Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 19 Feb 2017 (Sunday) 02:26
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

As much as I love the 7D2 I am getting rid of it.

 
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
42,302 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2765
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 3 years ago by Wilt. (11 edits in all)
     
Feb 21, 2017 10:05 |  #46

View_Finder wrote in post #18279285 (external link)
Your scenario is virtually identical to my experience. Went all in with the Bronica ETRSi system (which I still own) around 1988/1989 and sold all my Canon equipment (A-1's & FD lenses). But bought some Contax rangefinders when the kids came along. I was a slow/late convert to digital.

I'm definitely moving through a lot more equipment at a faster pace than during those years.

The equipment these days are so much more versatile/flexible/pow​erful and in so many more hands that it boggles my mind sometimes. Manufacturers must have sold so few cameras back in the film era in comparison. The emphasis was on film technology back then. Since digital equipment is both camera and "film", it makes sense that we all tend to go through bodies faster. Whatever the cost of the digital bodies, I'm always reminded how much film would have cost me over the life of an analog body. Good times ahead! :)


I still have two ETRSi bodies and a bevy of lenses, all to serve professional uses of cameras. The Olympus gear did not go away, it was retained for non-photographic vacations, although I did take a number of vacations that had photographic primary purpose, on which the Bronica gear went with me. I never sold off the Olympus, because it represented a 'different tool, for different purposes'...you don't sell your screwdriver because you have a wrench! :-)
I still have my first film SLR...it was $160 when new, with normal lens. And finally, about 3 years ago, I just acquired the object of my teen camera lust while paging thru photography magazines, the Beseler Topcon Super D, which was a totally unattainable $420 back when gas was $0.30 per gallon and median annual US household income was $6500!

Back in the 1970s, putting 100K exposures thru a body was unheard of, even in the lifetime of a camera... 100K = nearly 2800 rolls of film, with processing and printing...I don't recall cost of color back then but guessing $10 total cost for all that would mean $28000 in film and processing...over 3 entire years of median family income, in 1968 ($8632). So in the 9 year period in which the Nikon F2 ruled the world before the F3 launch, it was unlikely that the body would be worn out by an average consumer, as it represented $2800 annual film+processing expense, still close to 20% of the median US family income in 1975 ($13800). Now folks do 25k shots in a single year.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
7,617 posts
Gallery: 131 photos
Likes: 1337
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Feb 21, 2017 10:57 |  #47

logiclee wrote in post #18280422 (external link)
Correct, if you need the faster burst speed and AF system of the 7D2 for sports and wildlife then the 80D will not do.

If 7fps and the 45point AF is sufficient for your shooting then the 80D offers more functionality (Especially for video) and a better sensor,

The extra money for the 7D2 will also get you dual card slot and better weather sealing.

You buy whatever suits your needs. For some the 80D will be the better camera even if it was the same price, but for others the 7d2.

Choice is good and I'm sure the 7D3 will end the argument.

Lee

Time will only tell. I'm assuming if the 7dmk3 is coming out it will be an attempt to match the Nikon D500. Not much faith in this happening because at this moment Canon cannot even match Nikon's D750 with the comparable Canon 6D line.

Also the 7dmk3 will have to improve the massive pig size 4k video.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 85 mkII L | | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji - gone
Sony 2 x A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Sigma 24-70 ART | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Sigma ART 35 f/1.2 | FE85 f/1.8 | Sigma ART 105 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS & V1S

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pknight
Goldmember
Avatar
2,677 posts
Gallery: 37 photos
Likes: 117
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Flyover Country
     
Feb 21, 2017 11:03 |  #48

AlanU wrote in post #18280488 (external link)
Time will only tell. I'm assuming if the 7dmk3 is coming out it will be an attempt to match the Nikon D500. Not much faith in this happening because at this moment Canon cannot even match Nikon's D750 with the comparable Canon 6D line.

Also the 7dmk3 will have to improve the massive pig size 4k video.

Match the D500 in what way, precisely?


Digital EOS 7D Mark II Canon: EF 50mm f/1.8 II, EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro, Life-Size Converter EF Tamron: SP 17-50mm f/2.8 DiII, 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 DiII VC HLD, SP 150-600 f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2, SP 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD, 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 DiII VC HLD Sigma: 30mm f/1.4 DC Art Rokinon: 8mm f/3.5 AS IF UMC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
7,617 posts
Gallery: 131 photos
Likes: 1337
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Post edited over 3 years ago by AlanU.
     
Feb 21, 2017 11:30 |  #49

pknight wrote in post #18280491 (external link)
Match the D500 in what way, precisely?

Please note I'm a Canon shooter.....but the D500 crop is a potent beast. high iso and dynamic range of the D500 is something to talk about vs the aging 7dmk2.

If you were not brand loyal and wanted a crop dslr I think the D500 is one of the "better" sports camera's. Definitely a step up from an aging 7dmk2.

If your talking full frame the aging D750 is a massive jump in performance than the 6d.

For my uses even my X-t2 has many features that I can use as well as better high iso performance than the 7dmk2.

