Will I be overwhelmed by the 7D as a newbie?

The 7D is just a camera no different from any other camera. Sure it has a few bells and whistles but come on, this isn't rocket science and no one is forcing you to use all those bells and whistles. I say go for it. Start with the green box and go from there. Learning the 7D is no different than learning any other camera.

Hi
Definately no expert, so will not offer advice on on which camera you should buy ( though I'm secretly coveting a 7D )
I have read allot on the forums about how the 7D focusing is not easy for beginners. So I thought I would share this link with you. http://m.youtube.com/w​atch?v=iAx86nblZ2g
This is one of three videos about the EOS focusing system, though it does not mentioning the 7D the videos still relate to it. I found them very interesting and learned quite allot. There are also lots of other great videos on YouTube about the 7D. Hope this helps your choice a little
KathG

The 7D is a workhorse camera designed with professional shooters in mind. It's sort of a "1D Mark IV Lite", at one third the price. It does not have much support for inexperienced shooters. It's capable in most any environment, but in effect you pay extra for it's high frame rate and AI Servo/Action/Sports oriented focusing system, that's a lot more complex and needs to be set up correctly. It's a very capable camera, well made, solid, a bit on the heavy side even, pretty reliable and durable, and reasonably well sealed against all the nasty things that come with shooting in difficult situations.

Learn to use a 7D well, and it can do you proud. It takes some commitment to get good with one. If you are a serious amateur willing to work at learning the camera and setting it up properly, then it might be a really good choice.

However, if you want a camera for family photos and rather more sedate general purpose use, you have other excellent possibilities too, most at much less cost. One thing you don't have to worry about is image quality. All the current APS-C format Canon (T2i, T3i, T4i, 60D and 7D) use essentially the same 18MP sensor and are capable of delivering virtually the same image quality. The lenses used on them will make far, far more difference than the camera behind them, as you noted. And, that $2000-2500 budget will evaporate before you know it. Besides, I don't know where you are seeing 7D for $1000-1200... looks to me as if B&H is asking $1450 for them right now. And $900 for 60D (after a $100 instant rebate).

60D is currently probably a better choice for what you want to shoot and your level of experience. It has a simpler, but still quite capable AF system and a bit slower, but still fairly impressive frame rate (about 5 fps instead of 8 fps that the 7D can do). It is a pentaprism model, which will give you slightly bigger and brighter viewing than you see with your Rebel models and their penta-mirror arrangement.

So, I'd suggest 60D..... but right now I think you should wait a couple months to see if a 70D is announced. Often Canon rolls out new models at or just before the Photokina trade show, which is Sept. 18-23 this year. Sometimes they announce a new consumer model a bit later, for the Christmas buying season. A hint might be that there is currently a rebate on 60D. (And not on 7D... I seriously doubt there will be a 7D "Mark II" announced, also because Canon just rolled out the unusually comprehensive firmware revision for the current model this month.... why would they do that if they have a new model right around the corner?)

But, I would suggest instead that you concentrate on lenses now, get some experience with them on your current camera, and wait a bit before buying a camera. Let's see if a new 70D is announced in the next month or two.

So, I'd like to comment a bit about the lenses you're considering...

- EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS is a very good solid choice as a mid-range "walkaround" zoom. Get it and the hood to fit it. It's sharp, fast/accurate focusing, a top performer in all respects. It is not an L (no EF-S lens ever will be, by definition), so isn't sealed as well and there's more plastic in its construction... but the image quality from it rivals any L-series lens, and that's what really counts.

- EF 40/2.8 STM "Pancake".... Forget it. The 17-55 provides you with a 40mm focal length with f2.8 max aperture. Plus, AFAIK, only the T4i can take full advantage of the STM "stepper motor" of the lens, a feature that's particularly important for video, not stills. So there's little or nothing to be gained getting this lens, unless you just want something small and pocketable (but are putting it on a larger camera, so that's sort of self-defeating).

