7D vs MkIIn - Which would you buy & WHY??

Two weeks from now I am going to have ~$1,800 and I want a new body.

So, I could get a Brand New 7D... OR I can pick up a used MkIIn.

The obvious advantage to the 7D is the video capability, so for the purposes of answering here, please ignore the video capabilities.

I shoot sports, Sr. photos and have started shooting some weddings here and there.

I am just interested in hearing your thoughts opinions...

I have not used 7D, but many people swear that it's better than 1DII series camera.
Personally, I'd not change my 1DIIN for 7D.... unless I want a video feature of which I never will.

Sure, more MP, larger and brighter LCD, and higher ISO performance could be a deal breaker for many people.
But, none of those are crucial for my type of shooting....infact, more reliable AIservo and proven AF performance of 1DII series are more important for sports/action photography.
And, I just love the raw/jpg files from 1DIIN...

Yeah...I am ranting about 1DIIN...

Based on some very experienced shooters opinions, I would go to the 7D before any pre Mark III body.

sports in bad lighting - the answer is clear, newer is better that older.

I would wait a couple months for the 1Dmk3 to drop to the $2k mark when the 1dmkIV comes out and then pick up the 1D mkIII

If you are not going to be using video, I would go with the 1D Mk II and invest the rest in glass.

At $800-$1,000 USD used, you get one of Canon's best cameras, the proven reliable AF, the 1D-Series build quality and handling, the images that it produces are simply gorgeous, and I've found ISO 3200 to be very usable on the 1D Mk II.

The extra resolution that the 7D provides is definitely nice especially if you are printing huge, but a friend of mine who shoots a 50D said he finds himself shooting in sRAW (8.2MP, same resolution as the 1D Mk II) over 90% of the time because the size of the full res files and the amount of extra time it takes to process them he's found for him just isn't worth it.

The days of my MKIIN are numbered.

I own a MkII and would trade it fro a 7D if I could

tfd888 wrote in post #8967819
If you are not going to be using video, I would go with the 1D Mk II and invest the rest in glass.

At $800-$1,000 USD used, you get one of Canon's best cameras, the proven reliable AF, the 1D-Series build quality and handling, the images that it produces are simply gorgeous, and I've found ISO 3200 to be very usable on the 1D Mk II.

The extra resolution that the 7D provides is definitely nice especially if you are printing huge, but a friend of mine who shoots a 50D said he finds himself shooting in sRAW (8.2MP, same resolution as the 1D Mk II) over 90% of the time because the size of the full res files and the amount of extra time it takes to process them he's found for him just isn't worth it.

Where are you seeing the Mark IIn for $1,000??!! The cheapest one I have found was $1,300 and that had 140,000 actuations. The average seems to be around $1,500 - $1,700 right now.

Are you sure you're not thinking of a 1D?

He's talking about the 1D MkII .. the one that was before the "n" , though I'm amazed to see it already below $1K !

i have had both and i can only say that the 7d is much more versatile, not only what you mentioned but the wireless flash ( in daylight) pop up flash light weight ( depends on taste), faster operating, 1,6 vs 1.3 when it comes to birds and sports. (depends on usage) EFS lenses vs ef only etc etc however as a camera they are both VERY GOOD, I like the feel a lot better on the 1d ( again taste)

There is nothing like the sound of the shutter from the 1D series.....

Just took this on the way to home from work... MkIIN ISO 1600, 1/40

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

I've got the dynamic duo.

5DMKII & 7D

I now feel complete. ... oh wait .... now I need a computer fast enough to make both of 'em worth having.
Any suggestions on that issue?

zincozinco wrote in post #8968619
i have had both and i can only say that the 7d is much more versatile, not only what you mentioned but the wireless flash ( in daylight) pop up flash light weight ( depends on taste), faster operating, 1,6 vs 1.3 when it comes to birds and sports. (depends on usage) EFS lenses vs ef only etc etc however as a camera they are both VERY GOOD, I like the feel a lot better on the 1d ( again taste)

You forgot to mention that all 19 of the AF points in the 7D are cross-type sensitive with lenses having a max aperture of f/5.6 or wider. On the 1D series cameras, only the center AF points is cross-type sensitive with lenses having a max aperture of f/4. With f/5.6 lenses, the center AF point is only horizontal-line sensitive. So, for focus tracking of birds or wildlife, a 500 f/4 (or a lens with an f/4 aperture), with or without the 1.4x TC, would be better mated to the 7D than to any of the 1D series cameras. The same would apply for the 300 f/2.8 (or any f/2.8 lens) unless the 1D we're talking about is the 1D3 (or the 1D4), in which case, the 1D3 would have have the upper hand with its 19 cross-type AF points plus 26 AF assist points.

GSH wrote in post #8967833
The days of my MKIIN are numbered.

Why? Take a look at some of the photos from the past Olympics. Many were shot with the measly old MKIIN. Are you telling me your photo abilities have surpassed the MKIIN and you routinely produce Sports Illustrated material.

It always amazes me this race to the newest technology thinking somehow it will make better photos.