# Canon 5D or 7D?



## Hopeful4ky (Dec 27, 2011)

I am looking to shoot photos at indoor agility trials (dog action  shots). I am coming from shooting outdoor horse shows, which my Canon  digital rebel was fine for, but when it came time to shoot agility  trials, it failed miserably. It just couldn't handle shooting indoors  for action shots with no flash. I am going to be shooting action shots  indoors in average to low lighting. Would the Canon 5D or the Canon 7D  be better suited to shooting in these conditions? I should note that I will not be shooting in sports mode. Unlike many of those shooting both horse show and dog show photography now, I learned how to time shots (you had to when shooting large numbers of classes at horse shows, and couldn't afford to waste film), and will not be relying on holding the button down and lucking into good shots simply because I have caught every stride as a dog goes over a jump, so one being stronger at taking continuous shots does not need to be taken into consideration.
I will be printing photos that are anywhere from 4x6, up to 11x14. 8x10 will be most common.

  There is nowhere around me to try each of these cameras out to see which  performs better for what I'm wanting to do, so am having to rely on the  internet to help make the decision on which camera to purchase. 
  As a long time Canon owner, I don't wish to switch brands, and can't  afford the Mark II, which would probably be best for what I'm wanting,  but just isn't an option.
I am using the EF 70-200mm 4L usm lens (am saving for the 2.8 IS, but it's currently not something I can afford).
I still miss shooting with my old EOS-3 and Elan 7, as for the money, I could produce better shots than I've been able to produce for the same price with digital. Indoor shots at low light indoor horse arenas with no flash were never an issue.
Thanks
Stacey


----------



## MichaelH (Dec 27, 2011)

The canon 7d is what you should be looking at as it has a much better focusing system than the 5dmII. It has 19 cross type auto focus points, I believe.


----------



## EIngerson (Dec 28, 2011)

I agree with MichaelH, I own the 7D. It's great at higher ISO.  I love my 70-200 F4 but it does lack at most indoor events with lots of motion.


----------



## gsgary (Dec 28, 2011)

Ive used a 5dmk1 for indoor dog agility once because it handles noise better than my 1mk2's but i was using a 300F2.8L that you can pre focus on a jump set it, focus on another jump and with one twist of the barrel it is ready for the pre focused jump it's all down to knowing how good your camera works and then working around it, but there is no way i could have used my 70-200F4 not long enough or fast enough
Here's one from the 5D shot at F3.2 1/640 iso3200


----------



## MLeeK (Dec 28, 2011)

5d original or 5d Mk II?
The focus system in both 5D's will be tougher indoors in low to average light with any other focus point than the center one. The 7d's focus system is lightyears ahead of that in the 5d series to date. If the fast FPS is a concern, the 7D is also much better. I RARELY if ever use my 5d2 for any sports at all because of the focus issues with it. 
I honestly default to my 7D before my 5d2 on most things now days. I am just plain disappointed in the 5d2. 
The 5d2 has served me well for portraits and weddings, but I am pretty confident that there isn't a situation that I have been in for weddings or portraits that my 7d couldn't cover beautifully.

If it's sports you are shooting the 70-200 f/2.8L *IS* isn't really necessary. The non IS version will do perfectly. Your shutter speed has to be so high that the IS is totally irrelevant. So... if that helps you with your budget even better. You'll have to turn the IS off in most sporting situations.


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Dec 28, 2011)

Agree. You do not need the 2.8 because you can manage the ISO nicely on 7D to compensate for that small difference.


----------



## gsgary (Dec 28, 2011)

GeorgieGirl said:


> Agree. You do not need the 2.8 because you can manage the ISO nicely on 7D to compensate for that small difference.



Only if you get the exposure bang on, it will be noisy like any other camera if underexposed, because a lot on here think they can shoot on shutter priority at the speed they need and adjust in post


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Dec 28, 2011)

gsgary said:
			
		

> Only if you get the exposure bang on, it will be noisy like any other camera if underexposed, because a lot on here think they can shoot on shutter priority at the speed they need and adjust in post



What would other options be then?


----------



## gsgary (Dec 28, 2011)

GeorgieGirl said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




When shooting in these conditions you need the best kit possible, there are no cheap options, the next time i went to this event i changed tack to make money, i set up a studio and shot dog portraits instead, much better money maker


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Dec 28, 2011)

But a 7D and a 70-200 even at f/4 is not too shabby a setup. I don't think anyway...


