UK people. I see digitalrev has the 7D in stock (london stock apparently) for only £1368 inc postage. Is this the best deal going? They have it for £200 less for shipping from Hong Kong but I guess UK customs tax could easily be £200.
Yep, ebay. Though maybe it's Hong Kong stock that's been shipped to London? I guess a call would clear that up. Still a nice deal compared to the general ripoff prices everywhere else.
garyvot wrote:
I agree, based on my limted experience with the camera so far. I love the viewfinder size, brightness, etc., but it does not seem to be tuned for easy manual focusing. I think if you are into fast primes, alt-lenses and the like, you'll still want a 1-series or 5-series with an 'S' screen.
I sure hope Canon doesn't just drop this new viewfinder tech into the 3D or 1Ds Mark IV without giving us options for manual focusing.
They wouldn't do that, would they?
Maybe's it's just me, but I abhor using 1.6x croppers and fast glass in MF mode. I wouldn't care if they had interchangeable screens for the 7D, I wouldn't be using it. For me it's a FF or 1.3x cropper at worst. IMO there's not a snowball's chance in hell the 1 series will lose their interchangeable screen ability, although the current mk III screens are already excellent for MF.
I'm only a serious amateur and my main viewing method is an Apple Cinema display or a 1080p LCD TV. I only make prints to give to friends. You are certainly right in that static full frame on full screen even my 4 MP G3 pictures look great. So why are more MP and high ISO important? Wildlife photos. (For others it may be sports or concert work.) To capture an active monkey in the trees of a rainy Costa Rican jungle takes all the ISO and resolution a camera has. I'm pleased with what my 40D captured, but if the 7D can deliver a stop of noise improvement and a stop in resolution improvement along with its advertised AF improvement, it might be worth the upgrade.
One other image display method to consider... I have my Mac screen saver set up to display random images from my Pictures folder. The Ken Burns effect takes full advantage of your image's resolution by simultaneously scrolling and zooming on the image. It doesn't always work, scrolling in on someone's belt buckle, but when it scrolls across a well detailed landscape or zooms in on a sharply captured animal, you see things you haven't noticed before. Of course you can also find yourself being terribly critical of your own work and thinking that if you just had the 7D, all would be solved.
Edit: wow, I messed up the quotes, sorry. Don't try to edit with the emoticon window up on a Mac!
So, 97 pages later, is there a consensus as to whether this camera is worth owning or not? I'm interested but for every yes there appears to be a no. Humans sure are a fickle bunch
Mr Zoom:
is there a consensus as to whether this camera is worth owning or not? I'm interested but for every yes there appears to be a no.
Exactly. It appears as if we are reading about two (or more) different cameras. I do not think that there is any consensus ever achievable on the pages of this forum
Mr Zoom wrote:
So, 97 pages later, is there a consensus as to whether this camera is worth owning or not? I'm interested but for every yes there appears to be a no. Humans sure are a fickle bunch
Ken
Ken - I've been following this thread for the last 50, (?), pages or so. You just have to pick out the parts that you want...
For instance, the discussion about "no one views at 100%". Maybe not, But I do crop images, so how the camera handles cropping is important to me.
I skipped the 50D - just could not get myself to "pull the trigger", but I'm looking at the 7D very closely. The images I'm seeing on N&W are encouraging - you might want to pop over there if you haven't...
I'm going to wait until I see something that helps me make up my mind - that has not happened yet.
Ron
Mr Zoom wrote:
So, 97 pages later, is there a consensus as to whether this camera is worth owning or not? I'm interested but for every yes there appears to be a no. Humans sure are a fickle bunch
Ken
Ken ... it is a great camera ... if you are interested, just go buy one and give it a try. We are not going to get a consensus because many people that are commenting do not own one and are not going to be able to form final opinions. Others, myself included, are taking and processing images, but really waiting for full support from Adobe to produce final images and do detailed evaluations.
Someone was asking about an image with 7D and 15-85mm IS lens fully open and fully wide. So here is an example.
Also, the second image was shot at 85mm fully open and at ISO 6400. I didn't even bother to remove any noise. Both images processed from RAW in LR on Mac.
jorkata wrote:
From everything that I've seen so far, the 7D is shaping up as a great camera that is lacking in image quality at ISOs other than 100-200.
Strangely enough I have the 7D and it's high ISO capabilities are beyond (in a positive way) any of the previous cameras I had before and I had every single xxD starting with the 10D. If you insist on using beta quality RAW converters (as do most of the complainants in terms of ISO noise) this only is a testimony to the bad quality these deliver currently.
jorkata wrote:
From everything that I've seen so far, the 7D is shaping up as a great camera that is lacking in image quality at ISOs other than 100-200.
Is there really going to be no end to this nonsense from you?
I can't decide whether you need an eye test or are being deliberately - shall we say? - disingenuous?
jorkata wrote:
From everything that I've seen so far, the 7D is shaping up as a great camera that is lacking in image quality at ISOs other than 100-200.
Reminds of the Nikon D2X - some people bought it and others switched to the Canon 1DII(n) for cleaner images at higher ISOs.
It's a personal preference at the end.
If your camera really truly can not perform above 200 ISO then you need to look into a replacement, as my P&S does a better job!
jorkata wrote:
Right. JPEG out of the camera with NR set to Standard.
The 7D also has superb in-camera noise reduction. No argument about that.
And what is your problem? Photography is about the final result, not about the single pixel and it's properties because then it would be called pixelography...
UCSB wrote:
We are not going to get a consensus because many people that are commenting do not own one and are not going to be able to form final opinions. Others, myself included, are taking and processing images, but really waiting for full support from Adobe to produce final images and do detailed evaluations.
There are also a few individuals who just like stirring up the pot, I think.
