After handling Nikon and Canon I am really impressed with 7D

Hmm, not really a fair comparison. The price is an artificial effect of the situation at KM and the timing of their entry into the market amongst other things.

To be fair, you should compare the 7D to the Canon 20D and Nikon D200 as that is the segment it is aimed at. The 5D is a fair comparison in the D50/D70 and 350D class.

Of course, the low price makes the 7D more attractive than it would otherwise be, and puts it in practical competition with those cheap cameras, but in terms of features and build (as opposed to a buying decision, where what you get for the money is a huge component) it's not fair to judge it against cameras that are pitched at the next tier down.

--
Cheers,

Dave
http://purpledog.smugmug.com

'Third one from the left — Konica Minolta 7D Adoption Society'

I agree that the 5D is a better comparision and said that in my original post.

Dave Farmer said:

Hmm, not really a fair comparison. The price is an artificial
effect of the situation at KM and the timing of their entry into
the market amongst other things.

Click to expand...

I think it is a fair comparison. It isn't really important why the price is what it is. The fact is that at the price point the 7D is at the competition is the D50 and DRebel XT. Do you seriously think that consumers looking at cameras in this price range are thinking, "Well, since the 7D should be more expensive I'll remove it from consideration." It usually works jus the opposite. The low price is more likely to get people to consider it. Of course, it may be removed from consideration for other reasons, but I don't think the relatively low price is not one of them.

Dave Farmer said:

To be fair, you should compare the 7D to the Canon 20D and Nikon
D200 as that is the segment it is aimed at.

Click to expand...

Using your criterion for comparison then the D200 is also not a fair comparison. It is a much newer model.

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.hrich.com
http://www.printroom.com/pro/intrepid

you should compare the 7D to a Nikon D100 or the Canon 20D.

comparing the 7D with newer low-budget models is quite dumb, actually.

squeegee said:

you should compare the 7D to a Nikon D100 or the Canon 20D.

comparing the 7D with newer low-budget models is quite dumb, actually.

Click to expand...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1035&message=17684909

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.hrich.com
http://www.printroom.com/pro/intrepid

The Canon is still $800-$900 with kit lens. SO now the 7D is a fair comparison.

Also, I have found the 5D to be quite well built. Mine has taken a couple of spills one off my desk in thinly padded bag and one around my neck to concrete when I dove to the ground to stop my kid from walking over an embankment.

AS / Focus etc. all work perfectly eventhough I feared each time I had broken the camera
--
Ken H.
KM FiveDee - Kit 18-70- SG 70-300 APO

Umm, not reading the whole original post where I did say comparing them to the 5D would be more accurate is quite dumb, LOL!!

midwestshutterbug said:

I have wanted to slam my 20D to the ground, more than once, because
I could not instantly change a setting --but, that was due to my
own lack of familararity with the camera body. Not the camera
itself.

Click to expand...

It was not just how well I might could use the Canon or Nikon cameras, but watching how folks thoroughly familiar with them use them that brought me to the opinion that menu based systems were not near as good as control based systems. Think how much you can do with the 7D without even taking your eye from the viewfinder, for instance.

midwestshutterbug said:

Minolta makes the most inuitive body available, in the 7D, In my
not a darn bit humble Opinion.

Click to expand...

Agreed

midwestshutterbug said:

I do not regret, not a for a second, my change to Canon. I think it
is the stronger lens system.

Click to expand...

Then, since you believe the system is the best for you, that's what you should shoot.

Take a look at their macro abilities, including flash and you will see a area that is why I'm Minolta. They are trying with the flash, but behind minolta for macro. (and the current Minolta system is behind Minolta MF macro in many ways) Each of us has different needs.

At least for now I don't have to make a system change. I'm back to watching. If Sony does well and comes out with a improved 7D I'll probably buy that, but not be making a fundamental system change soon. It just costs too much to start over. I want to get as much value out of what I spent as I can. I not only have money invested in my system, but a lot of learning time too.

midwestshutterbug said:

I wish Minolta had it, Sony never took over Minolta, and I was
still shooting Minolta but, then again, while I may oftimes wish
for alot of things that never were or never will be again, I try to
learn to deal with what is and adapt.

Click to expand...

Indeed, I have no doubt I can do good photograpy with just about any brand. That is not the issue with me. At the points where I choose a system, I make the best choice for me at the time.

Walt

Are you still here? Just can't get any attention any where else?

Darwin

jamesdak said:

I agree that the 5D is a better comparision and said that in my
original post.

Click to expand...

Indeed you did...

--
Cheers,

Dave
http://purpledog.smugmug.com

'Third one from the left — Konica Minolta 7D Adoption Society'

I dont really care if the body feel like a cheap plastic. Those r not really important. The most important is the overall picture quality, is that what u guys want.

7D will beat any canon/nikon straight down! I hav a friend who shot w/ Canon IDs Mark II for a living and he prefers 7D lol. A test agaist nikon D2X that I saw, also make me laugh. 7D will beat them, if you do not believe just rent them n compare it.

Canon cant make wide angle lens n the color sux!! i had 20D once

Nikon has better colors even the pictures r too contrast. Just shoot black mix with white object, the white will be blown out n wont mix with others color