PDA

View Full Version : DPreview reviews Canon EOS 7d


Marloon
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 12:05
Canon EOS 7D review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos7d/)

I'm gonna have a read through it now.

beeng
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 12:12
7D managed to award itself quite the high score :p

gjl711
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 12:20
Sounds like they were impressed. :)

jwcdds
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 12:28
"At eight frames per second the EOS 7D is the quickest APS-C DSLR that we've seen in our labs so far. The frame rate is impressive on itself and even more so considering that with a very fast card, such as the Sandisk Extreme Pro, in JPEG format the 7D can maintain this speed indefinitely (well, we gave up after approximately 60 sec or 320 frames) and for 24 frames when shooting RAW."

I :lol:'d. *looks at watch, 60sec...* "screw it, let's move on." :lol:

timnosenzo
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 12:35
I skimmed it and read the conclusion, but it seems like the most glowing review they've given to a Canon DSLR in a long time.

New Hobby
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 12:39
My personal experience is in line with the review.
I'm impressed with the DR tests. It looks like the DR stays about the same all the way up to and including ISO 1600. Very nice job, Canon.

Zephyrize
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 12:40
Canon EOS 7D review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos7d/)

was about time....

...why am I under the impression every sites are conspiring in tempting me these days?

versedmb
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 12:43
Interesting 7D vs 50D and 7D vs 5D II review here....

http://rolandlim.wordpress.com/2009/11/06/canon-eos-7d-review/

garycoleman
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 12:54
finally. what took them so long? they were usually the first ones to review when new stuff came out

timnosenzo
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 13:02
Just as a side note... I know they do some RAW testing and convert the files with ACR, but Adobe hasn't even released the final version of ACR to support the 7D. Couldn't it be seen as premature to compare files using beta software?

blonde
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 13:03
ok, i admit it. even after reading Ronald's test, i am still quite tempted to replace my 5DmkII for the 7D simply because i think that the 7D is a much more versatile camera even though it is 1 .6 crop. maybe i should go ahead and do that and just add a 5D in case i ever need the FF but honestly, i think that with the right lenses (17-55 2.8 IS and 85 1.2L) the 7D can do a great job even compared to the FF.

New Hobby
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 13:04
Just as a side note... I know they do some RAW testing and convert the files with ACR, but Adobe hasn't even released the final version of ACR to support the 7D. Couldn't it be seen as premature to compare files using beta software?

They point out in the review that ACR's support of the 7D is beta.

timnosenzo
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 13:07
They point out in the review that ACR's support of the 7D is beta.

That's what I get for skimming it. :o

mikekelley
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 13:09
Interesting 7D vs 50D and 7D vs 5D II review here....

http://rolandlim.wordpress.com/2009/11/06/canon-eos-7d-review/


I am really astounded at the 50d vs 7d comparison.

there is virtually NO appreciable difference in ISO quality until about 6400, where the 7d easily wins, and only a slight difference at 3200. However, up until then, the difference is not even noticeable.

Sean
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 13:25
Quite impressive, seems like Canon hit this one dead on. Tempting to trade in my 50D, but It's not going to happen.

Tom W
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 13:31
ok, i admit it. even after reading Ronald's test, i am still quite tempted to replace my 5DmkII for the 7D simply because i think that the 7D is a much more versatile camera even though it is 1 .6 crop. maybe i should go ahead and do that and just add a 5D in case i ever need the FF but honestly, i think that with the right lenses (17-55 2.8 IS and 85 1.2L) the 7D can do a great job even compared to the FF.

If it means anything to you, I've taken maybe 3 dozen shots with the 5D2 in the last 2 weeks, and about 2000 with the 7D. Now, a lot of that is testing and learning the camera, but it is a very impressive body. It reminds me in many ways of my old 1D2 - responsive, and quite flexible.

BTW, this review is pretty good. I'd still like to see what ACR can do with the RAW once the non-beta version is out.

TwistYaWig
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 13:38
The 7D haters aren't going to like this review.

05Xrunner
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 13:39
these things are really not helping me with the choice of selling my 1DIII and getting a 7D..Its sooo tempting

binlerne
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 13:41
"At eight frames per second the EOS 7D is the quickest APS-C DSLR that we've seen in our labs so far. The frame rate is impressive on itself and even more so considering that with a very fast card, such as the Sandisk Extreme Pro, in JPEG format the 7D can maintain this speed indefinitely (well, we gave up after approximately 60 sec or 320 frames) and for 24 frames when shooting RAW."

I :lol:'d. *looks at watch, 60sec...* "screw it, let's move on." :lol:

LOL, I tried it and gave up after like 4 seconds. I was satisfied.


Wow...that's a TF nightmare statement.

Mr. Clean
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 13:43
The 7D haters aren't going to like this review.
7D haters are in a lonely little corner anyways :D
these things are really not helping me with the choice of selling my 1DIII and getting a 7D..Its sooo tempting
That move I wouldn't support as I think the Mark III will have better ISO performance and detail. However if you had a Mark II, or a IIn ... :D

05Xrunner
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 13:46
i know the 1D3 will ave better ISO but am trying to just figure things out..do I really need a 1D3 since I do this purely as a hobby. as the 7D will fill everything I need and then has the video i wanna play with.

CyberDyneSystems
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 13:55
Nice,. and it carries even more weight as Phil has been very down on Canon for some time since they opted not to treat him as special as he would have liked.

I did notice Phil did not review it though....

GSH
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 14:38
The 7D haters aren't going to like this review.

I couldn't care less what the "haters" think to be honest :)

Canon have delivered the camera i've been hoping to see for quite a while, a 1.6x Crop with accurate and customisable AutoFocus. That camera is the 7D and it works.

stax
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 14:38
I wish the review got a little more in depth with the AF testing, but I am pleased with it overall.

DarthVader
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 14:43
IMHO review is not needed....after several days of testing I knew Canon made a home run with 7D.

versedmb
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 14:43
ok, i admit it. even after reading Ronald's test, i am still quite tempted to replace my 5DmkII for the 7D simply because i think that the 7D is a much more versatile camera even though it is 1 .6 crop. maybe i should go ahead and do that and just add a 5D in case i ever need the FF but honestly, i think that with the right lenses (17-55 2.8 IS and 85 1.2L) the 7D can do a great job even compared to the FF.

Wait, your using the overall utility of a camera to make a judgement about it? How non-forum minded of you. Don't you know that you should always judge a camera solely based upon 100% crops!!? ;)

Seriously though, the 7D is looking like a fantastic camera.


I am really astounded at the 50d vs 7d comparison.

there is virtually NO appreciable difference in ISO quality until about 6400, where the 7d easily wins, and only a slight difference at 3200. However, up until then, the difference is not even noticeable.

Agreed; that really shocked me as well. Keep in mind though that ISO performance in real world "crappy" lighting often shows larger differences in my experience.

tkbslc
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 14:46
I think the review made me realize the 50D is still pretty darn good. It is about half the price now and holds up pretty well in all the tests to the D300s and 7D.

I can't remember a time where dpreview admitted there really were no Cons on a camera, though. Pretty glowing review right there regardless of the final score.

blonde
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 14:50
Wait, your using the overall utility of a camera to make a judgement about it? How non-forum minded of you. Don't you know that you should always judge a camera solely based upon 100% crops!!? ;)

Seriously though, the 7D is looking like a fantastic camera.




Agreed; that really shocked me as well. Keep in mind though that ISO performance in real world "crappy" lighting often shows larger differences in my experience.

heheh, sorry :) but seriously, i think that once you get over that 1.6 hang up, it is VERY hard to disagree that the 7D is the most versatile camera out there at the moment and at a great price. for me the biggest selling points are:

1) reach!!! 1.6 with 18MP means that for wildlife and birding, nothing can touch this camera.
2) AF- so far every single person i talked to including birders that i trust have said that the AF is spot on and is super quick.
3) features- video, level, build in flash, wireless flash control are all things that i want in a camera.
4) ability to use EF-S lenses which is HUGE!!! between the 10-22 and the 17-55 2.8, the EF-S lenses means that i can get similar speed and FL to what i am using right now (17-40L and 24-105L) all in a smaller and lighter kit.
5) 8FPS which for me is PERFECT for BIF and other action photography.

again, the only thing that stops me right now is my stupid hangup on FF and the fear that i will miss that "magic" look that a FF gets. i guess that the only way to get over that one is by finding a 7D and testing it or simply continue to search the net for more portraits that are done with the camera.

versedmb
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 14:56
heheh, sorry :) but seriously, i think that once you get over that 1.6 hang up, it is VERY hard to disagree that the 7D is the most versatile camera out there at the moment and at a great price. for me the biggest selling points are:

1) reach!!! 1.6 with 18MP means that for wildlife and birding, nothing can touch this camera.
2) AF- so far every single person i talked to including birders that i trust have said that the AF is spot on and is super quick.
3) features- video, level, build in flash, wireless flash control are all things that i want in a camera.
4) ability to use EF-S lenses which is HUGE!!! between the 10-22 and the 17-55 2.8, the EF-S lenses means that i can get similar speed and FL to what i am using right now (17-40L and 24-105L) all in a smaller and lighter kit.
5) 8FPS which for me is PERFECT for BIF and other action photography....


Couldn't agree more.


...again, the only thing that stops me right now is my stupid hangup on FF and the fear that i will miss that "magic" look that a FF gets. i guess that the only way to get over that one is by finding a 7D and testing it or simply continue to search the net for more portraits that are done with the camera.

Difficult one for me as well. I've got a 5D and I love the subject isolation that FF allows. But man, the 7D sure looks tempting.

Can't you see that Canon deliberately makes this a difficult decision. They want you to come the the conclusion that you need both!! They want you to buy 2 cameras instead of one! Canon believes in a "2 camera" solution. ;)

I'm still waitng for the 3D though. :D

blonde
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 14:59
Couldn't agree more.




Difficult one for me as well. I've got a 5D and I love the subject isolation that FF allows. But man, the 7D sure looks tempting.

Can't you see that Canon deliberately makes this a difficult decision. They want you to come the the conclusion that you need both!! They want you to buy 2 cameras instead of one! Canon believes in a "2 camera" solution. ;)

I'm still waitng for the 3D though. :D

well this is exactly why i got pissed at canon in the first place. they KNOW that we have to either compromise or just buy both cameras. this is exactly why the Nikon D700 became so popular because it showed that you can have both in one body.

i guess i will try to rent a 7D for the weekend and see. if i don't like it, i will be right back where i started and that is with you in line waiting for the 3D :)

Mr. Clean
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:16
It's hard to deny that FF/5D/5DII magic :D
The 5DII/7D would be a good combo too but I don't see going from a Mark III to a 7D.
I figure I'll always have two cameras and at least one will be full frame.

CyberDyneSystems
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:25
...




.... Keep in mind though that ISO performance in real world "crappy" lighting often shows larger differences in my experience.