- EF 50/1.8 or 50/1.4 or Sigma 50/1.4.... I'd recommend one of these instead of the "pancake". Sure, they also duplicate a focal length of the 17-55, but they are up to two stops faster than that zoom. These act as "short telephoto/portrait" lenses on an APS-C format camera. Great for low light, and for those family/baby portraits. The Canon 50/1.8 is inexpensive and very entry level quality build, but capable of nice images. I'd recommend it for someone wanting to use it for an occasional portrait. Both the Canon and Sigma f1.4 lenses give a bit nicer image qualities and faster/more accurate focus, and have 2/3 stop larger aperture available. They also are better built and more durable, but of course cost about 3X or 4X as much! The Sigma is fairly large and heavy, compared to either of the Canon.

- EF-S 10-22 USM.... is a fine choice for an ultrawide. Very capable. It's one of the best, but also one of the most expensive UWA zooms. You mention about 20% usage for the types of photography where you are most likely to use this sort of lens... so you might want to consider some close alternatives, that are less expensive. I'd suggest at least looking at: Sigma 10-22/3.5 HSM and the same but less expensive with a variable aperture; Tokina 11-16/2.8 and 12-24/4; Tamron 10-24. All of these are less expensive, but pretty capable. Personally I use the Tokina 12-24 and am happy with it. There is now also a super wide angle Sigma 8-16mm, the widest lens available aside from a fisheye, but it's priced close to the Canon 10-22. If you get the Canon, buy the lens hood too, which is sold separately. All the others here come with a hood.

- EF-S 55-250 IS.... This is an okay, entry level lens. For a couple hundred bucks it has surprisingly good image quality and it's fairly compact and lightweight. However, it's AF is slow and less accurate than a lens with USM. And, it's not built "for the long run" and there are other good options. Mainly, I'd suggest considering the 70-200/4L IS.... it's a killer lens, built like a tank, with fast and accurate USM focus. Yes, it's a lot more expensive... But if you save money elsewhere and can work it into your budget, this would be a great option. If the cost is too much of a stretch, the non-IS version of the lens might be an alternative. But IS is really nice to have on these longer focal lengths! There are few pro Canon shooters who don't have one or the other of the 70-200s in their kit. That might be a clue. The f2.8 versions are great lenses too... but more expensive, bigger and heavier.

As to the flash, pick up a 430EX or even a used 420EX, 550EX, 580EX. The built in flash is a joke and near worthless on any of these cameras. It is a heavy draw on the battery charge and still is weak and anemic... plus it's located in the worst possible place for redeye and ugly shadow effects. I'd suggest one of the accessory flashes... even the highly automated 220/230/270EX would be a big improvement over the built-in flash. I do suggest a flash bracket and an off-camera shoe cord, to put the flash off to the side and a bit further above the lens, which makes for even nicer lighting. These items are available generically off eBay or elsewhere, for not a lot of money.

Memory cards... well it depends on the camera model you get what type you'll need (60D uses SD, 7D uses Compact Flash)... Personally I use mostly 8GB cards... fourteen of them in a pair of 7Ds. I get close to 300 RAW files per card, in normal use. I have a couple 16GB cards, but mostly use them in my 5D Mark II, with it's somewhat larger files. I just am a strong believer in not putting all my eggs in one basket! There are often sales on memory cards... I recently noticed a two-pack of Lexar 400X UDMA 16GB CF cards were right at $100. I don't watch the price of SD memory, since none of my cameras use it.