Everyone has different applications so it's understandable to have different gear from individual to individual.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 85 mkII L | | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji - gone
Sony 2 x A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Sigma 24-70 ART | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Sigma ART 35 f/1.2 | FE85 f/1.8 | Sigma ART 105 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS & V1S

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pknight
Goldmember
Avatar
2,677 posts
Gallery: 37 photos
Likes: 117
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Flyover Country
     
Feb 21, 2017 13:10 |  #50

AlanU wrote in post #18280508 (external link)
Please not I'm a Canon shooter.....but the D500 crop is a potent beast. high iso and dynamic range of the D500 is something to talk about vs the aging 7dmk2.

If you were not brand loyal and wanted a crop dslr I think the D500 is one of the "better" sports camera's. Definitely a step up from an aging 7dmk2.

If your talking full frame the aging D750 is a massive jump in performance than the 6d.

For my uses even my X-t2 has many features that I can use as well as better high iso performance than the 7dmk2.

Everyone has different applications so it's understandable to have different gear from individual to individual.

This is what happens when companies release models on different schedules. What the D500 does is largely irrelevant to me, as I am not about to switch back and forth between camera systems as these staggered product releases come and go.

I have yet to run across a situation where somebody could look at a print and tell me what camera it was shot with.


Digital EOS 7D Mark II Canon: EF 50mm f/1.8 II, EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro, Life-Size Converter EF Tamron: SP 17-50mm f/2.8 DiII, 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 DiII VC HLD, SP 150-600 f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2, SP 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD, 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 DiII VC HLD Sigma: 30mm f/1.4 DC Art Rokinon: 8mm f/3.5 AS IF UMC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PNPhotography
Senior Member
Avatar
803 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 56
Joined Sep 2007
Location: central PA
     
Feb 21, 2017 14:45 |  #51

AlanU wrote in post #18280508 (external link)
Please note I'm a Canon shooter.....but the D500 crop is a potent beast. high iso and dynamic range of the D500 is something to talk about vs the aging 7dmk2.

If you were not brand loyal and wanted a crop dslr I think the D500 is one of the "better" sports camera's. Definitely a step up from an aging 7dmk2.

If your talking full frame the aging D750 is a massive jump in performance than the 6d.

For my uses even my X-t2 has many features that I can use as well as better high iso performance than the 7dmk2.

Everyone has different applications so it's understandable to have different gear from individual to individual.

I believe that the 7dMKII matches up nicely with the Nikon D500.Think about it for a moment-both shoot 10FPS,the Nikon buffer is deeper but really how much do you need?I've never maxed mine out so to me a moot point.Swivel screen?I have a swivel screen camera and honestly never use it and especially would never use it on a sports camera.High ISO-pretty even really,Nikon has a slight edge but not that much,lots of internet tests on this one.
4K video on a sports camera,me I never use video on any of my camera's,some might but considering Nikon's video focussing sucks is it really better than 1080 with DPAF?
Dynamic range,OK Nikon stomps up here but ONLY below ISO 400ish at ISO 400 to ISO 3200 where I shoot alot it's not that big a difference.Autofocus?N​ikon has a lot more points but as a sport shooter at least me I mostly use the center point and only occasionally use a wider point.
I'd love to get a Nikon D500 but I don't believe the "on paper" superior specs would translate in real world improvement in my sport shooting.


6D|7D|7DMKII|Nikon D750|Nikon 85 F1.8|Nikon D5500|G15| Gripped|300F4|35F2IS|8​5 F1.8|135L F2|200L F2.8|17-55 F2.8|70-200L F2.8 MKII|430EX|
https://www.facebook.c​om …2755174446/?ref​=bookmarks (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
View_Finder
Senior Member
Avatar
455 posts
Likes: 792
Joined May 2010
Location: Ohio
     
Feb 21, 2017 14:55 |  #52

Wilt wrote in post #18280433 (external link)
I still have two ETRSi bodies and a bevy of lenses, all to serve professional uses of cameras. The Olympus gear did not go away, it was retained for non-photographic vacations, although I did take a number of vacations that had photographic primary purpose, on which the Bronica gear went with me. I never sold off the Olympus, because it represented a 'different tool, for different purposes'...you don't sell your screwdriver because you have a wrench! :-)
I still have my first film SLR...it was $160 when new, with normal lens. And finally, about 3 years ago, I just acquired the object of my teen camera lust while paging thru photography magazines, the Beseler Topcon Super D, which was a totally unattainable $420 back when gas was $0.30 per gallon and median annual US household income was $6500!

Back in the 1970s, putting 100K exposures thru a body was unheard of, even in the lifetime of a camera... 100K = nearly 2800 rolls of film, with processing and printing...I don't recall cost of color back then but guessing $10 total cost for all that would mean $28000 in film and processing...over 3 entire years of median family income, in 1968 ($8632). So in the 9 year period in which the Nikon F2 ruled the world before the F3 launch, it was unlikely that the body would be worn out by an average consumer, as it represented $2800 annual film+processing expense, still close to 20% of the median US family income in 1975 ($13800). Now folks do 25k shots in a single year.


