Canon 7D vs. Nikon D7000

Hi All,

I want to order a new dslr, but I am not sure if I should buy the Canon 7D or the new Nikon D7000 (price in europe 7D 1200€ vs 1040€ D7000).

I had an Pentax K10D and want to change the system due to a lot of different issues.

My second hobby is driving with remote controlled cars (Buggy with Nitro-Engine).

So the AF speed and tracking is very important, because the buggys are very fast and small.

And I want to shoot video in full hd quality. I know the 7D is for video a bit better because it support 24 / 25 / 30 fps with full hd resolution and the D7000 only 24.
But this should not be a big deal 24 fps as well ok for our kids.

Thanks in advance

Hi,
Well D7000 is a great DSLR, but not in the same level as 7D(Nikon D300s maybe).

If your are looking for a DSLR, great at both video and photo shooting, 7D is a very good choice. Even in continuous mode 7D offers 8 fps over 6 fps for D7000 and there are a lot of good lens choices for Canon. I recommend 7D, but it's just my opinion.

Get a camcorder, they are easier for amateurs to causally shoot video. Their holding position, interface, duration, and other features are geared more towards what you want to do. A DSLR is ok when shallow DOF is wanted in cinematic style shooting which is not "seat of your pants", using shooting script and careful rehearsal focus shifts, stablized mounts and such which all take some commitment to a production. Camcorders are for when you see something interesting and quickly want to capture it on video. The ultimate image capture quality might be better, particularly in low light but ease of use and cost(the camera body is the cheapest part) of DSLR for quality captured is much lower.

In AF performance, a D300s in DX and for sure a D3s in FX format would do better for fast tracking of focus than either the D7000(on outer focus points, probably the same on the inner FPs) or 7d. Both are very capable cameras for advanced amateurs but involve a lot of study and money to get to a point where you are really using the capability of either one. Either one, to get much advantage from them will involve lens costs much more than either body. There is not much in lenses under $1000 each that would challenge either of these.

You might be buying a lot more camera that you will get any benefit from. With lenses and lighting that is not tops, you will not see the difference between theses and a D3100 or 550d, so why spend the money?
--
Stan
St Petersburg Russia

HI,

thanks for the first feedback.

A video cam is not an option. I have already one, but sometimes it is better to have both in one tool so you can switch easily from video to foto.

I believe the D300s is much better in case of AF, but the video support is not as good as from the 7d or D7000.

I miss a couple of things in the D3100 & 550D that's why I pointed out the 7D or D7000.

If you read in the canon forum it looks like that the 7D has an focus issue - not sure if it is true.

If you are looking for AF performance during video recording, D7000 is probably better that any Nikon or Canon camera since it is a more recent model with some improvement in this regard. However, Panasonic 4/3 cameras are even better.

If AF tracking for still shots is what you are looking for, of course Canon and Nikon are generally better systems but I am not sure which model does a better job in this regard.

spbStan said:

In AF performance, a D300s in DX and for sure a D3s in FX format would do better for fast tracking of focus than either the D7000(on outer focus points, probably the same on the inner FPs) or 7d.

Click to expand...

http://www.prophotohome.com/news/2010/03/01/autofocus-torture-test-updated-canon-1d-mkiv-nikon-d3s-added/

The 7D is comparable to the D3s and out classes the D3 and D300 in this test. The Nikons are all using a variation of the MultiCAM 3500 module. More than likely the processing power available for AF tracking is the difference. Note that the 7D has a separate, dedicated AF CPU in addition to the dual DIGIC processors.

They have not yet tested the D300s, but its performance no doubt depends on the processing power available for AF. Even if it's as good as the D3s it would not be significantly better than the 7D.

Daniel Lee Taylor said:

http://www.prophotohome.com/news/2010/03/01/autofocus-torture-test-updated-canon-1d-mkiv-nikon-d3s-added/

The 7D is comparable to the D3s and out classes the D3 and D300 in this test.

Click to expand...

Just to quickly point out a few interesting titbits in that test:

"These tests are all done using the default camera settings and default custom function settings. Tests are done using the center focus point only."

