Canon 7D vs Nikon D7000 ?

big soft moose said:
but so would an audi A3, an astra GTI, a Subaru impretza etc
Click to expand...

Actually, I had my first experience of an A3 yesterday. Dropped the car in for it's first service - (well oil change actually) and was given an A3 Cabriolet courtesy car. I have to say it was comfortable, pretty responsive, fairly economical and would make a lot more sense for us than the TT in some ways.

Would I buy one ? Nope! There might be some sort of parallel there - I'm not sure. :D
 
CT said:
Actually, I had my first experience of an A3 yesterday. Dropped the car in for it's first service - (well oil change actually) and was given an A3 Cabriolet courtesy car. I have to say it was comfortable, pretty responsive, fairly economical and would make a lot more sense for us than the TT in some ways.

Would I buy one ? Nope! There might be some sort of parallel there - I'm not sure. :D
Click to expand...

Like the association :thumbs:

However the TT is pretty - the A3 covertible looks like the b**tard lovechild of an A3 hatchback and a silver cross :D
 
Last edited:
Syd said:
Like the association :thumbs:

However the TT is pretty - the A3 covertible looks like the b**tard lovechild of an A3 hatchback and a silver cross :D
Click to expand...

LOL. Like it! Visibility out of the rear window is just a pigeon hole between the rear seat head restraints. Seriously though - it drove really well, had all the toys - Bluetooth and satnav etc., Just goes to show that's got nothing at all to do with how we choose cars. :D
 
If you are considering the D5100 consider the D90 as well. You can get it S/H for little over 400£ leaving you a bit of cash in the pocket for at a decent lens.

You will lose the High ISO performance of the D5100, the articulating display and some of the video capabilities but you will have more direct controls, a motorised body and a much better viewfinder and save 100-150£ on top of that.

On the Canon side look for S/H 40D a really well regarded camera if a bit old at the moment.
 
menthel said:
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
Click to expand...

Very nice shot, but how much sharpening and noise reduction did it take?
Lot's of sharpening and noise reduction, can do wonders as long as you don't need to do a tight crop.

I haven't spent much time around this forum, but I frequently keep seeing 7D users post up threads about unsatisfactory IQ over at POTN.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1048530
 
Last edited:
MomentCapture said:
Very nice shot, but how much sharpening and noise reduction did it take?

I haven't spent much time around this forum, but I frequently keep seeing 7D users post up threads about unsatisfactory IQ over at POTN.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1048530
Click to expand...

Not very much at all actually. I dn't have the exact numbers as its on my computer at home. Perhaps POTN is full of whinging, pixel peeping idiots who don't spend any time taking photos?
 
menthel said:
Perhaps POTN is full of whinging, pixel peeping idiots who don't spend any time taking photos?
Click to expand...

Dont get me started on POTN - I left there after being told by an amercican poster "you limeys know **** all about everything, remember the war of 1812-15" As England won the war of 1812-15 (defence of canada) I'm not sure what his latter point was ( I presume he was talking about the war of american independence but that was 1775-83 :lol: :lol: ) but as he seemed pretty typical I didnt bother with it after that.
 
Last edited:
LOL. I'm banned from POTN for all of this life and the next reincarnation. Probably the best thing that ever happened. :lol:
 
I suspose if I mention Volvos, I'm going to get shouted at, aren't I? :lol:
 
DemiLion said:
I suspose if I mention Volvos, I'm going to get shouted at, aren't I? :lol:
Click to expand...

not at all, if you want to drive a boxy, clunky fuel hog with its lights stuck on all the time its entirely up to you :lol:

just as i have no problem if the OP wants to go out and buy a Kyocera ;)
 
Last edited:
DemiLion said:
Oh dear Christ don't mention those! They are the worst printers that I've ever come across!
Click to expand...

yeah their cameras are a heap of ***** too - they bought the praktica brand name and started using it on digital compacts (which was a shame because the original praktica cameras werent half bad - they were the east german part of zeiss irrc who got stuck on the wrong side of the iron curtain after WW2)
 
The Contax N Digital was theirs, let down by its Philips sensor, which was also a hurdle for Pentax.
 
