Canon 7D vs Nikon D7000 ?

vrapan said:
Sorry for the diversion from the main topic but do you mean that if I stick my motorised Tamron in a motorised body (D90/D7000) it will still be using the lens motor to focus? Hm wouldn't like that I can tell you already
Click to expand...

No, there are two versions of this lens, the older version had no internal focus motor and relied on the camera's screw-drive focusing motor like D lenses.
So put this lens on a high-end body, and it's AF is impressively fast, solving the lenses only real Achilles heal which is AF speed.

The lens was then revised and the old one discontinued. With the new version they added an internal AF motor, like the Canon version had, except the Nikon version's motor is a fair amount quieter (still not exactly quiet, but acceptable) but a little slower.
 
arad85 said:
Yes, people use the weather sealed bodies in rainy/snowy days - assuming you are using an appropriate weather sealed lenses. The problem comes when you try and define what "weather sealed" means. For example, what do you define as a rainy day - a bit of light rain or driving storms?
Click to expand...

Ive used both my 20D and 300D (neither of which are weather sealed) in rain, snow, salt spray etc and they've been fine (tho i did once kill a 10D by imersing it in salt water - i got hit by a wave while shooting gannets from a RiB), I think most cameras are okay so long as you use comon sense about keeping them as dry as possible
 
big soft moose said:
Ive used both my 20D and 300D (neither of which are weather sealed) in rain, snow, salt spray etc and they've been fine (tho i did once kill a 10D by imersing it in salt water - i got hit by a wave while shooting gannets from a RiB), I think most cameras are okay so long as you use comon sense about keeping them as dry as possible
Click to expand...
I agree, but one mans weather sealing is anothers "it's pointless". Someone here killed a 5D2 with a wave that pushed water in through the covered HDMI socket.

It would be so much easier if camera manufacturers used the standard IP rating system.
 
MomentCapture said:
No, there are two versions of this lens, the older version had no internal focus motor and relied on the camera's screw-drive focusing motor like D lenses.
So put this lens on a high-end body, and it's AF is impressively fast, solving the lenses only real Achilles heal which is AF speed.

The lens was then revised and the old one discontinued. With the new version they added an internal AF motor, like the Canon version had, except the Nikon version's motor is a fair amount quieter (still not exactly quiet, but acceptable) but a little slower.
Click to expand...

Yes I know about the two versions, I have the motorised version which according to what you are saying means that regardless if I put it in front of my D40 or in front of a D7000 the lens will only use its own motor for focusing which is quiet but slow. :( Might have to hunt down a D version too...
 
arad85 said:
Yes, people use the weather sealed bodies in rainy/snowy days - assuming you are using an appropriate weather sealed lenses. The problem comes when you try and define what "weather sealed" means. For example, what do you define as a rainy day - a bit of light rain or driving storms?
Click to expand...


Well this guy looks like his been outside in heavy rain conditions:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rickrphoto/5547733549/
 
jonneymendoza said:
Well this guy looks like his been outside in heavy rain conditions:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rickrphoto/5547733549/
Click to expand...
But that's a 1D not 7D. For a start, it won't have the microphone/speaker holes necessary for video.... Personally, I'd take precautions if I was using either of my "weather sealed" bodies in anything more than a little light rain. I wouldn't trust a warranty claim based on "weather sealing". There are too many stories of cameras breaking in the field due to dust or moisture ingress...
 
arad85 said:
I agree, but one mans weather sealing is anothers "it's pointless". Someone here killed a 5D2 with a wave that pushed water in through the covered HDMI socket.

It would be so much easier if camera manufacturers used the standard IP rating system.
Click to expand...

I think a wave would kill most cameras - apart from under water jobs like the nikonos, or cameras in a fully waterproof housing - in his book 'a wildlife photographers year' Andy Rouse describes killing two Eos 1Vs (top end weather sealed film SLRs) while photographing dolphins from a boat

weather sealing is suposed to be proof against weather , not imersion in water (especially salt) - mind you saying that ages ago I fully imersed a pentax MZS in fresh water by rolling over a floating hide and once i'd taken it apart and left in the airing cupboard for a week it came back to life - but thats a film job, digital is bound to be more sensitive.
 
