New Camera

[kat]

Time to upgrade.

Has anybody used..or thoughts on..and sorry I may switch up my brands here..but the Canon EOS 7D?

[Mad Aussie]

I haven't looked into the 7D but I keep hearing good things. But then that's from people who have it so they could be biased :)

It will certainly give you those things you are lacking with your current camera!

[DonW]

I would give the 7D some time to get the bugs worked out. I test drove one for two weeks and was not overly impressed enough to justify the cost increase over the 50D. Our local shops pulled them due to proplems, not a good sign. I know its alot more expensive but the 5D is a much better choice than the 7D.
The high iso noise really isnt an issue if you buy good glass. The focus goodies are great but dont really help enough to make a difference. Its much easier to put money into fast glass and good lighting. Even with the additional features you will still need both.

Don

[Mad Aussie]

For the little I've looked into it I decided to stick with my 40D (virtually the same as a 50D) and not upgrade until I could get into the 5D mkll. I couldn't see anything between that was worth spending the money on.

There was another thread about the 7D wasn't there Don? I seem to remember you making a similar statement in there as well.

[DonW]

For the little I've looked into it I decided to stick with my 40D (virtually the same as a 50D) and not upgrade until I could get into the 5D mkll. I couldn't see anything between that was worth spending the money on.

There was another thread about the 7D wasn't there Don? I seem to remember you making a similar statement in there as well.

Yes there was. I was just not that impressed and agree with sticking with the 40d. You can buy alot of flash guns and maybe some better glass if needed. Getting even better results than you would by upgrading to the 7D.

Don

[kat]

For the little I've looked into it I decided to stick with my 40D (virtually the same as a 50D) and not upgrade until I could get into the 5D mkll. I couldn't see anything between that was worth spending the money on.

There was another thread about the 7D wasn't there Don? I seem to remember you making a similar statement in there as well.

We (hubby and I) were looking at the two of these. If I am to upgrade it is to be good and right.

I've heard many things between the 7D and the 5D mkll and it's confusing.

I want something for my landscape shots and portrait second. Sports a third.

[DonW]

I want something for my landscape shots and portrait second. Sports a third.

5D is full frame so you get more bang for your buck when it comes to lenses. A inexpensive 17-40 is really a 27-64 on the 7D so for your landscapes to get 17 youd have to by a very expensive 10mm.
For portraits the full frame is much nicer. The only thing better is 120 or 4x5.
For sports the focus issues with the 7D would not make it a choice until they get them all fixed.

Don

[F8&Bthere]

I really would like the 5D mkII for landscapes and portaits, for some sports the crop sensor might have an advantage and once the bugs get worked out of the 7D the AF system and shooting speed may prove to please. I've always been a fan of Canon sensors giving great colour reproduction and resolution, my only gripe was that the 5D series was still not dust/weather sealed. Canon lenses are mostly much better priced than Nikon.

[scorpio_e]

It is a tough call. 7D has a lot of nice features for the price..

Full HD Video..Ability to turn on and off on the fly
8 frames a second
19 point AF system
ISO to 12,800 !!!!! OH MY !!!!
Almost 100% field of view
Shutter up to 150,000 actuations
Best noise performance of the Canon aps c line..or so I have heard
Ability to switch Af points from vertical to horizontal without hitting a button
New metering system
Integrated Speedlight transmitter SWEET!!!
Dual-Axis Electronic Level ..I could use this *LOL*

Lots of great features even more than the 5DMKII.. Only draw back is that it is not full frame. Other than full frame, this camera is a winner.

The 50D was not much of an upgrade from the 40D.
I am still torn between the 7D and 5D MKII *LOL*


Good luck making a decision.. It is not an easy one.

[Marko]

I want something for my landscape shots and portrait second. Sports a third.I tried the 5D and 5DMark 2 - I'd say both are near perfect for landscape.

But I am NOT a fan of the autofocus of these 2 cameras, and for sports and portraiture the autofocus is important.

Don't get me wrong, the autofocus is good, but not great.
Nikon has much better autofocus in their higher end models imo. :twocents:

[kat]

I tried the 5D and 5DMark 2 - I'd say both are near perfect for landscape.

