Talk me out of buying a 7D (if possible)

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by kevin_b.|2, Jan 12, 2010.

  1. I have a Rebel XTI as a backup, and a 40D as a main. I want to sell my XTI, use my 40D as a backup and purchase a 7D as a new main. Here is why I feel I need a 7D. Talk me out of it, if you can.
    1. Better noise handeling than my 40D/XTI.
    2. Larger print sizes.
    3. Better AF system (I shoot sports and would like to use servo with AF)
    4. More robust body, it is very cold in SD (-20F last week) and I am afraid to take my 40D outside. I am missing lots of great winter shots.
    The price is what really concerns me. If I buy this 7D I don't want to have to upgrade in a few years (7D mII or comparable for example). The price of the 40D never really bothered me to upgrade.
     
  2. You should buy a 1D Mark IV.
    See, you're not buying a 7D anymore! :)
     
  3. Can't help you here as I also use a 40D now and I plan on getting one myself...soon as I save the $$. DSLR's are like computers and just about everything else electronic these days, they are outdated almost immediately. Sure there will be a MkII version in the future, but there was also a 50D out last year...did you feel you were missing out not getting it? I wouldn't worry about it, get it if you can afford it and enjoy!
     
  4. I didn't buy a 50D because of what I was reading on the forums, that the 40D was the better deal if not superior IQ.
     
  5. You should buy a 1D Mark IV.​
    I am leaning more towards the 5D mII for its IQ and noise. However it does nothing for sports shooting :(.
     
  6. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    they are outdated almost immediately.​
    Only if you buy the marketing spewed from the manufacturers and forums like this one.
    I still have photos being published full-page from the 10D. I don't use it anymore, but the biggest issue I had with it was the small font for the menus and the inability to read the top deck. More of a glasses problem than anything. The 40D I replaced it with has a number of advantages over it, but if it wasn't for the menu reading, I probably would have waited another year.
     
  7. Talk you out of it?

    Those 17MG images can fill up your hard drive pretty fast. I just finished HOURS cleaning up my HD after my Adobe Photoshop kept crashing. Apparently I only had 6MG left after months of downloading images, good luck.
     
  8. I am in the same boat as Kevin...
    I want the 7D for larger prints, better AF, slightly better VF, VF features like grid and level, better build, slightly better range in exposure latitude (dynamic range), lower noise at ISO 1600+, better LCD, HD video, microphone, and more room to crop.
    My oldest DSLR, the 10D, has been gathering dust for 2.5 years. The 40D's a workhorse.
    It's still in my virtual shopping cart.
    External hard drives are CHEAP... 200 bucks or a little more and you can devote an external to your HD video and another external to your 7D stills. 500GB will store easily 25,000 7D raw images. That's what 95% or more of DSLR shooters capture in two years. Therefore, a TB is 50,000 images! I've no idea the filesizes on the HD video files. 4GB for 25 minutes?
    So, Harry, your PC's primary disk is a minimum of 250GB (for shoots going back the past several months only). Duplicate all of these shots to a pair of external hard drives. Storage is CHEAP and EASY.
     
  9. I've no idea the filesizes on the HD video files. 4GB for 25 minutes?​
    Indeed, how much space does a clip take? On that note: What kind of memory cards do y'all use with the 7D? Yes, storage is cheap but it costs nevertheless.
     
  10. "I am leaning more towards the 5D mII for its IQ and noise. However it does nothing for sports shooting :(."
    You can shoot sports with a 5D2. With greater depth of field, more room to crop and less noise I might add.
    By the way, how do you put that gray box around a quote from another post?
     
  11. The 40D has a 1.6 lens multiplier and so does the 7D. It comes down to what you are using the camera for. If you need the multiplier for longer shots, the 7D adds distance to all lens. If you use more for close shots such as portraits and macro, the 5D may be a better choice (also more expensive). The 1080p on both cameras is a big plus. I also own a 40D and thinking about buying the 7D with the 5D a close second. Let your future needs be your guide. If I do get the 7D, my next choice will be a 1:1 camera from Canon.
     
  12. Nathan hit the nail on the head - old != obsolete.
    The video files produced by the 7D range from 160MB/min to 350MB/min. Factor in an external HD if you plan on doing video!
     
  13. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Nathan hit the nail on the head - old != obsolete.​
    How is that? Are you saying I can't sell my photos from an older camera? Or use it at all?
     
  14. By the way, how do you put that gray box around a quote from another post?​
    Copy, click the quotation mark, it should indent, paste, enter enter, then unclick the quotation. to unquote.
     
  15. Thanks Kevin, By the way not saying a 5D2 is ideal for sports but every camera has some kind of trade off so to say its not possible is just wrong. I will say after using a 5D2 for about a year or so now I will never go back to a crop camera.
     
  16. Why would you have 2 cameras with the same size sensor? Sell the Rebel and get a used 1st gen 5D and keep the 40D. Now you have FF and APS-C. One for landscapes/portraits and one for sports/wildlife. Your lens set will effectively double since each lens will look different on each body. You will have 2 specialty bodies and this will be alot more verstaile instead of having 2 bodies that do the same thing. There would be no need for the 40D if you had a 7D. If you consider the 7D, you might as well sell both and get a 1D MkII or III. Plenty of options here, but I wouldn't own 2 APS-C cameras. I personally would go with the 5D and 40D combo.
     
  17. You can shoot sports with a 5D2. With greater depth of field, more room to crop and less noise I might add.
    The 5D2 would have less DoF, not more. Room to crop is insignificant considering how close the two are (18 vs 21 MP). The 5D2 certainly does better on noise, but it only matters if you regularly print big (i.e. 16x24 or more) from ISO 1600 or higher.
    The 5D2 is for people who print big from high ISO, or own/use a handful of lenses which don't make sense on crop (i.e. T/S lenses). Otherwise...get the 7D and don't look back.
     
  18. I second what Tommy says about the 5D II.
    Deborah and I have the 40D canon body (and before that the 20D). We have also owned the Mark III (1D series) - we love the Canon 400mm AF lenses (both the DO and the F5.6). So my comments below relate to shooting birds in flight, often at 800asa and above.
    Recently we purchased the 7D based upon all the positives we read about it. And we agree - the build and AF of the 7D exceeds any previous 1.6x crop camera Canon has made. However, we have been disappointed with image quality - we are seeing moderate blue (purple) fringing around branches, even when the sun is at our backs (ie. we are not shooting into string light); we are disappointed with photos shot above 800 asa - way too grainy for our needs (40D seems better to us, though still not good enough); and in scenes encompassing shadows (and underexposed areas), we are seeing colors that looked "smeared" - they lack detail.
    So we are likely returning the 7D in the next few days. The image quality of a used Mark III (1D series) is better at higher ASAs - our primary need. Also, the 5D II has been wonderful for birds in flight, and especially at 1200-2400 asa...and its AF is fast enough. So do give that body some thought (buy used for about $2100.00). I have been very pleased and surprised with image quality and handling of the 5D II.
    So see if you can borrow.rent a 7D and shoot it at the ASAs and situations you need most - and make a decision based on your experience. OR, download some full raw images and work with them - you know your 40D - so see if raw images from the 7D are as good or better...
    Bottom line: there are better options than the 7D right now for our needs. I am not saying it is not a good camera nor that in some situations it produces images better than the 40D/50D, etc. Just make sure the 7D fits your needs before you spend your money on it.
     
  19. I think the reason you buy things is because they make your life or work better. A 7D or a 5D II may improve your photography if you're willing to work to improve your photographer. If you can afford it why not go for it. By the way the 5D II price just dropped $200 to $2499. Has me thinking to sell my two APS-C cameras, 17-55mm and 10-22mm lenses and get another 5D II for a backup to improve my life and simplify. The storage argument is spurious now with the price of storage. A friend of mine just built his latest windows computer with 2 1 terabyte hard drives. That should store a whole bunch of data, plus external drives are getting cheaper all the time. Horses for courses though. The digital rebel series are sized beautifully for shooting on the street. Lots of options and nobody can answer for you except the person in the mirror, allegedly the brains of the outfit. Best forget about what anybody else thinks.
     
  20. The 5D2 would have less DoF, not more​
    Daniel that is what I meant to say.
     
  21. Robert - fringing is a lens issue, and both RAW converters and PS can fix it easily. The 7D will reveal it sooner than other cameras because of its pixel density.
    As for noise, the 7D is cleaner than the 40D, and about equal to a 1D mkIII, in print. You might say this isn't true based on pixel peeping, but pixel peeping is viewing different resolution sensors at different magnifications. Try printing the same size, or equalizing the size before pixel peeping.
    As to smearing: this can happen when shooting JPG with the NR set too high. You have to play with that to get optimum results. I might consider it a flaw except for the fact that it's easily turned to low or off.
     
  22. we are disappointed with photos shot above 800 asa - way too grainy for our needs (40D seems better to us, though still not good enough)​
    And I'll repeat here what I recently wrote elsewhere in response to a similar comment you made: it's your conversion and processing choices that are the problem there, not the camera(s).
    I own both the 7D and the 40D and get excellent, detailed high ISO results from each with no trouble at all, converting in Capture One.
     
  23. You should get the Canon EOS 5D Mark II, go for the bigger sensor or wait for the 7d sensor and ability to come to the 40D/50D part of the Canon lineup.
    My 2 cents.
    Mark
     