Whatever camera you get, you are very likely going to want a spare battery or two. The 7D and 60D both use LP-E6, with give almost twice as many shots per charge as the LP-E8 the Rebel series cameras use now. It depends a lot on whether or not you use the built-in flash and how much you playback images and use the rear LCD to navigate the menus, since those things gobble up power a lot more than anything else on a camera. Using a pair of LP-E6 in the grip on one of my 7Ds, I can shoot well over 2000 images without changing batteries.... probably closer to 3000. So I bet I get 1200-1500 images per battery charge. But I never use the built in flash and only occasionally spot check images/histograms on the rear LCD. With earlier BP511/512 series batteries (such as those used in your 300D), I always carried two extras for every one in my cameras. Now with the LP-E6 in both my 7Ds and 5DII, I carry one extra. If I were using the Rebel series cameras with their LP-E8s, I'd have to carry two extras per. These newer batteries are more expensive, but I find I don't need as many spares. So it probably works out close to the same.

No, I wouldn't tell you to go straight to a full frame camera. In fact, the crop sensor cameras have quite a few advantages for a lot of people. They can be used with a wider choice of lenses (since all "crop only/EF-D" and all "full frame/EF" lenses will fit and work on them). And, lenses can be smaller, lighter and less expensive. Full frame has some advantages, too.... And I use one myself... but I think it's vastly overhyped here and most people would be better served sticking with crop cameras.

Please, I am dead serious, I mean really dead serious, someone explain to me why many you are telling/encouraging a guy who ALREADY OWNS a perfectly good usable DSLR that will accomplish all the basics of photography (Shutter speed, ISO, aperture, focus modes, metering, flash, ect), that he admitantly knows little more about than how to turn on, to go drop over $1,000 hard earned dollars into a newer perfectly good usable DSLR that he STILL won't know anything more about than how to turn on?

It will take at least a year or two of (fun) practice and learning for him to actually even realize the full potential of his current rebel body, and going out and buying a 7D isn't going to make that happen any faster. It just means that while he is going through that intial period of learning what he is going with the camera OUT of green box mode, his 7D will be plummeting in value, new models will be coming out, whereas his current XTi is paid for and certainly past the point of significant continuing depreciation at this point.

Whereas if he wants to go spend $2,000 or so on his hobby, he could go buy a few clean used quality lenses that will not decrease in value much if at all, will expand the range of what he will be able to do photographically, and if he buys the right ones will still be fabulous lenses in a couple years when he knows how to use a camera and is ready to buy the one that will fit his needs. And in a few years the body technology will continue to get much better, and he can spend the same money he would spend today on it (plus interest even) and get a much better camera body, with a couple years of experience behind him to actually know what to do with it.

I mean I am all for buying the best and getting the right product the first time, but if you actually stand to lose more money by buying something you won't get the benefit from today, than by sticking with what you have for now, and buying the best when you actually CAN get benefit for it, why spend the money today?

Please do explain if you have different views on the matter.

*end rant*

7D AF system, squares, squares everywhere. There is a detailed video that explains it well on youtube. I'll try to find it and update.

Actually, I agree... and at most recommend the 60D among current models, though I think right now it might be worth waiting a month or two to see if a 70D is offered (at which time, if that happens, brand spanking new 60D still in stores will drop in price precipitously and the question will be if the latest-and-greatest model has enough improvements to justify it's undoubtedly higher introductory price... I ain't big on being the first to adopt brand new models).

One thing that all the newer models offer is Creative Auto... even 7D has it. It's a good learning tool. I don't think the XTi has it and I know the older 300D/Original Digital Rebel doesn't have it.

The different control layouts of the Rebel series vs the xxD series is another factor. Basically, learning to more fully use a Rebel series is fine and entirely possible. But there will be some "unlearning" and "relearning" of the controls needed, if the OP later steps up to an xxD model. Not a huge deal, though some people find it a bit awkward making the switch.... at first.

But I think your "rant" is right on the money... Though they didn't mention specifically what lenses they have now, I am pretty sure the OP would be best to beef up his or her lens kit now (and possibly some accessories such as flash), using them on the camera(s) he or she already has, then step up to another camera a bit later.

