I'm Switching To Nikon????

I have a Canon 7D, 70-200L, 50 1.8, 28-135 Kit Lens. I shoot Jr/Sr/ HS baseball, Indoor/Outdoor Hockey, Family Portraits, and Landscapes.

I'm not much impressed with the high ISO quality of my 7D and am ready to remedy this, one way or another! I don't yet have the high end lenses that I one day WILL acquire, so this is why I am considering the change. I figure it would be less costly to sell my current gear and buy a D800, a 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8 VR II, instead of upgrading to a 5D MkIII and then buying the equivalent Canon lenses. I'm selling some of my construction equip to help make this happen, but I really do want to keep costs down.

I'm NOT bashing Canon in any way, so let's not get into a useless, tired squabble over our FAVORED BRAND...just thinking in terms of what would be financially practical and NOT sacrifice image quality.

Thank You.

So you joined a canon forum today and your VERY first post is to tell us you are leaving. As the saying goes...don't let the door hit...

Just don't get it.

Don't feed the trolls

LG_1089 wrote in post #16126661
I have a Canon 7D, 70-200L, 50 1.8, 28-135 Kit Lens. I shoot Jr/Sr/ HS baseball, Indoor/Outdoor Hockey, Family Portraits, and Landscapes.

I'm not much impressed with the high ISO quality of my 7D and am ready to remedy this, one way or another! I don't yet have the high end lenses that I one day WILL acquire, so this is why I am considering the change. I figure it would be less costly to sell my current gear and buy a D800, a 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8 VR II, instead of upgrading to a 5D MkIII and then buying the equivalent Canon lenses. I'm selling some of my construction equip to help make this happen, but I really do want to keep costs down.

I'm NOT bashing Canon in any way, so let's not get into a useless, tired squabble over our FAVORED BRAND...just thinking in terms of what would be financially practical and NOT sacrifice image quality.

Thank You.

I don't see any questions asked here, so umm...that's nice. Good luck!

cking2 wrote in post #16126670
So you joined a canon forum today and your VERY first post is to tell us you are leaving. As the saying goes...don't let the door hit...

Just don't get it.

Nope! Joined a couple of weeks ago and have been reading the various forums like crazy. A good friend recommended POTN, cuz I told him I'd been reading the FM forum. He said this forum was far better and not polluted with blithering morons...I guess he hasn't come across YOU yet!

Seriously, I enjoy my Canon gear and am just really struggling with the idea of the costs related to this serious upgrade, such as the one I am considering. Come on, what better place to get real and honest input, than on a great Canon oriented Forum? Don't give me trash talk, help me understand why the extra money is worth going the Canon route.

Any crop bodies isn't going to be as good as a full frame ISO control. If you want better ISO control I recommend a full frame camera. The grass isn't always greener on the other side.

If you're not shooting RAW and using a RAW processor already, you're not getting the most out of your images.

LG_1089 wrote in post #16126707
Nope! Joined a couple of weeks ago and have been reading the various forums like crazy. A good friend recommended POTN, cuz I told him I'd been reading the FM forum. He said this forum was far better and not polluted with blithering morons...I guess he hasn't come across YOU yet!

Seriously, I enjoy my Canon gear and am just really struggling with the idea of the costs related to this serious upgrade, such as the one I am considering. Come on, what better place to get real and honest input, than on a great Canon oriented Forum? Don't give me trash talk, help me understand why the extra money is worth going the Canon route.

Try reading up on TeamSpeed's posts on noise reduction using the 7D. He gets great results using ISO 6400. You also don't mention which 70-200 L you have. Is it the f/2.8 or f/4?

I switched to Nikon eight months ago, and the camera I now have (d7000) has a lot of advantages over the T2i I was using.

HOWEVER, my photography has not improved a lick as a result of the camera, and I'm not getting better images.

My photography HAS improved, and I AM getting better images now, but not because of my camera.

