7D against 1D MKIII

[Richard91758]

Would there be any legit reason to drop a MKIII for the new 7D when used for BIF apart from the crop factor and the possibility that AF may be better?

Fairly broad question but I'd love to hear other opinions.

Richard

 

[PhillipA]

Would there be any legit reason to drop a MKIII for the new 7D when used for BIF apart from the crop factor and the possibility that AF may be better?

Fairly broad question but I'd love to hear other opinions.

Richard

Not to me there wouldn't ! As far as the "crop factor" goes, the 1D will focus reliably with a 1.4 Extender, the 7D won't. As far as the A/F goes, the 1D has 45 A/F points as opposed to 19 on the 7D and they are better spread out. Unless you have an (early) unreliable 1DIII I would seriously doubt the A/F would be better on the cheap camera. Add the dual cards, the 3000 shot battery life, the faster frame rate, faster shutter, double shutter life, the big bright viewfinder and the build/weather sealing, you are still looking at a consumer camera as opposed to a professional model, regardless of how many pixels it has.

 

[RedFox88]

the faster frame rate, faster shutter, double shutter life, the big bright viewfinder and the build/weather sealing, you are still looking at a consumer camera as opposed to a professional model, regardless of how many pixels it has.

1D3 is just 2 fps more. And the 7D is not a consumer grade camera. It has the same weather sealing the EOS-1n had which was Canon's top camera for most of the 1990s and is the same weather sealing as the EOS-3. The 7D appears to be as professional as the EOS-3 was.

Want fewer pixels than the 18MP? Shoot mRAW for 10MP and smaller file size. We'll see how the 7D does once actual photographers have it in their bag.

 

[Bernie_King]

There's really no way we're going to know the real answer to this until the camera is actually released. The 1D3 has 45 points, but if the 19 in the 7D are remarkably better, then who knows? Many bird photographers (me included) use center point with assist points turned on with their 1D3. If that's the case, does it matter that the 7D has fewer overall points if you only use the center points anyways? I don't know. I'm thinking about picking up a 7D as a 2nd camera to my 1D3.

As far as focusing with a 1.4 extender, I guess that depends on which lens you have. The 500 f4 would certainly focus with the 7D and a 1.4 extender.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bernarrking
http://www.bkingphoto.com

 

[zoooming]

From what I've seen of my friend's 1DMKIII performance (blisteringly sharp with good lenses) the 7D would have to be pretty good to match its AF speed/accuracy.

All will be revealed when the 7D real time reviews appear. It's all pure speculation until then....

Of more interest is the release of the 1DMKIV. I'm betting that will be the 'next big thing' for Canon - cause if it ain't there'll be dramas in store for them.

Zoooming

Would there be any legit reason to drop a MKIII for the new 7D when used for BIF apart from the crop factor and the possibility that AF may be better?

Fairly broad question but I'd love to hear other opinions.

Richard

 

[KT_at_SF]

In addition to faster FPS, the 1D Mk III also has twice the RAW buffer of the 7D (at 30 shots vs 15 shots) - for those of us out in the field shooting fast/sustained action, that's a big difference. Also, under low-light/high-ISO conditions, one suspects that the larger sensor of the 1D Mk III should collect more photons of light than the small-sensor 7D; hence, there doesn't appear to be a huge advantage to the 7D for existing 1D Mk III owners, aside from higher resolution (for those who don't already own a 5D Mk II or 1Ds Mk III) and lower price.

KT

the faster frame rate, faster shutter, double shutter life, the big bright viewfinder and the build/weather sealing, you are still looking at a consumer camera as opposed to a professional model, regardless of how many pixels it has.

1D3 is just 2 fps more. And the 7D is not a consumer grade camera. It has the same weather sealing the EOS-1n had which was Canon's top camera for most of the 1990s and is the same weather sealing as the EOS-3. The 7D appears to be as professional as the EOS-3 was.

Want fewer pixels than the 18MP? Shoot mRAW for 10MP and smaller file size. We'll see how the 7D does once actual photographers have it in their bag.

 

[mgrum]

To actually answer your question, I can think of two "legit" reasons for ditching the 1DmkIII for a 7D.

Note: this says nothing for the reasons not to switch.

1. price - you could probably pick up a 7D for less than you'd get for selling a 1D
2. weight - the 7D weighs less which may be a factor if you're hiking a long way

 

[aayjay]

I never thought about it until I bought a 5D Mark II, but the cropless sensor of the 5D Mark II or the 1.3x cropped sensor of the 1D Mark III makes it easier to capture BIF.

A 1.6 cropped sensor gives you less wiggle room. In other words, the chances increase that you may clip a wing or head of a bird at close range.

As with other comments, it's too premature to judge the autofocus as compared to the 1DM3.

Alan

 

[Anastigmat]

the faster frame rate, faster shutter, double shutter life, the big bright viewfinder and the build/weather sealing, you are still looking at a consumer camera as opposed to a professional model, regardless of how many pixels it has.

1D3 is just 2 fps more.

And the 7D is only 2 fps more than the 50D.

And the 7D is not a consumer grade camera.

It is closer to the 50D than to the 1D.

It has the same weather sealing the EOS-1n had which was Canon's top camera for most of the 1990s and is the same weather sealing as the EOS-3. The 7D appears to be as professional as the EOS-3 was.

Unfortunately this is the 21st century. And APS-C sensors are so 20th century, like the EOS-3D.

Want fewer pixels than the 18MP? Shoot mRAW for 10MP and smaller file size. We'll see how the 7D does once actual photographers have it in their bag.

Those who want the 7D are primarily pixel pigs. And there are lots of them out there.

 

[rwbaron]

Those who want the 7D are primarily pixel pigs. And there are lots of them out there.

LOL, then what's the opposite of a "pixel pig"? A dynamic range doofus? A noise ninny?

Just curious.

Bob
--
http://www.pbase.com/rwbaron

 

[bluefox9er]

Would there be any legit reason to drop a MKIII for the new 7D when used for BIF apart from the crop factor and the possibility that AF may be better?

Fairly broad question but I'd love to hear other opinions.

Richard

nope..not a single one.
--

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dipak49ers/sets/

 

[Kyle Burt]

From what I've been reading, according to those who have had one in thier hands, the 7d is much closer to the 1d3 than it is to the 50d. I'm planning on getting one as a backup as well as a 1d4. The HD video intrigues me as well. I am sort of hoping that the 1d4 doesn't have video, in case video enabled cameras become banned from sporting event sidelines, but also I would prefer that the camera is dedicated to the task at hand. However IF the 1d4 does have video I hope it kicks A$S (ability to shoot HD at 120 fps for slow motion shots would be cool)

 

[RedFox88]

It is closer to the 50D than to the 1D.

In price, and that's about all.

It has the same weather sealing the EOS-1n had which was Canon's top camera for most of the 1990s and is the same weather sealing as the EOS-3. The 7D appears to be as professional as the EOS-3 was.

Unfortunately this is the 21st century. And APS-C sensors are so 20th century, like the EOS-3D.

You sound like a troll, IMHO. Tell your statement to the millions and millions of people that buy P&S digicams every year. It sounds like you don't know Canon at all. There hasn't been an EOS-3D.

Want fewer pixels than the 18MP? Shoot mRAW for 10MP and smaller file size. We'll see how the 7D does once actual photographers have it in their bag.

Those who want the 7D are primarily pixel pigs. And there are lots of them out there.

Shoot mRAW then for 10MP the same size as 1D3 images. And you'll be eating your words when the 1D4 is also 18MP.

 

[Julius T Santos]

Drop a proconsumer body for a consumer body....I don't think so.
--
http://www.juliussantos.com

 

[carlk]

35mm format was introduce in 1892 by Thomas Edison according to Wikipedia. I wonder what do you call people who still want to stick to it and call it “format of the future”?

 

[maxz]

You won't see a pro body with such high pixel density - for a while at least. the 1Diii has only lousy 5MP in the same sensor area.

And 18MP has a big advantage over 10MP period, so even if you shoot your bird in a cage, the 7D still gets better detail.

The 7D is also equipped with high def video... tired of still shots? grab a few minutes of Planet Earth style video while you are at it.

The 7D also has newer gen of AF system, chances are canon will dump the AF system in 1D3 altogether before coming up with an ultimate fix. So get rid of 1D3 while you can still sell it for a few grand and get a 7D and good glass. it will be a lot of work to convince your buyer your 1d3 is 'flawless' once the 1DIV is out.

And of course the 1.3x is an oddball by itself. You either need reach (1.6x) or coverage (FF), the 1.3x is nothing but an overpriced compromise.

