Anyone got a Canon 7d?

[dk]

thinking about upgrading my 50d, fancy something with a bit of video in and like the idea of the better AF (more points) system, mp count doesn't really bother me etc.

is it worth the jump from a 50d?

I've had it 3 years now, and taken about 15k shots probably, it has some dust in it and i can't be bothered to send it off for ages to get that dealt with etc.

Got a big trip coming up in december and want to get the best possible photos as i won't have a chance to do it again, so i thought i'd do a cheeky upgrade to this as i own EF-s lenses so can't go to the 5d MKII.

its cheap at the moment in jessops, just trying to decide if its worth the jump.

thanks

 

[Cup_Phil]

I had the 50D - and now have the 7D

The AF system on it is fantastic - I did BTCC with it this year and left it pretty much in servo AF and auto select points - every single photo was in focus
It's mind blowingly good

The video is brilliant - and the 60fps slow motion video is awesome. I don't use the video much though

It's not a massive jump - the Image Quality is about the same as the 50D, and both are full metal bodies etc..
It's the auto-focus system that makes it - for sports photography it's the best camera on the market sub £3k

 

[john182rs]

For last christmas i was going to buy the 50D as my first ever DSLR, talked and done a lot of research then bought a 7D.
Its quiet abit more expensive, well worth it though. Even as a learner like me, i have had some fantasic shots from it.

To go 50D to a 7D, i would say is more than worth it, get it well before you go on holiday though, just to get to grips with it so you dont naff up that all time one picture you'd like.

 

[dk]

thats what i was hoping you'd say, and thats the reason i wanted it, was using my 50d at the DTM recently on servo and most of it was good, couldn't help but feel i could do with a few more points though. plus i like the idea of the area focus.

if i have the 50d and the 7d then i also don't have to change lenses so often, can use the 70-200 4L on the 7d and keep the 17-55 2.8 on the 50d, although that would be a heavy combo to carry around! And to take abroad!

 

[dk]

For last christmas i was going to buy the 50D as my first ever DSLR, talked and done a lot of research then bought a 7D.
Its quiet abit more expensive, well worth it though. Even as a learner like me, i have had some fantasic shots from it.

To go 50D to a 7D, i would say is more than worth it, get it well before you go on holiday though, just to get to grips with it so you dont naff up that all time one picture you'd like.

my 50 d was £1100 when i bought it when it first came out and the 7d is the same price. I bought it the week before i was going to Machu Picchu in Peru, so that was my first use of it, and it went well tbh. I had moved up from the 350d.

If i buy the 7d now, that gives me a couple of months to get used to it before Antactica, need to master the white balance for all that snow and ice!

 

[john182rs]

The white balance is easy, i have it on custom set up now i know more about it, for a noivce to get hold of it quickly, you should be well on your way with it.
Focus points are brilliant, ok i know i have not owned another DSLR but ive used many different ones and found the 7D to be more than superior, well till i had a 1D mk4 for a while.

Either how (music to your ears) go get one, you'll not regret it and with the 7D alone it will be all you need for the holiday. Just take a range of lenses and try to keep it light ish.

 

[SamP]

White balance in auto, shoot raw, job done. Seriously though do you need the better AF? As you're unlikely to get better image quality and maybe a wee bit better noise reduction. White balance wont be a problem in Antarctica, its getting a proper exposure else you'll end up with grey snow.

5DMk2 makes way more sense even if it is 'long in the tooth'. Sell EF-S and get 'real' lenses.

 

[dk]

Flol @ real lenses, 10-22 (£700) and 17-55 f2.8 IS (£800) are VERY good lense, the 17-55 is L quality, I have those two ef-s and a 70-200f4 L and. 50mm so there's no way I'm changing to full frame, loads of serious photographers who use 5dmkII and bought a 7d say there's actually no need to go 5d now. I'm never going to get to 1d stage.

I just can't see the point of full frame for me, especially when I enjoy the extra focal lenth it gives me on the lenses. A bit feature I want to give a go is 1080p video with the 70-200 lense.