  24. Talk you out of it? Maybe. It does cost a fair bit of money by itself, and is good enough to make use of the best IS glass and the fastest UDMA CF, both of which are disproportionately pricey. The 16GB Sandisk ExtremePro cost $300 a month ago; it might be a bit less today. It holds 2100 full resolution JPGs, and is fast enough to keep up with the continuous 8 shots per second. IS glass helps to hold the very finest AF point on your intended target. The wrongly maligned AF system will track that target and pick it out of a crowd of milling confusion. Just hold the pipper on target and squeeze until the card fills up, 4 minutes and 22 seconds later. But who does that? I have 2.5 TB of disk space, and I don't do that. I have LightRoom 2, which turns the 2100 shots into a fast motion video as I scrollwheel and slide the mouse across the filmstrip thingee at the bottom, and I don't do that. Except just once to entertain myself.
    The 7D is a wireless master for 430EX and 580EX flashes. If I buy a gaggle more, I can still control them all in 3 wireless groups. I don't need the 580EX's additional stop and a half of flash intensity, nor do I need its wireless master. The whole gaggle can be the smaller and cheaper 430EXii. But I don't really need a gaggle of them. I'm pleased as punch with the lone 430EXii now that I got it off the camera. One or two more can be useful, but I'm in no hurry.
    I had been eyeing the original 5D for some time for its fullframe sensor and wideangle. But then, the very wide EF-S 10-22mm makes this almost superfluous. I'd love to have a Zeiss 21/2.8 on a FF, but that might be somebody else's cuppa for the moment. For me, if I had it to do over again, I might not get the 7D. I probably really want the 5D Mk2, and a whole different set of lenses. But that's the kick. I already have a large investment in the long zoom range, which works very well for me on a crop sensor. The fullframe would have to in addition to, not instead of. And so the wideangle end would cost $1k for the used (12.1 Mpx only) 5D; $1.7k for the 21/2.8; and a new bag to carry the additonal gear. Versus $800 for the EF-S 10-22mm.
    The HD video is a videographer's dream, I hear. The best I can get out of it is almost passable focus racks when it's mounted on a fluid head. Forget about handheld or mobile. There's no way to pull focus without help when it's mounted on a Fig Rig or Merlin. I jury rigged a laptop and an old XBox controller into a remote control of sorts. A lot more practice and some gym time building these shoulders might make it into a usable system.
    How'd I do? Are you still thinking the 7D is your dream box?
     
  25. I forgot about the memory card... crap. That will add cost, especially for the speed I would need.
     
  26. I've been disappointed in my 7D. While the AF is somewhat improved (more points=better framing and servo tracking is better though still flawed) and the high ISO perforamance is a bit better (straight out of camera at least) it really doesn't do that much more than my 50D other than video. So, if you don't need video, I'd save your pennies and get a nice lens instead.
     
  27. DSLR's are like computers and just about everything else electronic these days, they are outdated almost immediately.​
    Gotta go with Jeff on this. The "hype" is getting monotonous. Haven't heard yet of a camera that suddenly quits giving us quality results on the release date of a new model.
     
  28. But what about the Leica mystique? Surely you can't miss out on that..
     
  29. It's a Canon.
     
  30. Hi Kevin, all your points but point 4 were discussed already. I don't have a 7D but my 40D worked very well at low temperatures. Ok, -20F is very cold. I recently shot for several hours around -6F, the ony problem I had was with a lens, not with the camera body. The aperture of my Tokina 12-24mm was stuck at f/8. It recovered at warmup. Other lenses like the 24-105mm f/4 worked flawlessly. I don't see too much difference between the 40D and the 7D that makes me expect much more reliability in cold dry weather.
     
  31. It's a Canon.​
    Could be worse - it could be a Nikon D1X.
     
  32. "Just say no." - Nancy Reagan
     
  33. You guys make me chuckle with all of these conversations about something that will be a piece of worthless plastic in about four years time. I spent a lot of money about three months ago on a D700 with the MB-D10 battey pack. It is a great camera and certainly pulls some great results, and is without peer for low-light shooting. However, if we keep chasing the next digital device to stay up there with technology all we are doing is taking away the energy and time that should be spent taking great shots - to say nothing about making the big Companies (Nikon and Canon) rich.
    I am puting my D700 up on ebay and will stick with my Nikon F5's. The D700 cannot match the colours, hues and tones that I get from Velvia 50. For the ones that I need to put on the computer or send online my local lab does high image scans onto disk. I will be shooting 'real raw' will always have a clean 'sensor' and my F5 will be just as viable in ten years time as it is now. Your latest wizzbang that cost you 3 Big Ones, will be in some land-fill.
    Have you ever felt cheated when you projected one of your beautiful digital shots onto a screen via the latest digital projector? No matter how expensive the projector or how great your shot - they always look like crap. Do yourself a favour and grab the old Kodak projector and whack a few slides onto the screen. You will be blown away at what you see. My almost 30yr old F3 with a 20 year old lens will blow the socks off any of the latest technoligical wizzbangs and can be bought for a handful of dollars at a pawn shop.
    While you guys are sitting here deliberating senseless questions - I will be out getting some good shots.
    Phil
     
  34. Talk you out of buying a 7D? No way. Buy one now! It has been cold here in the lower midwest (Indiana--not as cold as where you are, but still cold!), single digits at times with occasional dips below zero and I've had my 7D/17-40 combo out in this weather for 45 minutes to an hour with no issues whatsoever. Well, except for me nearly freezing to death...other than that, the camera was outstanding. It's a (buy it ) fantastic camera (buy it ); you'll (you know you want to ) love it!
     
