-= 7D2 owners unite! Discuss and post photos!

People,city,lowlight indoors. I understand your point. I was expecting to see anything different here but everything here is wildlife and at least half of them are not any better than ultra-zoom compacts.

Heres a bird I shot when I first got the markII

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pvik​fA

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/qH3P​Hp

Pondrader, your fox pictures are the best in this topic. I "liked" all of them.

AE-1 wrote in post #17417313
Pondrader, your fox pictures are the best in this topic. I "liked" all of them.

Thanks Im just trying to find something other than animals, I do think I need to expand my outlook

By the way, as I visited pages, I officially "liked" all the pictures I liked.

AE-1 wrote in post #17417342
By the way, as I visited pages, I officially "liked" all the pictures I liked.

Ya trying to get use to that facebook like addition

If I really like a picture I want the owner knows it, but if I make a post for each post then this topic will be hard to follow.
So. If I like it I like it.

I posted some non wildlife stuff a couple pages back. I was quite impressdd with the 7d2 shooting winter scenes. Anxious to try it on portraits.

Yes, #3 in your post caught my eyes. Good work.

kesterc wrote in post #17404773

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/qEAF​Ly Snowy Standoff

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/q1bf​Xh Snowy Dance

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/q1L8​NQ Burrowing Owl

When you look at these pictures, they absolutely shine in this topic like the fox pictures.
Then check the lens, it is 500mm F4. $10K lens. You expect it as soon as you see the pictures.
Like this example, when you see a stunning picture, 90% of the time either the lens is ultra good or body is 5DM3.
As I said, may be it is just the photographer who has enough experience to invest $10K for a lens.

OK, all 7D2 enthusiasts, help saving my $1300 with your posts.

AE-1 wrote in post #17417522
When you look at these pictures, they absolutely shine in this topic like the fox pictures.
Then check the lens, it is 500mm F4. $10K lens. You expect it as soon as you see the pictures.
Like this example, when you see a stunning picture, 90% of the time either the lens is ultra good or body is 5DM3.
As I said, may be it is just the photographer who has enough experience to invest $10K for a lens.

OK, all 7D2 enthusiasts, help saving my $1300 with your posts.

In these pics, the subjects and the moment make the pics shine.

Plus of course the excellent capture, which requires great gear and a skilled photographer.

So it comes down to the photographer who brought it all together.

It wasn't long before this that I was shooting with a 300 f/4. A $1000 lens. I'd like to think that in situations where I wasn't distance challenged, my pics were just as good. Also, it's a 500 f/4 Ver. I. I paid 5k for it, not 10.

AE-1 wrote in post #17417522
When you look at these pictures, they absolutely shine in this topic like the fox pictures.
Then check the lens, it is 500mm F4. $10K lens. You expect it as soon as you see the pictures.
Like this example, when you see a stunning picture, 90% of the time either the lens is ultra good or body is 5DM3.
As I said, may be it is just the photographer who has enough experience to invest $10K for a lens.

OK, all 7D2 enthusiasts, help saving my $1300 with your posts.

However, take a look at Jeff's (Pondrader) fox photographs here and on individual threads. Most of them were taken with the 7D2 and the 70-300L lens. Because of the 100-400ii's entrance into the market, you can pick up a used 70-300L for $1000. It's a bargain. I can't part with mine, even though I really like the 100-400ii. I hope my wife will begin to use it. I paid $1449 for it back in 2012 and that was a sales price.

Using the old 100-400

AE-1 wrote in post #17417522
When you look at these pictures, they absolutely shine in this topic like the fox pictures.
Then check the lens, it is 500mm F4. $10K lens. You expect it as soon as you see the pictures.
Like this example, when you see a stunning picture, 90% of the time either the lens is ultra good or body is 5DM3.
As I said, may be it is just the photographer who has enough experience to invest $10K for a lens.

OK, all 7D2 enthusiasts, help saving my $1300 with your posts.

I can't help you. I shoot birds and wildlife and my equipment is geared towards that. I don't know what your photography style is, but based on your comments, I say get the 5D3. Your mind seems made up based on your comments and observations above. If you get the 5D3 be sure to budget for the 1.4xIII or earlier models. Another thing, if one post a bird or wildlife image on the 5D3 thread, it gets passed by pretty quickly because the mindset is not nature, but human nature, landscapes, models etc. That's pretty much the same here, except nature and possible sports. To get a true look at the 5D3 and your photography genre, post up a thread requesting some images with the 5D3.

Have you considered the 1D4?

Also, I don't think you should compare the 7D2 with the 5D3; it's like comparing cops and robbers. If you want to do a fair comparison compare the 5D3 to the 1Dx or one of the Nikon FF offerings.

Here's something a little different with the 7D2 and a zooooom lens.

https://photography-on-the.net …8&&mg=161802&i=​i150452028