It sure was an expensive hobby/craft/art/profes​sion back then!!!

I had a motor drive on my A-1's which zipped film along at 5fps. I bulk-rolled my film but still never shot more that 3~4 frames at a time. To keep costs down, I processed all my B&W and E6 film. I printed both in my darkroom. Speaking of which, I still have my darkroom and enlarger - why?!!!! LOL. Ah the sweet aroma of chemicals and waiting around for about 20 minutes of drum agitation just to produce one color print .... everyone should have to experience that :)


5D4, 5D2, 7D2, 50D, SL2, 16-35 f/4L IS, 24-70 f/2.8L II, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 100-400L IS II, 100 f/2.8L IS, 300 f/4L IS, 500 f/4L IS, 1.4xIII, 2xIII, Σ14A, Σ35A, Σ85A
EOS R, RF24-105 f/4L IS
http://viewfinder.us/ (external link) Just call me Jack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
7,617 posts
Gallery: 131 photos
Likes: 1337
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Feb 21, 2017 14:55 |  #53

pknight wrote in post #18280576 (external link)
This is what happens when companies release models on different schedules. What the D500 does is largely irrelevant to me, as I am not about to switch back and forth between camera systems as these staggered product releases come and go.

I have yet to run across a situation where somebody could look at a print and tell me what camera it was shot with.

Irrelevant to many. However Canon should take note of it's competition and start pushing it's R&D a little harder. Now that the 1.3 crop sensor is a dead product canon should be emphasizing better performance with the 1.6 crops. There's a reason it seems many wildlife shooters purchased Canon FF for maximizing IQ over the 7dmk2.


The D500 has raised the bar for crop sensors. It's a matter of time when mirrorless bodies can be fully 100% equiv to existing DSLR bodies for action. For my use I appreciate what the fuji X-t2 and 80d does for me.

Print is a photographer's best friend :) My photos I took with my XTi rebel at 10MP produced great images in print :)


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 85 mkII L | | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji - gone
Sony 2 x A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Sigma 24-70 ART | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Sigma ART 35 f/1.2 | FE85 f/1.8 | Sigma ART 105 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS & V1S

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pknight
Goldmember
Avatar
2,677 posts
Gallery: 37 photos
Likes: 117
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Flyover Country
     
Feb 22, 2017 09:02 |  #54

AlanU wrote in post #18280721 (external link)
Print is a photographer's best friend :) My photos I took with my XTi rebel at 10MP produced great images in print :)

I agree about prints. I have large, heavily-cropped prints from an XT on my wall, and nobody would question it if I claimed they were from a 5DIV. However, JPEGs of the same images look just as good at web resolutions. People don't share full-sized RAW files so their audience can pixel peep at 100%. When I upgrade my camera body, it is because the newer model might help me better acquire the images I am after in terms of AF, vibration control, FPS, etc. Given the high quality of all sensors being used today, about the only IQ issue that interests me is high-ISO noise and, from what I read here and elsewhere, there is no disadvantage to the 7DII compared to the D500 in that regard.

I got into digital photography, after using an AE-1 for many years, at a time when Nikon was still using CCD sensors. The Canon CMOS sensors were king of the hill, so I went that direction. Nothing since then has made as big a difference as the move from CCD to CMOS. Although, I must admit that in terms of prints I am not sure that I could pick CCD images from CMOS images at that time, once they were on paper.


Digital EOS 7D Mark II Canon: EF 50mm f/1.8 II, EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro, Life-Size Converter EF Tamron: SP 17-50mm f/2.8 DiII, 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 DiII VC HLD, SP 150-600 f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2, SP 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD, 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 DiII VC HLD Sigma: 30mm f/1.4 DC Art Rokinon: 8mm f/3.5 AS IF UMC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,558 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6188
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
Post edited over 3 years ago by TeamSpeed. (8 edits in all)
     
Feb 22, 2017 09:50 |  #55

There is a point where the size of a print shows the weakness of the resolution of the JPG image.

I posted this example: https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18276909

This is from a 4.5Mpx image vs a 20Mpx image, where I crop out a section from both, then print as 8x10 or 11x14. There is clearly a difference in print quality between the two. So a crop from an 8Mpx XT (assuming Canon) vs something from the 5D4 is going to show differences in larger prints. However in that case, the 5D4 cropped to an APS-C yields a 12Mpx version compared to the 8mpx, so cropping the same from both might require a larger print in the end than my example above (where I used the same sensor format for both). ISO differences, sharpness, etc will be part of that equation as well.

Uprezzed low resolution images start to look like paintings at some enlargement factor. My general rule of thumb is that my upgraded camera should have at least 40% more resolution after equalizing the FOV between the new camera and the old camera, that is where I start to see differences in print. When one has to be resized roughly 200% to match the other, the visual results suffer.

So prints from an XT or XTi vs a 7D/7D2, yes upgrade. If trying to upgrade from a 50D, then only upgrade based on other features and improvements in IQ/ISO, and not on resolution.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

8,540 views & 18 likes for this thread
As much as I love the 7D2 I am getting rid of it.
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Mortspanx
842 guests, 342 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.