Canon EOS 7D: the best amateur camera?

[philip_wilson]

<p>Alberto comming from film I would suggest the 5DII over the 7D. I am a long term (and current) film user and have both the 7D and 5DII. I almost always use the 7D for sport but if I pick up a body for general use I go with the 5DII 80%+ of the time. If I was in your position the decison would be harder but I had the 5DII before I added the 7D. Either body will deliver great results but if you shoot film and have the lenses you like then the 5DII will be a better transition as your lenses all behave the same. The 5DII also has a bigger brighter viewfinder (DSLRs do not have as bright and large a viewfinder as SLRs - surprisingly the viewfinders on my EOS 1V bodies are bigger and perhaps slighty brighter than the 5DII)</p>

[don_bryant2]

<blockquote>

<p><em>The 5DMKII will have superior image quality to the 7D at all ISO settings, especially for discriminating fine detail. </em><br>

God I get tired of this myth.</p>

<p>Sorry but this isn't a myth.</p>

</blockquote>

[dogbert]

<p>When every new camera is released I marvel at the feature set. But the reality is that most of it I never use and hence more features often get in the way. Evaluate you style of shooting and work out which features you think you will really need in practice.<br>

The 7D is loaded with features, but I have no need for its AF or low light abilities. Some obvioulsy do. You might find that a rebel is sufficient. Up to 13x19 print sizes all DSLRs with 10 or more megapixels are virtually indistinguishable.</p>

[craig_meddaugh]

<p>Donald, while it may not be a myth, it's an empty statement absent serious considerations of print size and cropping. For anything that comes out of a desktop printer there is no effective difference at low ISOs. Furthermore, if I have to crop a 5Dii image to the FOV of a 7D image, the 7D should win at just about every ISO. </p>

[dallalb]

<p>Thank you for the interesting and honest suggestions! My current lens setup is a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 EX DG Macro and a Canon EF 70-200 f4 L. I'd like to replace my Sigma with a wider zoom lens, to get better IQ around focal of 24 mm and so I struggle between two options:<br>

1) Buy a 5D II and keep the Sigma (but how does it perform on it?) and waiting for a new lens, like the Canon 17-40 f4 L;<br>

2) Buy a 7D + a Canon EFs 10-22 and sell the Sigma.<br>

These choices are closely related to budget available.</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>I don't have to have the "best," only that which is good enough for what I want to do.</p>

<p>When I see persons claiming that this or that camera or lens is the best, I just want to go to some quiet place and shoot my old Canon AE-1 (film) or Olympus E-20 (digital). The "best camera" is the one that one will shoot.</p>

<p>I have newer, better cameras now, but none has given me more satisfaction than those two old workhorses.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<blockquote>

<p>Furthermore, if I have to crop a 5Dii image to the FOV of a 7D image, the 7D should win at just about every ISO.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>That's why we have interchangeable lenses, so that we don't have to do dumb things like that.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<blockquote>

<p>Buy a 5D mkII if you need to make large prints from high ISO shots and/or if you want to use certain lenses at their intended focal lengths, such as Canon's f/1.4L wide angle primes or T/S lenses. Buy a 7D for just about everything else. For most people it really is that simple of a decision.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>A simpler rule would be to buy the crop sensor camera if you want to shoot with more magnification. For just about everything else, use the FF sensor camera.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[lukeap69]

<p>Alberto<br>

Try them both on a camera store (if there is one accessible to you). You may get an idea which one is best for you.<br>

As for your choices, I'll take either of them. I like the AF system and built in speedlite commander of the 7D and I like the IQ of the 5DII than 7D (that is my own taste). But at the moment I am still enjoying and contented with 5D classic + 40D combo. I bought myself a ST-E2 to stop thinking of the 7D's speedlite commander. :)</p>

[danielleetaylor]

<p>Donald - <em>Sorry but this isn't a myth.</em></p>

<p>Really? What do you know that dpreview.com, imaging-resource.com, Amateur Photographer, and I do not know?</p>

<p>Please, enlighten everyone with your tests which contradict all the tests performed by all of the above. You do have tests which clearly prove your point, do you not?</p>

<p>I get into these same types of debates over certain lens comparisons (i.e. 85 f/1.8 vs. 85 f/1.2L; 15-85 vs. 24-105L; Tokina 11-16 vs Canon 16-35L). People will insist X is better than Y if they are taught that it should be (i.e. but it's an L, or a full frame!) or if they spend more money on it. It's called the placebo effect, something that's not limited to medicine. The cure is to actually pay attention to the results of professional testers regardless of preconceived notions about what should be.</p>

[danielleetaylor]

<p>Landrum - <em>That's why we have interchangeable lenses, so that we don't have to do dumb things like that.</em></p>

<p>Price of Canon 300 f/4L IS: $1,250</p>

<p>Price of Canon 500 f/4L IS: $6,140</p>

<p>Some people can't drop $6k on a lens, and do "dumb things" like use a crop camera or crop a FF image to get the FoV they need.</p>

<p><em>A simpler rule would be to buy the crop sensor camera if you want to shoot with more magnification. For just about everything else, use the FF sensor camera.</em></p>

<p>Yes, spend more money on the camera that has fewer features and equal print quality. Then spend more money again because Canon FF WA glass often struggles at the edges and corners where cheaper APS-C lenses do not. Sounds brilliant.</p>

[madza_zulu]

<p>"<em>The 5DMKII will have superior image quality to the 7D at all ISO settings, especially for discriminating fine detail"</em><br>

Maybe for shooting static object.<br>

You want to compare 7D AF with 5D II AF for sports...which one will get more blurry shots ?. So in this case "The 5DMKII will have <strong>superior OOF image quality </strong>to the 7D at all ISO settings blah blah blah" LOL.</p>

[garydem]

<p>just a thought on viewfinders. i shot film slides for 32yrs, that is the equiv of today's FFdslr. when i switched to digital i bought a 1.5 c sensor dslr. if i ever noticed or cared about the viewfinder difference it was gone the first day. and in a very few hours. after that point i never even thought about it. the viewfinders are just something you get used to. after all it is not as though you are going to take a couple dozen pics with the c sensor dslr then go back to using film in a slr. you are going to be shooting many thousands of pics through that c sensor dslr. now, after using the c sesnor dslr for 8 yrs i do not even think about the viewfinder difference if any. it is just something i am now used to.</p>

<p>on whether you go after a FFdslr or a crop dslr. base it on the % of wideangle vs telephoto images you take. even a c dslr with the right lens can get pretty wide. with film i never felt the need to go wider than 17mm. that is about 12mm on a c dslr, and that is certainly buyable. on the other hand the ease of getting some very long lenses as a side benefit with a c sensor cannot be underestimated. really big glass costs a bundle. and you get the long mm as a free gift with a c sensor.</p>

[mattb1]

<p>I agree with the though of going with a FF digital since you are currently using film. Given what is in your portfolio here on photo.net I don't see any thing that would suggest that a crop sensor is the best for you.</p>

<p>Since the 5D MkII is a little much for your budget I would suggest finding a first gen 5D. I think the image quality will be a little better than the 7D, but with out all the bells and whistles. The 5D seems to match up well with your shooting subjects and style.</p>

<p>Not to bash the 7D, it is a fine camera and you would do well with it. And it has features like AF that are better than the 5D. However, IMO you would do better with a FF.</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<blockquote>

<p>Some people can't drop $6k on a lens, and do "dumb things" like use a crop camera or crop a FF image to get the FoV they need.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Daniel, I use a crop sensor Canon as well (and love it), but I have to admit that my fave is still my 5D II. As for what to do about really long (read: "expensive") stuff, I happened onto two great used lenses on the old auction site, one a Nikon manual focus 600 f/4, as well as a Sigma 300 f/2.8--the latter of which has AF but no IS. I don't have any six-thousand-dollar lenses (or anything remotely close to that), and I respect those who get great results exclusively from the crop sensor cameras. More power to them (no pun intended). Some of the best photographers out there use only crop sensor cameras.</p>

<p>I have some pretty good shots of the moon that I got with a 50D, using the 80mm APO ED objective of a telescope (total cost without mount: $500) as the lens. There's more than one way to skin the fuzz off a peach if you have little money, as I do.</p>

<p>I should have said that I sometimes use a crop sensor Canon, but I do not buy EF-S lenses--although I have seen great results from those who do so in order to shoot wide angle. </p>

