Canon 7d vs. 5D Mark II

Thanks guys, that's exactly the info I was looking for and hoping to hear. Although I would like a higher fps, I don't use mine much as it is. That will probably change in several years as my kids get older and into sports, but for now I seem to do ok capturing my 2 crazy dogs in SI mode with my 5d. I'm also quite content with 12mp, so I'm sure 21 will be more than efficient. Still torn on waiting for the Mark3 though. Thanks again.

themadman wrote in post #11498568
I can't wait for a camera to have processors that fight each other!

Technology is an amazing thing.

Thanks for the grammar check! I can spell, I just can't type.

anthony11 wrote in post #11498577
Would a square sensor count as medium format?

hmmm... is there a "set" size for MF? I thought is is just larger than 35mm film and smaller than 4x6? I could be completely wrong, I don't know much about MF.

themadman wrote in post #11498749
hmmm... is there a "set" size for MF? I thought is is just larger than 35mm film and smaller than 4x6? I could be completely wrong, I don't know much about MF.

Wikipedia says medium format is smaller than 4X5, so you're close enough.

If the 5D MIII does not have increased FPS (5 at least) and AF system (don't care about megapixels; 21 is enough) then I will be ditching my gear and going to Nikon. I am itching to go full frame and I love the D700's better AF and FPS system along with high ISO quality.

I like my 7D and prefer Canon lenses, but Nikon is really setting the bar in many areas save video. Canon needs to match Nikon or set the pace.

jase1125 wrote in post #11502195
If the 5D MIII does not have increased FPS (5 at least) and AF system (don't care about megapixels; 21 is enough) then I will be ditching my gear and going to Nikon. I am itching to go full frame and I love the D700's better AF and FPS system along with high ISO quality.

I like my 7D and prefer Canon lenses, but Nikon is really setting the bar in many areas save video. Canon needs to match Nikon or set the pace.

I agree, in general Canon has been playing catch up to Nikon these last few years and as a result many people have switched to Nikon. Good for Nikon, they are really setting the bar high and producing top notch cameras. This is why I say Canon really has to do something different or they are in serious danger of loosing their position as the #1 camera maker. Canon has been satisfied with incremental improvements while Nikon has has been leap frogging. Also SONY is very serious about becoming a major player in the DSLR industry and their shutter-less cameras are a real innovation, I don't rule them out.

robtaylor22 wrote in post #11502326
I agree, in general Canon has been playing catch up to Nikon these last few years and as a result many people have switched to Nikon. Good for Nikon, they are really setting the bar high and producing top notch cameras. This is why I say Canon really has to do something different or they are in serious danger of loosing their position as the #1 camera maker. Canon has been satisfied with incremental improvements while Nikon has has been leap frogging. Also SONY is very serious about becoming a major player in the DSLR industry and their shutter-less cameras are a real innovation, I don't rule them out.

If Nikon had made incremental improvements over the D100, they'd be out of business by now. Some years Canon products are better. Some years Nikon products are better. I really can't believe that either is so much better than the other that it would be worth a switch. The large investment is in lenses and both companies make nice lenses.

JoeW wrote in post #11502370
If Nikon had made incremental improvements over the D100, they'd be out of business by now. Some years Canon products are better. Some years Nikon products are better. I really can't believe that either is so much better than the other that it would be worth a switch. The large investment is in lenses and both companies make nice lenses.

Yes, people do switch, I know several who have, most, but not all, go from Canon to Nikon these days. They sell their Canon lenses and cameras and jump ship. I don't think I would because I don't feel the need to chase every camera review and buy the latest "Best Camera." It does happen and Canon can't be happy to see their market share slip year after year. I know several Pros that go back and forth, owning Canons for a while then selling it all and going Nikon then back again. Keep in mind that many pros lease equipment or use company owned equipment that gets rotated out on a regular basis, they don't own it like you or I would. That way they have the flexibility to change Cameras and gear on a regular basis.

To your second point, no, there really isn't that much difference. If I showed you a picture could you tell what camera it was taken with, without looking at the metadata? Probably not, I couldn't. Nearly all modern cameras produce excellent images, more than worthy of glossy magazines, never mind a web page. But none the less, people do switch over perceived differences. It's a totally different question as to whether or not it's smart or wise, but people definitely do.

jase1125 wrote in post #11502195
If the 5D3 does not have increased FPS (5 at least) and AF system (don't care about megapixels; 21 is enough) then I will be ditching my gear and going to Nikon. I am itching to go full frame and I love the D700's better AF and FPS system along with high ISO quality.

I like my 7D and prefer Canon lenses, but Nikon is really setting the bar in many areas save video. Canon needs to match Nikon or set the pace.

My thoughts exactly. I have a 7D with a 17 -55 IS. Got to barrow a 5D with a 17-40L this weekend and I must say I simply can't go back. FOR ME full frame and low light shooting was enough for me to switch. The D7000 is very nice, but I love Canons glass.

Now I'm in a bind. I dont want to buy a new 5D2, with the possibility of the 5D3 right around the corner. I'm sure CES 2K11 will have some sort of indication... I hope. Also with the 5D2 lasting two years and still one of the top cameras, I wont feel guilty on paying $2500-3000 for a 5D3.

I truely believe the 5D3 will be the camera to beat and should put Canon back on top. The 5D3 will be nothing more than a 7D+5D with additional goodies... I can't wait. Again this is all hear say for now, but a safe hear say!

Your post puzzled me until I realized that you mean 5D2 instead of D2 and 3D instead of D3. I doubt that Canon will call a body the 3D, though, as "3D" has obvious connotations.

anthony11 wrote in post #11541201
Your post puzzled me until I realized that you mean 5D2 instead of D2 and 3D instead of D3. I doubt that Canon will call a body the 3D, though, as "3D" has obvious connotations.

I think he was leaving the "5" off of both D2 and the fictional D3. Yes, a bit confusing since Nikon has a D3.

robtaylor22 wrote in post #11502696
To your second point, no, there really isn't that much difference. If I showed you a picture could you tell what camera it was taken with, without looking at the metadata? Probably not, I couldn't.

Totally off topic but I can in some cases

Only with the sun in the frame (usually when using UWA): Nikon produces much nicer sun stars.
I hate Canons 6 pointed stars (10-22mm), my analog Nikon FE2 and manual lenses produced beautiful 12 and 18 pointed stars.

Are you perchance related to KR? He's got the same sun star obsession.

anthony11 wrote in post #11541492
Are you perchance related to KR? He's got the same sun star obsession.

Ah, Ken Rockwell, the Chuck Norris of photography
I noticed that he prefers Nikon sun stars too

Obsession? Just an observation.
No, if it was an obsession I would have stayed with Nikon in stead of switching to Canon.

Heh. Seriously, your mention above is the first I've seen of sun stars outside of KR's site.