----------



## gsgary (Dec 28, 2011)

GeorgieGirl said:


> But a 7D and a 70-200 even at f/4 is not too shabby a setup. I don't think anyway...



At the event above i was shooting at you would have to set the ISO at 6400 and that was the well lit part of the areana


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Dec 28, 2011)

I have that photo on my bookmarks with your set up from when I first saw it. Love it! 

So the moral of the story is that arena lighting is so poor that there is not much likelihood of getting a decent result no matter what..?


----------



## MLeeK (Dec 28, 2011)

gsgary said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > But a 7D and a 70-200 even at f/4 is not too shabby a setup. I don't think anyway...
> ...



I shoot at 6400 OFTEN. Probably more often than not with my 7D. Results are beautiful. I do agree that the f/2.8 lens is almost a requirement, just not the IS, HOWEVER I will add that I most often am using my f/2.8 lens at about f/4. Every lens is at it's sharpest somewhere around 2 stops down from wide open give or take. When using an f/2.8 lens you are stopped down at f/4-5.6 and get that extra sharpness. Not that it's BAD at 2.8 by any  means!


----------



## gsgary (Dec 28, 2011)

GeorgieGirl said:


> I have that photo on my bookmarks with your set up from when I first saw it. Love it!
> 
> So the moral of the story is that arena lighting is so poor that there is not much likelihood of getting a decent result no matter what..?



No i got loads of keepers with the 5D and 300F2.8L 
This dog was like lightning but i had to shoot it at iso3200 F2.8 1/400 which it not really fast enough, plus i had to shoot JPG's because we were printing on site


----------



## kamerageek (Dec 28, 2011)

I take a lot of shots at my kids' swim meets where the light is typically really poor. I had been using my 70-300mm f4-5.6 on my 40D and found that it was just barely sufficient for the lighting conditions at the pools. I bought a 200mm f2.8L and I have been really happy with the results. I've been able to shoot handheld for the most part and have not had an issue with camera shake. The 7D will probably help, but I've some pretty good success just by upgrading to faster glass.


----------



## MLeeK (Dec 28, 2011)

GeorgieGirl said:


> I have that photo on my bookmarks with your set up from when I first saw it. Love it!
> 
> So the moral of the story is that arena lighting is so poor that there is not much likelihood of getting a decent result no matter what..?



No way!!! I shoot in some of the worst gyms in the world and some of the worst lighting I can imagine... You can get beautiful results in poor conditions-within reason.

This was shot in a ptich black gym with one single spot light just over the mat. Granted I did use a little fill flash on this one:






This gym wasn't ideal to say the least. No flash. ISO 12800, shutter 1/320 f/2.8





This wasn't the greatest,  Not the worst either...  ISO 2500; f/2.8 shutter of 1/200 (NOT good shutter there)
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




This gym was a NIGHTMARE. Dark as hell. ISO 12800, f/2.8 1/320


----------



## Hopeful4ky (Dec 28, 2011)

Thank you all so much for your help. I went ahead and decided to go with the 7D. I am also upgrading to a better lens (using my lens, and then trying someones canon 70-200 f2.8 tonight sealed that deal). It's nice to know that the IS isn't something I must have. I couldn't afford the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS lens. I could either afford to get the Canon f2.8 without IS, or the Sigma f2.8 with OS. Speaking of which... is there much difference in quality between what the Canon and Sigma lens will produce? I have always had Canon lenses, and have never owned a Sigma, and if there is much difference in quality, I would prefer not to go with another brand.


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Dec 28, 2011)

It depends on the lens...some Sigma's are superior to Canon's...Congrats...and Happy Shooting!!!


----------



## Hopeful4ky (Dec 28, 2011)

It would be this Sigma lens:
Amazon.com: Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM II Macro Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo
or the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8 usm lens


----------



## MLeeK (Dec 28, 2011)

In that case I'd go with the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 non IS version. It's going to focus much faster and with dogs and agility trials you'll want the better focus.


----------



## MLeeK (Dec 28, 2011)

Hopeful4ky said:


> It would be this Sigma lens:
> Amazon.com: Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM II Macro Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo
> or the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8 usm lens


That's the non OS version. It's the macro capable one. Either this one http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-70-200m...1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1325129550&sr=1-1 or the Canon for sports.


----------



## xzoup (Dec 29, 2011)

Very nice shot, that's why I'm saving for a 5DM2 to compliment my 7D


----------

