freelance as both a photographer and cameraman. 

I am looking at both the 7D and 5D mark ii, I have been going crazy the last few days trying to decide on which one to get being that I love both cameras for different reasons. 

I like the idea of the 7D for the higher fps for slow motion and action shots and the the fact that is has a flash built in but I am also drawn towards the 5D for the apparent better image quality and that it is better in low light with a higher ISO. I have read through countless forums and I am still completely split! 

Both have their obvious appeals and drawbacks but cannot decide which one would be more suited for me. At the moment, I feel slightly more drawn towards the 7D but also find the 5D appealing for its advantages in low light.. does anyone have experience of both? Is the 5D noticeably better in low light? and is the 7D still quite good in low light?

If anyone can help, I really appreciate it as I am about to go insane if I read another forum with people arguing that their camera is better. 

Im going to buy a lens with wahtever camera I get but yet to decide on which one to go for.


----------



## AshD_UK (Mar 28, 2011)

Also, as I will use the camera for shorts and so on.. audio will be a factor that is important, which one would be better for this?


----------



## Bram (Mar 28, 2011)

You decide, nobody here can choose for you, they will only say which camera they would buy. Go to the store and hold both of them, check the specs and decide which will benefit you more.


----------



## Overread (Mar 28, 2011)

The 5DM2 has a controllable volume audio recording with both its internal and external mic connection - whilst the 7D only has auto volume control. This feature was added to the 5DM2 in an update and some are wondering if the 7D will get it in an update or not (for the foreseeable future with the trouble in Japan the answer is no - and if it waits too long canon might just release a 7DM2 with the feature instead of updating the original). 

If you record audio with a totally separate audio recording setup this is a moot point; but if your using a mic on the camera the 5DM2 would give you a much bigger advantage in the audio department.


----------



## Village Idiot (Mar 28, 2011)

Neither one is particularly great for audio. External solutions will be better any day of the week. The larger sensor on the 5D MKII might attribute to being able to shoot more and have less down time from heat. I haven't seen many 5D MKII people complain about heat shut downs, if any at all, but I've seen plenty about smaller sensor Canons. You might want to research that.

Also, check out the cinema5d.com forums. It's a forum dedicated to DSLR videography. You'd be better off asking your questions there.


----------



## Dao (Mar 28, 2011)

Do not know if this site will make you gear more on the 5dmk2 or not.  But I think you should check them out if you are into film related stuff.

Magic Lantern Firmware Wiki


----------



## cabrosh (Mar 28, 2011)

Is cost a factor?   I went with the 7D so I could put more money into lenses.  Either one will need good glass to get the pictures they're capable of, and a quality IS lens can cost more than the camera.  Most top notch Canon lenses are 77mm, and  77mm  filters aren't cheap, either.  You'll get better pictures with a 7D and an L lens than a 5Dmk2 and a basic lens.  Check out the controls and menus on both before you decide, see how they handle with a heavy lens attached.  Good luck!


----------



## molested_cow (Mar 28, 2011)

Nikon.




Joking. For audio, why not use a separate microphone or sound recorder like one of those Sony ones? You are going to edit the video anyway, so it shouldn't be a problem syncing the audio with it. I'd not expect much out of the quality of audio from any DSLR.


----------



## dnavarrojr (Mar 28, 2011)

I shoot video for a living and the answer depends on what you are shooting...

First, as others have suggest, you need to totally give up on the idea of recording video in-camera.  Even if you use the Magic Lantern firmware, it's still not as good quality as getting a Zoom H1 ($99) or Zoom H4N ($300).  I have the Zoom H1 and the sound quality is great, not to mention the convenience of being able to hand it to someone with a boom to get into a better position for recording audio.

Second, the ONLY advantage the 5DM2 has over the 7D for video is better low light because it's a full frame sensor.  So if you are shooting in uncontrolled light (outdoor, news-journalism type stuff) you want the 5D.  Otherwise, you're going to get a LOT more versatility in shooting with the 7D.  If you're doing film making, webisodes, or television the 7D gives you more creative freedom.  Again, strictly from a video point of view.  For still photos, the 5D is better hands down.

