Canon 550D vs 7D

[Turn]

ok so I've been looking to "upgrade" from my 450D, I love the bastard but I feel like I'm kicking a wall when it comes to its ISO 1600 limitation and lack of movie mode

before I go any further I shoot everything hand held, a lot of walking and available light shots. I rely heavily on ISO and I do a lot of night time shooting.

I'd buy a flash but I'd use it for around 15% of my night shots so it wouldnt be worth the money.

From my research the 7D and 550D are identical except that the 7D has (that's worth mentioning):

8fps shooting
better weather proof body
19 point AF system
100% viewfinder
1/3 increments in ISO
silent shooting mode


the only thing that I'd get the 7D over the 550D is the AF system due to again moving a lot but for the money?

From the comparisons i've seen of ISO, they look literally identical. beyond reason I can't spot a difference.

Ok so by the end of writing this I've sold myself on the 550D because it covers both the things I wanted which then I can use the extra 900 dollars on a better lens.

What do you guys think?

[faisal]

I was a little annoyed when the 550D came out and a little more annoyed when I saw the similar ISO performance. Recently I tried out the 550D and realised why I decided to move up to the 7D. In all honesty, I'd still buy the 7D if I was given the choice just because of that viewfinder, 8fps and the AF system. It's a much better camera IMO...

[Csae]

I'm kicking a wall when it comes to its ISO 1600 limitation

I don't quite get this.

Theres very very very few times where you should shoot beyond that, even with the newest cameras.

And why would you want to, at that point its all just so messy.

I'd practice more with either proper flash, or long exposures with a tripod.

I do alot of night time shooting, and for landscapes, its tripod. Always. For people, its tripod + off camera flash.

[Elisha]

If you like the Rebel size then go for the Rebel. IQ is identical between the 2 since it is the same sensor but AF would be worlds apart since the 7D has a separate processor dedicated for AF.

[Rasidel Slika]

I don't quite get this.

Theres very very very few times where you should shoot beyond that, even with the newest cameras.

And why would you want to, at that point its all just so messy.

I'd practice more with either proper flash, or long exposures with a tripod.

I do alot of night time shooting, and for landscapes, its tripod. Always. For people, its tripod + off camera flash.

everything you said is subjective

[Csae]

-Everything- is always subjective, whats your point :P

[Nickcanada]

-Everything- is always subjective, whats your point :P

Wrong! A triangle has three sides.

[laydros]

I feel like I was totally where you are, and it ended up higher ISO wasn't the answer. Yes technique will help, but really it had a lot to do with lenses.

People will tell you to use a flash and to use a tripod, but those people are thinking planned landscapes, which you probably aren't. I wanted to grab candids of both strangers and my friends, and I wanted to be able to grab quick landscapes when I went out places (like downtown at night) without the bulk of a tripod or having to stop and make a big scene.

I eventually started shooting faster glass. A big part of why I went full frame was so I could find affordable fast wide primes. The 35/2 or 28/1.8 is pretty cheap and pretty wide on FF. But you can at least get something like the Sigma 30/1.4 to be a fast normal, and as time and money permit, maybe pick up something like the 24L (older version used is a bit more reasonable) to be a 35mm equivalent. And when you still don't have enough, underexpose by a stop at 1600 and push it a stop in post (assuming you shoot RAW).

If you are serious about the hobby (and I think you are from your presence here) you shouldn't really buy another body without moving up a line. The 550D is a great camera, but what makes the xxD and xD series isn't the image quality, it is the controls and handling. Bear in mind that bigger heavier body will often buy you a little bit more shutter speed too. Spend the money on glass now and pick up a step up body down the road. The 7D will probably let you shoot usable 3200, but beyond that it is going to be pretty messy anyway. The 450D and 5D don't have "emergency" ISO settings, but some of these other cameras do.

Also find a pole to lean on, or prop your camera on a car or a fence, work on hitting the shutter on your exhale, and gently. And really think outside the box. Some of the best photos are when the photographer realized they couldn't get the shot they wanted because light was too low, so they use motion blur (or even slow shutter speed blur) to their advantage instead of trying to fight it. Also black and white seems to make slight amounts of blur or noise work better.

[adam75south]

I don't quite get this.

Theres very very very few times where you should shoot beyond that, even with the newest cameras.

And why would you want to, at that point its all just so messy.

I'd practice more with either proper flash, or long exposures with a tripod.

I do alot of night time shooting, and for landscapes, its tripod. Always. For people, its tripod + off camera flash.

i feel like i'm between ISO 1600 and 6400 the majority of the time...and i definitely wouldn't say it's messy. not compared to my old 30d days anyway.

here's an example where high ISO comes in handy. off camera flash would be very tough to duplicate this depth of field along with the lighting...and a tripod with slow shutter would be tough as well. plus this is candid, i'd have had to tell them to stay still and stop eating.
of course i could have shot this at ISO 3200 and 1/30s instead...and i did soon after.
5d mk II & 35L @ ISO 6400 f/1.4 1/60s

[Csae]

I don't know, maybe its just me, but i would never rely on high iso.

I love it, i use it when i need it or when it fits, but i wouldn't rely on it.

I see plenty of great shots at high isos, from everyone here, but at that point the shot is soo much more about the moment then the iso.