Besides the added complexity (likley largely unnecessary for the OP's uses), the 7D takes an additional approx. $500 "bite" out of their budget compared to 60D. Personally I just think those monies would be better used toward lenses and accessories. Images coming out of 7D or 60D or T2i/T3i will be virtually indistinguishable from each other... after all. Any of them would be a reasonable step up from the 10MP XTi or a bigger step up from the 6MP Digital Rebel cameras the OP has now.

Billginthekeys wrote in post #14913536
Please, I am dead serious, I mean really dead serious, someone explain to me why many you are telling/encouraging a guy who ALREADY OWNS a perfectly good usable DSLR that will accomplish all the basics of photography (Shutter speed, ISO, aperture, focus modes, metering, flash, ect), that he admitantly knows little more about than how to turn on, to go drop over $1,000 hard earned dollars into a newer perfectly good usable DSLR that he STILL won't know anything more about than how to turn on?

If the question would have been "Do you think it's time for me to upgrade, here is my story" the answer would have been completely different. His question was more like "I have a DSLR, it sucks as it's been in the closet for years, I am upgrading to a 7D. Is it too much camera for me?" He has already made the decision to upgrade.

First I would like to thank everything for all the insight, it's really thoughtful to see everyone put as much time and effort into replying to my post.

I think I will take a lot of the suggestions here and upgrade the glass first. My first class is scheduled for next week so I was just wondering if it would make sense having the camera that I intend to shoot with but now that I think about it, camera basics such as ISO, etc, is transferable and should be able to be applied to whatever camera I choose.

I am going to get the 17-55 first. It seems that this would be a pretty versatile one to get started with and hopefully will be the one that I use the majority of the time. I think I have a nifty-fifty that I lent to my sister and can get back. I will also consider a second hand 55-250, I see that there are a few on the for sale forum in the sub $200 range.

I think that I will wait to see what the next announcement is, I keep on hearing at Photokina. I think another month's time should give me some time to get clarity on what I want to do, plus I should have 2 lessons under my belt.

In the meantime I'm going to practice, practice, and practice with the XTi now. I took 30+ shots of the same image yesterday experimenting with various dials, shutter speeds, and other settings. I spent time today reading a few books. I will take the suggestions of reading the manuals for the 7D, the 60D, and others.

So here's my timeline for now.

This week - Buy 17-55 2.8. ($1000). Pickup a copy of the 50 f/1.8.
Next week - Buy 55-250 and flash (not sure of 430EXII or the 270EXII to start. ($300-400).

Next month - See if they release specs for 70D. Then decide between the 7D, the 70D, or the 60D.

I'll put the 10-22 and the 70-200 on hold.

gjl711 wrote in post #14913675
If the question would have been "Do you think it's time for me to upgrade, here is my story" the answer would have been completely different. His question was more like "I have a DSLR, it sucks as it's been in the closet for years, I am upgrading to a 7D. Is it too much camera for me?" He has already made the decision to upgrade.

Sure I understand what you are saying. I am just trying to get the OP to not spent his hard earned cash on something he won't, IMO, get the full value out of.

I would take a 40D and a 70-200 F4 IS L over a 7D and an EF-S 55-250 IS any day of the week.

amfoto1 wrote in post #14913649
The different control layouts of the Rebel series vs the xxD series is another factor. Basically, learning to more fully use a Rebel series is fine and entirely possible. But there will be some "unlearning" and "relearning" of the controls needed, if the OP later steps up to an xxD model. Not a huge deal, though some people find it a bit awkward making the switch.... at first.

I agree with you there, which is why I mentioned in my other post that if for ergonomics and control purposes the OP wants to upgrade they should consider a used 40D or 50D. A used 40D at $350 will depreciate a lot less than a new 7D or even a new/like new used 60D.

TMaG82 wrote in post #14913716
...
In the meantime I'm going to practice, practice, and practice with the XTi now. ...

That more than anything else will improve your skills.