I have always found DPReview's ISO test to tell only a small part of the true story...
I don;t know why but so often this one aspect of the reviews seem to contradict my own experiences and use.. very often in fact.

Ferrari_Alex
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:28
In simple words Canon is asking users to purchase 7D and 5D MKII in order to get what D700 is offering, more or less....

CyberDyneSystems
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:29
....

...again, the only thing that stops me right now is my stupid hangup on FF and the fear that i will miss that "magic" look that a FF gets. i guess that the only way to get over that one is by finding a 7D and testing it or simply continue to search the net for more portraits that are done with the camera.

One of the few shooters to post on this with what I would consider realistic views on facing their FF attachment...
Refreshing! :)

blonde
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:29
In simple words Canon is asking users to purchase 7D and 5D MKII in order to get what D700 is offering, more or less....

except for the resolution and video, yes pretty much :(

tkbslc
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:29
In simple words Canon is asking users to purchase 7D and 5D MKII in order to get what D700 is offering, more or less....

I thought they were just asking users to buy a 7D instead of a D300s. Maybe I am wrong, though.

Tom W
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:30
heheh, sorry :) but seriously, i think that once you get over that 1.6 hang up, it is VERY hard to disagree that the 7D is the most versatile camera out there at the moment and at a great price. for me the biggest selling points are:

1) reach!!! 1.6 with 18MP means that for wildlife and birding, nothing can touch this camera.
2) AF- so far every single person i talked to including birders that i trust have said that the AF is spot on and is super quick.
3) features- video, level, build in flash, wireless flash control are all things that i want in a camera.
4) ability to use EF-S lenses which is HUGE!!! between the 10-22 and the 17-55 2.8, the EF-S lenses means that i can get similar speed and FL to what i am using right now (17-40L and 24-105L) all in a smaller and lighter kit.
5) 8FPS which for me is PERFECT for BIF and other action photography.

again, the only thing that stops me right now is my stupid hangup on FF and the fear that i will miss that "magic" look that a FF gets. i guess that the only way to get over that one is by finding a 7D and testing it or simply continue to search the net for more portraits that are done with the camera.

Read Rolandlim's review - he compares the 7D to the 5D2. There's a lot to be said of the shallow depth of field and detail retention (especially at high-ISO settings) afforded by the 5D2, but the 7D has the speed and pixel density that is an advantage for many as well. Everything you enumerate about the 7D is true - it is a winner.

Your idea of renting one is a good one.

blonde
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:30
One of the few shooters to post on this with what I would consider realistic views on facing their FF attachment...
Refreshing! :)

hehe :)

we should just rent a 7D and go shooting one day dude. We should go to the same great spot where we first broke the 1DmkIII AF just to make it fair :)

CyberDyneSystems
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:32
hehe :)

we should just rent a 7D and go shooting one day dude. We should go to the same great spot where we first broke the 1DmkIII AF just to make it fair :)

Was that at Allen's Pond?
Wrong time of Year unfortunately.. if we can wait till Spring ;)

I might be going to the Galapagos this January..
I have no money for the trip itself,. and there for ZERO $$ for the 7D,. but I can't help but dream about it's portability and Video for that trip!!!!

gjl711
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:33
In simple words Canon is asking users to purchase 7D and 5D MKII in order to get what D700 is offering, more or less....No

I thought they were just asking users to buy a 7D instead of a D300s. Maybe I am wrong, though.That's the way I see it as well. The 7D is competing with the 300s and competing quite well. The 5DII is competing with the 700. Why compare the D700 to the 7D?

blonde
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:34
Read Rolandlim's review - he compares the 7D to the 5D2. There's a lot to be said of the shallow depth of field and detail retention (especially at high-ISO settings) afforded by the 5D2, but the 7D has the speed and pixel density that is an advantage for many as well. Everything you enumerate about the 7D is true - it is a winner.

Your idea of renting one is a good one.

i read Ronald's review and it did shad some light (altough did not really surprise me). however, we all know that judging from internet reviews is never as good as shooting with the real deal. for me, what will break or make this deal is my own shooting. if i shoot with the 7D for a few days i should be able to see if i can leave without FF or not. 100% crops means nothing to me to be honest because again, the difference might seem huge between the 2 bodies but if you look at the whole picture (pun intended) the difference might be negligible (just like noise and printing).

blonde
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:35
No

That's the way I see it as well. The 7D is competing with the 300s and competing quite well. The 5DII is competing with the 700. Why compare the D700 to the 7D?

we are not comparing the 7D to the D700. what we are saying is that people have been asking for a fast FF camera without built in grip and with good AF for action. with Canon you HAVE to buy 2 cameras to get that where the D700 does fill that role quite well.

tkbslc
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:35
No

That's the way I see it as well. The 7D is competing with the 300s and competing quite well. The 5DII is competing with the 700. Why compare the D700 to the 7D?

I don't even think the 5Dmk2 is directly competing with the D700 honestly. It's like a luxury car vs a sports car in the same price bracket.

blonde
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:37
Was that at Allen's Pond?
Wrong time of Year unfortunately.. if we can wait till Spring ;)

I might be going to the Galapagos this January..
I have no money for the trip itself,. and there for ZERO $$ for the 7D,. but I can't help but dream about it's portability and Video for that trip!!!!

yep, Allen's Pond it was :)

btw, if you do end up going and want video for that trip, just come and take my 5DmkII. the FF, IQ and video will be great for such a once in a lifetime trip!

