D7D better than 20D??

[Daemeon]

I keep hearing the above sentiments thrown around. The D7D will be better than the 20D, or so people say, but as I look over the spec list, I fail to see why, so help me understand your perspective. What am I missing?

Please note that this is not a dig at the D7D. I'm quite impressed and think it will be one of the finer camera's on the marketplace....but I'm not seeing why everyone else believes it should be #1 in its segment ahead of the 20D.

Better Viewfinder? Yes (I'll give KM the nod here based on expectations)
In-Camera AS? Yes
Better Image Quality? No. (At best, this is debatable)
Better High ISO performance? Nope
Bigger top Shutter speed? Nope
Better Metering? Questionable.
Better X-sync speed? Nope.
Faster Continuous shooting? Nope.
Larger Frame Buffer? Nope.
More custom functions? Nope.

Someone please tell me what I'm missing. Again, this isn't a dig at the D7D. I'm just trying to understand the perspective of some other photogs here....

--
--The artist formerly known as The Krakken

 

[Rommaker]

I keep hearing the above sentiments thrown around. The D7D will be
better than the 20D, or so people say, but as I look over the spec
list, I fail to see why, so help me understand your perspective.
What am I missing?

Frankly, I don't remember such a statement. It's way too early for anyone to make such a claim. Besides ... what would it matter anyway? I'm not out to prove a point that's moot as long as both cams deliver superb image quality.

--
Rommaker
http://www.pbase.com/rommaker

'Tagline pending'

 

[thw]

In-Camera AS? Yes

Even if the other functions you listed are comparable or just less than the Canon 20D, then the AS alone will tip many things in its favor. The ability to shoot in low light conditions hand-held simply by turning on AS and turning up the ISO gives one a lot of freedom. No tripod, isn't that awesome???

 

[Daemeon]

It depends on your shooting style. But some of the features aren't "just less". Some of them are significantly less. It doesn't really matter if the camera gets the pics you desire. I'm just wondering.

In-Camera AS? Yes

Even if the other functions you listed are comparable or just less
than the Canon 20D, then the AS alone will tip many things in its
favor. The ability to shoot in low light conditions hand-held
simply by turning on AS and turning up the ISO gives one a lot of
freedom. No tripod, isn't that awesome???

--
--The artist formerly known as The Krakken

 

[ChristopherF]

Who knows, why dont we just wait until the production D7D comes out and there are full tests on it or comparos against the 20d. In the mean time this is all speculation and quite probably a waste of time.

I keep hearing the above sentiments thrown around. The D7D will be
better than the 20D, or so people say, but as I look over the spec
list, I fail to see why, so help me understand your perspective.
What am I missing?

Please note that this is not a dig at the D7D. I'm quite impressed
and think it will be one of the finer camera's on the
marketplace....but I'm not seeing why everyone else believes it
should be #1 in its segment ahead of the 20D.

Better Viewfinder? Yes (I'll give KM the nod here based on
expectations)
In-Camera AS? Yes
Better Image Quality? No. (At best, this is debatable)
Better High ISO performance? Nope
Bigger top Shutter speed? Nope
Better Metering? Questionable.
Better X-sync speed? Nope.
Faster Continuous shooting? Nope.
Larger Frame Buffer? Nope.
More custom functions? Nope.

Someone please tell me what I'm missing. Again, this isn't a dig
at the D7D. I'm just trying to understand the perspective of some
other photogs here....

--
--The artist formerly known as The Krakken

 

[Daemeon]

I'd track down the posts and show you. I don't think it matters greatly either...but I am curious as to why people fall on one side of the fence or the other.

I keep hearing the above sentiments thrown around. The D7D will be
better than the 20D, or so people say, but as I look over the spec
list, I fail to see why, so help me understand your perspective.
What am I missing?

Frankly, I don't remember such a statement. It's way too early for
anyone to make such a claim. Besides ... what would it matter
anyway? I'm not out to prove a point that's moot as long as both
cams deliver superb image quality.

--
Rommaker
http://www.pbase.com/rommaker

'Tagline pending'

--
--The artist formerly known as The Krakken

 

[José B]

Couldn't care less about the 20D but here is what I like about my Maxxum system which attributes are transferable to the 7D:

Very accurate metering
Superb handling
Fast AF performance
Delicious bokeh of my fast lenses

I add all of the above to the huge LCD, superb images at high ISOs and of course the one and only AS----------------I get one magnificent photography tool in the 7D.

Cheers,

José

I keep hearing the above sentiments thrown around. The D7D will be
better than the 20D, or so people say, but as I look over the spec
list, I fail to see why, so help me understand your perspective.
What am I missing?