A little closer to my decision on which way to go...

D7000 Continuous Shooting limitations has got me, quite frankly, angry with Nikon...why couldn't they have addressed this knowing what the competition (Canon) could do?
Ergonomics is pretty even for my in-experienced hands...even though the grip and the thought of one-hand operation leans more to the 7D.
Low light Photography is better on the D7000? How much will I be doing?
Sports Photography is something that I definitely would like to try & 8fps for more than 3 seconds on the 7D wins hands down.
I'm not too concerned with the Movie options, but nice to have if needed.
I'm wondering how much the cost of other accessories like Flashes will add up, the Canon seem a little pricey on this one.

Come to think of it, it looks like I'm choosing a hobby that could cost a small fortune !

Today I am mostly leaning to a 7D...
 
Last edited:
WannaTakePix said:
I'm wondering how much the cost of other accessories like Flashes will add up, the Canon seem a little pricey on this one.
Click to expand...
Think lenses - that will be your most expensive outlay over time. You'll end up with more and cheaper choice with Canon (let's assume you'll go 17-55 f2.8 and 70-200 plus a 10-20ish range). Of course, if you go with the third party manufacturers, the costs even out, but for the crop sensor cameras, Canon have the cheaper "quality" lenses (for the most part).

WannaTakePix said:
Today I am mostly leaning to a 7D...
Click to expand...
If you're looking for a decent lens with that, I'd start with either the Tamron 17-50 non VC (although some people think the VC version is better now than the tested results), Canon 15-85 IS (what I have) or Canon 17-55 IS and see where you go from there (at a guess next move is normally a 70-200 f2.8/f4...)
 
WannaTakePix said:
Low light Photography is better on the D7000? How much will I be doing?
Click to expand...
Actually, that's not what I'd say. The D7000 is better at recovering details from underexposed photography. Underexposed photos and low light photography are two different things (although you might encounter underexposure when you're doing low light photography).
 
WannaTakePix said:
A little closer to my decision on which way to go...

D7000 Continuous Shooting limitations has got me, quite frankly, angry with Nikon...why couldn't they have addressed this knowing what the competition (Canon) could do?
Ergonomics is pretty even for my in-experienced hands...even though the grip and the thought of one-hand operation leans more to the 7D.
Low light Photography is better on the D7000? How much will I be doing?
Sports Photography is something that I definitely would like to try & 8fps for more than 3 seconds on the 7D wins hands down.
I'm not too concerned with the Movie options, but nice to have if needed.
I'm wondering how much the cost of other accessories like Flashes will add up, the Canon seem a little pricey on this one.

Come to think of it, it looks like I'm choosing a hobby that could cost a small fortune !

Today I am mostly leaning to a 7D...
Click to expand...

I think you should probably take both out on a test drive first, as it's a little painful to switch camps when your invested in a system.
If your really interested in shooting sports above other types of photography (never seen the draw personally) then the 7D probably is the way to go...
 
WannaTakePix said:
D7000 Continuous Shooting limitations has got me, quite frankly, angry with Nikon...why couldn't they have addressed this knowing what the competition (Canon) could do?...
Click to expand...

I don't see why. You've been told several times now that the D7000 is not the direct competitor to the 7D; that place is occupied by the D300s. The D7000 is equivalent to the 60D, and stands up well against it.

Basically if you want a better camera, pay more money!
 
I could argue with the word "better." You get different features but "better" is deffo up for debate as is if spending more money will get you it.
 
@ DemiLion
The question really is if the Op actually really likes sports photography and places the most importance on that?
Aside from sports the D7K has the D300s and 7D beat.
 