Lani Kai
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 15:38
That was remarkably positive. I don't think I've ever seen such a short "Cons" list.

toxic
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 16:25
Question here: DR of the 7D is 8.3 stops*, and the reviewers were able to extract a maximum of 9.8 stops. If highlight recovery is 1 stop, that leaves half a stop for shadow recovery. Darkest shadows are at -5.5 EV, brightest highlights at 4.3 EV.

For comparison, they were able to extract 11.1 stops from the 5DII, with a baseline of 8.4 stops, with about 1.2 stops of highlights (they say 1.5, but I think that's optimistic in real-world conditions), which leaves 1.5 stops for shadows. This comes out as a minimum of -6EV and max of 5.1...let's momentarily forget about the shadow banding.

For the 50D, it's -6.3 to 5.3EV, for a total of 11.6 and baseline of 8.3, an extra 1.5 stops in the shadows and 1.8 in the highlights (all DPR's numbers).

So has anyone had any issues with shadow recovery on the 7D? I find it curious that it's so much less than other cameras.

*baseline is the DR in a standard Jpg, this will vary with RAW converter and settings

versedmb
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 16:38
well this is exactly why i got pissed at canon in the first place. they KNOW that we have to either compromise or just buy both cameras. this is exactly why the Nikon D700 became so popular because it showed that you can have both in one body.

i guess i will try to rent a 7D for the weekend and see. if i don't like it, i will be right back where i started and that is with you in line waiting for the 3D :)

Agreed, once again.

versedmb
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 16:44
we are not comparing the 7D to the D700. what we are saying is that people have been asking for a fast FF camera without built in grip and with good AF for action. with Canon you HAVE to buy 2 cameras to get that where the D700 does fill that role quite well.

Exactly.

Quite honestly, if Nikon offered a 17-40 f/4, 24-105 f/4 IS and a 70-200 f/4 I would be shooting with a D700.

I like my Canon gear, but Canon "handicapped" the 5DII to such a degree that I remain quite dissapointed.

firomero
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 17:04
In simple words Canon is asking users to purchase 7D and 5D MKII in order to get what D700 is offering, more or less....


the simple fact that some want to compare the 7d to a much more expensive nikon ff talks very sweet about the 7d:p

tkbslc
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 17:06
Exactly.

Quite honestly, if Nikon offered a 17-40 f/4, 24-105 f/4 IS and a 70-200 f/4 I would be shooting with a D700.

I like my Canon gear, but Canon "handicapped" the 5DII to such a degree that I remain quite dissapointed.

For your purposes maybe. Some in the Nikon camp are probably horked that they have to spend $8000 to get a FF camera with decent resolution and they still don't get 1080p. Handicapped is relative to a persons wants and needs. Not everyone shoots sports.

versedmb
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 17:20
For your purposes maybe. Some in the Nikon camp are probably horked that they have to spend $8000 to get a FF camera with decent resolution and they still don't get 1080p. Handicapped is relative to a persons wants and needs. Not everyone shoots sports.

No, your right, its all a matter of perspective.

And I rarely shoot sports, I shoot mainly landscape and nature. But I also shoot kayaking, my nieces running around, etc, etc. I shoot all kinds of things actually.

There is just no reason in Hell why my 40D should feel more responsive than the 5DII. Canon didn't even improve the VF blackout time. I mean, come on, that's just silly.

JBF
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 17:25
ok, i admit it. even after reading Ronald's test, i am still quite tempted to replace my 5DmkII for the 7D simply because i think that the 7D is a much more versatile camera even though it is 1 .6 crop. maybe i should go ahead and do that and just add a 5D in case i ever need the FF but honestly, i think that with the right lenses (17-55 2.8 IS and 85 1.2L) the 7D can do a great job even compared to the FF.

Crap Blondie, My thoughts exactly! Now you've really put it in my head. Cuz I ain't gonna sell the 5D Mark II and the Mark III and get a Mark IV. I think we've already been that route!!

mshill
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 18:07
Glowing review for the 7D but having just purchased a 50D for half the price of a 7D (and seeing how well it performs not only aginst the 7D but the D300 as well) the 50D may be the price performance win in this review. Granted, the 7D HD Video, improved AF, additional 3MP, and High ISO noise handling make the 7D a real competitor at it's price point. Looking forward to someday upgrading to it, but I should get a few years if not more out of the 50D.

tkbslc
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 18:13
Glowing review for the 7D but having just purchased a 50D for half the price of a 7D (and seeing how well it performs not only aginst the 7D but the D300 as well) the 50D may be the price performance win in this review. Granted, the 7D HD Video, improved AF, additional 3MP, and High ISO noise handling make the 7D a real competitor at it's price point. Looking forward to someday upgrading to it, but I should get a few years if not more out of the 50D.

Those were my thoughts, too. Anyone bashing the 50D for noise ought to look at the Pentax K7 in that review! Thats what I call ugly.

Marloon
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 18:20
Those were my thoughts, too. Anyone bashing the 50D for noise ought to look at the Pentax K7 in that review! Thats what I call ugly.

LOOK AT THAT K7! LOL man that was REALLY ugly LOL

Collin85
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 21:14
I think I'm gonna pick up both a 7D and 5D II over Christmas. I'll keep the 50D as a backup.

amfoto1
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 21:24
Just as a side note... I know they do some RAW testing and convert the files with ACR, but Adobe hasn't even released the final version of ACR to support the 7D. Couldn't it be seen as premature to compare files using beta software?


I've always felt this was a big problem with DPreviews camera reviews. There is room for all kinds of software/hardware issues doing that. They insist on using ACR, which isn't always the best software to use even after it's been updated to best accomodate a new camera model.