<p>There is the factor of the low-noise, high ISO shots to consider, however, and the pixel density of the 50D and 7D is just too high to match the 5D II in that category. The sad fact is that no single camera can do it all, but the 5D II comes as close as anything that I have personally used.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[Dave Luttmann]

<p>Lannie,</p>

<p>Have you compared a 16x24 at iso 100 on both cameras? Or even iso 200? I have yet to find anyone who could tell the difference between the two. Not disagreeing with you...but in real world use, I'm not seeing any difference. My prints where on HM Photorag 308 on my Epson 3800. Both images slightly uprezzed to 240 ppi on print.</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>When comparing the 5D II with the crop sensor cameras, I should have added that high ISO capabilities are the real trump card for persons like myself who like to shoot in low light and who hate to have to use flash.</p>

<p>For those who do not have those preferences, perhaps there is no compelling reason to shoot FF. I have found the 5D II indispensable for the kind of work that I like to do, but to each his own. As for lenses, if one really wants good IS, I have to recommend the relatively new EF 100 f/2.8 IS, which together with the 5D II can darn near shoot in the dark--with remarkably low noise.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>No, I have not, Dave, and I believe that, if I were a wildlife or sports photographer, I would shoot only the 50D or 7D and not fool with FF. It is the low light situations that one can capture with modest focal lengths that determine my own choices. Of course, if I had to sell my 5D II to pay my bills, I console myself that even the 50D is not a bad little camera. I would almost have to get a good EF-S wide angle lens to make it work for me, however.</p>

<p>As for prints, I have to say that I sometimes got pretty good results with my Olympus E-20 on 13x19 paper--and on my old Epson 2000P. I have yet to fire up the 3800 that I bought some months back. I hope to give it a try this summer--and print all kinds of stuff from several digital cameras.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[florinp]

<p>Alberto,<br>

After browsing your portfolio, I'm able to comment...<br>

You use EOS 3 (stunning !), you are more of a landscaper and open wide areas catcher...<br>

You probably own a few good lenses (in your presentation photo I see the 70-200 1.4) <br>

5D II will make you feel at least the same as by now . (full frame, full coverage)<br>

7D will make you start a new life, when lenses are bought in 35 mm equivalent... (and you'll have to look at your existing lenses, as being different)<br>

As you're quest relates to an amateur photographer, as someone said: 50D + a bunch of L lenses.<br>

I go even deeper and suggest 20D, 30D (second hand at a good price) + a bunch Lenses: bodies go, lenses remain !<br>

:)<br>

Take care and be inspired in your purchase !<br>

Thanks !</p>

 

[Dave Luttmann]

<p>It may sound silly nowadays with all these high end cameras....but I'd still love to have an Olympus E20</p>

[rickeselgroth]

<p>I took a look at your portfolio and think if you don't need the speed (fps), I would go with the 5dmkII. You got the "Vision". You prob. will end up wanting to upgrade to a ff dslr down the the road if you were to purchase the 7d.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>Wow, people do get... excitable... over this stuff.</p>

<p>To me, it comes down to: do you want the large frame or the small frame? You didn't say what you're going to do with the camera. If you're not printing posters of images taken at high ISO, the image quality of either of those cameras is going to be more than enough. (If you want posters of images taken at high ISO, go full-frame.) The 7D with its 1.6x crop factor is going to better for tele and the 5DII with its 36x24mm frame is going to be better for wide and more familiar to you, coming from 35mm film.</p>

<p>It's a personal preference - there's no "best". Ask 10 people what the best camera is and you'll get 10 different answers.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>Yeah, I don't see how anyone can look at Alberto's portfolio and think anything other than film or full-frame. The guy loves light, texture, color, detail, scenic, subtlety and he's coming off a top film camera. Why in the world would he want a 20D or even a 7D? There's just nothing in his porfolio that points anywhere to anything other than the best IQ possible. He'd be ok with a 7D (I own one) but he'll be overjoyed with a 5D MkII (I own one), IMHO.</p>

[don_bryant2]

<p>Dave Luttman you are right that does sound silly!</p>

[don_bryant2]

<p>Daniel Lee Taylor get a grip, all other things being equal the 5DMKII will produce finer detailed images than the 7D. There are several tests on the internet that demonstrate that. If you are interested in looking at the tests then Google for it!</p>