  35. I am puting my D700 up on ebay and will stick with my Nikon F5's. The D700 cannot match the colours, hues and tones that I get from Velvia 50.​
    Sounds like you need a beginners book on post processing if you cannot get awesome shots from a D700. Weird to say the least.
    Back to the OP's question, what does a D700 have to do with a 7D anyway? Maybe some Nikonians aren't hip to Canon product lines.
     
  36. I live in Estonia and I use my 10D outside all the time. My trigger finger gives out way before the camera would. I agree with philip and his film spiel. I love my EOS3 more than 5Dmk2 or any of the other xxD cameras I've owned. I just hate going through the hassle of getting the film developed.
    If price is a concern... I think the answer is NO DEAL on the 7D purchase. For $1800 or whatever they sell for these days, you can really put that money to better use.
     
  37. Can't help. Get the 7D but don't sell the XTI. Convert it to IR instead.
     
  38. The weather sealing of the 7D will not be of any bennifit at -20F. The improved weather sealing is to block liquid water more effectively. At -20 there is no liquid water and the air is typically very dry. You 40D should handle -20 just as well. However when bringing the camera inside (40D and 7D) brush off any snow and put it in a zip lock bag before you go in. Inside air is warmer and therefore has more moisure in it. If you don't put the camera in a sealed bag before you enter moisture will collect on the exteror and some might condense on the interior of the weather sealed 7D. Only open the bag once the camera has warmed up.
    The most common problem with cold weather is the batteries. In cold weather batteries just don't work well. Both cameras use lithium ion batteries so both should perform about the same in cold weather.
     
  39. Kevin, you have outlined pretty compelling reasons to get the 7D. I still have and love my humble XTi, but it just doesn't get that much use these days. Once you've tasted the gourmet of a 5D2 it's hard to go back ;-)
    <p>I think the 7D will stand you in good stead for a good few years to come, more so given your intended usage. I'm sure you've seen this link too: http://canonfieldreviews.com/7d-1-weather-sealing/
    <p>As others have said, storage is cheap, and that's a relatively small price to pay for the image quality and other features you've mentioned. I don't think you'll suffer from buyer's remorse :) Now go forth... :]
     
  40. The most common problem with cold weather is the batteries. In cold weather batteries just don't work well. Both cameras use lithium ion batteries so both should perform about the same in cold weather.
    Admittedly I haven't had a lot of stick time in the freezing cold with my 7D. But what I have had leads me to believe that the new battery will hold up much better than the xxD batteries. On paper the power rating doesn't look that much different, but I'm pretty impressed with how long these new batteries last and how well they hold up in the cold.
     
  41. I will say after using a 5D2 for about a year or so now I will never go back to a crop camera.​
    I second what Tommy says about the 5D2
     
  42. Ooops! Sorry for posting the same link Scott did. Mine would have arrived way earlier ;-) but I forgot to click send before I went home last night.
     
  43. I went from a 20D to a 5D (original) and I agree with the commenter's above about once you go full frame, you'll never go back. I will at some point buy the 5DMKII (or it's replacement), but I sincerely doubt if I'd ever buy another crop camera.
    As far as the 7D shooting sports "better" than the 5DMKII, I admit that the slightly faster burst rate on my 20D has me grabbing it over my 5D.....I do sneak in a few more keepers because of that (by the way....I shoot in RAW all the time, so burst rate is slow regardless of either of the cams I own). But, having grew up in the film world of no motor drives or very slow motor winders (ie limitted funds prohibitted me from getting more expensive cams with motor drives and such).....when I do bring the 5D instead, I just revert back to my "peak of action" timing methods. I only shoot youth hockey.....so my experience in sports photography is limitted, but it's a fast paced sport, so I don't think reduced burst rate is hurting me all that much. Perhaps if I did it for a living it might matter, but then I think I'd also go all the way and buy a 1D. Now THAT is a sports based cam!
     
  44. Get a 7D now...it's one heck of a camera!.
     
  45. you can get a Nikon D700 for the same money​
    What sort of non answer is that? The OP already has two Canon DSLRs. Going to a D700 would be abject madness. Maybe you don't read or have not read the thread? If not, why even answer so silly?
    Get the 7D. ;-)
     
  46. Here's what I'm gonna do. I don't shoot professionally as I used to, part time (snow skiing, mostly.) So I have a 1D Mk ll, which is outdated but great. One desire is a smaller camera (Which could be made bigger with the vertical grip of course), and to have the latest, greatest thing (well, short of the 1D Mk4, lol). I love wide angle...and everything else that full frame huge sensor that the 5D 2 brings to the table. But the 7D is great for extended telephoto range due to the 1.6 crop factor.... and high speed shooting-better sports, wildlife in motion.
    So, since money is not an issue, I'm gonna buy one of each, dammit.....
    By the way, with ebay bucks, using MSFT Bing to search, and myrebates.com, and a discount ebay seller, I can get the new 5D for dang close to $2k! full USA warranty too boot...woot woot
     
  47. Dear Kevin B.
    I think you don't want anybody to talk you out of buying the 7D, but just want some guys and girls to support your choice.
    So here is my contribution: get it a.s.a.p. and enjoy it and don't forget to spend a lot of time to get the best out of it. Forget all the comparisons to FF, Nikon & whatever. BTW, I use a 5D, considering a 7D for backup/tele.
    Cheers.
     