At the end of the day it's whatever system suits you whether it be Nikon or Canon. I have been lucky to use both systems and im happier with Canon that said i enjoyed using a D3s for a week would i change it for my 1D MK4 no i would not i just like the Canon more there's things i would swap on the cameras though if i could. On the 7D focus issues :naughty: i found the AF so atrocious i bought 2, 12 months apart :thinking: i must love wasting my money :shrug: but the AF pays the bills for me so i must be lucky but there again i don't bother reading what others think when a camera comes out i put it through it's paces and see if it suits me. I see a few others also claim theirs work as well so they must be like me lucky :thinking: now if only my luck extended to the lottery.
On a more serious note most of my lenses are L spec and calibrated i have'nt noticed the need for extra sharpening and the firms who buy my images are more than happy and they don't comment on the use of the 7D amongst images taken with the 1D mk4 or the 5Dmk2 or the ones i had taken with the D3's so i can only draw the conclusion that unless you are pixel peeping you don't see the difference. I think at the end of the day it's the images that count not the cameras.
Regards
Richard
 
DemiLion said:
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.
Click to expand...
all the 51 points are selectable on the d300 d300s d700 d3 d3s d3x
 
jonneymendoza said:
nothing wrong with potn :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

Thats distinctly debateable vis my last post about it, but i dont supose mods would thank us for discussing the various merits of different forums further

big soft moose said:
Dont get me started on POTN - I left there after being told by an amercican poster "you limeys know **** all about everything, remember the war of 1812-15" As England won the war of 1812-15 (defence of canada) I'm not sure what his latter point was ( I presume he was talking about the war of american independence but that was 1775-83 :lol: :lol: ) but as he seemed pretty typical I didnt bother with it after that.
Click to expand...
 
big soft moose said:
Thats distinctly debateable vis my last post about it, but i dont supose mods would thank us for discussing the various merits of different forums further
Click to expand...

It works both ways. Us British can act the same too. Tbh I have never encounters what you have
 
jonneymendoza said:
It works both ways. Us British can act the same too.
Click to expand...

yeah but my point isnt about the nationality per se, but if someone -of whatever nationality- acted like that on TP one of the mods would whack them with the ban hammer

wheras on POTN it seemed that no one gave a good **** if members were subjected to that kind of abuse so long as the abuser was an establishement member they could say what they liked.
 
menthel said:
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
Click to expand...


With respect that is not a representation of the 7D's true ISO performance, I can post pictures taken on my D3 at ISO 25,000 that are usable but would never claim it represents the true performance of the D3. I'm a Nikon man through and through but given the choice I would probably pick the 7D. I think I may need to go and lie down now after making that statement. :D
 
gpa said:
With respect that is not a representation of the 7D's true ISO performance, I can post pictures taken on my D3 at ISO 25,000 that are usable but would never claim it represents the true performance of the D3. I'm a Nikon man through and through but given the choice I would probably pick the 7D. I think I may need to go and lie down now after making that statement. :D
Click to expand...

It is, however , a truer representation than some of the trouser trumpets that have been spoken as truth in this thread! ;)
 
MomentCapture said:
^^^
Think you need to lie down indeed, that's a crazy talk! ;)
Click to expand...

Why ? it was shot at 1600th of a second ! clearly good light, now shoot the same shot at 100th sec with crap light and post the same picture.
 
Exposure is exposure, what shutter speed you use is irrelevant with regards to noise as long as you achieve the same exposure.
A REAL test would be to post a 100% crop that hasn't seen allot of noise reduction, luminance noise reduction in particular.
 
MomentCapture said:
Exposure is exposure, what shutter speed you use is irrelevant with regards to noise as long as you achieve the same exposure..
Click to expand...
:cuckoo:

a) how exactly do you get to 1600th of a second without turning the ISO up

and

b) Long exposures show comparitively more noise (regardless of camera model) at any given iso, probably as a function of sensor heat.

to say that the shutter speed is irrelevant with regard to noise is simply untrue
 
^^^
Read gpa's comment again, are you seriously telling me there is a noticeable (even pixel peeping) difference in noise, between an image correctly exposed at 1/100 and an image correctly exposed at 1/1600?
 
MomentCapture said:
^^^
Read gpa's comment again, are you seriously telling me there is a noticeable (even pixel peeping) difference in noise, between an image correctly exposed at 1/100 and an image correctly exposed at 1/1600?
Click to expand...

What I'm telling you is that it is the quality of light that effects the final print, shoot the same subject at 1600th of a second and then re shoot the same shot at 100th sec when the light has gone and is crap and you will see the difference.

I had to do a great deal of experimenting with high ISO shooting to try and understand how to extract the best out of my D3 and secondly just for fun to see how far I could push the limits to. The above are my findings and have been mirrored by many people who have also explored this.