And I'm selling it to go back to Canon. I'm going mirrorless (Canon EOS M) because 99% of what I shoot is still (portraits, landscapes, etc.) and I'd rather travel light.

The DSLR isn't for me, and neither is the point and shoot. I want both. The EOS M is a great compromise.


But, back to YOUR situation: Stay with Canon. It's what you know, and it isn't any better or worse than Nikon.

LG_1089 wrote in post #16126661
I have a Canon 7D, 70-200L, 50 1.8, 28-135 Kit Lens. I shoot Jr/Sr/ HS baseball, Indoor/Outdoor Hockey, Family Portraits, and Landscapes.

I'm not much impressed with the high ISO quality of my 7D and am ready to remedy this, one way or another! I don't yet have the high end lenses that I one day WILL acquire, so this is why I am considering the change. I figure it would be less costly to sell my current gear and buy a D800, a 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8 VR II, instead of upgrading to a 5D MkIII and then buying the equivalent Canon lenses. I'm selling some of my construction equip to help make this happen, but I really do want to keep costs down.

I'm NOT bashing Canon in any way, so let's not get into a useless, tired squabble over our FAVORED BRAND...just thinking in terms of what would be financially practical and NOT sacrifice image quality.

Thank You.

MY QUESTION IS: Given the cost considerations, why should I bite the bullet and shell out the extra $$ for the Canon option? Thank you

Well, if you want a D800, go for it. You have a 70-200L, and logistically I think it would be easier to just get a 5D Mark 3 and buy a 24-70. Unless, of course, your 70-200L is the f4 or non-IS, equivelant etc.

Also makes me wonder that you want to switch to a camera with 4fps from a camera with 8fps. From reading your OP, it sounds like you shoot a lot of sports. Shooting sports, to me, equates to many shutter clicks a night, and with the D800, you've got massively bigger files than a 5D Mark 3. Negligable to some, but something to think about. From the information you presented us with, I feel like a 5D Mark 3 would suit you better, but that doesn't mean a thing if you really just want a D800.

kouasupra wrote in post #16126718
Any crop bodies isn't going to be as good as a full frame ISO control. If you want better ISO control I recommend a full frame camera. The grass isn't always greener on the other side.

Yes, the idea is to go full frame. I'm not at all crazy about the idea of the switch, because I tend to be the type of person that dislikes the new and unknown. I'm just trying to be financially practical in considering this nuclear option.

TY

VCY wrote in post #16126721
If you're not shooting RAW and using a RAW processor already, you're not getting the most out of your images.

I shoot RAW and use Adobe CS6 for my post work. admittedly, I need to better educate myself on getting the most of CS6, but I am also ready to make the switch to a FF body.

TY

Welcome to the dark side.

Part of the reason the 7D has lesser high ISO capability than something like the 5D mkIII is the higher pixel density. The D800 also has a high pixel density, compared to the 5DIII. If you compare the ISO capabilities of the two bodies, the 5DIII goes to ISO 25600 (which can be pushed to 102,400 with expansion) but the D800 tops out at just 6400 (which can be pushed to 25600 with expansion). I think that this clearly shows how the manufacturers feel their cameras can cope with high ISO. The 5DIII still produces very good images at 12800, yet by that level the D800 is already into the expansion zone and the image will suffer accordingly.

I really don't get your logic, you specifically want better high ISO performance but want to go with the D800 which isn't a great camera at high ISO either. You rule out the 5DIII because it will cost more by the time you have bought the equivalent lenses, yet all your current lenses will fit it and with the better ISO capability you don't need to get faster ones. Surely the simplest (and cheapest) way to go is to just buy a 5DIII and use your current lenses.

I'm not knocking the D800, it's a very good camera and can give the 5DIII a very real run for its money up to ISO 800, so I believe, but above 800 the advantage goes to the 5DIII and gets bigger the higher you go. If you were after great LOW ISO performance, then I would probably recommend the Nikon, but you say you want great HIGH ISO performance, and that would be the 5DIIIs territory.