  48. You know what, let me talk you into buying a 7D.
    You're getting Canon's latest technological baby: nearly everything that the 5DmII was supposed to be, but 1.6x crop. Oh, I know some of the people here might bring up the crop vs FF thing again, but let's save that for another day. Since you're shooting sports, crop might be a better option for you.
    And since you're shooting sports, here's what you get compared to the 1DmIII (I still haven't read much about the mIV so let's work from there):
    • 8fps; the 1DmIII did 10fps IIRC. Realistically speaking, .025 of a second won't be much of a difference for the price.
    • All cross-type 19-point AF system with improved AI Servo II AF subject tracking and user-selectable AF area selection modes for sharp focus no matter the situation (blatantly copied from Canon's site)!
    • FULL HD VIDEO!
    • New iFCL Metering with 63-zone dual-layer metering system uses both focus and color information to provide accurate exposure even in difficult lighting. (again, blatantly copied from Canon's site)
    I can go on and on, and so can the rest of the community. But all I can say is this: get it. You know you want it. It knows you want it. It wants to be yours too. You're just kidding yourself if you won't get it soon.
    Over and under on how many days till we get to read a post on "My new 7D experience" by Kevin: +/- 5.5 days. I'm betting on the under.
     
  49. Why would you buy a Canon 7D when you can get a Nikon D700 for the same money (well in the UK anyway!)​
    It might shock you to know that the the 7D can do stuff the D700 can't, and - you'll hate this - there's far less noise difference between the two than you might like to believe exists.
    More to the point, here's a reality check:

    Best UK D700 price
    Best UK 7D price
    £500+ difference is "the same money", is it?
     
  50. Nice catch on the price differences Keith. I've nothing against Nikon anymore, it's just when clueless advice is posted here to the OP from said crowd, it's rather nauseating.
    I want a 7D badly too and shoot occasional sports. The 7D AF supposedly blows away the 5D2's AF system. Why then would I want a 5D2, outside of the super FF sensor? The 7D has all those other features the 5D2 lacks. Talked myself into it too. Good.
     
  51. Why would you buy a Canon 7D when you can get a Nikon D700 for the same money (well in the UK anyway!)​
    That makes absolutely no sense. Go back and read the OP original post. In addition to the XT1, they have a 40D. Which means (and alothough they do not state) they've probably have an investment in Canon glass as well.
     
  52. Buy a 7D It is an awesome camera.
    http://cid-5cc40c3b7ccad3c6.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/NM%20sports/climbing/2010-01-10-1521.jpg
    http://cid-5cc40c3b7ccad3c6.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/NM%20birds/2009-12-11-1537.jpg
    http://cid-5cc40c3b7ccad3c6.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/NM%20birds/2009-12-14-1709.jpg
     
  53. The D700 blows the 7D out of the water in low light situations and you know it.
    They're roughly equal to 1600. The D700 is a little better at 3200, and significantly better at 6400, at least for larger prints. I wouldn't describe that as "blows out of the water." If you always shoot at 6400, hey, knock yourself out with a D700. (Or better yet, get a 5D2 which holds much more detail than the D700 at high ISO.) I spend most of my time at 100-800 where the 7D out resolves the D700.
     
  54. An attached image didn't post...I'll try again.
    ADMIN EDIT: Please do not take images from other sites and post them here. If you need to reference an image on another site, please link to it. Photo.net tries to set a good example in regards to respecting image copyright and we do not allow people to upload images taken by other people for that reason.
     
  55. Hi Daniel. Without being patroninsing the D700 has a pixel pitch of 8.4 microns, compared to the 5DII which has a pixel pitch of 6.4 microns and the crop sensor 7D which has a pixel pitch of 4.3 microns. It's called physics.
    Actually it's called back up your assertions with evidence. If pixel pitch were the only factor in high ISO performance, the 3 MP Canon D30 released in 2000 would have never been beat here. The idea that pixel pitch determines high ISO performance is something of a myth. Total sensor surface area (i.e. the total area gathering light) is actually the important point as far as physics is concerned, but it's still a mix of surface area, sensor technology level (i.e. circuitry and microlenses), processing of the data from the sensor, etc, etc.
    The D700 blows the 7D 'out of the water' in low light situations because its pixels are so much bigger.
    If I didn't label the two crops above, you would be helpless to tell us which produced which, and that's at magnification equivalent to a 30" print. I don't know what your definition of blow away is, but for me "unable to discern in a 30" print" != "blow out of the water".
    This is reflected by DxO labs scores for low light ISO:
    And if DxO lab scores reflected reality I might care.
    Here's the D700 vs 5D2 at 6400, magnification roughly equal to a 30" print depending on your monitor. The 5D2 has a little less noise. If I could post the crops at larger magnification* you would see the 5D2 is not only cleaner, but also sharper with more fine detail. So much for DxO's conclusions.
    * I can't seem to post a wider than 700 pixel image; the page to confirm that an image will not be inline errors out.
    ADMIN EDIT: Please do not take images from other sites and post them here. If you need to reference an image on another site, please link to it. Photo.net tries to set a good example in regards to respecting image copyright and we do not allow people to upload images taken by other people for that reason.
     
