This topic is in the 2009 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 20097d for weddings?
p.1 #17d for weddings?
Man. I'm disappointed. Things the 7d has that the 5dII doesn't but should:
- 100% field of view viewfinder
- 19-point all cross-type AF vs the mkII's 9pt?!
I know its gear, but this is the first I heard of the 7d, and I wanted to
know if anyone is actually considering picking one up. It's a 1.6xcrop
body which blows whale blubber but at the price, and with those specs,
seems kinda cool.
Mod note: trying to keep the gear talk relevant to weddings - Steve
Edited by Steve Tinetti on Sep 01, 2009 at 12:23 AM · View previous versions
- 100% field of view viewfinder
- 19-point all cross-type AF vs the mkII's 9pt?!
I know its gear, but this is the first I heard of the 7d, and I wanted to
know if anyone is actually considering picking one up. It's a 1.6xcrop
body which blows whale blubber but at the price, and with those specs,
seems kinda cool.
Mod note: trying to keep the gear talk relevant to weddings - Steve
Edited by Steve Tinetti on Sep 01, 2009 at 12:23 AM · View previous versions
Aug 31, 2009 at 11:29 PM
p.1 #37d for weddings?
also... 8fps.
and it looks to use the 5dII batteries and grips. At least
they're not total jerks.
and it looks to use the 5dII batteries and grips. At least
they're not total jerks.
Aug 31, 2009 at 11:31 PM
p.1 #47d for weddings?
oh boy, can't wait to see how it stacks up against the 5DII.
Aug 31, 2009 at 11:40 PM
p.1 #57d for weddings?
I really dont get Canon anymore....
As i mentioned in the rumour thread, the 7D takes out the 5D Mark II in all aspects but the 21.1 resolution and full-frame-sensor... Wauw! Now im not sure about you, but i feel that Canon are way off..Aug 31, 2009 at 11:53 PM
p.1 #77d for weddings?
TRReichman wrote:
The real question is does the AF work?
- trr
straight from robgalbraith:
Static autofocus was excellent, using Spot AF, various AF points, AI Servo (we almost never use One Shot) and a small batch of different lenses. With the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II, EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS (also introduced today), EF 70-200mm f/4L IS, EF 200mm f/2L IS and EF 800mm f/5.6L IS, photos were simply in focus. We also used the EF 85mm f/1.2L II, and focus was all over the place. The same lens exhibited the same unstable AF on an EOS 5D Mark II, suggesting the problem was more a function of the lens than the camera.
to me it makes sense that Canon would release such a camera, mainly to compete with Nikon's D300 and even full frame D700. The 7D exhibits 1D series technology (dual digics, improved af) which are evident in Nikon's line of cameras. However to us who own the 5d mark II, it wouldn't make sense, but that's just how technology goes - canon sees a weakness in their line up, canon releases.
The real question is does the AF work?
- trr
straight from robgalbraith:
Static autofocus was excellent, using Spot AF, various AF points, AI Servo (we almost never use One Shot) and a small batch of different lenses. With the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II, EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS (also introduced today), EF 70-200mm f/4L IS, EF 200mm f/2L IS and EF 800mm f/5.6L IS, photos were simply in focus. We also used the EF 85mm f/1.2L II, and focus was all over the place. The same lens exhibited the same unstable AF on an EOS 5D Mark II, suggesting the problem was more a function of the lens than the camera.
to me it makes sense that Canon would release such a camera, mainly to compete with Nikon's D300 and even full frame D700. The 7D exhibits 1D series technology (dual digics, improved af) which are evident in Nikon's line of cameras. However to us who own the 5d mark II, it wouldn't make sense, but that's just how technology goes - canon sees a weakness in their line up, canon releases.
Sep 01, 2009 at 12:01 AM
p.1 #87d for weddings?
i will not consider any camera that is not full frame.
Sep 01, 2009 at 12:14 AM
p.1 #107d for weddings?
Hilarious - if it was FF and retailed for $2499, people would bitch about the price. 
