I used to have a 7D for occasional paid HS sports gigs, but sold it. I now use the 1DX2 and 5D4 for those jobs, however sparingly it happens. Thinking of getting the 7D again, both for sports and just giggles.
Other than "only" 18mps and not being able to get it serviced, any drawbacks to getting this camera in 2025? lol
I still have both my 7d’s (both I/II) shutter count is low on both 15k/19k
They are/were absolute speed demons for their time. I can’t envisage ever selling mine. They fetch peanuts these days.
A lot of fun for little outlay
I say go for it 🤣👍🏻
Just to add…
Their build quality was legendary back then, remember Kai on YouTube setting fire to one, run over by a truck, thrown down concrete steps…and it still worked!!
Everything was compared to the 7d ruggedness (except One D’s obvs)
I’ve still got my MK 1 and 2 wasn’t worth selling them as shutter count was fairly high at around 75 K
Agree completely reliable but would say to go for the MK 2 as the autofocus was better
I was always happy with image quality but do need to nail the exposure/expose a bit to the right
Yes, still got mine. Built like a brick. AF a bit suspect with my 100-400L but usable for closer subjects. Good IQ for the time but now eclipsed by the RF series.
The 7D was never all that great. In addition to the noise the AF was not so reliable even with the micro adjustments. The 7D II was one of the few from that era I never had due to unfavorable timing. I had to get the 70D and then the next time I needed a cropper it was the 80D which was one of if not the first Canon with the new-technology sensors that had better low ISO.
EB-1 wrote:
The 7D was never all that great. In addition to the noise the AF was not so reliable even with the micro adjustments. The 7D II was one of the few from that era I never had due to unfavorable timing. I had to get the 70D and then the next time I needed a cropper it was the 80D which was one of if not the first Canon with the new-technology sensors that had better low ISO.
EBH
Still have both 70d & 80d too
For some bizarre reason I always preferred the 70d in live view?? Canon changed the AF on the 80d and we just didn’t gel !
Those last years of the dslr era were frankly amazing.
Ming-Tzu wrote:
I used to have a 7D for occasional paid HS sports gigs, but sold it. I now use the 1DX2 and 5D4 for those jobs, however sparingly it happens. Thinking of getting the 7D again, both for sports and just giggles.
Other than "only" 18mps and not being able to get it serviced, any drawbacks to getting this camera in 2025? lol
I think that only you can make the call on this one. The camera, obviously, is capable of doing everything it was able to do when it was a new product, and if those capabilities are what you are looking for, it will still make good pictures. And, of course, the lenses on your other two DSLRs will still work with it.
These days, for those buying a _new_ camera (and I realize that isn't your goal here), one of the more contemporary mirrorless models will have improved capabilities... but that doesn't mean the old stuff doesn't still work, too.
I still have a 1DsMKII with a 16.7 megapixel CMOS sensor! It presents a wonderful unique image file to me! I sold my original only to have "sellers remorse" the minute I did! I asked the buyer to sell it back. He said no way! So I got another! Still have it and love the image it presents.
Yeah it has its "minuses" but nothing some pp wont remedy!
If you find the 7D makes an image you enjoy why not get another? I love APS-C sensors for my macro work!
I have not moved to mirrorless yet!
Good luck!
Dan
On 18mp and 24mp Rebels, there really isn't much difference in high iso. Sure 24mp is a little better, but either way i'm using iso 6400 without too much concern and avoiding 12800 (full stop iso on Rebels.) So it kinda didn't necessarily matter if I used one or the other for high iso,
Haven't used 7D, but 60D looked pretty clean at 6400 for aps. 7D should do fine vs latest 24mp sensors, I'd think, unless they've really improved high iso (which I doubt.)
Yes 24mp is supposed to have better DR, especially at <400 or so, on most of them, 5D4 and 1Dx2 better DR anyway though, not sure if aps makes much sense on high DR
Back when I was first getting into photography I really wanted a 7D and a 24-105 F4 but just couldn't afford it. Years later I eventually went full frame with a Nikon D600 followed by a number of Sony A7 bodies. I never did buy that 7D but every now and then I still get the itch to pick one up and live out that dream.
AmbientMike wrote:
On 18mp and 24mp Rebels, there really isn't much difference in high iso. Sure 24mp is a little better, but either way i'm using iso 6400 without too much concern and avoiding 12800 (full stop iso on Rebels.) So it kinda didn't necessarily matter if I used one or the other for high iso,
Haven't used 7D, but 60D looked pretty clean at 6400 for aps. 7D should do fine vs latest 24mp sensors, I'd think, unless they've really improved high iso (which I doubt.)
Yes 24mp is supposed to have better DR, especially at <400 or so, on most of them, 5D4 and 1Dx2 better DR anyway though, not sure if aps makes much sense on high DR ...Show more →
7D uses the "old" sensor. Compared to newer Rebels (e.g. SL2) there would be that difference of 5D3 vs 5D4 in the sensor performance.
I missed more images with the flakey AF of the 7D than anything else. It was my extra reach camera when the 1Ds IIIs and big teles were not enough. The 5DsR changed the game as it had enough pixels to be cropped and yet had some of the larger camera performance characteristics.
Canon really lost the plot by the time of the 80D. The sensor was good except it should not have had an AA filter. I bought the 80D and D7200 within about a month and tested and compared quite a bit. The Nikon was just so much better. I still feel that Canon was never so good with croppers, all the way through the shaky 90D and the R7.
EB-1 wrote:
I missed more images with the flakey AF of the 7D than anything else. It was my extra reach camera when the 1Ds IIIs and big teles were not enough. The 5DsR changed the game as it had enough pixels to be cropped and yet had some of the larger camera performance characteristics.
Canon really lost the plot by the time of the 80D. The sensor was good except it should not have had an AA filter. I bought the 80D and D7200 within about a month and tested and compared quite a bit. The Nikon was just so much better. I still feel that Canon was never so good with croppers, all the way through the shaky 90D and the R7.
That’s polar opposite to my experience
I used the original 7d for 2yrs with 70-300L (sons football)
Worked flawlessly, I then bought the 7dii…ugh!! AF and exposure were constantly off, so decided to bite the bullet and bought the 5diii & 100-400Lii …. WOW 😳
Never looked back, still have it and use it to this day. That particular 5diii has been glued to that lens forever. I have a 2nd 5diii with a 40stm for team shots.
Often considered the 5div, but read a fair few comments elsewhere saying they preferred the 5diii files ?? So I stayed put!! 😂
Pixelpuffin wrote:
That’s polar opposite to my experience
I used the original 7d for 2yrs with 70-300L (sons football)
Worked flawlessly, I then bought the 7dii…ugh!! AF and exposure were constantly off, so decided to bite the bullet and bought the 5diii & 100-400Lii …. WOW 😳
Never looked back, still have it and use it to this day. That particular 5diii has been glued to that lens forever. I have a 2nd 5diii with a 40stm for team shots.
Often considered the 5div, but read a fair few comments elsewhere saying they preferred the 5diii files ?? So I stayed put!! 😂
I used a 5D3+100-400II for soccer. Then I added a 7D2 for more "reach". It was OK, but I wound up preferring the files from the 5D3, even with cropping. I never got a 5D4 because it looked like an incremental upgrade without solving the major issues I had with the 5D3. I held out for the R6 which I'm still using.