Billginthekeys wrote in post #14913726
Sure I understand what you are saying. I am just trying to get the OP to not spent his hard earned cash on something he won't, IMO, get the full value out of.

No doubt, and your right. For me if I had been in that position I would not do the upgrade. I am not a rich man. However I have learned that to some $2k is discretionary spending and who am I to judge.

Sounds like a very good plan!

Yogi Bear wrote in post #14913232
I would definitely get the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 first and start using it with your XTi.

As far as the move to the 7D is concerned, I came from a Rebel XSi and I didn't have any problems. However, I was well past using the "Auto" mode on the XSi. With what you learn in the coming photo classes, I think that you'll do fine with the 7D.

Definitely get an external flash, like the 430 EX II! With the new one on the way you'll be taking lots of photos and the capability to bounce your flash will make a lot of difference in your photos!

Good luck!

Yogi

Fully agree with Yogi.

My advice: don't buy 7D if you are shooting on 'green' mode. It doesn't work well (the AF) on the 7D and it seems the camera isn't designed for it. So, I'd only buy the 7D when you're comfortable shooting Av, Tv or M mode.

Taking the class is a great decision. Doing that a few years ago helped me a lot understanding the basic concepts.

Billginthekeys wrote in post #14913536
Please, I am dead serious, I mean really dead serious, someone explain to me why many you are telling/encouraging a guy who ALREADY OWNS a perfectly good usable DSLR that will accomplish all the basics of photography (Shutter speed, ISO, aperture, focus modes, metering, flash, ect), that he admitantly knows little more about than how to turn on, to go drop over $1,000 hard earned dollars into a newer perfectly good usable DSLR that he STILL won't know anything more about than how to turn on?

You neglect the want part of the equation. I went from a Yashica FX-2, which is manual everything: film speed, aperture, shutter and focus, to a 500D. Did I know what half the buttons were for? NO! Did I have to read/practice/repeat? Most certainly. I fail to find anything in your well-thought-out post concerning wants. If the user wants a 7D, why should he NOT buy one. Very little in modern society is about needs. I feel very confident in stating that nowhere, at any time, ever, has anyone actually needed a camera. I passed on the 7D because I did not want one. I bought a 60D a year later because I did want one. I will be buying a 5D3 in early 2013, yes, because I want one. What is wrong with scratching an itch?

TSchrief wrote in post #14913752
You neglect the want part of the equation. I went from a Yashica FX-2, which is manual everything: film speed, aperture, shutter and focus, to a 500D. Did I know what half the buttons were for? NO! Did I have to read/practice/repeat? Most certainly. I fail to find anything in your well-thought-out post concerning wants. If the user wants a 7D, why should he NOT buy one. Very little in modern society is about needs. I feel very confident in stating that nowhere, at any time, ever, has anyone actually needed a camera. I passed on the 7D because I did not want one. I bought a 60D a year later because I did want one. I will be buying a 5D3 in early 2013, yes, because I want one. What is wrong with scratching an itch?

Hey it is a hobby, no one needs a hobby to survive (well... maybe to stay sane). But still, I maintain that it sounds like the OP doesn't just happen to have $2,000 laying around to spend on hobbies every day since he said "This is a comfortable budget that I've been saving for a while." Thus if he has spent some time saving that money, I think he should think more about where it will be best spent for the enjoyment of his hobby.

And hey speaking of wants, I want to own a $3000 Fender guitar. I can barely strum more than three chords of the crappy guitar I have owned for years and never have taken the time to really learn to play. Could I go buy the guitar I want, put it on a stand in my house and marvel at it? Sure. Will it make me a better guitarist than I am today? No. Could I use it and go get lessons and use it during those lessons? Sure. Would it make me a better guitarist than the $200 beginners guitar I have collecting dust? No (effectively anyway). Except even that isn't a fair comparison because at least a quality Fender guitar wouldn't depreciate a ton while I was learning and be massively surpassed by newer technology by the time I knew how to play it.