Both are a good choice over the T2i, 60D and T3i because both the 5D and 7D are weather sealed (using the proper lenses).  Although the construction of the 5D is a bit more solid and it takes more of a punishment (I saw a friend standing on a breakwater with his 5D get nailed with a huge wave, he shook it off and kept shooting).

If you are always shooting in a controlled environment (studio, outdoor set, or staged outdoor shooting) then the T2i, 60D and T3i will give you identical images and video as the 7D.  The 7D's dual processors let you shoot stills faster, but it's the same sensor.

Oh, if you are not using a battery grip on your camera, the T2i, 60D and T3i will overheat faster when shooting video than the 7D.  But with the battery grip on my T2i, I rarely run into overheating issues unless it's 80+ degrees outside when I'm shooting.  Then a freezer gel pack clipped to left side (side opposite the shutter release) of the camera with a rubber band fixes that problem.


----------



## mikehaugen (Mar 29, 2011)

I don't understand everyone's obsession with buying a dslr with the intend of shooting mostly video. Wouldn't a dedicated video camera do a better job? I always thought of the video feature on a dslr as kind of a gimmick afterthought- maybe it would come in handy in a pinch. Maybe I am wrong, I don't have a lot of knowledge of video, but it seems to me with most things that buying something that is made for a specific purpose always gives better results than buying something that is "capable" of a certain feature. Especially if you are looking at a 5dmkII, I would think $2500 would get you a pretty decent video camera- maybe not 7:00 o'clock news quality, but I would think better than a dlsr. Then just by a decent p&s for stills, at least then you could do both at the same time. Maybe I am way off base here and I am underestimating the abilities of the newer technology.


----------



## Offhand (Mar 29, 2011)

Actually, Hollywood has jumped all over DSLRs and uses them to shoot scenes in major motion pictures, commercials and television shows. The last season finale of House was shot entirely with Canon 5D mkii's. There's an entire industry growing around shooting video with DSLR rigs. They're cheaper than a dedicated video camera, faster to setup, lighter and with L lenses or cine lenses with adapters, you get top quality. Of course, the rigs are pretty tricked out with firmware mods. But it's essentially the same camera and lenses you'd buy at Samy's. Just go to YouTube and check out the video that people are posting. High production values from the desktop is very accessible now. Too bad the content is a bit lacking but that's not something you can buy.




mikehaugen said:


> I don't understand everyone's obsession with buying a dslr with the intend of shooting mostly video. Wouldn't a dedicated video camera do a better job? I always thought of the video feature on a dslr as kind of a gimmick afterthought- maybe it would come in handy in a pinch. Maybe I am wrong, I don't have a lot of knowledge of video, but it seems to me with most things that buying something that is made for a specific purpose always gives better results than buying something that is "capable" of a certain feature. Especially if you are looking at a 5dmkII, I would think $2500 would get you a pretty decent video camera- maybe not 7:00 o'clock news quality, but I would think better than a dlsr. Then just by a decent p&s for stills, at least then you could do both at the same time. Maybe I am way off base here and I am underestimating the abilities of the newer technology.


----------



## Overread (Mar 29, 2011)

I think its true to add and say that a good video DSLR is not something you just take out of the box and slap a lens on and use. It requires different skills to stills photography and also benefits greatly from a range of external addons - sound has already been mentioned, but holding support (for less wobble when hand holding) - tripods with fluid motion heads - eyecup viewfinder hoods over the LCD (giving you a viewfinder type use). There is a lot more to is than that of course and lots of little and big extras to consider. 

I think that many who have classed the video feature as a gimmick have tried it out - got rubbish and (because they are good with stills) classed it as worthless. With the right support and the right skills its a worthy setup and great for getting into tight places or for reducing the bulk of travelling if one is already using a DSLR.