MomentCapture said:
^^^
ISO's a tad better...
Click to expand...
Yes, a tad is probably the right way to describe it... Looking on DPReview, and comparing 7D vs D7000 vs 5D2 ('cos I know the Canon bodies), I'd say the D7000 fits somewhere between the 5D2 and 7D, probably closer to the 7D. The difference between 5D2 and 7D is about 1 stop...
 
arad85 said:
Yes, a tad is probably the right way to describe it... Looking on DPReview, and comparing 7D vs D7000 vs 5D2 ('cos I know the Canon bodies), I'd say the D7000 fits somewhere between the 5D2 and 7D, probably closer to the 7D. The difference between 5D2 and 7D is about 1 stop...
Click to expand...

Yeh, the reviews I'v seen have point to 0.5 stops better ISO than 7D.
 
MomentCapture said:
It's just the truth imho, after all I started out a Canon user 13 months ago...
Click to expand...

See, the problem is (as already pointed out) that a lot of your comparisons come from websites etc. The real truth of this is probably that the cameras are much of a muchness (unless you really need the 7d's AF and high speed shooting rates) and that in most situations you will get very similar results. The OP really needs to decide whether the 7d's sports/wildlife credentials are important to them or whether the percieved slightly (and really 0.5 of a stop is slight) better ISO performance of the D7000 is what they are after.

However, I think the camera body is a red herring, as quite frankly its the lens choices available that will make the real difference. The only way the OP should differentiate is whether they prefer the Nikon or Canon layout.

Anyways the OP may end up with a D7000 as 7D's are like fairy dust at present after the act of god that occured over in Japan not so long ago! :)
 
woof woof said:
I could argue with the word "better." You get different features but "better" is deffo up for debate as is if spending more money will get you it.
Click to expand...

So the series level and pricing structure of cameras is just some form of elaborate smoke screen is it?

If you want higher fubnctionality or better features then you have to pay for them. That includes AF receptors, sensor size, fps, buffer size etc etc. There's absolutely no point in having a go at a manufacturer because they didn't put a mid level feature in a low range camera, or a high level in a mid range et al.
 
DemiLion said:
So the series level and pricing structure of cameras is just some form of elaborate smoke screen is it?

If you want higher fubnctionality or better features then you have to pay for them. That includes AF receptors, sensor size, fps, buffer size etc etc. There's absolutely no point in having a go at a manufacturer because they didn't put a mid level feature in a low range camera, or a high level in a mid range et al.
Click to expand...

"So the series level and pricing structure of cameras is just some form of elaborate smoke screen is it?"

Is that what you read? Jeez.

If you want to debate series levels, fine,if you want to debate features, fine, but my comments were clearly about "better" in terms of image quality and look at any camera line up with an open mind and you'll find that different features are a lot easier to both define and buy than additional image quality.

As for what camera actually better, that's a whole different thing.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
"So the series level and pricing structure of cameras is just some form of elaborate smoke screen is it?"

Is that what you read? Jeez.

If you want to debate series levels, fine,if you want to debate features, fine, but my comments were clearly about "better" in terms of image quality and look at any camera line up with an open mind and you'll find that different features are a lot easier to both define and buy than additional image quality.

As for what camera actually better, that's a whole different thing.
Click to expand...

You pulled the word better from my post and commented on it. In that context better referred to the feature line up whereby WTP was complaining about the buffer size in the D7000. No one even mentioned image quality.
 
DemiLion said:
Balls
Click to expand...

there you go agan with not expressing your feelings clearly :LOL:

To the OP - this thread is just going to go round and round in circles , theres no resolution to whether canon is 'better' than nikon or vice versa

if you wanna take pix just buy a camera and go take them - then this rabid puppy of a thread can be taken behind the barn and shot :LOL:
 
On the contrary. I'm making a concerted effort to vary my responses!! :p :D
 
There is a lot of talk about FPS but surely the AF system is more important? From what I have read the D300s system is far superior to the 7D and I think the D7000's might be too? Yea the buffer is a frustration on the D7000 but if you use he latest SDHC cards it is better than shown on the Cameralabs test. AF will give you more keepers than FPS in most uses...FPS will only be relevant in long bursts of Sports shooting.
 