  56. I suppose it depends what fills your needs. I like the specs on the 7D but I have no need for video..and if I do, I will get a vid cam. My eyes are on a used 5D for my next cam. And a really nice point n shoot to carry around. And a few good lenses, so I will keep my 40D and use extra monies on lens.
     
  57. Howdy!
    Many people discuss full frame vs. crop frame, noise, pixel peeping, etc.
    How about peace of mind with a sealed body?
    I got a tiny bit of water on my 40D during a very light rain, and I stupidly pressed the * button. The camera still works (mostly) but the focus point select and * buttons are shorted together, so when you press one, you get both. So it's off to the factory service center in Irvine for a hopefully not too costly repair.
    Will any prosumer camera work down to -20 F? I don't know. I've seen several 20D's freeze up at about +24 F, but my 40D and XTi work reliably down to the teens. -20 might be pushing it. Weather sealed doesn't necessarily mean cold tolerant.
    Later,
    Paulsky
     
  58. Dont waste your money on a new camera - it wont make you a better photographer, nor your images significantly better. Spend that money getting out taking shots. Take a vacation, shoot some models, use that money for something fun and that will provide you with some great photos. Get out of the Gear Head Mentatlity.
    Seriously, any 6MP camera allows you to print with great quality to poster sized prints. And how often do you actually print out poster sized prints. Hell, how often you print out prints anyway? Actaully, a 3MP camera covers all the resolution you need for viewing on a huge monitor or HD screen.
    Dont worry about the cold. Your cameras are not going to break. If you are paranoid about it, get a good Digital Compact such as a G9/10/11 or even a film body that accepts your Canon lenses that you wont care about breaking. Use the gear, get some great shots, enjoy.
     
  59. Take the 40D out and if it quits working than you have a reason to buy the 7D.
     
  60. I think perhaps the photo.net staff need to educate themselves regarding fair use: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
     
  61. Daniel,
    Disregarding the fact that I think you are incorrect about what constitutes "fair use", this isn't a matter of fair use. It is a matter of what our site policy is. Policy that you agree to when signing up and that you agree to when you use the site. If you want to have your own forum website, you can make your own policy.
    Photo.net tries to set a good example to the photographic world about respecting other photographer's copyright.There is far too much of a "well it's on the web so I can use it if I want" attitude on the internet these days and we see that reflected here every time a thread comes up about someone using an image without permission. While we can't change the world, we can at the very least stand up and say "we as a community respect the copyright of other photographers just as we would want our own images to be respected".
    If you have further questions on the subject, I can be reached via email. Further photo.net policy discussion will be deleted from this thread as it is not part of the subject at hand.
     
  62. Howdy!
    Dont worry about the cold. Your cameras are not going to break.​
    I have never tested a camera for -20 degrees, but my mountaineer friends have, and they only pull them out from under their jackets long enough to take the picture.
    Cameras are precision instruments. Precision instruments have tolerances. Tolerances are affected by temperature. Battery life is also heavily affected by temperature.
    I wouldn't push it. Keep it warm until you are ready to shoot.
    Later,
    Paulsky
     
  63. I see a lot of recommendations to buy used. I have always purchased my equipment new for fear of getting ripped off or worse. Where does one go to find good quality used deals and not get "burned"?
    I have a 7D and love it. I haven't had any issues with blue fringing.
     
  64. Dorothy, I have a very lightly used Tokina 80-200/2.8 in like new condition that can help your 7D exhibit blue fringing. Drop me a note if you're interested.
     
  65. Dont waste your money on a new camera - it wont make you a better photographer, nor your images significantly better.​
    That's potentially wrong in so many ways I hardly know where to start!
    If your photography requires better AF than you currently have, better noise handling than you currently have, more resolution than you currently have, bigger files/more "croppability" than you currently have, then of course a different camera will improve your photography!
    Not everyone takes snapshots that a P&S will do the job on...
     
  66. Dont waste your money on a new camera - it wont make you a better photographer, nor your images significantly better.​
    That was so true in the film days. Today, it is still partially true. The new and improved cameras will not make you much of a better photographer, but it will help you make better photos. Unlike in the film days, the quality of the imaging media (sensor) is now dependent on the camera body.
     
  67. Actually it's called back up your assertions with evidence.
    Indeed - and here we go:
    This is a D700 image and this is the same scene from a 7D, both at 3200 ISO with no NR.
    Download them at full res then equalise them (or use a browser that allows you to do this) so that they're the same size.
    Then look : the D700 has absolutely no noise advantage, but the 7D has an absolute freaking ton more detail. Just look at the cranes and warehouses towards the back of the scene.
    They're part of a huge set of test images by the photographer incidentally, so you can do this test with any of his files: here are 6400 ISO files from the 7D and D700 and it's the same result when equalised - the D700 looks like an oil painting and I'd actually say that the noise is worse than from the 7D.
    Oh - and both sets used the same Nikon lens, manually focused.
    The D700 blows the 7D out of the water? Not on this or any other planet...
    And DxO? Look at the images and tell me that DxO's scores make any sense.
     
  68. Seriously, Dont worry about the cold. I've had my cameras out in -30/-40 below weather, in Siberia none the less, without any breakdowns. Yes, batteries go dead faster, and you need to put your camera in a sealed plastic bag before coming inside to prevent condensation, but otherwise, you should be fine. At least my Minolta 7D digital and 7 Film were. Being a first generation DSLR, I assume the newer models are only better in all respects, including tolerating cold weather.
     
  69. ...and if your Rebel does break. well, now you have a reason to buy that new cam;
     
  70. True, better autofocus could be a strong reason to buy a new camera - if you are shooting sports, and your current autofocus is a dog. But, Even the film era Minolta 7 had lightning fast autofocus, and I know the latest Canon and particularly Nikon cameras have only improved since that time. I guess only you know if you really need the improved autofocus. Yes, if you are missing lots of fast sports shots, then get that new camera.
    Same goes for high ISO, but it is a much weaker reason than autofocus. You should have some pro quality fast 2.8 glass as a first priority before looking to a new camera.
    But I still hold that in general, we all get too caught up in buying gear, instead of directing that money toward getting out and using our equipment to the fullest. Learning to live with and overcome any gear limitations, and tuning out all the marketing hype around new camera releases. Yes, you certainly need a certain basic level of camera performace for the various applications you are into, but beyond that it is overkill.
    It is all too easy to get carried away with the never ending improvement in camera specs. 6MP, 10MP, 24MP, etc. 6400ISO, 12800ISO, 100,000ISO, etc. Define what you rellay need for what you do, then buy to that level. Then, put blinders on to the advertizing hype.
    I suspect that the fact that you even had to ask whether you should get a new camera means that you dont really need it.
     
  71. Same goes for high ISO, but it is a much weaker reason than autofocus. You should have some pro quality fast 2.8 glass as a first priority before looking to a new camera.​
    Randall,
    again , I have to say that you need to stop judging other people's needs by what and how you shoot: there are many photographers on this and every other board (sports photographers shooting fast, badly lit indoor sports like ice hockey for example) that would kill for higher ISOs than they can shoot now - and indeed higher than can be achieved by the current crop of bodies - and are already shooting with fast glass.
     
  72. Keith and Randall,
    Both of you fine points, and just because you have different opinions doesn't mean that you can't both be right. Keith is perfectly right that better AF or better ISO can help people make great leaps in their photography if the AF or ISO on their current camera is holding them back in some way and keeping them from 'getting the shot'. Randall is also perfectly right that too many people become obsessed with gear and the idea that they will be better photographers if they have newer or more expensive tools. That doesn't mean that it isn't true for some of them. But come on, you know full well that too many people are more obsessed with "buying and researching" than they are "photographing".
    However, regarding the ISO, I have to side with Keith 100%. For me, AF speed is pointless. I haven't used tracking AF more than a handful of times in the past 5 years. Single AF is all I need for 99.9% of my shooting. But high ISO.......oh my goodness. I just about passed out when I saw what I could do with the 5D mk II when it came out. ISO 12000 (or whatever it is)? I was in heaven. I shoot a ton of stuff in dark bars and reception halls and dingy clubs. I love LOVE LOVE clean high ISO ability and am willing to upgrade to get it. And I don't think I'm all that unusual.
     
  73. I see a lot of recommendations to buy used. I have always purchased my equipment new for fear of getting ripped off or worse. Where does one go to find good quality used deals and not get "burned"?​
    Dorothy, give KEH a try: www.keh.com Good used gear for film & digital at reasonable prices, and you can get a warranty to boot!
     
  74. @Dorothy, the big stores stock used gear and, better still, refurbished gear. I saw a refurb 5D2 on Adorama for USD2,200 just yesterday, replete with a 1-year Adorama warranty, so it's unlikely that you'll get your fingers burned. In fact, I bought mine just like that. Buying from online auction sites however, is potentially more risky.
    <p>@Kevin B. - so are you convinced about the 7D yet? :)
     
  75. Fair points well made, Josh.
    It was really the "absolutist" nature of Randall's observations I was reacting to: there are indeed situations where a different camera will result in better images and a better photographer, and to suggest that this simply won't/can't happen, flies in the face of logic and my own personal experience.
     