Some other reviewers only use the camera manufacturer's supplied software, which should give the most optimal performance at the time.

It's important to me, how well a camera does with RAW files. A great deal more so than JPEG conversions done in-camera. So I tend not to put too much weight on this portion of DPreview's reviews.

amfoto1
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 21:33
we are not comparing the 7D to the D700. what we are saying is that people have been asking for a fast FF camera without built in grip and with good AF for action. with Canon you HAVE to buy 2 cameras to get that where the D700 does fill that role quite well.

Yeah, actually I don't think either the 7D or the 5D2 compete directly with the D700. It's a different animal. So even buying both of the Canon's won't give you the same as the D700, and vice versa.

Canon will have to field another camera if they choose to go head to head with the D700. Right now the 1D MkIV is the closest to head to head against both the D700 and the D3.

The 7D competes against the D300s. The 5D2 doesn't have a direct competitor in the Nikon line (look to Sony instead, but not for lens selection unfortunately).

timnosenzo
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 21:44
again, the only thing that stops me right now is my stupid hangup on FF and the fear that i will miss that "magic" look that a FF gets. i guess that the only way to get over that one is by finding a 7D and testing it or simply continue to search the net for more portraits that are done with the camera.

I dunno, I think once you get over the "oooooohhhhhhh" factor of the 7D, you realize the IQ still can't match a FF camera. I haven't used my 7D much since I got it, mostly because the lack of RAW support really f's up my workflow, but when I sit down and edit the files, I don't see much difference between what I used to see with my 50D or 40D.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a sweet camera at the price, but I don't see it becoming my main camera.

Ferrari_Alex
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 22:01
the simple fact that some want to compare the 7d to a much more expensive nikon ff talks very sweet about the 7d:p

I am not at all comparing crop to FF:-) I am sure that 7D is a very capable camera and I am happy that canon has it in the line up. What I am saying is that you either have FF with primitive AF and 3.9 FPS or crop with decent AF and 8 FPS, whereas Nikon has in all in one body - D700.

jwcdds
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 22:18
I don't get it. If the D700 is that appetizing (and I'm sure it is for many), then get it. You'll be happier, Nikon will be happier, and when Canon's corporate spy gets a hold of Nikon's report saying sales of D700 jumped 50-100% (due to the switch), they will finally get the message.

But by that time, you'll be already happy shooting the D700 and you couldn't care what Canon does. That's how I see it. :D

It's a given that both manufacturers produce good photographic "tools." You just have to find the best tool for your needs. Get away from the brand loyalty, and go with what works.

DarthVader
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 22:21
I think he needs a D700 to start winning awards.

I don't get it. If the D700 is that appetizing (and I'm sure it is for many), then get it. You'll be happier, Nikon will be happier, and when Canon's corporate spy gets a hold of Nikon's report saying sales of D700 jumped 50-100% (due to the switch), they will finally get the message.

But by that time, you'll be already happy shooting the D700 and you couldn't care what Canon does. That's how I see it. :D

It's a given that both manufacturers produce good photographic "tools." You just have to find the best tool for your needs. Get away from the brand loyalty, and go with what works.

Ferrari_Alex
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 22:26
Guys, I am almost 100% sure that you would be superbly happy if Canon could give a 5D MKII with just 16 MP, but 6 fps and superb AF.
So....you should understand what I am saying. Going to Nikon is not what I want to do because of the body as I am happy with the lens I have.
It would be just nice to have a more versatile FF in 5D.

timnosenzo
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 22:32
Is there any good reason to rehash the 5D MKII v. D700 debate in a 7D thread?

DarthVader
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 22:38
That is his hobby...you can check his postings in dpreview or any other Canon forums...like Canon will listen to him :).

Is there any good reason to rehash the 5D MKII v. D700 debate in a 7D thread?

New Hobby
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 22:40
Is there any good reason to rehash the 5D MKII v. D700 debate in a 7D thread?

I think film is better then all of those. ;)

Bob_A
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 22:56
I am not at all comparing crop to FF:-) I am sure that 7D is a very capable camera and I am happy that canon has it in the line up. What I am saying is that you either have FF with primitive AF and 3.9 FPS or crop with decent AF and 8 FPS, whereas Nikon has in all in one body - D700.

I'm probably not getting what you're saying and for that I apologise. The D700 is a fantastic camera and I wouldn't trade it for anything currently available, but it certainly doesn't have the advantages that come with a crop body. Lots that own a D700 also have a D300(s) or a D90 in order to get the best of both worlds.

To me the 7D really gives some pretty stiff competition to the Nikon D300s, but doesn't compete against the D700 at all. I was actually really surprised with this move by Canon as the two companies seemed to only compete head to head with entry level and pro cameras. Now I wonder if they have something up their sleeve to go after the D700 market next!

The 7D sure looks like a fantastic camera.

dithiolium
6th of November 2009 (Fri), 23:42
Oh great, now the 7D will be back ordered even more... heh.

punkerz123
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 00:13
what a great camera... One day...... one day....... when it drops in mega price :D

gte357s
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 02:49
1 month ago, I made up my mind to cancel my 7D order and bought a 5D MK I. After reading the review, I want a 7D. After using the MK I, besides the sensor, I can really see the great leap in technology, including the AF and noise control at high ISO. .. the 7D has everything you can have today, I am so tempted to get the 7D now.

jorkata
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 03:16
I dunno, I think once you get over the "oooooohhhhhhh" factor of the 7D, you realize the IQ still can't match a FF camera.

+1.

Maybe the 7D image quality would have been better with less megapixels. Don't know.

