Upload & Sell: Off
| Re: Your choice of body for wildlife? |
Never said a thing about pixel density or reducing an 18MP image to a 7MP image. My point is that the 7D does not provide more reach. You may interpret all the pixel density crap that way but I don\'t. Feel free to have a different opinion but it\'s rude to discount other\'s opinions as rubbish.
But the very omission of pixel density and not taking it into account is precisely what makes your initial statement inaccurate and misleading. The reality that an APS-C sensor does not make a 100 mm lens into a 160 mm lens is completely irrelevant in focal length-limited situations. What is relevant is the pixel density and, subsequently, how many pixels you can put on the subject.
My main point is that there is no universal answer to the question of which camera body is the best for wildlife shooting. Whether it is a 7D, a 1D Mark IV, a 5D Mark III, or a 1DX, each is going to have the potential to perform better in some situations than will the others. If I\'m focal length-limited or if I need mobility, there is no question that my results are going to be better with the 7D. If I\'m not focal length-limited and if I don\'t need mobility, the results will be (marginally) better with the 1D Mark IV. And, if I knew that I was never going to be focal length-limited and never need the mobility that a shorter/smaller lens affords, I\'d be more than happy to take my chances with a 5D Mark III or 1DX.
Thus, my objection is to the use of blanket statements like \"no brainer\", \"hands-down winner\", etc. that would mislead people into thinking that there is a single Canon camera body is that is going to be the best for use in all wildlife shooting situations. That simply is not the case.