  76. Mark, Thank you for the reply. I have looked at the used equipment at both Adorama and B&H along with their ratings but have yet to take that crucial first step. I didn't realize that Adorama had a one year warranty on their used equipment. I want to increase my arsonel of equipment and like the rest of us, can use all the help I can get to slow down the hit on the pocketbook.
    As for the 7D, I do really enjoy the camera. I was torn between the 5D and 7D but opted for the later because of the smaller sensor and greater lens magnification. I do a lot of wildlife photography and felt the greater magnification would work to my advantage.
    I used it with both a Tamron 200-500 and Canon 100-400 with a 2x converter this past week. The lack of auto focus was a total hindarince to me and I wound up dumping a lot of shots. The next time the tele-converter will stay home and auto-focus and cropping will become the norm.
    The weather was dark with a light, misty fog atmosphere. I shot at ISO 1000-1600 to compensate for the dark skies and longer lenses and increased shutter speeds to catch movement at a bird wild life preserve, and there was absolutely no grain.I love this camera.
    Will this camera make me a better photographer? Only experience will do that. But having the tools to be able to learn from experience is essential. It is disappointing to look at frame after frame of lost shots simply because you don't have the equipment to capture that that crucial shot. And when shooting wildlif you don't get a second chance. Again, I love this camera. It will enhance MY learning curve!
    I'll look into that 5D. It wasn't there the other day when I checked.
    Dwain, thanks. I have never heard of KEH. I will check them out. I've been doing this for a few years, but am new to the forum scene. This is my first attempt!
    Thanks for the non-sarcastic input!
     
  77. Will this camera make me a better photographer? Only experience will do that. But having the tools to be able to learn from experience is essential. It is disappointing to look at frame after frame of lost shots simply because you don't have the equipment to capture that that crucial shot. And when shooting wildlife you don't get a second chance. Again, I love this camera. It will enhance MY learning curve!​
    That's exactly it, Dorothy. A "high performance" tool gives you the opportunity to raise your game to get the best from it.
    As you say, wildlife photography is often about getting it right first time or not at all, shooting subjects that don't want to be photographed (and are usually hell-bent on getting as far away from you as possible), frequently in far from ideal light, and with only a second or two to see, frame, focus on and take the shot.
    The idea that a more capable camera will make for better images in those circumstances - as long as we improve too, to make the most of the camera - is a very sound one.
    I've done very well shooting birds with my 40D, but there's no question that with the 7D things are better again. The camera's AF, configurability, speed, ergonomics and overall efficiency see to that - but this improvement also relies on me doing my bit...
     
  78. "The idea that a more capable camera will make for better images in those circumstances - as long as we improve too, to make the most of the camera - is a very sound one."
    Thank you Kieth. A lot of the wildlife shots I do are well after sunset, just at the point where you can barely see, and my previous Rebel xti just couldn't handle it. The grain at higher ISOs was intolerable and not correctable, even in PS4 + Noise Ninja. AF is a must with my aging eyes and slower reflexes. Those two reason's alone would have made the Rebel almost useless with the lenses I was using the other day requiring MF. The 7D is a huge improvement and a step up for me. Does it make me a better photographer? Probably not, at least not at this point. But it is allowing me the opportunity to become one. I am still dumping shots, but the dumped shots are looking better all the time which shows that the use of the new camera is increasing my level of experience, my knowledge of the craft, and improving my shots.
    Now I just have to decide which telephoto lens to go with. My current main is a Canon EF 70-300 f4.5. I liked the Tamron 200-500 especially because of it's weight, but do wish it had VC and it might be a bit softer fully extended. And the Canon 100-400 L is heavier but is sharper fully extended which makes for better cropping. Since both are too heavy for me to use hand-held for more than a shot or two, I would guess that stabilization should not be a requirement but a definite plus. I didn't notice any fringing with either of the lenses I was using. And since I was shooting at the same setting all day, MF was about the same speed on both lenses(except when using the 2X teleconverter). The Canon is faster overall. I probably answered my own question. Has anyone tried the Sigma 150-500? With all the latest technological advances I do wish someone would come up with a good quality light weight telephoto. Any thoughts or suggestions would be welcomed. Should I pose this question on a different forum?
     
  79. Got my 7D last friday. Have a 5D and decided 7D for extra tele and backup.
    Did some tests with the 100-400 L IS on both 5D and 7D @ 200, 400, 800, 1600 and 3200 ISO.
    5D is less noisier @ ISO 800+, as expected, but 7D is surprisingly good.
    Made pics @ 400 mm, F8 of the same objects at same distance, on both 5D and 7D.
    Made crops of the 5D pics, showing the object at the same size as in the 7D frames, and printed them on 8" * 12" because I can't judge them "on screen". The 7D prints are more detailed (as expected) and quality is not visible different to me, even @ 800 ISO. So it delivers what I was looking for.
    Extra tele, AF speed and FPS is a joy when shooting BIF with 7D.
    So I'm happy, but there's a lot about the 7D I have to learn ........
     
  80. Dorothy - which teleconverter were you using? I know that with the Canon teleconverter you will lose AF with some lenses, but I have found that the AF on my 70-300 IS remains active with the Tamron 1.4xtc.
     
  81. Buy the 1D Mark IV and talk yourself out of the 7D. Good Luck!
     

Share This Page