This means that all the AF options are being ignored bar the defaults, which are supposed to be out-of-the-box for all types of shooting. Which, as we all know, the AF required for landscapes is totally the opposite end of the scale for the AF required for birding/running/fast cars. Thus the default sits in the middle. All this test really shows is which camera, in the default settings, can get more in focus shots.

Which leads on to the point that they provide none of their samples. All they've done is presented numbers. Without samples you can't confirm their testing. I'm not saying that their tests are totally worthless, but without a way to confirm what they are seeing then their tests are just numbers at best. Don't read anything into them.

Using numbers in testing for AF speed and accuracy is more accurate then looking at a bunch of test shots.

Sorry, but your reasoning doesn't make any sense.

To add to this, Canon's defaults are focus priority, Nikons are release priority.

So obviously Canon would have a higher in focus amount of shots.

Ashley P said:

Daniel Lee Taylor said:

http://www.prophotohome.com/news/2010/03/01/autofocus-torture-test-updated-canon-1d-mkiv-nikon-d3s-added/

The 7D is comparable to the D3s and out classes the D3 and D300 in this test.

Click to expand...

Just to quickly point out a few interesting titbits in that test:

"These tests are all done using the default camera settings and default custom function settings. Tests are done using the center focus point only."

This means that all the AF options are being ignored bar the defaults, which are supposed to be out-of-the-box for all types of shooting. Which, as we all know, the AF required for landscapes is totally the opposite end of the scale for the AF required for birding/running/fast cars. Thus the default sits in the middle. All this test really shows is which camera, in the default settings, can get more in focus shots.

Which leads on to the point that they provide none of their samples. All they've done is presented numbers. Without samples you can't confirm their testing. I'm not saying that their tests are totally worthless, but without a way to confirm what they are seeing then their tests are just numbers at best. Don't read anything into them.

Click to expand...

--
Correct my incorrect photography answers at:
http://photo.stackexchange.com/

Please update the Camera Shutter Life Expectancy Database with your experiences:
http://www.olegkikin.com/shutterlife/

Dave Luttmann said:

Using numbers in testing for AF speed and accuracy is more accurate then looking at a bunch of test shots.

Sorry, but your reasoning doesn't make any sense.

Click to expand...

Except the site linked talked about taking shots and judging them. Thus without presenting their raw data you can't confirm that their numbers are based upon anything. Your counter doesn't make any sense.

They both have their own advantages, but the 7D has more advanced features than the Nikon D7000.

I think the 7D's high continuous burst would meet your requirement more.

We did a comparison on these two cameras - http://www.digitalrev.com/en/nikon-d7000-vs-dot-canon-eos-7d-could-it-be-a-7d-killer-6817-article

Hope it helps!

--
Photos.Passions.You™

I prefer Canon 7D

I am looking forward to buy my first new DSLR and here it is my neutral views on this
Comparison after doing my research

It is funny to see that the people are trying to tell the world that D7000 is better then 7D.

1- D7000 has 39 AF sensors with only 9 cross type sensors while 7D has 19 cross type sensors (big difference; 7D 19 cross type fall into Pro level). 7D wins

2- Nikonians talk about 2 SD slots; be real. CF cards are much faster then SD, having one slot is not that big of an issue
3- D7000 is half plastic and half magnesium while 7D is all magnesium

4- D7000 18-105mm pictures are soft; you need to buy more expensive lenses to get results or take picutres in RAW format to tweek it up (Jpg images are soft).
5- D7000 with 18-105 kit $1500 while 7D with 18-135mm is $1500 at newegg.com.

So I don't see any price difference in price for the kit except if you want to buy a body which will come down in price as expected very soon.
5- Video is much superior on 7D then D7000 (7D is a clear winner)
6- 8 fame per second shutter vs D7000 6 frame per second shutter (again 7D is a
clear winner)

7- 7D Picture Quality is very comparable to D7000 and you can even compare D5000
and T2 to 7D and D7000 because every DSLR camera can take good pictures; Only

features of the cameras make them different and sold at different price points for
features.
8- 7D has 2 speedy processors built in and D7000 has one so information is
processed at very high speed on 7D

After all, I believe that 7D is proven and overall better camera then D7000. Wait until the end of November and buy it at cheaper price and that is what I am going to do.

