canon 7d - DPChallenge Forums

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

11/21/2009 09:37:49 AM · #1

It is an interesting read for people looking for update.

//darwinwiggett.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/the-canon-7D/

This article seems to suggest that old rebel performs better than new canon 7d. This is the reason i am posting it here for people looking for upgrade. Make your own conclusions.

Message edited by author 2009-11-21 09:38:11.

MattO

Nikon D4

11/21/2009 10:04:35 AM · #2

This review seems to disagree with what "Darwin" says. There are many people who do reviews. And 99% of them you have to take with a grain of salt. This is one I'd not even waste the salt on.

Matt

rider

Canon EF 500mm f/4.0L IS USM

11/21/2009 12:10:20 PM · #3

Well i don't know about enyone else but i've had a 20D,40D and now a 7D and if someone would give me anyother camera right now for my 7D i would have to decline!

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

11/21/2009 12:16:37 PM · #4

I've owned or used a 300D, 350D, 20D, 40D, 50D, 5D and 7D. The 7D is easily the best of the bunch.

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

11/21/2009 12:26:59 PM · #5

Everyone's mileage will vary. Based on his extensive tests I would say it comes down to post processing. It's quite possible that straight out of the camera a 7D image will need more tweaking than an image from a different camera.

Only the owner of a 7D could say whether that's the case or not and maybe Darwin was just using an early production model which could be improved by the firmware update.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

11/21/2009 01:06:18 PM · #6

IMO, the definitive resource for unbiased reviews is here. I've linked only the conclusions page; a quick read of this page will tell you in no uncertain terms that the 7D is among the very best of currently available APS-C cameras.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

11/21/2009 01:10:34 PM · #7

Originally posted by kirbic:

MattO beat ya to it...

R.

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

11/21/2009 01:43:34 PM · #8

I'm very happy with mine. Other than it would be a pain to do so, I could run tests comparing the 7D to the 30D, I suppose. But I probably won't. :-)

david_c

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

11/21/2009 02:39:23 PM · #9

Originally posted by zxaar:

Make your own conclusions.

7D on the left, XSi on the right. Not a chance in Hell they were using the same lens.

cloudsme

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1 L IS USM

11/21/2009 03:42:20 PM · #10

Originally posted by scalvert:

I've owned or used a 300D, 350D, 20D, 40D, 50D, 5D and 7D. The 7D is easily the best of the bunch.

Do you like it better than the 5D mark2?

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

11/21/2009 04:42:40 PM · #11

Originally posted by cloudsme:

Do you like it better than the 5D mark2?

I haven't used that model, but for my purposes I'd probably still prefer the 7D. I already have a 10-22mm lens, so I'm trading a bit of noise and shallower DOF for longer telephoto reach, a faster frame rate and $1000 savings.

SteveJ

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

11/21/2009 05:04:51 PM · #12

Originally posted by david_c:

Originally posted by zxaar:
Make your own conclusions.

7D on the left, XSi on the right. Not a chance in Hell they were using the same lens.

Why?? 18mp and 12mp camera will produce different sized pics, so why not a chance in Hell??

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

11/21/2009 05:07:09 PM · #13

Originally posted by SteveJ:

18mp and 12mp camera will produce different sized pics, so why not a chance in Hell??

Not if the sensor has the same dimensions, which these two do. But that's not the point anyway...

R.

SteveJ

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

11/21/2009 05:11:52 PM · #14

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by SteveJ:
18mp and 12mp camera will produce different sized pics, so why not a chance in Hell??

Not if the sensor has the same dimensions, which these two do. But that's not the point anyway...

R.

I still don't understand the reasoning, being a Nikon user:) Surely if this new all singing, all dancing 7D should be producing better quality photos? If not, then why bother upgrading? Nikon stated that 12mp for the majority of their range gave best results unless you want to move up the true pro range of bodies. Perhaps I know nothing and should have stuck with a slate and chalk!! :)

BTW, I read the review and thought it was a fair review for their usage. Perhaps doesn't comply with studio tests, but then how many of us shot solely studio test shots?

Message edited by author 2009-11-21 17:13:40.

11/21/2009 06:43:57 PM · #15

the reason i posted is review seems to be fair but contradicts common wisdom. Ultimately if someone owned both cams and thinks 7d is better than thats all count. Owner shall be happy.

As someone pointed out lense might have something to do with it.

Azrifel

Fujifilm X100VI

11/21/2009 06:43:57 PM · #16

Many new cameras are marginally better than the old ones. And Canon vs Nikon is pure BS... There is little to nitpick on between their camera's in every range. As you can see in my profile I will use anything I can get my hands on. So there are small variances in quality. Still have to see a good print that shows a serious lack of quality from any camera. Some people think too much that the camera will make a lot of difference. All you need is a camera and a good lens, and be there and push the button when it matters.

It was interesting to nitpick when the jumps were from ISO 800 to 1600 to 3200, the first full frames, the jumps from 3 to 6 to 12 mp. But now.... Can't get me excited. They are all high quality machines with good results. Get what you want to pay for and shoot.

david_c

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

11/21/2009 06:50:42 PM · #17

Originally posted by SteveJ:

Why?? 18mp and 12mp camera will produce different sized pics, so why not a chance in Hell??

