Canon 7D or Nikon d7000?
There are aspects of both that I like but at this point the only thing that sways me is the 8fps on the Canon. I will be shooting sports(horse shows to be exact) so that is important to me. I will also be doing portraits so I need something versatile. I have read a TON of reviews and so far these two seem like the best two candidates. Any input on these two cameras? I am hoping to buy one or the other in the next week or so. I would love to hear from you!
0
Comments
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
The autofocus system in the D7000 has 39 points in the viewfinder that you can use as your focal point, seen below.
Image from DPReview's D7000 review
It's not quite as many as the 51 points in the D300/D700/D3 bodies, but it covers most of the frame. That means you might be able to find a focal point closer to your desired subject without having to recompose the shot as much as you would with fewer autofocus points.
The 7D has 19 points arranged like so:
Image from DPReview's 7D Review
However, I believe all 19 of the 7D's points are "cross-type" as opposed to the D7000, which has only 9 of its 39 points as cross-type. Cross-type AF sensors mean that the focus is achieved with a pair of sensors oriented 90 degrees from each other rather than a single sensor, and thus cross-type sensors can detect light in both horizontal and vertical directions. So while the D7000 has more total points, which can help, the 7D has more of the higher-accuracy sensors.
They're both darn fine cameras. My advice is to go to a store, try out both in your hand and see if you prefer the feel of one to the other. You will adjust to whichever set of ergonomics you end up with, but it's nice to feel comfortable with the camera in your hands.
My site 365 Project
This is the advice I'd give. If you're new to DSLRs then you need to keep in mind that you're buying into a system. If it's down to Canon vs. Nikon, decide which one fits your hand, face, style the best. Body selection is going to drive lens selection as well, so keep that in mind.
Good luck. I think both cameras are fantastic. I own the D7000 myself and am very pleased with it, but I don't think you can go wrong either way here.
It is unfortunate, of course, since if you're into portraits you may also eventually delve into full-frame, which is where I feel like Canon drops the ball and Nikon takes a lead, as far as versatility and power are concerned. But, hopefully the upcoming 5D Mk3 will remedy that. Of course for anyone who is in the mood to wait, the Nikon D400 is probably going to be announced within a few weeks, and THAT camera will probably be able to achieve 8 FPS with a battery grip. So, go figure! :-P
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
What exactly is a battery grip? I've been reading where people use them but I haven't seen what they actually are. Also, what isthe benefit of full frame?
There are various size sensors available in digital cameras. Although there are a few larger sensors available, most photographers will use one of the following size sensors...
Many photographers like the larger full-frame format which "can" produce better imagery. However it is not a panacea and shooting with full frame will not magically improve your photos.
I have been shooting with crop format cameras for a long while and will continue to do so. I can get very acceptable imagery from the Canon 1.6x format (Nikon's equivalent is a 1.5x crop). These were shot with an older Canon 40D 1.6x crop camera.
Virtually any camera can do a good job with portraiture. Here are a few of portraits I shot with a 7D using a 70-200mm f/4L IS lens...
Battery grips usually hold two batteries as opposed to the camera holding a single battery. This will give you extended shooting capability. However I get a lot of shots from a single battery and it is quite quick and easy to change batteries in the field. I don't like battery grips because they increase the weight and size of the camera. However, they do work well on the smaller size rebel cameras making them more balanced with larger and heavier lenses.
A nice advantage of the battery grip is that most grips have a second shutter release button which is convenient when shooting in the vertical position. They will also often accomodate a set of AA batteries which I have no use for because I always have extra camera batteries at hand...
Nany photographers swear by battery grips and often used third party grips which are less expensive than the grips offered by the camera makers. Here is an example of a third party battery grip. I am not recommending it, just using it for an illustration...
http://www.amazon.com/BG-E7-Battery-Canon-Digital-Camera/dp/B003MRI1JU/ref=sr_1_18?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1312412738&sr=1-18
I don't know if a battery grip will be on the must-have list for me...I've heard the 7D can be pretty weighty.
Ok another subject for all of you experts! Lenses. I've heard that with Nikon, you can buy older/used lenses because of the way they assemble to the camera doesn't/hasn't changed. Is this true? What about Canon? Do lenses in general change a lot in quality or is it the sort thing where once you buy the lens your set unless it gets damaged? Does the lens technology change as much as the actual cameras?
Thanks again everyone! You're really helping me tremendously!
Any "mainstream" camera such as the 7D or D7000 can be used for all kinds of purposes. Lenses make much more of a difference (after photographer skill/ability) in the image than the camera itself does. And correspondingly, high quality lenses typically cost as much as or more than the price of either of these two cameras.