Sep 01, 2009 at 12:53 AM
p.1 #127d for weddings?
sav1977 wrote:
Hilarious - if it was FF and retailed for $2499, people would bitch about the price.
= 5diii
Hilarious - if it was FF and retailed for $2499, people would bitch about the price.
= 5diii
Sep 01, 2009 at 12:58 AM
p.1 #137d for weddings?
its ok though, means i dont gota spend monies on new body. I like my 5D1 anyhow.
Sep 01, 2009 at 01:02 AM
p.1 #147d for weddings?
can someone explain why you guys choose full frame over crop?
Sep 01, 2009 at 01:09 AM
p.1 #157d for weddings?
sidewa
388 wrote:
can someone explain why you guys choose full frame over crop?
Cuz i buy the 16-35 to use it at 16-35... and i buy my 50mm to use at 50mm.
388 wrote:can someone explain why you guys choose full frame over crop?
Cuz i buy the 16-35 to use it at 16-35... and i buy my 50mm to use at 50mm.
Sep 01, 2009 at 01:31 AM
p.1 #167d for weddings?
sidewa388 wrote:
can someone explain why you guys choose full frame over crop?
Sure.
If I own a 35mm lens. I want the resulting image to appear as though
it was taken with a 35mm lens. I don't want what looks like an image
from a 56mm lens (which is what you'd get with a 1.6x crop)
Similarly, for those that love their wide angle glass, like the 16-35,
putting that on a Crop sensor body would just be idiotic.
Plus, FF sensors just have a look to them, just more pleasing to me.
could be in my head, but I see a difference.
I'm sure there are other reasons- people will poost
388 wrote:can someone explain why you guys choose full frame over crop?
Sure.
If I own a 35mm lens. I want the resulting image to appear as though
it was taken with a 35mm lens. I don't want what looks like an image
from a 56mm lens (which is what you'd get with a 1.6x crop)
Similarly, for those that love their wide angle glass, like the 16-35,
putting that on a Crop sensor body would just be idiotic.
Plus, FF sensors just have a look to them, just more pleasing to me.
could be in my head, but I see a difference.
I'm sure there are other reasons- people will poost
Sep 01, 2009 at 01:32 AM
p.1 #187d for weddings?
Well everyone...
Here's the long and short of it.
It should be a great body. It's already testing better than the 50D and it's features in MANY areas better the 1DMark III.
Which means but one thing... a better 1D Mark IV. :o)
My Mark III will continue to deliver one of a kind images, and better autofocus than most other cameras on the market.
Only one thing really matters with todays technology because it's all great... YOUR & MY skills with said cameras. It'll still come down to that in the end.
With everything said... I believe I've found my next backup camera.
-Tim
Red Vine Studios
Http://redvinestudios.com
Here's the long and short of it.
It should be a great body. It's already testing better than the 50D and it's features in MANY areas better the 1DMark III.
Which means but one thing... a better 1D Mark IV. :o)
My Mark III will continue to deliver one of a kind images, and better autofocus than most other cameras on the market.
Only one thing really matters with todays technology because it's all great... YOUR & MY skills with said cameras. It'll still come down to that in the end.
With everything said... I believe I've found my next backup camera.
-Tim
Red Vine Studios
Http://redvinestudios.com
Sep 01, 2009 at 02:02 AM
p.1 #197d for weddings?
tmiller wrote:
My Mark III will continue to deliver one of a kind images, and better autofocus than most other cameras on the market.
http://www.photographertoronto.com/images/1%20canon.gif
My Mark III will continue to deliver one of a kind images, and better autofocus than most other cameras on the market.
http://www.photographertoronto.com/images/1%20canon.gif
Sep 01, 2009 at 02:08 AM
p.1 #207d for weddings?
a new release and more complaints.........this will never end 
Nothing is for everyone. Just get what YOU need and skip the rest. Why don't we complain about P&S too
Nothing is for everyone. Just get what YOU need and skip the rest. Why don't we complain about P&S too
Sep 01, 2009 at 02:09 AM