Are you seriously suggesting the quality difference on 100% crops like this is factual? 7D owners would be lining up to get their money back. I call egregious shenanigans on that guy's blogreview.

Message edited by author 2009-11-21 18:50:56.

11/21/2009 07:03:46 PM · #18

Originally posted by david_c:

Originally posted by SteveJ:
Why?? 18mp and 12mp camera will produce different sized pics, so why not a chance in Hell??

Are you seriously suggesting the quality difference on 100% crops like this is factual? 7D owners would be lining up to get their money back. I call egregious shenanigans on that guy's blogreview.

i went to imaging-resource and compared rebel against canon 7d. And the difference is much more with canon 7d showing more resolution. (iso 200).

But then i compared my pentax k-x (12mp) against canon 7d. I only compared iso 6400 and iso 12800 images. The difference is very minute. Despite its resolution 7d one will be hard pressed to say that there is some advantage to 7d images. Very much equal.

jotaga

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

11/21/2009 09:07:17 PM · #19

I dont know if those results are reliable, but even so I think the reasons to upgrade would be more than just pixel peeping... People should also consider weather sealing (that guy - as a landscape photographer - should consider this), magnesium body, high frame rate on burst mode, better autofocus, lower noise, higher ISO settings, wireless flash, micro focus adjustment... and so on...

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

11/21/2009 09:23:52 PM · #20

Originally posted by jotaga:

i think at base isos more pixels are better. Plus almost 70 or more shooting is done at base isos. In that respect at 18mp canon 7d is good buy. But at higher isos, resolution advantage is somewhat voided by larger pixels of lower mp cams. But higher isos shoot is less than 30% of shooting in general use.

MattO

Nikon D4

11/21/2009 09:28:59 PM · #21

Originally posted by zxaar:

Originally posted by jotaga:
I dont know if those results are reliable, but even so I think the reasons to upgrade would be more than just pixel peeping... People should also consider weather sealing (that guy - as a landscape photographer - should consider this), magnesium body, high frame rate on burst mode, better autofocus, lower noise, higher ISO settings, wireless flash, micro focus adjustment... and so on...

i think at base isos more pixels are better. Plus almost 70 or more shooting is done at base isos. In that respect at 18mp canon 7d is good buy. But at higher isos, resolution advantage is somewhat voided by larger pixels of lower mp cams. But higher isos shoot is less than 30% of shooting in general use.

I'm not sure what you shoot, but about 90% of my shooting is 2000ISO or higher, with much of it at 3200 and 6400. Heck when my 1DMKIV gets here my normal shooting will be at 8000ISO or higher.

Matt

Sigma 24-35mm f/2.0 DG HSM A

11/21/2009 10:00:17 PM · #22

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by zxaar:

Originally posted by jotaga:
I dont know if those results are reliable, but even so I think the reasons to upgrade would be more than just pixel peeping... People should also consider weather sealing (that guy - as a landscape photographer - should consider this), magnesium body, high frame rate on burst mode, better autofocus, lower noise, higher ISO settings, wireless flash, micro focus adjustment... and so on...

i think at base isos more pixels are better. Plus almost 70 or more shooting is done at base isos. In that respect at 18mp canon 7d is good buy. But at higher isos, resolution advantage is somewhat voided by larger pixels of lower mp cams. But higher isos shoot is less than 30% of shooting in general use.

I'm not sure what you shoot, but about 90% of my shooting is 2000ISO or higher, with much of it at 3200 and 6400. Heck when my 1DMKIV gets here my normal shooting will be at 8000ISO or higher.

Matt

the only thing that i found problematic from light point of view was shooting fireworks in night.

So here it is :

iso 200 handheld , fireworks festival. (i did not shoot a single photo above iso400 that day). Have a look:

//farm3.static.flickr.com/2549/3787593845_4382d5021d_o.jpg

for me i do not need more than iso800, that too i rarely go.

chrislee980

11/24/2009 12:03:29 PM · #23

What makes it my favorite Canon so far is actually everything that\'s completely new to Canonâ��DP Review has a nice summary here, in pictures. But in short, while this might sound weird, it shoots more like a Nikon than any Canon DSLR I\'ve used. This is primarily because of the new 19-point autofocus system and the color metering system that goes with it. You\'re able to select AF zonesâ��clusters of AF pointsâ��while in the past with Canon you\'ve been limited to a full AF blast or picking out a single point. The system is also more customizable, so it can be locked with different default focus points depending on whether you\'re holding the camera horizontally and vertically orientations. Against Nikon\'s D300s, Canon\'s new AF system mostly kept up, and definitely performs better than autofocus on the 5D Mark II.

Message edited by author 2009-11-24 12:04:37.

dmadden

Canon EOS-40D

11/24/2009 08:13:51 PM · #24

This is really for the guys using the 7d now, like Scalvert and Azrifel. How would you guys compare ISO1600 to the iso on a 40d? Is it any better?

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III