Please note that this is not a dig at the D7D. I'm quite impressed
and think it will be one of the finer camera's on the
marketplace....but I'm not seeing why everyone else believes it
should be #1 in its segment ahead of the 20D.

Better Viewfinder? Yes (I'll give KM the nod here based on
expectations)
In-Camera AS? Yes
Better Image Quality? No. (At best, this is debatable)
Better High ISO performance? Nope
Bigger top Shutter speed? Nope
Better Metering? Questionable.
Better X-sync speed? Nope.
Faster Continuous shooting? Nope.
Larger Frame Buffer? Nope.
More custom functions? Nope.

Someone please tell me what I'm missing. Again, this isn't a dig
at the D7D. I'm just trying to understand the perspective of some
other photogs here....

--
--The artist formerly known as The Krakken

 

[E Scott Cragg]

Ok, let me start this by saything- hey- we really don't know until we actually get our hands on the M7D, right now we're ALL armchair quarterbacking... but lets assume both camera's live up to their potential - the 7D is as good as we hope, and the 20D doesn't have any problem...

First off- you've missed several of the 7D's "advantages' as far as a number of us are concerned - the huge rear LCD, the Knob-and-dial interface, etc...

You really hit the nail on the head though when you said "Depends on your style of photography"... absolutely, 100%- I'm never going to say that one camera is BETTER than the other - however, I thinks its safe to say That each have their very strong Niche-

20D - Its a mini 1D Mk-II... Superb, sports-focused AF and outstanding frame-rate are a sports photographer's dream... slight advantage in ISO (hard to quantify, but at this point I'll give it MAYBE a 1 stop advantage, based on the samples I've seen) also helps here to freeze the action.

7D - Low light/Ambient... The 7D simply can put more light on the sensor hand-held than the 20D can... period- The Minolta will allow, for the first time in HISTORY, us to shoot a 35/1.4 lense, stabalized at ISO 1600... The fastest Canon Stabalized lens is f2.8- two stops higher, and twice the focal length, so it will, on average, require about twice the shutter speed for equivolent sharpness (using the 1/focal rule)... That's 2-3 stops, I,e 4 to 8 TIMES as much light allowed into the camera handheld while staying sharp... For a sports photographer, of course, this is 100% worthless... for an ambient light street photographer however... You're talking about an absolute dream come true... Lets go handheld shoot a model by candle light!...

Now, both the 20D and the 7D are competent in the other's forte- the 20D certainly can handle ambient light photography reasonably well, while the 3fps for 12 frames and excellent Minolta (easily equivelent to Canon's) AF will make the 7D a passable sports shooter... They are both equally 'well rounded' cameras... it just depends on where you want your emphasis...

As you said- what type of photography do you do?

Lens wise is probably a draw- Minolta G ~ Canon L.. .similiar price too - both mounts have access to the same wide range of 3rd party lens... although you might give points to minolta for having 'cheaper' stabalization on their lenses (once you've paid for it in the body)...

The 3rd party 70-200/2.8 lenses are all easily the equal of the Canon Glass in terms of optics, the only problem is they're unstabalized... The Minolta will turn a 799 Tamron 70-200EX into the equivolent of a 1700 dollar 70-200LIS... nothing to snease at.

Minolta and Canon are both healthy systems with a wide range of supported lenses..

Either way - Minolta deserves a great deal of respect for bringing SUCH a competitive entry to the table out of the blue... the 7D stands to be an absolutely outstanding camera- And for my prefered photography style the better choice... This doesn't mean I don't have absolute respect for the 20D, my 10D has served me VERY well, and the 20D is a clear step up... but for my photography- the Minolta looks to be the better choice...

to each their own - thank god for choice

 

[JackRiley]

The fastest Canon Stabalized lens is f2.8- two stops higher, and twice the focal length, so it will, on average, require about twice the shutter speed for equivolent sharpness (using the 1/focal rule)...

Are you forgetting aboutt the 28-135 IS, let alone the 17-85 IS. f4?

 

[JackRiley]

Why compare the KM 351.4 to a zoom? Compare it to the Canon 35 1.4L. Now, if you are correct that the Canon has better ISO performance by about a stop, kinda narrows the Minolta's advantage a bit.

Plus, do you have any idea how dim these light levels are? Yes, like you fancied, almost candle light level. So for "candle light" photographers who can't or won't carry a tripod, then the D7 fits the bill.

I still think the benfits of AS in a DSLR (with good ISO perf. ) is being overstated. IMO the other features of the D7, build, viewfinder, ergonomics, these are much more compelling.

The fastest Canon Stabalized lens is f2.8- two stops higher, and twice the focal length, so it will, on average, require about twice the shutter speed for equivolent sharpness (using the 1/focal rule)...

Are you forgetting aboutt the 28-135 IS, let alone the 17-85 IS. f4?

 

[Patrick H Lockwood]

With AS, fast lens, and a viable ISO 3200, for a wedding shooter, this is a valuable camera, indeed. I can shoot in churches that without flash, and shoot without a tripod. My God I'm in Heaven.

You have no idea of how that is going to improve my shooting in that environment. I can't wait to buy one. I just hope it doesn't have QC issues like Canon SLRs.

Patrick

 

[E Scott Cragg]

The 17-85 and 28-135 Are both slow as balls, even at 4 you're talking a full 3.5 stops slower than the Minolta equivolent...

compare 35/1.4 to 35/1.4 and the Minolta has AS, good for 2-3 stops as well...

Trust me, I know EXACTLY how dark we're talking about - I'm CONSTATLY bouncing against this barrier when shooting with my 10D... (Have I meantioned I love this style of photography).

I really think this is one of those things where - if you have to ask why its worth something, then it really is pretty worthless for you... For those of us who have been fantasizing about a setup like this for years though (litterally, I tried to implement a software version of this in a computer vision class 3 years ago... to zero success unfortunate:- ) It is an absolute fantasy come true.

Don't tell me its not worthwhile simply because you don't see a use for it - obviously its not your style of photography - go shoot a 20D and by happy...

But oh my god I've been salivating about the 7D since I heard about it six months ago - it is litterally my dream camera take form (in theory), and the 20D is simply inferior for my purposes...

Again - assuming it works as advertised.

The fastest Canon Stabalized lens is f2.8- two stops higher, and twice the focal length, so it will, on average, require about twice the shutter speed for equivolent sharpness (using the 1/focal rule)...

Are you forgetting aboutt the 28-135 IS, let alone the 17-85 IS. f4?

--
Happy 10D User.

http://mail.rochester.edu/~ec009j/ESC 's%20Online%20Portfolio/

http://www.pbase.com/eridanman

 

[JackRiley]

Well, when you're concerned about quality control, wouldn't it be best to look at fhe manufacturer's previous offerings?

How was that A2 when it first came out? Hmmmm?

With AS, fast lens, and a viable ISO 3200, for a wedding shooter,
this is a valuable camera, indeed. I can shoot in churches that
without flash, and shoot without a tripod. My God I'm in Heaven.

You have no idea of how that is going to improve my shooting in
that environment. I can't wait to buy one. I just hope it
doesn't have QC issues like Canon SLRs.

Patrick

 

[E Scott Cragg]

Plus, do you have any idea how dim these light levels are? Yes,
like you fancied, almost candle light level. So for "candle light"
photographers who can't or won't carry a tripod, then the D7 fits
the bill.

or for, say - street photographers who want to be able to do candid street photography after dark, where a tripod is impossible, or wedding shooters trying to capture that perfect candid shot at a dark reception where there's no time to setup a tripod...

I am intimately familiar with the frustration present in both of those cases...

Sure - its not an every-day thing- different strokes for different folks.

--
Happy 10D User.

http://mail.rochester.edu/~ec009j/ESC 's%20Online%20Portfolio/

http://www.pbase.com/eridanman

 

[E Scott Cragg]

I prefaced with "if the camera lives up to its potential"...

and I'm sleeping with my fingers crossed right now

How was that A2 when it first came out? Hmmmm?

With AS, fast lens, and a viable ISO 3200, for a wedding shooter,
this is a valuable camera, indeed. I can shoot in churches that
without flash, and shoot without a tripod. My God I'm in Heaven.

You have no idea of how that is going to improve my shooting in
that environment. I can't wait to buy one. I just hope it
doesn't have QC issues like Canon SLRs.

Patrick

--
Happy 10D User.

http://mail.rochester.edu/~ec009j/ESC 's%20Online%20Portfolio/

http://www.pbase.com/eridanman

 

[raminolta]

Because the Canon 35mm f/1.4 is not IS, but on 7D, KM 351.4 is IS!

As he mentioned, he knows Canon now is offering unexpensive consumer zoom lenses.

His point is that with on D7 all lenses including the fastest ones and all fixed focal ones become IS! This includes 50mm f/1.4, 100 f/2.8 macro, 35mm f/1.4 and many others.

The canon system currently does not offer IS versions of these lenses and their fast zoom lenses are quite costly. For a person in need of IS, KM now is obviously a better choice. It can even mean thousands of dollars saving on lens costs!

From what we have seen here it seems D7´s noise level is quite good. Maybe not %100 up to D20, maybe one stop worse, but how much this is important.

The point is that equaling the benefit of AS to a mere noise reducer (because one can shoot at lower iso´s) is in my opinion is quite under-evaluating AS! The difference in some situations is between having the picture (maybe with sslight to some noise) AND not having the picture!!

I am sure in some situations i would like to have the picture even if it is a bit noisy.

