Canon 7D user thinking of switching to Nikon D600, big mistake?

Spend EUR 96,00 buy a Canon 50mm f/1.8  and be done!

I've had the Canon 50mm before (twice actually, one time it broke, the other I sold it) and while for the price it's very good, in absolute pic quality at 1.8 it's crap, which is the aperture I would probably use the most (ok, a lot). The nikon seems much better in that regard, being sharper than most f1.4 lenses at 1.8. Plus I wouldn't have the full frame sensor of the D600

Not quite so obviously, you need to compare the Nikon with the 17-55 at 32mm - if you ever use that focal length... And the DOF gets really shallow, most of the time too shallow!

--
regards
Karl Günter Wünsch

Only you can decide if a Nikon fullframe with a 50/1.8G lens is the tool you will be happy with as it is completely different than the combination you are presently using. Maybe rent or borrow a D600 with lens and try it out.

You are right, I was thinking at comparable focal lengths, which is 32mm in APS-C sensors. The DOF getting shallow is actually good since I can always is stop it down more.

Besides the obvious differences in shooting styles, which I guess is very subjective, I guess my doubt is more about the differences in picture quality going from the 7D+17-55 combo to the D600+50mm. Would it really be an upgrade or the maybe better glass of the 17-55 vs 50mm would offset the differences in bodies?

How would your photos improve when you lack a variety of focal lengths?

BAK

Two different cameras - the 7D a crop body and the D600 full frame. I know that my Canon 50mm 1.8 lens on my 7D is fantastic. Both are excellent cameras. The D600 3 years newer technology - the 7D still one of the best crop bodies around if not the best ever. If you want a full frame camera I see nothing wrong with switching to the D600 and the Nikon 50mm lens as you don't have much investment in Canon lenses. However, I would also consider the Canon 50mm - probably a cheaper alternative for you. A couple of things to consider - according to all reviews the D600 has better high ISO than the 7D but may not be as good at high action photography and you give up the extra reach (the crop factor). Depends what is most important to you. Can't go wrong with either decision.

--
Bert D

What do you do with your images?  Do you print them as posters?  Do you enjoy looking at 100% crops (which is equivalent to a 70" wide print)?  If these things are what you must do with your photographs, or you want to be able to reduce your depth of field to 1" or less, then you should go for a 35mm sensor camera.

It will produce better image quality, the issue is will you even notice?  I think my suggestion would be different if you didn't already own an excellent camera.  You may be struck with the grass is always greener sickness.  

I have the sigma 50 f1.4 and the sigma 17-50 f2.8 OS (which I did a side by side comparison with the 17-55), I'm not sure what aspect of "image quality" you are hoping to improve.  If by "image quality" you mean thinner depth of field and nicer bokeh, well yeah, it'll do that, but also have more chromatic abberations and it won't be as sharp until you get into the f2-2.8 range, it's a trade off.  Great lens, btw.

Most people that have FF cameras also have a crop sensor.  You own one of the best cameras ever made.

Before I got my 5DM3 I used my 7D with my Sigma 50mm f/1.4 and Canon 85mm f/1.8 and my prize posession 135L...

If you want the narrow DoF why don't you try the very inexpensive Canon 85mm f/1.8 which is quite sharp wide open....  This lens is highly rated...

If you did not already own the 7D then I would suggest a D600 or 6D....    It pains me to see you forfeit a 7D for a D600.....  In many ways it is a 'downgrade'....

borrow or rent the 85mm !!     Much narrower DoF than a 50mm especially when you take into account that the 50's are soft wide open....   The Sigma less so than Canon 50 but is STILL soft wide open.  Also, the 85mm focal length lends itself more to portraiture...(think nose distortion here.)

Think this out......You are giving up so much here.  In terms of 'upgrade' a 5dm3 would more fit that definition given the feature set.

--
img7d

I don't print things big at all, so that's not the point, but I do want thinner DOF and always better high ISO performance

That might be, it's more like full frame + 50mm sounds exciting for creative purposes

From what I read of the nikon 50mm 1.8G, it's better than the sigma 50mm f1.4, since it's sharper in the wide open range (don't know if the Canon and Nikon sigma 50mm perform the same). However, I don't know how the nikon 50mm 1.8G compares to the 17-55mm at equiv 50mm range

You mean to use the 85mm f1.8 together with the Canon 7D? Wouldn't that be very constrained since it would be ~ 135mm equiv? I've read a couple of reviews and it seems to be quite a good bargain, plus I like the fact that it works on full frame too and it would probably be an ideal focal length there.

