Is a Canon 7D a worthwhile action-shooting companion to a 5D Mark II?
Asked 10/7/2010
2 views
2 answers
0
I mainly shoot landscapes with a Canon 5D Mark II and really value full-frame wide angle. But I also occasionally photograph animals and people running, and while the 5D Mark II autofocus is usable, it shows its age for moving subjects.
I currently have a 40D as a backup, but I’m not fully satisfied with its AF performance either. I’m considering adding a Canon 7D as a second body mainly for action work.
Would the 7D provide a noticeable real-world improvement in autofocus and burst shooting for moving subjects, enough to justify buying it as a companion body to the 5D Mark II? Or is it better to keep working with the 5D Mark II/40D setup and wait for a newer all-around body?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
15y ago
2 Answers
5
If you primarily shoot landscape, it might be better to wait for the 5D Mark III in 2011. The rumormill has it getting an improved AF system, that while not likely to beat the 7D for action shots, should definitely be better than the 5D Mark II. You would then have a single camera that could serve all your needs, rather than needing to lug around two camera bodies everywhere.
The 7D is a great burst-mode camera for photographing birds in flight, though. I recently had the chance to use one to photograph some birds near where I live, and the thing is absolutely amazing. I have a lot of trouble photographing birds with my 450D (almost all my bird shots are total waste), but the 7D feels like it was practically designed for it. It manages to focus tack-sharp all the time. It is a large body, however, almost as large as a 5D, and pretty solid. Personally, I would rather trade the weight of the 7D for another useful lens, and carry just one camera body.
Originally by user124. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user124
15y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Yes—if your goal is specifically better performance for moving subjects, the 7D should be a noticeable upgrade over the 5D Mark II and 40D. The community consistently describes it as much stronger for action, with faster burst shooting and autofocus that performs especially well for things like birds in flight and other fast subjects.
The tradeoff is that the 7D is an APS-C body, so it won’t match the 5D Mark II for full-frame wide-angle work, and several answers note worse high-ISO/noise performance than the 5D Mark II. In good light, that matters less; in low light, the 5D Mark II remains stronger.
So the decision comes down to priorities:
- Want a dedicated action body now? The 7D makes sense.
- Want one body that better covers both landscapes and action? Waiting for a newer 5D-series body was the suggested path.
In short: for action and tracking, the 7D is worthwhile; for overall image quality and low light, keep leaning on the 5D Mark II.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI15y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Is the Canon EOS 7D Mark II a worthwhile upgrade from the 7D for bird photography?
Canon 7D vs 5D Mark III for sports with the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS
Is a used Canon 5D Mark II a good budget full-frame upgrade from a Rebel?
Is the Canon 5D Mark III worth the upgrade over the 5D Mark II?
Should I upgrade from a Canon 550D to a 7D or 5D Mark II on a tight budget?