@TCampbell wrote:
Although... the 7D series are APS-C size sensors (not full frame) and the 5D series are full-frame sensors.
The difference alters the angle of view you would get (assuming the same lens). Since a full frame sensor alters your angle of view, it means the distance from the subject when using an APS-C size sensor will be a bit farther than the full-frame sensor and that, in turn, alters the depth of field. So you can think of full-frame sensor cameras as having a shallower depth of field compared to crop-frame sensor cameras and that means they have stronger background blur (which many people fell is an attractive attribute - especially in portraits).
Another difference tends to do with the idea that a “full frame” sensor will have less “noise” in an image (when using high ISO) than a crop-frame camera. This isn’t strictly true... but it tends to be generally true.
Part of the difference is that as a generalization, “full frame” sensors tend to have physically larger “pixels” (technically a pixel has red, green, and blue color attributes which are blended to result in a final color — the “pixels” on your camera sensor are more properly called “photo-sites” and they only have single color values and software will create blended colors by comparing each photo-site’s value to the values of it’s neighboring photo-sites). Anyway... the larger the photo-site, the more samples of photons it will receive and the less “noise” it should have... but this assumes the technology of the chip between two cameras is similar (it would be fair to compare the technology behind the chip of a very modern camera with the technology of a very old digital camera).
But that brings up another point... the larger sensor (full-frame) cameras do cost more AND it’s where camera companies spend most of their research & development dollars. So the technology in the full-frame cameras tends to be ahead of the technology in the APS-C crop-frame cameras... and then that technology tends to trickle down into the other products over time. Canon’s flagship camera... the 1D X series, gets the very best tech... then the 5D, 7D, 6D, then the xxD (80D, 70D, 60D, 50D, etc.) line, then the Rebel line.
So while there’s no absolute rule that says a full-frame camera must have better ISO performance with lower noise... it “tends” to be true based on the photo-site size on the sensor AND based on where the camera companies spend the majority of their R & D dollars.
To be fair... a full-frame camera is not “better” than a crop-frame camera... it’s merely different. But the difference involves nuances that many photographers appreciate.
I switched to a full frame for the reasons Tim cites above. First and foremost, I wanted the wider angle-of-view, because most of my shooting is landscapes, cityscapes, and street life, not action shots. All versions of the 5D, 6D, and 7D are more robust than I am, so body build is important, it is not the deal maker or breaker for me. Neither are dual card slots.
I also frequently found myself in shooting scenarios where the ISO was 1600, and higher. At the time, the 6D was the reigning low noise champion in the Canon DSLR lineup. I went to a local camera store, (B&H, lucky me), and compared the 6D and the 7D mark II. The difference at ISO 3200 was like night and day. It was not until the 6D hit ISO 12800 did it show similar noise.
To be fair, though, there is very little noise difference between a 20MP APS-C 7D Mark II, and a 20MP FF 6D, at ISO 100. I own both, and have used them extensively side by side. Unless I need the extra “reach” afforded by the APS-C sensor, I find myself always reaching for the 6D.
I do wish the 6D had a top shutter speed of 1/8000, instead of 1/4000. But, shooting conditions and scenarios where i need a shutter speed that fast are pretty rare for me. If you are shooting with at f/1.4, or faster, on a bright sunny day, then you will need 1/8000 more than I would. Many of my shots are between f/2.8 and f/5.6, half are at f/6.3 or f/8.
But, I like the images out of the 6D FAR more than the images coming out of the 7D mark II. I love the colors and details. I also find myself applying more noise reduction to 7D2 images, than 6D images, which reduces detail and dynamic range.
In fact, I had bought a 7D2 shortly after buying my 6D, with the intent of giving one to my son. I wound up giving him the 7D2, which totally impressed him, as he was using a T5. It was spring time, I found that I liked making vain attempts to phtograph birds in flight, so I bought a 7D2 for myself, which is what I have in my bag now. I had also done the same with an 80D, and gave it to another relative. Actually, I did it twice. i guess that might mean I like the 80D better than a 7D2. Hmm.
I have found the 7D2 easier to use to track birds and athletes. In fact, I didn’t really have that “AHA” moment until I gave the 6D a rest, and started using the 7D2 in earnest. But, this year I decided to give the 6D another turn at bat. I found that I could take very good action photos with the 6D, but I just could tell where the camera was focusing at the time.
The 6D lacks the HUD, heads up display, when using AI Servo mode, that the 7D2 gives you. As a resull of not seeing the active AF point, you cannot always be sure where the camera is locking focus, except to reset the AF system back to the center AF point, as you track an object, although this is really not necessary.
The 80D gives you a HUD when using AI Servo, but 45 cross type AF points, instead of the 65 cross type AF points in the 7D2. But, the 80D has 27 f/8 AF points, compared to the one f/8 point, in the center, on the 7D2. These 27 points are very faster, and seem to be more accurate than the f/5.6 points surrounding the 7D2 center AF point.
The 80D can track just as well as the 7D2, but the 7D2 has a higher frame rate, which is great if your primary use is fast action photography. The 6D Mark II can track even better than the 80D, and even easier than the 7D2. My results so far shooting action shots with the 6D2 has been a significantly higher keeper rate than the 7D2, mostly because of the lower noise. The lower noise also carries with it the side effect of producing sharper looking images.
The 80D also produces images that seem to have noticeably lower noise than the 7D2. Deciding between the two cameras comes down to frame rates [7D2], dual card slots [7D2], noise performance [80D], and Wi-Fi [80D] or GPS [7D2].
If frame rates and dual card slots are of the utmost importance to you, then the 7D2 is an easy decision. If you need fewer professional features and more consumer features, then the 80D is the easy decision. If you want low noise photos when shooting at higher ISO, as I did, then the 6D is the easy choice compared to the 7D2.
If you want a full frame version of the 80D, the 6D Mark II is the logical choice, although the 80D does have a top shutter speed of 1/8000, while Canon hobbles the 6D series at 1/4000 maximum speed. Comparing the 6D2 to a 5D3, I chose the 6D2, mainly because of the vastly improved AF system, which has 27 f/8 AF points, DIGIC 7 CPU, and the 26MP sensor.
--------------------------------------------------------
"The right mouse button is your friend."