 

[john182rs]

With the 5D and 1D bodies, even tho they are good they have the full sensor and not the 1.6 crop sensor.
I could have had a 2nd hand 5d mk II for about the same money as a brand new 7d with a lense. The full sensors are good for close up photography, dont forget this is in my opinion. Although you call them 'real' lenses you dont get as much zoom as the ones with a crop.

A 70mm-200mm lense on a 5D is equivlent to having a 112mm-320mm on a 7D but still the 7D is only using a lense with the same range of the 70-200.
The over all quality of the cameras makes as little difference between each other that the human eye can pick up on. Image size may be alot bigger tho.

It all comes down to what you want though? Oh an how much you would like to spend on a body too?

 

[SamP]

They're optically L quality but thats about as far as it goes. Comparing my 10 - 22 to any of my other L lenses and its a non starter. What are you even shooting to need the better AF? By your lens selection its obviously not birds in flight/aircraft, im guessing its just car bits and every day portraits here and there?

Personally I dont think its really worth the upgrade. None of your lenses are weather sealed so thats not a feature you'll be making use of, nor will you really notice the ISO performance/image quality change.

On the upside though, the video is fantastic if a bit limited in some aspects (rolling shutter mainly). You'll get to retain the CF's you've got from your 50d. Dunno, if it was me I'd keep my money. If you do buy, mint second hand ones come up for about 875 quid on talk photography. I might even be tempted to sell mine in a few weeks if I can get money together for FF.

FYI - the 'real' was tongue in cheek, hence the '''s.

 

[john182rs]

I just can't see the point of full frame for me, especially when I enjoy the extra focal lenth it gives me on the lenses. A bit feature I want to give a go is 1080p video with the 70-200 lense.

1080p at 60fps on a 1.8 50mm prime lense is brilliant, slow mo vids rule. Specially of things, people, animals crashing into each other or some thing hard.
If you lived any where near to me I'd let you have a play with mine to see how you get on with it.

 

[Andy.]

*lens. Just an itch I had to scratch.

 

[SamP]

1080p at 60fps on a 1.8 50mm prime lense is brilliant, slow mo vids rule. Specially of things, people, animals crashing into each other or some thing hard.
If you lived any where near to me I'd let you have a play with mine to see how you get on with it.

1080p at 60fps also isnt possible on a 7d.

 

[Brazo]

I too would also question the suitability of that camera for the 'travel' applications you say you need it for. Whilst its undoubtedly a great camera for the motor sport/wildlife applications as a travel camera I would want something much smaller. In addition the sensor is far from cutting edge nowadays and many much smaller cameras will offer better quality (lens for lens!).

 

[john182rs]

1080p at 60fps also isnt possible on a 7d.

I stand corrected, 720p not 1080p.

 

[dk]

They're optically L quality but thats about as far as it goes. Comparing my 10 - 22 to any of my other L lenses and its a non starter. What are you even shooting to need the better AF? By your lens selection its obviously not birds in flight/aircraft, im guessing its just car bits and every day portraits here and there?

Personally I dont think its really worth the upgrade. None of your lenses are weather sealed so thats not a feature you'll be making use of, nor will you really notice the ISO performance/image quality change.

On the upside though, the video is fantastic if a bit limited in some aspects (rolling shutter mainly). You'll get to retain the CF's you've got from your 50d. Dunno, if it was me I'd keep my money. If you do buy, mint second hand ones come up for about 875 quid on talk photography. I might even be tempted to sell mine in a few weeks if I can get money together for FF.

FYI - the 'real' was tongue in cheek, hence the '''s.

The 17-55 is L quality, it's the construction of the body which doesnt make it an L, it's a very good lens though, especially for indoors low light. I also have a 24-70 L and it's not as good as the 17-55.....

Anyway, I need the af for motorsport and general sport photography, I do a lot of that tbh.

 

[dk]

I too would also question the suitability of that camera for the 'travel' applications you say you need it for. Whilst its undoubtedly a great camera for the motor sport/wildlife applications as a travel camera I would want something much smaller. In addition the sensor is far from cutting edge nowadays and many much smaller cameras will offer better quality (lens for lens!).

Size is not an issue, it's no larger than the 50d, just 80 or 90g heavier, but when you have the lens's I do, it doesn't really matter.

 

[Cup_Phil]

From what I've read - if your doing stuff like the DTM then DEFINITELY you'll love the 7D AF system
I wouldn't keep a 50D as a second body - it's too bloody heavy and a very similar camera to the 7D
You could sell it and get like a 450D or something lighter as a backup body

As for the argument of L lenses and non-L lenses. LOL there's some retarded comments in here - the lenses you've got are fine. I use the 70-200mm f4/L loads and it is absolutely pin sharp
HOWEVER I swapped a load of my lenses for L-lenses and I would never go back - the image quality is amazing - but it's a big jump in money

The people saying you don't need a 7D for what you do are utter morons - anyone who does motorsport photography who's used a 7D will tell you - it's the difference between a 50% keep rate and a 90% keep rate. Every photo I take with the 7D is pin sharp and useable - with the 50D it was more like 60/70% of shots
The shooting speed is insane, the video is awesome for drift shoots etc..

Oh and while I'm on the rant - 5D isn't even a camera you should consider unless you only do static shots - it's AF system is archaic. Full frame is nice for portraits and it's ISO handling is insane - but for sports photography it's not even a choice

You've got either the 7D or the 1D MKIII and I can't justify £3k+ on a body lol

 

[Andy.]

The 5DII (& classic as they're effectively the same) AF is not as bad as people make out. You are limited to using the centre point if you want to accurately use servo focus, but it can keep up with most subjects without a problem. A 1DII/III/IV/ or 7D will definitely have the upper hand, but the 5DII is more than adequate.

I've used mine for loads of sporting events, with both the 24-105 and 70-200 f2.8L IS MkII and I never felt that I was missing shots because of the AF speed.

That said, the 7D is probably the better choice for DK, although I'd be tempted to wait for the next gen of Canon cameras and then upgrade. Both the 5 and 7 are getting a bit old these days and must be due a refresh soon.

 

[dunganick]

Just as a note, motorsports (cars particularly) doesn't actually require a fast AF system, just an accurate one. Most of the shots are taken so far from the subject that the lenses operate on close to infinity, so there is very little AF travel to track cars.

Cars are also massive, they typically contrast the background and are just a sitting duck for AF systems.

I would happily use a 5d2, they are used by plenty of motorsports togs.

However for the money the 7d is a cracking camera and for people not wanting to spend too much money on glass, the 1.6 crop will help maintain your focal lengths.

Keep the 50d for a 2nd camera, its much more suitable for a 2nd body than an XXX body. The last thing you want for a 2nd body is one made of plastic (2nd cameras get more wear than the first camera as they get bashed) and the 50d is a much easier camera to use if you quickly need to swap onto another body. Controls are easier to quickly use etc...

 

[dk]

hmm, i was on the verge of buying it yesterday, then all the negativity in here i kind of talked myself out of it, now i'm back in the purchase camp.

what to do.

wonder if an 8d is on the cards anytime soon.....

 

[dk]

As for the argument of L lenses and non-L lenses. LOL there's some retarded comments in here - the lenses you've got are fine. I use the 70-200mm f4/L loads and it is absolutely pin sharp
HOWEVER I swapped a load of my lenses for L-lenses and I would never go back - the image quality is amazing - but it's a big jump in money

see, i agree, the 70-200 is an amazing lens, i get 99% hit rate from it its sooo good.

but i have a 24-70L and a 17-55 (not the silly kit lense 18-55 but the f2.8 IS model), and it produces better pics than the L lens, so i never use the 24-70 as it just ca't beat the 17-55.

Not all non-L lens's are poorer quality, the 17-55 is a special case, lots of people think it should be an L lens, but because of its construciton it can't, but its L quality for sure.

With the 10-22, i didn't really have a choice, so the range i have are all top quality, i can't justify upgrading the 70-200 to a 2.8 as its a big jump in money and weight, and i don't need the speed as i'm mostly shooting outside with it.

