7D - 70D - 7D2

Started Jul 21, 2013 | Discussions thread
bobn2
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 63,431
Re: 7D - 70D - 7D2
2

Karl Gnter Wnsch wrote:

Bobn2 wrote:

They are both DSLR's.

With completely different target audiences. The 6D can't do half of what the 7DII will do and the 7DII will do plenty the 6D can't even dream of managing!

They both accept EF-S lenses.

Wrong.

I meant EF, which is right.

They both have very similar controls.

Wrong.

I believe so.

They both will take very similar photos in maybe 95% of photographic situations.

Wrong again.

Really? The advantages that the 7D has (reach, frame rate and more points in the AF) allow it to take photos in just a few situations where the 6D won't. The advantages that the 6D has (lens choice at the wide end, utilising shallower DOF, low light ability, low light AF) allow it to take photos in just a few situations where the 7D won't. 95% is a guess, but in all likely hood in the right range.

The 7D has some features that the 6D does not, and vice versa, but for most people buying a general purpose camera, they mostly do the same job.

Wrong again.

See above, most situations, you'll end with pretty much the same. The only question is whether you want the reach and frame rate or the lens options, shallower DOF, low light - both are edge situations, and in the end it matters which edge is more important to you. It's only if there you exclusively work at one edge and never work at the other that there is no question of choice, and there are relatively few photographers like that.

For those that need both there are alternatives available - i.e. 5DIII. But the target groups are as far seperated as they could be from the onset, so the availability of both cameras will *not* create any further division in markets.

You don't know what the 'target groups' are - Canon knows that. I doubt that many who buy a 7D use it exclusively for action photography, nor do those that buy a 6D use it exclusively for studio and landscape work.

The 6D can't do action properly,

The 6D can do action 'properly' in the hands of a competent photographer.

not even the 5DIII is fully capable to replace a current 7D. Period.

I would think the 5DIII wins quite a lot and loses a little. It has a much more capable AF system, it loses 2FPS, but the main thing in action photography is learning your timing, if you don't do that the difference between 6FPS and 8FPS is 6 garbage shots or eight garbage shots. If you do lean your timing then the difference is between 5 garbage shots and 7 garbage shots, by and large. Occasionally you might get lucky, and 8FPS increases your luck from 6 in 100 to 8 in 100

The 6D autofocus is whoefully inadaequate for fast moving subjects

Again, not optimised but focusses fast and sure with the centre point, in worse light than the 7D will with any point.

and the 5DIII lacks speed.

2 FPS, not anything really, just less file space filled with 'not quite' photos.

Face it, the 6D is [b]not[/b] a valid replacement for a 7D!

I never ever suggested that it is a 'valid' replacement, what I said was with three other Canon cameras eroding the potential market, Canon might choose not to replace it, validly or otherwise.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD elfroggio
MOD elfroggio
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
MOD elfroggio
MOD elfroggio
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow