Canon 5D II vs 7D for underwater photography & Cinematography

[honeylager]

Currently I own a 50D but I am going to invest in a HDSLR for scuba diving/travelling. I will be diving in Thailand, Indonesia, and possibly Vietnam as well as here of course, in Vancouver. I am on my way to becoming a DM and soon after an instructor and would like to carry my passion for photography with me to the depths of the ocean :cool2: .

Anyway, enough about me, lets talk about the cameras.

7D:
Good noise control
1.6 crop (useful for macro)
Insane AF
Good image quality
1080p 30fps

5D II:
Excellent noise control
Full frame sensor
9 point AF
Incredible image quality
1080p 30 fps

For glass I already have:
Tokina 10-17 f3.5-4.5 FE (I've heard this is a good underwater lens)
Pentax SMC 50 1.4
Canon 70-200 F4 L IS
Helios m44-2 58 F2

So either way I'm going to be spending a lot of money on a housing as well as strobes and towers, I've accepted this. However I've never shot underwater before and I'm wondering if you guys think it would be beneficial to have one over the other, and why. I'm not looking for a compact camera as I am looking to make a profession out of photography above and below water paired with scuba instructing. Price is a factor, but not a huge problem as I'll be in love with either camera lol.

Input?

Thanks

 

[bvanant]

If video is at all important, I would go the 7D route, the video output is a lot better and for WA you already have the tokina which is not for the 5DII. You will need of course a good macro lens, either the 60, or the 100 and ports for both the wa and macro lens.
Bill

 

[honeylager]

If video is at all important, I would go the 7D route, the video output is a lot better and for WA you already have the tokina which is not for the 5DII. You will need of course a good macro lens, either the 60, or the 100 and ports for both the wa and macro lens.
Bill

Thanks for the input Bill! Video is important, although the photo quality of the 5D II is almost convincing me to go that route. If I had the chance though I would trade my fisheye for a usable WA on a FF body in a heart beat. My fish eye faze has kind of passed. Which would you say would be more useful for underwater photography the 100 or 60? I'm leaning toward the 100 for the working distance it gives you. However would it be worth it for the 100L to get the IS for underwater or is it easy enough to control camera shake in the water given you have good buoyancy skills?

 

[darook]

If you go FF then you will want the 100 for Macro. I know a very high end UW photog that prefers the crop to the FF and swears by the Tokina 10-17. The 60 is great for crops but doesn't work on the FF.

 

[bvanant]

The 100 has a larger working distance and a smaller FOV so it is harder to find your subject. The 100 is optically a bit better than the 60 IMHO but they are both quite nice. The 100 has the advantage if you want to do super macro stuff since an add on diopter has a larger magnification on the 100 than on the 60. One other option is the 60 with a 1.4 tele. Gets you 40% more magnification at 1 stop less light. Eventually you will get both if you get a 7D, for the 5DII the 60 is not an option (it is EFS).
Bill

 

[beautybelow]

My point of view on this would be more towards the land based photography that you say you would like to "make a profession out of". It is never too early to start thinking about making every image you take the best possible quality.

Trust me, not doing this will come back and bite you if you really travel that path.

For that reason I, personally, would go for the big boy.

 

[Viz'art]

I swing my vote for the 5D Mk II, every TV show and documentary cameraman we supply uses the 5D Mk II and none that I know off would go for the 7D, nothing personal against the 7D, I happen to think it’s the best cropped sensor DSLR Canon ever made. But pro quality video is the 5D Mk II turf, many production house will accept the its video but won't touch a cropped sensor.

Bob Talbot of Walt Disney fame shoot with one, the team of the TV series "Into the drink" has a few of those, Liquid production does TV ad with them, Darren Fletcher who shoot the Sea Hunters for history channels got one and Berkley White of Backscatter has what I consider some of the best footage done with a 5D Mk II on the Backscatter website, well worth checking out. Backscatter : Underwater Camera, Underwater Video Housing, Underwater Photography, Waterproof Camera he has the Lembeh footage on the front page, but also has some footage of dolphins and sharks done wit a 5D Mk II in there somewhere.

Choice of lenses: Sigma 15mm Fisheye, Canon 100mm L IS and Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L, make sure you retain manual focus access either via a knob on the housing or a knob on the extension ring, no matter what camera out there (Nikon or Canon) AF in video sucks, so having manual overide will make your footage much better than a lame AF hunting around during a sequence.

On the other hand if you would use your equipment only for home style production, then the 7D is plenty of camera for the job, it can use the Tokina you have already and everything will cost less (camera and housing principally)

 

[ronscuba]

If video is at all important, I would go the 7D route, the video output is a lot better.......
Bill

Curious, why is that ?

 

[bthinnes]

Another take perhaps? I agree with Vis'art thoughts completely. Another show that uses the 5DMkII is Monster Quest on History channel. I LOVE mine on land! However with the motor drive it is big and heavy and very expensive. I though hard about taking that investment underwater. Yes you get a great housing and insurance to minimize the risk but it is still big and heavy.

I opted to go with a 550D (T2i). Not full frame but underwater with the water affect it really doe not matter as much. You could also use your 10-17 Tokina. Fisheye underwater is not as all like a fisheye in air. Very few straight lines underwater so the fisheye affect is minimized. Generally this is considered one the finest WA lens underwater by many.

In a good aluminum housing (i use an Aquatica) the plastic camera is well protected and the package is much lighter and more compact. Both are much appreciated on a long dive in shallow reef environments.
Just another point of view. YMMV

The T2i has been replaced by the T3 but the T2i can still be bought new. Housings can still be bought for the T2i and a few bucks can be saved overall yet the results will still be very good. Remember underwater the camera is less the problem than the composition and positioning of the camera for the shot. Lighting is also much more important underwater than having the absolute camera technology. Again IMHO YMMV

 

[bvanant]

My take is that bitrate and compression are quite important (maybe they aren't) and the 7D has about a 50% better bitrate/pixel than the 5DII. I have friend who do video commercials here in LA and they chose the 7D for that reason. Check out the underwater video promo for the Canon 8-15 and see if you can tell which bits are from the 5D and which are from the 7D. I can't tell but that may just mean they did good editing. On land, I think the 5D guys who have access to very expensive (Panavision) lenses have a different view but UW shooting WA, I think the 7D with the 10-17 is probably better quality (or as good as) the 5D II with the 16-35
Bill