----------



## Village Idiot (Mar 29, 2011)

mikehaugen said:


> I don't understand everyone's obsession with buying a dslr with the intend of shooting mostly video. Wouldn't a dedicated video camera do a better job? I always thought of the video feature on a dslr as kind of a gimmick afterthought- maybe it would come in handy in a pinch. Maybe* I am wrong*, I don't have a lot of knowledge of video, but it seems to me with most things that buying something that is made for a specific purpose always gives better results than buying something that is "capable" of a certain feature. Especially if you are looking at a 5dmkII, I would think $2500 would get you a pretty decent video camera- maybe not 7:00 o'clock news quality, but I would think better than a dlsr. Then just by a decent p&s for stills, at least then you could do both at the same time. Maybe I am way off base here and I am underestimating the abilities of the newer technology.



I hightlighted the important part of your post.

If you've looked up good video shot on a DSLR, researched the video feature on a DSLR and how people are using it, or compared the price of a camera and setup that has equal or better quality with the same features, then you're ignorant on the subject and everything you say about it should be taken with a grain of salt.

Why am I so defensive? A lot of people say video on a DSLR is a gimmick, but they haven't seen videos from people like Vincent Laforet or any of the number of videos from users of cinema5d.com. They don't know that videographers now have tools where they can spend $5,000 and have a video camera that shoots 1080p, has the option for detachable lenses with huge wide open apertures, and the ability to shoot with very crappy low light. The new DSLRs can compare to some very expensive rigs. They do have issues to work around, but if DSLRs with video were such a gimmick, you wouldn't see the large amount of indie film makers embracing the technology. It open up options at a price range, for a lot of people, that was previously unavailable.

Of course, I'm talking about productions here and not family videos and such.


----------



## tyler_h (Mar 29, 2011)

Most people will notice poor quality audio more than a slightly grainier video etc. That in mind, Overread has mentioned the audio control with the 5D II, so that would make me lean that way. You have to consider it as a full package for external mic, rig, body, and the lenses you want.

I know  guy who works as a videographer (whatever its called) for a news station, but shoots weddings/events in his spare time and currently used a 5D II. Had nothing bad to say about it for videoing purposes.


----------



## mikehaugen (Mar 29, 2011)

mikehaugen said:


> I don't understand everyone's obsession
> 
> Maybe I am wrong, I don't have a lot of knowledge of video
> 
> Maybe I am way off base here and I am underestimating the abilities of the newer technology.


 
I also only included the important stuff, I wasn't trying to say that everyone was wrong, I just didn't know enough about it.  DSLR's may well be quite capable, more than I imagined.  I haven't used one for video, nor do I have the skill to get a decent video probably anyway.  But people do still buy the $5,000, $10,000, and $40,000 cameras so there has to be a reason.  Does say a 5dmkII with the necessary accessories compare well with a dedicated video camera in that price range?  I couldn't say.  Sorry if I offended someone by knocking the idea, but these were my thoughts and as stated "I didn't know" and just wanted to hear people's position.


----------



## dnavarrojr (Mar 29, 2011)

Another great advantage of shooting video with a DSLR is stealth...  When I showed up somewhere with my Canon XH-A1, it would draw a crowd and sometimes it made shooting things inconspicuously a major problem.  But when people see me with my T2i, they mostly ignore me.

Also, if you saw the movie "Up in the Air" with George Clooney the Wedding sequence is amazing.  You see footage of the wedding from all different angles that all syncs up in the timeline.  They were able to do that by sticking 25 camera operators in the wedding crowd with 5DM2's in tuxes and wedding dresses and unless you specifically look for them, they blend right in.  So you don't notice all those camera people shooting video... stealth!  Plus, if you saw it in the theater, you know that footage from most DSLRs upscales to 2k for movie theaters VERY well.

I shot a short film for the 48 Hour Film Festival last summer on my T2i and it was amazing looking on the big screen.


