-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Wake up, Canon
- Thread starter Howard102273
- Start date
-
- Tags
- canon eos 7d
NikonBoy88
New member
- Messages
- 1
- Reaction score
- 0
it's cold here bro..
LOL
Both Nikon and Canon would be out of business. You state you could get away with a 10mp camera that goes to iso 1600. Well those have been around for years, surprised you upgraded to a 7d. Actually the 7d was more for sports with better AF and higher FPS, so perhaps you bought the wrong camera.
It was either the 7D or the more expensive 5DmkII for video work, something that was needed for college projects. That was my only reason. I couldn't keep my 40D as a second body so I sold it for the 7D. Did I buy the wrong camera? For my purposes, definitely not. However if I chose it for photography reasons, it definitely would be the wrong camera for me since my 40D did the job perfectly fine.
And yes, I had no problem with the 40D and would still own it to this day. You don't have to have 50000mp, ISOs up to bloody 8 sextillion and such for most photos. To think that you really need to is a bit stupid IMHO. As stated before, I never really go above ISO 3200 on my 7D. I was the same with my 40D. Just to correct you though, the 40D can do ISO 3200 when you enable ISO expansion through custom settings.
As for Canon and Nikon losing business, I frankly don't really care. I'm not loyal to either and only see their products as tools for my means. That said, they do make a killing in the entry level section and on their lenses, so I doubt it would make a huge impact.
And yes, I had no problem with the 40D and would still own it to this day. You don't have to have 50000mp, ISOs up to bloody 8 sextillion and such for most photos. To think that you really need to is a bit stupid IMHO. As stated before, I never really go above ISO 3200 on my 7D. I was the same with my 40D. Just to correct you though, the 40D can do ISO 3200 when you enable ISO expansion through custom settings.
As for Canon and Nikon losing business, I frankly don't really care. I'm not loyal to either and only see their products as tools for my means. That said, they do make a killing in the entry level section and on their lenses, so I doubt it would make a huge impact.
actually the nikon d300 hasn't had an update since 2007( that's 5 years). the d300s only added the functionality of video to the camera
the Canon 7D is only 3 years old. but quite adequate. so i can see why nikon shooters are crying but i hope canon updates the 7d offering as well
the Canon 7D is only 3 years old. but quite adequate. so i can see why nikon shooters are crying but i hope canon updates the 7d offering as well
Realize people shoot different things, thd 40d would not do so well for sports. Some people print big so they upgrade to a 36mp camera, if they are making poster boards, then they need that.
But some people upgrade just because they can. That is ok too if they have the money. So what may not make sense to you may make perfect sense to someone else which was my point.
So, now we are best buds, if I come to Ireland to do some shooting, I can stay at your house right?
Billboards etc. do not need a high DPI, since most people will look at them from a considerable distance. That means any extra megapixels in reality are wasted. I printed as big as 18x12 with my 40D for camera club competitions and they still came out sharp and detailed.
The 40D is terrible for sports? I'm not a sports photographer, so that isn't an issue for me. As I said, upgrading would make more sense for the likes of sports photographers since they *need* the advanced AF functions and such. For hobbyist photographers such as myself, such features are wasted unless they have the intention of wanting to do the likes of sports to begin with.
As for people upgrading simply because they have the money to do so, It's entirely up to them. My opinion still stands though and frankly find it a fruitless thing to do. It does not improve their photography one bit *unless* their previous DSLR is limiting them, going back to the sports photography example. However, even entry level DSLRs these days can do 99.99% of shots these days so the only real choices to upgrade are for things like build quality, weather sealing and more action orientated things such as more advanced AF/faster FPS. For anything else it's really just a waste of money in my opinion.
The 40D is terrible for sports? I'm not a sports photographer, so that isn't an issue for me. As I said, upgrading would make more sense for the likes of sports photographers since they *need* the advanced AF functions and such. For hobbyist photographers such as myself, such features are wasted unless they have the intention of wanting to do the likes of sports to begin with.
As for people upgrading simply because they have the money to do so, It's entirely up to them. My opinion still stands though and frankly find it a fruitless thing to do. It does not improve their photography one bit *unless* their previous DSLR is limiting them, going back to the sports photography example. However, even entry level DSLRs these days can do 99.99% of shots these days so the only real choices to upgrade are for things like build quality, weather sealing and more action orientated things such as more advanced AF/faster FPS. For anything else it's really just a waste of money in my opinion.
Last edited:
TN Args
Forum Pro
Please, please do.
Howard102273
Senior Member
When you upgrade (and you did), it's justified; when other people want to upgrade, then they are "buying into consumerism" and you go on such a long rant. Do you see the irony in this?
If you are happy with the equipment you have, then that's fine and be happy, nobody is forcing you to upgrade. But there are other people who want improvements in the current lineup of equipment. And guess what? All equipment eventually get upgraded, technology advances, always.
If you are happy with the equipment you have, then that's fine and be happy, nobody is forcing you to upgrade. But there are other people who want improvements in the current lineup of equipment. And guess what? All equipment eventually get upgraded, technology advances, always.
I never claimed that I don't buy into consumerism, among other things. I don't see the irony since I already admitted that I do. I think you should read what I said again.
I am mainly pointing at the people who upgrade for no reason but to expect that their photography will be better. Look at the comment that TN quoted above you, that's a clear example of what I mean. I am not advocating people to not upgrade, I am advocating that people only upgrade when it's needed.
I am mainly pointing at the people who upgrade for no reason but to expect that their photography will be better. Look at the comment that TN quoted above you, that's a clear example of what I mean. I am not advocating people to not upgrade, I am advocating that people only upgrade when it's needed.
Last edited:
PJC Imagery
Forum Enthusiast
PJC Imagery
Forum Enthusiast
spidercrown
Well-known member
You got to blame canon on that, D300s doesn't look old beside the 7D and holds well against the 7D still. 7D should had been made better...
RogerMexico
Leading Member
Yawn.
Cropping.
Almost all lenses can out-resolve the 18MP sensor, at least at some f-stops and in the center of the image circle. My 70-200/2.8L IS II could out-resolve a 72MP 1.6-crop sensor easily. Besides, even if the sensor out-resolves the lens, more pixels still means more resolving power.
Only if per-pixel or at 100% cropped level IQ is good. 24mp at 100% cropped level is not good as we have seen from D3200 and NEX-7. I never crop my 18mp 60D photos more than 50% as IQ simply is not good. In comparison, I have no probem to 100% crop my 5D1 and 1D3 (5D2 also pretty good) photos if necessary in low ISOs.
Jan from UK
Well-known member
Whatever Canon chose to replace the current 7D with, it must have LESS noise at higher ISO's please ..
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum