Thread: Canon EOS 7D

Originally Posted by series3

G'day everyone just looking for some opinions about the upcoming 7D being released by Canon some time in October.. to me it looks to be a very good DSLR, blurring the lines between keen amateur and full-blown professional. It doesn't have a full sized sensor, but other than that looks very good. I am planning on dedicating much of my free time to try my hand at motorsport photography and this bad boy seems pretty good in my eyes. thoughts?

Canon unveils EOS 7D high-end digital SLR

If you are interested in quick action then the Nikon D3 is the way to go.
Canon lost more than 80% of their business with the pro photographers at the last Olympic games for two reasons.
1 heaps of problems with their firmware and 2 their top of the range camera was not near as good as the Nikon.

I do not know about the 7D, the only what I can telling you is that the old 5D was and is a great landscaping camera, the later version of the 5D have a lot of problems like the mirror come loose in places with high humidity like north of Oz and the islands.
I believe that that problem was correted now but Canon push their products in the last 3 years without make sure that the camera is reliable.
If you go for the 7D I would wait for 6 months and read what it is going on with the cameras in use by the pros in the forums.

For motor sport (or any sport) the full frame sensor isn't that much of an issue. It's only subjects that lend themselves to wide angles such as landscapes, that really benefit

Personally, I'd be looking at the 50D and investing the extra money into buying the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS and the matching 2x converter. The camera bodies get updated a lot more often than the lenses these days.

If money isn't an option then the 7D's 8fps and HD modes would be fun to play with.

I'm afraid the D3 will blow my budget way out, or I will be stuck with a great body and craphouse lens that limits everything. Holding off and waiting for public opinion is a good idea.. let other guinea pigs spend the $$ first.

I was actually looking at the 70-200 2.8 USM as a lens option. quite exxy but seemingly damned good in terms of clarity and AF capabilties. But I am worried that not having a full-sized sensor (1.6 cropped) will give me too much of a narrow lens? Does anyone here have a similar lens on a similar body? are you seriously limited in your uses (using in the city, family shots etc)?

I am leaning towards a Canon, as my brother has a 40D with a very nice 28-70mm EF lens that i plan on borrowing frequently.

You'd need to have another lens besides the 70-200.

I have 3 lenses in my bag that I carry everywhere; a Minolta 17-35f2.8, a Minolta 28-70f2.8 and a Sigma 70-210f3.8 APO lens that I've had for years. Most of the time I'm shooting with the 17-35.

I agree with the comments that the lens it is the most important part and Canon have excellent lens and well below the cost of the Nikons.
I have few friends that have the 40D and is excellent package with a good lens.

The 7D will do fine for motorsports. While it is generally true you should invest in lenses over bodies, action like motorsport is an exception because you need a high frame rate, and good servo focusing. The 7D has 8fps which is ideal, so a much better action camera than the XXXD line.

The 1D fiasco has been fixed and I know many pros who happily use Canons for automotive photography. And the problems were confined to early 1s, not all of them, and certainly not the other Canons. It's a bit like saying all Landies are unreliable because you've had a bad run with Freelander 1.

A 70-200 will be a great lens, go for the f/4 IS USM.

G'day rmp,

Why do you say the f/4? Because it is significantly cheaper than a 2.8 and my money would be better spent on other components (monopod or something)?