Max

Would there be any legit reason to drop a MKIII for the new 7D when used for BIF apart from the crop factor and the possibility that AF may be better?

Fairly broad question but I'd love to hear other opinions.

Richard

 

[snapperZ]

I certainly wouldn't let depreciation on the value of your 1DIII play any part in your decision. All bodies lose value and always trading up to the new body is rarely a good financial move.

The 1DIII will remain a more desirable body than its predecessors. There are plenty of peole waiting to pick up a cheap 1DIII (way too many for it to become that cheap IMO). An unarguably pro quality body will still appeal to many. The 1DIV will be MUCH more expensive and in short supply for a considerable time. The 7D, while its the latest hot new release will likely lose value in percentage terms more quickly than a 1 series purely because sales of cheaper cameras are always higher and it too will be replaced in time. Get the body which does what you need it to and keep it until there's a compelling reason to change it. Spend what you save on something else.

 

[zoooming]

You're making fairly bold presumptions about a camera (7D) which hasn't even been fully evaluated and has yet to hit the market.

I'm guessing there's also a lot of users out there who aren't even remotely interested in having the video capability in a particular body. If they wanted it they'd probably buy a video camera.

There must be a lot of "oddball" sports photographers out there as well judging by the popularity of the 1.3x crop, and the 1D/1DS series.

Have you ever thought that the popularity of a particular model lies in the special set of features that fit the particular requirements of the user? I'm sure Canon/Nikon take that into consideration whenever they release new models.

I think there's a bit more to it than what you have assumed.

Zoooming

You won't see a pro body with such high pixel density - for a while at least. the 1Diii has only lousy 5MP in the same sensor area.

And 18MP has a big advantage over 10MP period, so even if you shoot your bird in a cage, the 7D still gets better detail.

The 7D is also equipped with high def video... tired of still shots? grab a few minutes of Planet Earth style video while you are at it.

The 7D also has newer gen of AF system, chances are canon will dump the AF system in 1D3 altogether before coming up with an ultimate fix. So get rid of 1D3 while you can still sell it for a few grand and get a 7D and good glass. it will be a lot of work to convince your buyer your 1d3 is 'flawless' once the 1DIV is out.

And of course the 1.3x is an oddball by itself. You either need reach (1.6x) or coverage (FF), the 1.3x is nothing but an overpriced compromise.

Max

Would there be any legit reason to drop a MKIII for the new 7D when used for BIF apart from the crop factor and the possibility that AF may be better?

Fairly broad question but I'd love to hear other opinions.

Richard

-

 

[Richard91758]

Some good aguments for and little against but no one as yet has stated the fact that the MKIII is getting pretty close to 3 years old which to me means the 7D has to be better until the MKIV is released, again that's my thought in its most basic form.

45 focus points and 10fps for the MKIII, let's be honest with ourselves here, how many owners really use these 2 features constantly, same for weather sealing?

Finally, in todays economics, is it really worth forking out big dollars for the 1D series as against the afordable 7D given that the 7D'sfeature set is pretty well close to perfect for those that do wildlife photography?

I should have added in my original post I have the MKII and MKIII.

Richard

 

[GazzaJagman]

Point 1 is a serious point. Many pros ditched their 1DsIII cameras and swapped to the 5DII's becuase they could buy nearly 2 cameras for the S/H price for one of their old cameras. So many Pros were buying 2 5DII bodies, selling their old camera bodies and making a few quid too. They lost nothing in image quality but gained a few stops of low light iso ability.
I wonder if we'll see the same migration with the 1DIII ---> 7D?
Many sports users want the longer reach of the 1.6x crop.

Pop a 300mm f2.8 on a 1DIII and it's 1.33x crop pretty much makes it an effective 400mm. but on a 1.6x crop, it jumps to a far longer 500mm (aprox).
Even a humble 70-200 hits a respectible 100-300mm as a 1.6x crop

To actually answer your question, I can think of two "legit" reasons for ditching the 1DmkIII for a 7D.

Note: this says nothing for the reasons not to switch.

1. price - you could probably pick up a 7D for less than you'd get for selling a 1D
2. weight - the 7D weighs less which may be a factor if you're hiking a long way

--
http://www.GMCPhotographics.com (weddings)
http://www.pbase.com/gazzajagman (other stuff)

'Science is what we dream of, technology is what we are stuck with' Douglas Adams