But I am NOT a fan of the autofocus of these 2 cameras, and for sports and portraiture the autofocus is important.

Don't get me wrong, the autofocus is good, but not great.
Nikon has much better autofocus in their higher end models imo. :twocents:

See..I knew it! Back to nikon I look :p

There are just so many too choose from! I'm not sure what to look for..it's like this camera I got now. If I knew now what I did when I got it I would of looked for something else. I don't want to end up doing that when I spend lots of money on the next one.

[Mad Aussie]

Yeh Kat ... Marko and I both shoot Canon and you know how bad our focus is ;)

[jumpinjimmyjava]

I agree Marko. The Canon autofocus leaves much to be desired! I now try and use manual focus when possible on my 40D. I get better results! My son is just now switching over to Nikon because of the poor Canon autofocus performance. I hope he has better luck with the Nikon system - jimmy

[AcadieLibre]

I never have an issue auto-focus issues and I use it a lot when I do concerts, it focuses in extreme low lighting conditions even. When I am doing studio or outdoor shots I use half manual and half auto all depends what I am shooting and what I want to get from the photo. Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, etc. all have good qualities as well as flaws. Read reviews on the Cameras you are considering and think of Glass also because in the end that will be your most costly expense. If you look at Lens Quality and use that as part of your consideration, good glass is always good glass, bodies are replaced every 2 to 3 years,

[kat]

Thanks for all the replies.

I haven't figured it out yet..but you'll know when I do. And like you all said..I'm going to be spending more picking out/money on the lens so that I will definitely take in to consideration. Also believe I'll wait till I'm in the city so that I can actually see the camera/lens. :)

[Bambi]

ha ha Kat you are beginning to sound like me! :p:clown:

[Fortytwo]

It's true that the current Nikon autofocus is better that the one Canon uses. But the Canon one isn't bad in my opinion. And I'm not really a big fan of switching systems. First of all, it'll cost you extra money. Almost nothing is interchangeble between Nikon and Canon, so you're starting over again with all your gear. Second, it's a whole new process of learning camera controls. Which takes time.

And things change. A few years back, Nikon was way behind anything Canon made. Who knows, given another few years, it might be Sony who makes the best gears. Then you're stuck with Nikon and need to change again. Always wanting the "best" stuff will cost time and money and in my personal opinion doesn't really improve your pictures. I've never heard anyone say "that's sportsphoto is really nice, must be a Nikon". If the camera is the decisive factor of how good the picture is, then you've bought the wrong camera. It should be you who's learning from using the camera. The camera isn't going to learn from your superior skills. So buy a camera that can do everything you can and then some. So a 7D or 5D don't sound that bad, even for sports. If sports is 'just' third, I'd go for a 5D. Just take a look through the viewfinders of both and you'll know what I mean.

Hope this helps. :)

[dulvari prestige]

I'm probably wrong, but could it be the lenses that are the main reason with the bad focus reports on the 7d, i'll get a lot of misses when shooting moving subjects with the 50 1.8, sigma 17-70 non HSM and tamron 28-300, but with the canon 70-200, sigma 70-200, and sigma 10-20 i get a much much higher success rate, as these lenses seems to be able to keep up with the 7's fast focusing.

[JAS_Photo]

When you first got the D40, you did not know much about photography. It has served you well. Just look at your photos. You may want to keep the D40 and just add to it with a higher end Nikon. It's often more convenient to have two cameras with different lenses then to change lenses frequently and having a second camera offers the flexibility. Whichever camera you do decide on, you can expect to 'grow' with that brand.

Regarding the Canon autofocus, I was under the impression it was superior to Nikon's? I do not know better by experience but just look in the sports pits or press pits at concerts and see how many shiny white Canon long lenses are in there.

[kat]

Yes, I won't part with the d40. It's small and compact and perfect for some situations. I was, at one point of time going for the d300 or 700. I may, depending on how I like it.. go to the 300s. I don't know. I guess it will all come down to when I have the money in hand to buy one..and then off I go. This time, I do know what to ask for, except for lens. I know there are d,f,g's. Not to sure what they all mean but will search that up too.

[Greg_Nuspel]

I love my D300; wife knows about it and has learnt to share :)