So AS has certainly more into it. At iso 3200, with a fast lens f/2.8 or f/1.4 and AS on, you make pictures that you couldn´t make it without it!

Ramin

Plus, do you have any idea how dim these light levels are? Yes,
like you fancied, almost candle light level. So for "candle light"
photographers who can't or won't carry a tripod, then the D7 fits
the bill.

I still think the benfits of AS in a DSLR (with good ISO perf. ) is
being overstated. IMO the other features of the D7, build,
viewfinder, ergonomics, these are much more compelling.

The fastest Canon Stabalized lens is f2.8- two stops higher, and twice the focal length, so it will, on average, require about twice the shutter speed for equivolent sharpness (using the 1/focal rule)...

Are you forgetting aboutt the 28-135 IS, let alone the 17-85 IS. f4?

 

[JackRiley]

The 17-85 and 28-135 Are both slow as balls, even at 4 you're
talking a full 3.5 stops slower than the Minolta equivolent...

Well, yes, but by choosing the lense that you alluded to, a 70-200 IS, you had Canon starting at 70mm, where you gave KM the luxury of a 35mm focal length.

compare 35/1.4 to 35/1.4 and the Minolta has AS, good for 2-3 stops
as well...

Yes, minus the one stop of higher ISO performance that you conceed to Canon, right?

Trust me, I know EXACTLY how dark we're talking about - I'm
CONSTATLY bouncing against this barrier when shooting with my
10D...

What type is that? I am genuinely curious, since I shoot indoors alot, average to below average lit living room, and have no problem with faster lenses an higher ISO.

Somebody post an entire wedding shot recently with his 20D at ISO 1600. Was that Zachary here?

 

[JackRiley]

Plus, do you have any idea how dim these light levels are? Yes,
like you fancied, almost candle light level. So for "candle light"
photographers who can't or won't carry a tripod, then the D7 fits
the bill.

or for, say - street photographers who want to be able to do candid
street photography after dark, where a tripod is impossible, or
wedding shooters trying to capture that perfect candid shot at a
dark reception where there's no time to setup a tripod...

Well, Michael Reichman just wrote a piece of a shoot he did recently in Paris using the 20D and the 1-85 IS at night.

I am intimately familiar with the frustration present in both of
those cases...

Sure - its not an every-day thing- different strokes for different
folks.

--
Happy 10D User.

http://mail.rochester.edu/~ec009j/ESC 's%20Online%20Portfolio/

http://www.pbase.com/eridanman

 

[E Scott Cragg]

As I said - I'm impressed with the 20D, I do respect it...

But for what I enjoy, the 20D will be easier...

Plus, do you have any idea how dim these light levels are? Yes,
like you fancied, almost candle light level. So for "candle light"
photographers who can't or won't carry a tripod, then the D7 fits
the bill.

or for, say - street photographers who want to be able to do candid
street photography after dark, where a tripod is impossible, or
wedding shooters trying to capture that perfect candid shot at a
dark reception where there's no time to setup a tripod...

Well, Michael Reichman just wrote a piece of a shoot he did
recently in Paris using the 20D and the 1-85 IS at night.

I am intimately familiar with the frustration present in both of
those cases...

Sure - its not an every-day thing- different strokes for different
folks.

--
Happy 10D User.

http://mail.rochester.edu/~ec009j/ESC 's%20Online%20Portfolio/

http://www.pbase.com/eridanman

--
Happy 10D User.

http://mail.rochester.edu/~ec009j/ESC 's%20Online%20Portfolio/

http://www.pbase.com/eridanman

 

[E Scott Cragg]

But for what I enjoy, the 20D will be easier...

Plus, do you have any idea how dim these light levels are? Yes,
like you fancied, almost candle light level. So for "candle light"
photographers who can't or won't carry a tripod, then the D7 fits
the bill.

or for, say - street photographers who want to be able to do candid
street photography after dark, where a tripod is impossible, or
wedding shooters trying to capture that perfect candid shot at a
dark reception where there's no time to setup a tripod...

Well, Michael Reichman just wrote a piece of a shoot he did
recently in Paris using the 20D and the 1-85 IS at night.

I am intimately familiar with the frustration present in both of
those cases...

Sure - its not an every-day thing- different strokes for different
folks.

--
Happy 10D User.

http://mail.rochester.edu/~ec009j/ESC 's%20Online%20Portfolio/

http://www.pbase.com/eridanman

--
Happy 10D User.

http://mail.rochester.edu/~ec009j/ESC 's%20Online%20Portfolio/

http://www.pbase.com/eridanman

--
Happy 10D User.

http://mail.rochester.edu/~ec009j/ESC 's%20Online%20Portfolio/

http://www.pbase.com/eridanman