D3
ISO 25600
16mm
1/20th sec hand held
http://www.flickr.com/photos/25907924@N05/5286059323/sizes/l/in/photostream/
 
^^^
Sounds like to me your confusing image quality, with quality of light (softness/colour).
Put a camera on a tripod and expose a scene at 1/1600 and then expose the sensor again with the same 'relative' quantity of light (1/100) there isn't going any appreciable difference in noise, as the signal-to-noise ratio remains constant, and 1/100 isn't going to do any weird stuff like heat up your sensor.
What may change is the white balance and the direction/quality of the light, but there isn't going to be any more noise.

Edit:

Also could you explain what the picture you posted is tells us? as landholding at 1/20 isn't strictly the best method for IQ comparisons as a softer image will show more noise, even if there isn't any more noise, similar to how easily noise is seen in bokeh.
 
Last edited:
MomentCapture said:
Oh, and the poster in question would have got a much cleaner image at 1/200 ISO 400.
Click to expand...

Not with my shaky hands and the 70-200! I know the settings were less than optimal but I think it came out quite well all the same!
 
^^^
No doubt it's a lovely shot, and noise isn't an issue, particularly at the res posted which will hide a magnitude of IQ sins from PP (which I know is fortunate and personally it comes in handy at times).
But as we are directly looking at noise, are you able to post a 100% crop of his face/eye with zero noise reduction? if your using LR, then you can leave colour noise reduction at default as it doesn't sacrifice texture, but it makes a big difference.
 
MomentCapture said:
^^^
No doubt it's a lovely shot, and noise isn't an issue, particularly at the res posted which will hide a magnitude of IQ sins from PP (which is fortunate and comes in handy at times).
But as we are directly looking at noise, are you able to post a 100% crop of his face/eye with zero noise reduction? if your using LR, then you can leave colour noise reduction at default as it doesn't sacrifice texture, but it makes a big difference.
Click to expand...

When I get some time I will try!
 
MomentCapture said:
^^^
Sounds like to me your confusing image quality, with quality of light (softness/colour).
Put a camera on a tripod and expose a scene at 1/1600 and then expose the sensor again with the same 'relative' quantity of light (1/100) there isn't going any appreciable difference in noise, as the signal-to-noise ratio remains constant, and 1/100 isn't going to do any weird stuff like heat up your sensor.
What may change is the white balance and the direction/quality of the light, but there isn't going to be any more noise.

Edit:

Also could you explain what the picture you posted is tells us? as landholding at 1/20 isn't strictly the best method for IQ comparisons as a softer image will show more noise, even if there isn't any more noise, similar to how easily noise is seen in bokeh.
Click to expand...

I'm not confusing anything, I am saying that posting a shot at ISO 3200@1600th sec does not represent real world high iso shooting. The basis for using increased iso is to chase shutter speed ,aperture or both for the lowest increase in iso you can get away with. In the real world a far better example of what the camera can do would be to shoot this shot in very difficult lighting conditions at say 100th of a second and then post the picture, it would be completely different.

My link wasn't done to make a comparison, the example was to test how much I could push my camera using the basic rule of handholding in difficult light at the bare minimum I could get away with, personally I was quite surprised.

I think the crux of the argument is……….. I don't believe posting iso 3200 pictures shot at 1600th sec are a good representation of a camera ability, you seem to think they are.
 
An exposure at 3200 at 1/1600 (correctly exposed) will produce the same amount of noise (because that's what we are talking about) as 3200 1/100 (correctly exposed), as the signal to noise ratio doesn't change, so yes it's a good representation of camera ability.

And, I think the poster of that image only used such a high shutter speed to freeze any action of the birds he was shooting that day.
 
Last edited:
LOL I have never mentioned noise nor half the other inferences you have dropped into the discussion. I said "What I'm telling you is that it is the quality of light that effects the final print, shoot the same subject at 1600th of a second and then re shoot the same shot at 100th sec when the light has gone and is crap and you will see the difference."

Two mates... one posts a shot of this bird at ISO3200 @ 1600th of a second and his mate posts the same shot but very late in the day at ISO3200 @100th of a second................................. which one represents the real world use of high ISO and which one will look the best ? that's my point.

I never questioned the reason why the poster took this at iso 3200, I questioned his use as an example of a high iso shot.

The reality is you never shoot intentionally at such high iso with so much shutter latitude, there are exceptions to this I guess depending on your mobility and ability to hold the camer a still but this is not the norm.

Anyway we have strayed well of topic, it looks like the OP has made his choice and I’m sure he is going to love it.

cheers
 
gpa said:
Anyway we have strayed well of topic, it looks like the OP has made his choice and I’m sure he is going to love it.

cheers
Click to expand...

Sorry mate, sometimes I do like to go on a bit, if you don't want to discuss it any further that's fine with me. Sure the Op will enjoy his purchase.

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top