Beardy said:
There is a lot of talk about FPS but surely the AF system is more important? From what I have read the D300s system is far superior to the 7D and I think the D7000's might be too? Yea the buffer is a frustration on the D7000 but if you use he latest SDHC cards it is better than shown on the Cameralabs test. AF will give you more keepers than FPS in most uses...FPS will only be relevant in long bursts of Sports shooting.
Click to expand...

Seriously? The 7D AF system is as good as it gets in a crop camera and in the canon range the only way to get better is to get a 1D series.
 
Beardy said:
....but if you use he latest SDHC cards it is better than shown on the Cameralabs test....
Click to expand...

Without trying to open up a previous can of worms...can we quantify "better" on this occasion by:

- cost of card (lets say 32GB)
- How many more shots can be taken before the buffer fills?

& the way this thread has been going (shooting off on tangents) I'm wondering if I'm trying to run before I can crawl, looking to buy a Semi-pro camera?

Should I just go for an entry-level to see if I can actually take a decent picture?

e.g. 600D vs D5100
http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-600d-vs-Nikon-D5100
 
Last edited:
WannaTakePix said:
I was wondering when mind reading technology was introduced, but didn't want anyone to think I thought I was an "expert" or anything
Click to expand...

Mind reading technology :p The different focusing methods have their uses depending on what your shooting.

I had my 7d on the Mach loop using zone af - it picked up the f15's as they entered the valley and continued to track them all the way passed. Using back button focusing and a heavy finger on the shutter meant most if not all the shots I took were focused on the plane (I tried single point af but when they're dots in the distance this was tricky if not impossible!)

It's all about understanding the limitations - and unfortunately for me my skill is far more limited than the camera!! But I am learning!!

Neil
 
MomentCapture said:
Well I personally wasn't talking Auto area AF, I never ever use such a setting, I hear it's only good for BIF, but I don't shoot those either.
Click to expand...

Those shots are definitely something to be proud of :)

Well for birds in flight there's almost no mind reading to do - your background is uniform or moving out of the frame (sky or land) and the bird is consistently there.

As far as AF goes:

D7000, D300s and 7D will all lock focus in low light past where you could reliably do so manually by eye (without using live view). The D7000 will track just as well as a D300sm and the 7D seems as quick. On all 3 you need to change the refocus delay to suit your style - what's fine for me (delay off) may be too twitchy for another. It takes time to determine whether you prefer a little leeway for tracking or want instant response, both will cost and save you shots.

The buffer:

The D7000's is horrible. There is no getting around that. If you will rattle off continuous shots, buying it will only mean you'll have a really expensive dent in a wall soon. The 7D is great, D300 is great unless you want 14 bit.

There is a very good reason for the buffer being horrible as much as it frustrates me. Product segmentation. It's a great way to do it from a non sports consumer perspective, terrible otherwise. There are already a lot of people looking at a D7000 instead of a D300s. If it had the buffer, a lot of those hemming and hawing wouldn't. The D300s has body and buffer over a D7000, not much more. So when the D400 comes out with the D7000 sensor (or the 24), the pro body, a silly AF system and a proper buffer, there will be no question over which to buy if you're shooting things that require those.

That said, the buffer isn't entirely useless:


Nuclear Grab by ausemmao, on Flickr


Just a long blink by ausemmao, on Flickr
The really funny thing about that one is that at ISO 800, I'm not sure if it counts as low light :wacky:
 
menthel said:
Seriously? The 7D AF system is as good as it gets in a crop camera and in the canon range the only way to get better is to get a 1D series.
Click to expand...

From what I have read the Nikon AF system is considered better...the D300s shares it's AF system with the D3s and D700 which I think are considered to have superior AF system's to the Canon equivalent ? I've certainly read about people moving from Canon to Nikon because of AF.