One thing is certain, though: those 18mp on the 7D are not the same as on the 5DII.

Check out Roland Lim's 7D vs 5DII comparison at the bottom of his review (http://rolandlim.wordpress.com/2009/11/06/canon-eos-7d-review/).

coldcase
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 03:57
+1.

Maybe the 7D image quality would have been better with less megapixels. Don't know.

One thing is certain, though: those 18mp on the 7D are not the same as on the 5DII.

Check out Roland Lim's 7D vs 5DII comparison at the bottom of his review (http://rolandlim.wordpress.com/2009/11/06/canon-eos-7d-review/).

Different tools..:rolleyes:

If I was shooting landscapes or portraits most of the time I'd get a 5DII. I don't. And since wildlife, most of the time, doesn't stand still I like the 7D.

I don't understand why people compare the 7D with a 5DII. One is not better than the other. They are different and very good depending on what you shoot.

I Like the image quality fine on my 7D and Roland or no Roland, that's fine with me.

hollis_f
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 04:03
there is virtually NO appreciable difference in ISO quality until about 6400, where the 7d easily wins, and only a slight difference at 3200. However, up until then, the difference is not even noticeable.

So we're going to be seeing a lot of guff about how the 40D is better at high ISO that the 7D now? After all, it's CIK (Common Internet Knowledge - a phrase meaning an untruth made true by repeated repetition on the Net) that the 40D is less noisy than the 50D :cool:

gte357s
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 05:01
+1.

Maybe the 7D image quality would have been better with less megapixels. Don't know.

One thing is certain, though: those 18mp on the 7D are not the same as on the 5DII.

Check out Roland Lim's 7D vs 5DII comparison at the bottom of his review (http://rolandlim.wordpress.com/2009/11/06/canon-eos-7d-review/).

That is a very interesting review. I am very surprise to see the 5D MK II is that much sharper. This is also one thing I notice on my 5D MK I. Somehow, some of the picture especially those taking still objects looks more 3D but I cannot explain as I am just a beginner. Maybe it is due to the higher local contrast as outlined. This makes me feel better, hoping my 5D MK I has similar result when compared to 7D, and I take portraits and landscape 95% of time.

Collin85
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 05:03
That is a very interesting review. I am very surprise to see the 5D MK II is that much sharper. This is also one thing I notice on my 5D MK I. Somehow, some of the picture especially those taking still objects looks more 3D but I cannot explain as I am just a beginner. Maybe it is due to the higher local contrast as outlined. This makes me feel better, hoping my 5D MK I has similar result when compared to 7D, and I take portraits and landscape 95% of time.

I have a 5D but not a 7D, but the popular concensus appears to be that the 5D captures more detail (perhaps giving you that 3D look you desire), but the 7D has equal, if not slightly better high-ISO noise performance.

Tom H. Photography
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 05:11
Soooo tempting, must resist urge to get a 7D... AAaaaaaaaaaaarrrrgggggghhhhhhhhhh....



No seriously, it looks great. I will make my choices even harder a few years from now when looking to replace the 500D.

dithiolium
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 05:34
1 month ago, I made up my mind to cancel my 7D order and bought a 5D MK I. After reading the review, I want a 7D. After using the MK I, besides the sensor, I can really see the great leap in technology, including the AF and noise control at high ISO. .. the 7D has everything you can have today, I am so tempted to get the 7D now.

I too cancelled my 7D, and I was on the first batch list. Its amazingly tempting after reading the review. Ah the power of the internet.;)
However there is no need to replace my 40D now, and and APS-C won't solve my high ISO lust.

Collin85
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 05:53
Not sure why some of you guys are looking at the 7D in such a shining way after the DPR review. Pretty much every other 'big' review of the 7D has been just as positive anyway! :)

hollis_f
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 05:55
Not sure why some of you guys are looking at the 7D in such a shining way after the DPR review. Pretty much every other 'big' review of the 7D has been just as positive anyway! :)

Yes, but for a lot of people DPR is the 'biggerest'.

Collin85
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 06:01
Yes, but for a lot of people DPR is the 'biggerest'.

DPR is the review I personally look forward to the most for any big review. But my point was, there has been a number of big positive reviews on the 7D. It was getting irrefutably clear this camera was a winner and that by that stage, one shouldn't rationally expect a different concensus from DPR, whenever that review would arise. In other words, if you've been following the other reviews, you wouldn't have been surprised by DPR's verdict in the least.

oRGie
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 06:43
I sold my 40D and some sigma lenses when I saw the release info on the 7D, but not just to get a 7D, I have been ready to get better glass for a while now and this felt like the time to start my upgrade path. I was tempted to get a 5dII and figured I would go one way or the other as the reviews and real world photos became available to help me decide. I, like many am not a pro, so I will for now just have 1 body, so after much back and forth thinking I finally decided on the 7D because it does a better job overall to match what I will take photos off, or to put it better, the 7D covers what the 5dII can do better than the 5DII covers what the 7D can do, overall.

So I think the dpreview is great news as I ordered the 7D on Monday and I feel it backs up my decision, I am happy that they compared it to the 5D and showed they are different tools for different jobs.

Rolands review was also very nice work and great to see the comparison to 50 and 5D.

Camera and 15-85 due in my hands next friday, its going to be a long week :cool:

Mr. Clean
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 08:06
I dunno, I think once you get over the "oooooohhhhhhh" factor of the 7D, you realize the IQ still can't match a FF camera. I haven't used my 7D much since I got it, mostly because the lack of RAW support really f's up my workflow, but when I sit down and edit the files, I don't see much difference between what I used to see with my 50D or 40D.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a sweet camera at the price, but I don't see it becoming my main camera.

That's what makes me want to get a D3. FF quality with FPS to boot!

gcogger
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 11:07
I am really astounded at the 50d vs 7d comparison.

there is virtually NO appreciable difference in ISO quality until about 6400, where the 7d easily wins, and only a slight difference at 3200. However, up until then, the difference is not even noticeable.

I'm afraid I don't agree. The only reason the 50D stands comparison with the 7D in the review is that its images have been softened by noise reduction. At equal levels of sharpness/contrast (the only fair way to compare noise levels IMHO) the 7D is, to my eye, easily better despite the small increase in resolution.

I've always felt this was a big problem with DPreviews camera reviews. There is room for all kinds of software/hardware issues doing that. They insist on using ACR, which isn't always the best software to use even after it's been updated to best accomodate a new camera model.

Some other reviewers only use the camera manufacturer's supplied software, which should give the most optimal performance at the time.

It's important to me, how well a camera does with RAW files. A great deal more so than JPEG conversions done in-camera. So I tend not to put too much weight on this portion of DPreview's reviews.

I actually applaud dpreview's use of 3rd party RAW converters for reasons which are demonstrated in the review. The images converted by DPP, even with noise reduction 'off', have clearly had noise reduction applied to them. Different converters also apply different tone curves and sharpening. This makes good comparisons between cameras impossible if they use different RAW converters (e.g. if each camera uses the manufacturer's software). You end up comparing the software, not the cameras.

tigerotor77w
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 17:55
Is it likely that an SD card slot will ever appear in anything but the Rebels? I know it's a moot point for most people here, but if Nikon can put in dual slots (one SD, one CF), shouldn't Canon be able to do the same?

hollis_f
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 18:01
Is it likely that an SD card slot will ever appear in anything but the Rebels? I know it's a moot point for most people here, but if Nikon can put in dual slots (one SD, one CF), shouldn't Canon be able to do the same?

They do - check out the 1D.

tigerotor77w
7th of November 2009 (Sat), 19:26
They do - check out the 1D.

Good point... what about the others? Other generations of 5Ds or 7Ds? Or the "60D"?

benesotor
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 10:42
CameraLabs gave a good review too

Burnzz
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 11:16
Is it likely that an SD card slot will ever appear in anything but the Rebels? I know it's a moot point for most people here, but if Nikon can put in dual slots (one SD, one CF), shouldn't Canon be able to do the same?

i had to buy a CF card again. gave the wife all my SDs . . .:mad:

apersson850
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 11:18
The 7D would have been even better with one CF + one SD slot.
They you could for example shoot RAW on the CF and small jpeg on the SD. The SD you could then insert in a small netbook (mine has SD slot, but not for any other card) already out there, on site, and then have the RAW files to process when you come home.

Or if you want to go with jpeg alone, you could store the large jpeg on the CF and a small one on the SD (assuming camera allows it), then still easily see the small jpeg directly on the netbook. No need for any direct connection and the netbook will handle small files quicker. They easily outresolve the screen anyway.

jackies35
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 13:47
The 7D haters aren't going to like this review.

hahahaha... i doubt it! Nikons D3 and D300 was and still is a great camera!

jackies35
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 13:51
I couldn't care less what the "haters" think to be honest :)

Canon have delivered the camera i've been hoping to see for quite a while, a 1.6x Crop with accurate and customisable AutoFocus. That camera is the 7D and it works.

there isn't any haters aound! everyone who likes this camera will get it!
Everyone is just waiting for the price to drop! hahahahhaah

Plus, Christmas is just arond the corner.... Everyone will have it and the market will be flooded all over again... Then, the stocks will go up and then..new jobs.. hhahahhahha

KanosWRX
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 14:18
I too wonder when CF will go away.. It seems like SD is just the better way to go due to smaller size. but similar space. I don't see any downsides other then a bunch of people have a lot of CF cards ;)

Collin85
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 14:22
I have nothing against the card being CF. I DO wish it had dual slot CF + SD - very useful for the togs' shooting for money. I've lost a card full of shots before (thankfully it wasn't for a job), and it was most frustrating.

bohdank
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 14:32
The 7D would have been even better with one CF + one SD slot.
They you could for example shoot RAW on the CF and small jpeg on the SD. The SD you could then insert in a small netbook (mine has SD slot, but not for any other card) already out there, on site, and then have the RAW files to process when you come home.

Or if you want to go with jpeg alone, you could store the large jpeg on the CF and a small one on the SD (assuming camera allows it), then still easily see the small jpeg directly on the netbook. No need for any direct connection and the netbook will handle small files quicker. They easily outresolve the screen anyway.

No need. I just got back from 2 weeks of vacation and only shot RAW. My netbook had no isues transferring/storing/viewing 5DII images.

FuturamaJSP
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 14:46
Exactly.

Quite honestly, if Nikon offered a 17-40 f/4, 24-105 f/4 IS and a 70-200 f/4 I would be shooting with a D700.

I like my Canon gear, but Canon "handicapped" the 5DII to such a degree that I remain quite dissapointed.

or even better if Nikon offered a D700 with EF mount I would not hesitate one minute to buy that camera :D

elader
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 14:54
Guys, I am almost 100% sure that you would be superbly happy if Canon could give a 5D MKII with just 16 MP, but 6 fps and superb AF.
So....you should understand what I am saying. Going to Nikon is not what I want to do because of the body as I am happy with the lens I have.
It would be just nice to have a more versatile FF in 5D.


actually I would have taken a 5DmkII with 12.7mpixels, the 7Ds focusing, less VF blackout, and a one stop improvement on the noise over the 5D, and I would have paid $2700 for it.

So I bought a 1dsMKII instead.

apersson850
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 14:59
My netbook had no isues transferring/storing/viewing 5DII images.Perhaps your's is faster than the little one I have, because that one takes some time to do things and doesn't have too much hard drive space either.

hollis_f
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 18:12
I too wonder when CF will go away.. It seems like SD is just the better way to go due to smaller size. but similar space. I don't see any downsides other then a bunch of people have a lot of CF cards ;)

And capacity. Oh, and speed. Oh, and compatability. But apart from those - no there is no advantage to CF.

beeng
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 18:19
compatability.
I'm not quite sure how CF can be more compatible than SD cards... if anything SD cards are more compatible because most computers come with SD card readers now. :P

hollis_f
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 18:22
I'm not quite sure how CF can be more compatible than SD cards... if anything SD cards are more compatible because most computers come with SD card readers now. :P

SD - SDHC????

Tom W
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 18:23
I too wonder when CF will go away.. It seems like SD is just the better way to go due to smaller size. but similar space. I don't see any downsides other then a bunch of people have a lot of CF cards ;)

I can change a CF card with gloves on. I can change it bare-handed without looking at it. Not so easy with an SD card - too tiny to feel and handle. I'll stick with the CF cards, thank you.

beeng
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 18:26
SD - SDHC????
SDHC readers are backwards compatible with SD... so yes?

hollis_f
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 18:59
SDHC readers are backwards compatible with SD... so yes?

To some extent, yes. CF are backwards, forward and probably sideways compatible.

I fell foul of SD and SDHC comaptability with my TomTom sat-nav. When they claimed SDHC compatability - but only up to 4GB.

beeng
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 19:02
To some extent, yes. CF are backwards, forward and probably sideways compatible.

I fell foul of SD and SDHC comaptability with my TomTom sat-nav. When they claimed SDHC compatability - but only up to 4GB.
They most likely required SDHC for the added throughput compared to SD cards. Most modern devices stipulate which generation of SDHC card they require.

CyberDyneSystems
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 19:02
And it's always a shock to pop an SDHC card into my laptops built in reader and find it can't read it..

DOH! The laptops reader can;t read the SDHC card I use in the cameras! :)

beeng
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 19:03
And it's always a shock to pop an SDHC card into my laptops built in reader and find it can't read it..

DOH! The laptops reader can;t read the SDHC card I use in the cameras! :)
Sounds like it's an old SD card reader and doesn't support SDHC :P

snoop99
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 19:30
Upgraded to 7D from 40D and I am happy with camera and picture quality. I find the dpreview close to my personal expierence with camera.

I do not miss my 40D and love the fact that I can crop half of an image and still print out an 8 by 10 picture.:D

mikekelley
10th of November 2009 (Tue), 21:23
I'm afraid I don't agree. The only reason the 50D stands comparison with the 7D in the review is that its images have been softened by noise reduction. At equal levels of sharpness/contrast (the only fair way to compare noise levels IMHO) the 7D is, to my eye, easily better despite the small increase in resolution.





There was no noise-reduction done in the ISO test that I linked. I am still impressed that they managed to keep the noise under control at 18mp, but there is realistically no difference between the photos in the test I linked until ISO 3200.

gcogger
11th of November 2009 (Wed), 02:58
There was no noise-reduction done in the ISO test that I linked. I am still impressed that they managed to keep the noise under control at 18mp, but there is realistically no difference between the photos in the test I linked until ISO 3200.

It's clear from various reviews and test samples that DPP (or the in-camera processing) applies some noise reduction to 50D files even when NR is set to 'off'. Take a look at the dpreview samples, for example - the out of camera JPEGs and the DPP processed RAWs are all clearly softened by noise reduction at high ISOs compared to both the lower ISO shots and to the same RAWs processed by ACR.

mikekelley
11th of November 2009 (Wed), 03:11
And what is to say that the 7d isnt?

gcogger
11th of November 2009 (Wed), 03:54
And what is to say that the 7d isnt?

Look at the sample images on dpreview :)

TeamSpeed
11th of November 2009 (Wed), 06:29
What I really enjoy is how some members will look at review after review until they find the one that seems to support their suppositions.

There have been a few 50D vs 7D comparisons made already with full-size OOC JPG shots available as well as crops that show a bigger difference between the 50D and 7D than Roland's. Not only that, more and more members that pick up the 7D also are able to realize the same differences and they post their excitement here. If you shoot both side by side in the same everyday conditions, you will see a larger difference than from what you see in Roland's review.

Anyways, this thread is not Roland's thread on his review, it is about DPReview's review, and they have been pretty hard on Canon over the last few reviews, so it was refreshing to see actually how much they seem to like the 7D.

freshcargo
11th of November 2009 (Wed), 10:30
What I really enjoy is how some members will look at review after review until they find the one that seems to support their suppositions.

There have been a few 50D vs 7D comparisons made already with full-size OOC JPG shots available as well as crops that show a bigger difference between the 50D and 7D than Roland's. Not only that, more and more members that pick up the 7D also are able to realize the same differences and they post their excitement here. If you shoot both side by side in the same everyday conditions, you will see a larger difference than from what you see in Roland's review.

Anyways, this thread is not Roland's thread on his review, it is about DPReview's review, and they have been pretty hard on Canon over the last few reviews, so it was refreshing to see actually how much they seem to like the 7D.

well said.