Ashley P said:

Just to quickly point out a few interesting titbits in that test:

This means that all the AF options are being ignored bar the defaults, which are supposed to be out-of-the-box for all types of shooting. Which, as we all know, the AF required for landscapes is totally the opposite end of the scale for the AF required for birding/running/fast cars.

Click to expand...

On Canon the relevant settings are AI Servo (it's obvious they chose that), tracking or release priority, and tracking sensitivity. Out of box I believe AF is set to tracking priority which is appropriate for this test. And tracking sensitivity should not be relevant in this test as it affects whether or not there is a pause if the AF point detects a radical shift in focus (i.e. something passes between you and the subject).

Even if tracking sensitivity could be used to tweak the results the test is still a valid indication of overall AF performance.

Also, they do perform all focus point tests as well: http://www.prophotohome.com/news/2009/11/26/canon-7d-new-autofocus-king/

If you have evidence that there's some setting on the Nikon bodies which would significantly improve AF performance, by all means post it.

Ashley P said:

Which leads on to the point that they provide none of their samples. All they've done is presented numbers. Without samples you can't confirm their testing.

Click to expand...

There are sample links in some of their other AF Torture Test articles, including the one posted above.

Ashley P said:

I'm not saying that their tests are totally worthless, but without a way to confirm what they are seeing then their tests are just numbers at best. Don't read anything into them.

Click to expand...

As opposed to reading anything into user reports where human bias and brand loyalty, not to mention huge variables, are all likely to sway results?

The AF Torture Test is not representative of performance in every possible context with every possible body/lens combination. But it is at least an attempt at repeatable, verifiable testing. It is the strongest indicator we have of relative AF performance.

Well for starters, you are not even coming close to answering anything the OP asked about. He wanted to compare the 7D to the D7000. You have not even attempted to answer his question.

Daniel Lee Taylor said:

The AF Torture Test is not representative of performance in every possible context with every possible body/lens combination. But it is at least an attempt at repeatable, verifiable testing. It is the strongest indicator we have of relative AF performance.

Click to expand...

No, it is a test of cameras out of the box and how they compare that way. nothing else.

--

“I’m not in this world to live up to your expectations and you’re not in this world to live up to mine.”

“Showing off is the fool’s idea of glory.”

Chris, Broussard, LA

bikinchris said:

Well for starters, you are not even coming close to answering anything the OP asked about. He wanted to compare the 7D to the D7000. You have not even attempted to answer his question.

Click to expand...

Well for starters I wasn't responding to the OP, but to a sub point made by spbStan where he claimed that the D300s would out perform the 7D on AF tracking. You have not even attempted to follow the thread.

bikinchris said:

bikinchris said:

The AF Torture Test is not representative of performance in every possible context with every possible body/lens combination. But it is at least an attempt at repeatable, verifiable testing. It is the strongest indicator we have of relative AF performance.

Click to expand...

No, it is a test of cameras out of the box and how they compare that way. nothing else.

Click to expand...

That claim was already made and I responded to it. Repeating it does not make it more valid.

Next time do everyone a favor and do not post to a thread unless you have something worth posting, new information or an actual argument. Thank you.

Seems like I hurt your feelings. Sorry.

Daniel Lee Taylor said:

bikinchris said:

Well for starters, you are not even coming close to answering anything the OP asked about. He wanted to compare the 7D to the D7000. You have not even attempted to answer his question.

Click to expand...

Well for starters I wasn't responding to the OP, but to a sub point made by spbStan where he claimed that the D300s would out perform the 7D on AF tracking. You have not even attempted to follow the thread.

photog7320 said:

photog7320 said:

The AF Torture Test is not representative of performance in every possible context with every possible body/lens combination. But it is at least an attempt at repeatable, verifiable testing. It is the strongest indicator we have of relative AF performance.

Click to expand...

No, it is a test of cameras out of the box and how they compare that way. nothing else.

Click to expand...

That claim was already made and I responded to it. Repeating it does not make it more valid.

Next time do everyone a favor and do not post to a thread unless you have something worth posting, new information or an actual argument. Thank you.

Click to expand...

--

“I’m not in this world to live up to your expectations and you’re not in this world to live up to mine.”

“Showing off is the fool’s idea of glory.”

Chris, Broussard, LA