I understand where you are coming from, however I barely use what makes the 7D so good, which is very good AF tracking, 7fps, and APS-C for easier zoom. I got the 7D because at the time it was the only one to shoot 1080p 24fps video (together with the mark II) and I love the camera. But the way I tend to shoot I think is much more suited to full frame.

I will think about the canon 85mm, although ideally I would like the new Sigma 85mm f1.4 (barring the 3x price difference)

It seems like you are intent on going full frame.

Have you considered a Canon 5D Mk II?

The 5D Mk II appears to be priced less than a Nikon 600D.

Looks to me like the 5D Mk II and a Canon 85mm f/1.8 would price out less than the Nikon 600D and the 50mm f/1.8G.

DPReview side by side RAW: Nikon D600 vs Canon 5D MkII ISO 3200

Don't get too hung up on the 85mm equivalent being the ideal portrait focal length, there's a range of focal lengths in which compression is good and you don't get flattening distortion, the 85 f1.8, Sigma 85 1.4 or Canon 85 f1.2 are quite nice on APS-C, it's really just about how close/far you need to be to shoot.

The 5dmk2 or 6D argument is pretty good too, if you are familiar with Canon you might find that an easier transition, though either way that or the D600 make a nice 35mm format solution.  I think I'd go for the 6D out of those 3 choices, even though the 5dmk2 has a better interface (more 7D like) the center AF point of the 6D seems quite nice.

I do understand your situation, I'm a 7D shooter and I really liked shooting the 5Dmk3, but the price jump is significant, and if I'm honest with myself there hasn't been anything that my 7D hasn't handled with ease.  Portrait shoots, sports, landscapes printed to 30"x20", it's been great at it all.

The 5dmk2 is out of the question for me because it's just too old tech (no doubt it can make great pics, but here in Germany it costs around the same as a D600, and I think sensor wise the D600 kills the 5dmk2, which is the biggest reason I would be upgrading. The Canon 6D would probably be good too but as I said before is simply more expensive, and I'm already streched to the max budget wise. Plus I don't care about the differences in handling between Canon and Nikon, I can learn the details as I go (the one thing going against the d600 is the stupid distribution of AF points all bunched in the center as compared to the 7D)

I think I've made up my mind, I'll go with the D600 plus the 50mm 1.8G initially only, and in a couple of months will probably buy the Rakinor 85mm 1.4, which is quite cheap at around $280. That way I'll have 2 good primes plus full frame which should improve the kind of photography I do 90% of the time. Now to ebay to sell the gear

Canon EF 50mm 1,4 does not cost too much.... and when get bored with it (as you will)

you can again return to your zoom - it is more versatile...

--
Kari
SLR photography started in 1968, 40D since 2007, and now 7D !
60.21 N 24.86 E

As one poster suggested, rent first. Or at least give the D600 a thorough try out in-store. My friend I often shoot with is very pro-Nikon, and once i set down my 7D and tried out her 300S w/70-200 VRII. I literally RAN back to my 7D. While it may just be my opinion(especially to Nikonites), frankly Nikon's user interface vs Canon stinks. One example burned on my brain is having to remove your finger from the shutter, press a back button, then spin a horizontal wheel w/cheap feel on the back, then hit shutter button agan just to simply do exposure compensation. Versus just spinning a perfectly damped back dial on 7D? Nikons certainly have their qualities, but no thanks. If you have no grievance w/such designer mindset, go for it...
Cheers,
Mark

Thanks for the input, however I have no time/interest in renting a d600 just to check it out, I've read more than enough online that I think I know all major D600 shortcomings (such as no quick Aperture change in Video, clustered AF points, max 1/4000 shutter speed, etc). I've never shot Nikon before but I doubt the interface would be consistantly worse than Canon's, it might just get some used to it. To me IQ trumps ease of use, and since I post-process all my pics, reading about some of the shadow recovery capabilities of the D600, dynamic range and high ISO performance convinced me that's what I want.

Time will tell if it was a bad mistake or not