 

[Feirny]

I'd just get it Dave, the residual value isn't going to be much less if you decide ou don't like it or you upgrade to a new canon model in the near future.

 

[SamP]

I'd just get it Dave, the residual value isn't going to be much less if you decide ou don't like it or you upgrade to a new canon model in the near future.

Agree'd. Its not going to be replaced this year, and certainly not until winter next at the earliest.

Oh and while I'm on the rant - 5D isn't even a camera you should consider unless you only do static shots.

b****cks.

 

[Andy.]

DK, wasn't your 24-70 sent back by a customer as he wasn't happy with the quality or something? The 17-55 is a great lens, but a perfectly working 24-70 should easily match it in terms of IQ.

 

[Cup_Phil]

Just as a note, motorsports (cars particularly) doesn't actually require a fast AF system, just an accurate one. Most of the shots are taken so far from the subject that the lenses operate on close to infinity, so there is very little AF travel to track cars.

Cars are also massive, they typically contrast the background and are just a sitting duck for AF systems.

I would happily use a 5d2, they are used by plenty of motorsports togs.

However for the money the 7d is a cracking camera and for people not wanting to spend too much money on glass, the 1.6 crop will help maintain your focal lengths.

Keep the 50d for a 2nd camera, its much more suitable for a 2nd body than an XXX body. The last thing you want for a 2nd body is one made of plastic (2nd cameras get more wear than the first camera as they get bashed) and the 50d is a much easier camera to use if you quickly need to swap onto another body. Controls are easier to quickly use etc...

You obviously haven't taken any shots at cadwell park or at the WRC

The cars virtually run over your toes lol

 

[Feirny]

You obviously haven't taken any shots at cadwell park or at the WRC

The cars virtually run over your toes lol

I have

 

[sneeks]

I have been considering selling all of my Sony gear and investing in a 7D instead. The alternative is sell my A55 and upgrade to the A77. Not sure what I'll do but I'm definitely tempted to make the switch.

 

[dk]

Oops........

 

[Brazo]

Oops........

Well I think you'd made your mind up before asking so no bad thing

 

[dk]

Lol, I went to sainsburys to get the shopping and had a quick detour the other side of town to jesseops to take a look.

Had some yound teenage girl ask me if I needed help, me thinking she would be rubbish, but she actually knew loads about cameras, knew the features of the 50d even though they don't sell it now, I was really impressed, so I bought it.

Cheapest place you can get it too, checked out camera price buster, so all good. Just need to try some video and hope I can edit it on the mac book air, otherwise I'll have to invest in a mac book pro.........

 

[Brazo]

Well get some pics up

 

[dk]

Bloody battery is empty, charging it now, on first impressions it's lovely, the AF if immense

 

[Feirny]

Video editing is a doddle Dave, just make sure you have the latest iMovie and you'll be away.

 

[dk]

Oh right, so I don't need to use the canon software then, do I just install the driver and then import the video into iMovie?

I only have 2gb ram on my air though, hopefully the ssd will make up the difference.

 

[Feirny]

2GB will be fine unless you're using something like FCP, After Effects or Premiere Pro.

But yeah, just transfer the files to a folder, import from there and let iMovie do the rest, some decent tutorials on the net to get you started.

 

[dk]

been having a play, not too bad, although i really need more than 7gb free on my hard drive really.....

 

[Paul_G]

Good buy - great camera I really like mine. Admittedly not the latest technology but it's still a great alround body that will serve you well.

 

[dk]

DK, wasn't your 24-70 sent back by a customer as he wasn't happy with the quality or something? The 17-55 is a great lens, but a perfectly working 24-70 should easily match it in terms of IQ.

Very good memory there Andy!

i had a play with micro adjustments and it was back focusing, had to adjust it +10, still prefer the 17-55, maybe i just trust it more.

love micro adjustments though, as much of a pain in the ass that they are, its a great feature to save a fucked lens

 

[dk]

right, one lessen learnt so far, need IS on a lens to do video, pretty pointless without, might need to upgrade my 70-200f4 to the IS model.