show me your 7d landscape shots

Beautiful work Rob! I must go and say nice things to my 7D now.

Hehe well if you really want to compare heres a few from the last month when I have been using a 5d2 instead.

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1195878

brownmichael wrote in post #14593550
Beautiful work Rob! I must go and say nice things to my 7D now.

Yeah, just WOW - I've only really used my 7D for sports and some "birding" - I do have a Tokina 12-24 but I've only used it for auto photos -

Now I'm inspired to to out and do a few landscapes -

Some truly beautiful work from Jack and Rob and others!!!

Sucks that I live in Florida now when I spent most of my adult years in Aspen and Boulder - when I had already given my baby brother my Nikon F that my dad gave me when I was in college - along with one 50mm lens. (and no money to buy any other lenses with).

Peace,
D.

Those photos are stunning. Was that the sigma 10-20 you used?

I owned the 7D for almost 2 years and just added a pre-owned 5D Mk 2 a month ago.

While less technically advanced for things like AF detection, fps and some other bells & songs that makes the 7D, a legend, realised that the 5D Mk2 is a very good landscape or slow subject photography. The low noise & rich colors, due to large sensor, is a plus.

Of course, I had wished for multiple exposure and thats only in the Mk3.

I am the kind that hates to Photoshop here and there. Already finding Picasa 3 a bit too much featured for me these days.

Will I upgrade both the 7D & the 5D Mk2 to the 5D Mk3 ? Nope. I still have a lot to explore with this FF & 1.6X setup. Rather spend more time out there with them or more $$ on good glasses.

Not arguing the 7D is a good camera for landscapes but it sure does not hurt if the photographer knows how to use filters well and is skillful with post processing as these captures show

studlymonkey wrote in post #14593646
Those photos are stunning. Was that the sigma 10-20 you used?

I just checked a few of the pictures. The EXIF info says 17mm on a bunch of them.
im thinking 17-40L. even on the 7d sometimes.

There shot with 17-55f2.8 or sigma 10-20.

of course you can do landscape with a 7D ! but the benefit of the 5D is that there is more lenses to choose from on the wide end.

But a 10-22 and 17-55 is all 95% of people really need.

You wont notice the difference with a 24tse or 17-40 or cz21 unless you push boundaries or print really big.

jonneymendoza wrote in post #14591881
even my 400d can do landscape

Not 7d but 400d. same sensor

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/josh1408/440553​2339/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/josh1408/440630​7508/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/josh1408/440630​7148/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/josh1408/440627​8542/

^ yup I agree, any camera can do well

7D

its all about composition mate. who cares what dslr is being used.

you can take spectacular shots on any dslr.

7D and Tamron 17-50mm

jonneymendoza wrote in post #14594306
its all about composition mate. who cares what dslr is being used.

you can take spectacular shots on any dslr.

Absolutely true, but the 400D isn't the same sensor as the 7D as you state above, nor is it a similar pixel count. Part of the argument against the 7D for landscape is the aggressive AA filter on the latter that sometimes requires a bit of post processing.

I'm in the pro-7D for everything camp.