----------



## Village Idiot (Mar 29, 2011)

mikehaugen said:


> mikehaugen said:
> 
> 
> > I don't understand everyone's obsession
> ...



What was already stated, the ability to change lenses, the ability to have an extremely shallow DOF, and the ability to shoot in poorly lit conditions because of larger sensors and better high ISO sensitivity. The people that spend more than $5,000 on a video camera are doing so because they have the budget. For less than $5000, you can get a good HDSLR setup with an external recorder, a rig, and several lenses. Cheaper primes work just fine for video. It's not very often you actually see a camera zooming in and out during a shot.

There are downsides, like the possibility of overheating, the jellow effect, and other quirks, but for the price, you can't get the quality out of a dedicated video camera and the options that you can get in an HDSLR with video.

This is a video for Vincent Laforet's Reverie. It was a video he shot for Canon to show off the 5D MKII. Although it had a fairly large budget, a person does not need 20 different lenses and a helicopter to make a good video, just some imagination and the know how to produce it.
Reverie on Vimeo)


----------



## dnavarrojr (Mar 29, 2011)

mikehaugen said:


> mikehaugen said:
> 
> 
> > I don't understand everyone's obsession
> ...



The disadvantages to shooting video with a DSLR are still many...  Only supports 12 stops of light (compared to a RED ONE that supports 18 stops out of 24), limited to shooting 4GB of footage per clip (typically 12 minutes at 1080p), not ergonomic, harder to handle unless you spend a lot more on special rigs, record in AVCHD or MPG4 which is lossy compression, etc...  I'm working as a camera operator on a feature film this summer and the executive producer decided he wants to shoot with the RED ONE specifically because there will be a TON of color grading and special effects, so he wants to shoot in RAW.  Even at rental prices, it's over $100,000 with all the Cinema lenses.  I think we could still do it on DSLRs, but he's an old school producer and doesn't trust them.  That said, we've only got the one RED, so he's agreed to let me shoot additional angles with DSLRs at the very least to compare footage.


----------



## Offhand (Mar 29, 2011)

Mike, you figure that a Canon 5D is capable of shooting better than most video cameras out of the box. With good lenses and shooting RAW still files are going to be way better quality than 1080 and it has terrific low light because of the sensor size and depth of field. Of course, the 5D can't shoot video at that high RAW level. But dslr's probably blow anything comparable in its price range away. The Canon XLs are twice the price, though DSLRs do have other video issues like overheating, rolling shutter when you pan quickly, etc.

Sorry if I repeated what was said. I didn't see that there was another page of posts. 

On the sound front, if you're serious about getting clean sound, invest in a good digital recorder with XLR inputs and decent preamps (most cheap decks have noisy preamps that come across as hiss when you up the levels). XLR are the big 3 prong plugs that lock in. The lower end recorders have 1/4" mini plugs, which are okay for casual use. But they don't provide a secure connection so, if you're on the move, you can get noise from stress and twisting on the contacts. I was never a fan of the Zoom recorders but know a few people that like them. I like the Marantz decks and Tascam makes some affordable ones with decent preamps and XLR inputs. The higher end Sonys produce really nice clean sound but have really clunky, awkward interfaces. It's best to have another guy doing sound handheld ENG style with a mic or with a boom and constantly monitoring levels using headphones and watching the meters. You'll also not want to skimp on good mics. You'll probably need several types, depending on the conditions, including a decent cardioid for hand held (lobe shaped sound pickup that doesn't pick up noise behind), directional and some wireless lapel mics. Check out the Digital Rev videos on YouTube. Pretty simple roving, single camera, single-user DSLR setup with decent sound. They use wireless lapel mics.


----------



## DiskoJoe (Mar 29, 2011)

i would suggest going to flickr and doing a camera search so you can see images taken by both. But either would be great. The 7d is more of a working camera where the 5d is a little more artsy. so decide which fits your taste more. If you get two 5d's you can do HDR video. which is very awesome but you have to have two cameras to capture the different exposure levels.


----------