I know it's not all numbers but the D300s has 51 sensors (15 cross type) whilst the 7D has 19 sensors (all cross type) so the D300s must have much better frame coverage even if it has slightly fewer cross type sensors.
 
Beardy said:
From what I have read the Nikon AF system is considered better...the D300s shares it's AF system with the D3s and D700 which I think are considered to have superior AF system's to the Canon equivalent ? I've certainly read about people moving from Canon to Nikon because of AF.

I know it's not all numbers but the D300s has 51 sensors (15 cross type) whilst the 7D has 19 sensors (all cross type) so the D300s must have much better frame coverage even if it has slightly fewer cross type sensors.
Click to expand...

Sorry but please give sources. The AF system on the 7D is superd and well recognised to be so. I think any number of examples in here of difficult subjects shows this. The thing about it is that it needs to be set up for different circumstances, so perhaps what you have been reading is lazy reviewing by people who don't know what they are doing.

Ps, anyone worrying about the 7D at higher ISO's, this one was taken as 3200


Cotswolds May 2011-46.jpg by menthel, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Beardy said:
I know it's not all numbers but the D300s has 51 sensors (15 cross type) whilst the 7D has 19 sensors (all cross type) so the D300s must have much better frame coverage even if it has slightly fewer cross type sensors.
Click to expand...

It has more so it must be better and shinier then? The 300 may have 51 points, but how many are selectable?

As for your other point...

I know a few people that have switched from Canon to Nikon for the IQ and low light ability, but I've only ever come across one that switched for AF reasons.
 
Good God - what a painful thread - why oh why did I just read the whole thing :shrug:

I think the OP has had his answer on a number of occaisons - >>

Check Lens support - Go to shop - hold bodies - make best compromise decision - Spend hard earned money - ENJOY taking images, learning your craft and sharing some good ones with us ;)

I'd love to have the comfort of a S Class, the performance of a 911, the elegance of a Aston Martin and the Parking ease of a Mini - But hey my Golf does EVERYTHING I need it to do pretty damn well.....................

BTW : Is that Menthel from Hexus - I'm guessing it is with your continued love of photography - Hi ;)
 
Syd said:
Good God - what a painful thread - why oh why did I just read the whole thing :shrug:

I think the OP has had his answer on a number of occaisons - >>

Check Lens support - Go to shop - hold bodies - make best compromise decision - Spend hard earned money - ENJOY taking images, learning your craft and sharing some good ones with us ;)

I'd love to have the comfort of a S Class, the performance of a 911, the elegance of a Aston Martin and the Parking ease of a Mini - But hey my Golf does EVERYTHING I need it to do pretty damn well.....................
Click to expand...

:)
 
Syd said:
But hey my Golf does EVERYTHING I need it to do pretty damn well.....................
Click to expand...


but so would an audi A3, an astra GTI, a Subaru impretza etc

discuss (no actually please dont)

the brand loyalty things been done to death - is nikon better than canon, or canon better than nikon - each has different strengths and weaknesses but between comparable models theres not that much to choose and all have the potential to take good photos
 
Last edited:
big soft moose said:
but so would an audi A3, an astra GTI, a Subaru impretza etc

discuss (no actually please dont)

the brand loyalty things been done to death - is nikon better than canon, or canon better than nikon - each has different strengths and weaknesses but between comparable models theres not that much to choose and all have the potential to take good photos
Click to expand...

Forgive me if my attempt at irony was mistaken for more brand loyalty - I was merely trying to empasise the importance of compromise and that whatever he buys - it will almost certainly suit ALL (+more) of his needs.
 
Syd said:
Forgive me if my attempt at irony was mistaken for more brand loyalty - I was merely trying to empasise the importance of compromise and that whatever he buys - it will almost certainly suit ALL (+more) of his needs.
Click to expand...

Sorry mate I didnt mean you, I meant the whole thread, I was agreeing with you and saying that the discussion of nikon vs canon would be as pointless as "is a Golf GTI better than an Astra GTE" (though personally I like the old model sirroco better than the golf ;) )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top