That can always be added later if you choose. I thought I would like one, mostly for the additional shutter release for vertical mode than for the extra battery life and speed, but after trying one for a little while, I found it rather awkward. I don't shoot fast action sports so I don't need the higher fps (my D300 gives me 6 fps, IIRC), and a battery charge typically lasts me 3 weeks or more unless I have a really high volume shooting day or two mixed in there, so the extra battery life doesn't matter to me. But both of these bodies have grips available, and they can be added later, so don't let that be the deciding factor.
Yes, Nikon's basic mount hasn't changed in many decades. Some older lenses work very well on modern bodies and can be found cheaply. However, some of the lenses won't communicate correctly with the camera and thus are completely manual control. But I wouldn't let this be the deciding factor in your choice, either. Both companies make wonderful lenses and there is a thriving used gear market for both brands. Unless you really want to use 30+ year old lenses, I wouldn't let this stand in the way of getting a Canon. I believe that Canon's lens mount dates back roughly 25 years, so it's not like it's a new kid on the block, either.
If you spend good money on high quality lenses, then yes, you could probably spend the rest of your photographic life using them, and they will still be excellent. Lenses are updated periodically, even the top of the line pro lenses, but the new ones won't completely obsolete the old ones. The electronics in the cameras change much more quickly and often than the optics in the lenses.
Depending on your budget, you might want to look into spending more on the lenses and less on the camera at first, and it will pay off more in the long run. You might want to upgrade the camera in 3-4 years as you outgrow it, but if you buy top quality lenses, you'll have them for decades.
Oh yeah... about the shutter speed. The 7D does indeed go from 30s to 1/8000s. I'm not sure where you found the spec listing it from 1/60 - 1/8000. And both have bulb modes that can hold the shutter open indefinitely, as well. Any camera in this price range will not be lacking in any of the major specifications. I'm not sure about all the nitty gritty test results, but assuming Qarik is right (and I have no reason not to), it seems like the D7000 is a little better in low light, while the 7D is a little better for fast action. Otherwise, they're both very good and probably pretty comparable. Hard to go wrong with either.
My site 365 Project
[IMG][/img]
[IMG][/img]
I got the specs off the BestBuy website, maybe it's a print error. Ok, so what I feel like I'm getting from all this is that they are both excellent cameras and while there are some minor differences, I just need to decide which qualities work better for what I want to do and also decide which will be more comfortable for me to handle.
Ok now I'm probably opening up a can of worms...but now I need lens suggestions. And I'm not trying to break the bank here!!
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_7d
and lenses
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup
Nikon likewise has good info an I'm sure someone will chime in the the locations of those web sites too.
http://www.danalphotos.com
http://www.pluralsight.com
http://twitter.com/d114
Common telephotos are the 70-200mm offerings. photodad1 is right in that Canon has a wider range of selections. Nikon has the 70-200 f/2.8 VRII (2nd generation Vibration Reduction) in production now. You can also find the VRI version or older lenses like 80-200 f/2.8 on the used market. All of them are good to varying degrees. Canon offers 4 (I think) different lenses in this range, a f/2.8 with IS (image stabilization), f/2.8 without IS, and f/4 with and without IS. Price ranges from several hundred US$ to over $2k. The benefit of the f/4 is they're smaller, lighter, and less expensive. The drawback is you lose a stop of light gathering ability. If your shooting environment is mostly in good light, the f/4 can be a good option. Nikon appears to be gradually releasing a series of f/4 zooms, but they don't have anything in the 70-200 range yet. Anyway, that range is a very versatile lens that can do sports as well as a bunch of other things, including portraits.
Good dedicated portrait lenses can be whatever your style dictates. HIstorically, 85 to 135mm lenses (on 35mm film cameras or full-frame DSLRs - which 7D and D7000 are not) are considered good portrait lengths. On crop sensor DSLRs like 7D and D7000, you might be doing head and shoulders shots with a 50mm and head/face shots with 85mm, or use the 85 and just back up farther when you shoot. Canon and Nikon both offer very nice lenses in the 50, 85, 135mm ranges. They can range from around $100 for a 50mm f/1.8 up to well over $1k and more. It all depends on your budget. Rental companies are a good way to try out lenses for a few days or weeks before committing to buying.
My site 365 Project
As for lenses, if you go with Canon I'd suggest a 70-200 f/2.8L. It's definitely good for portraits and sports. Or, if it's too expensive, you can settle for the f4 version, but the background won't be as blurred (a blurred background is good for portraits and sports).
If you want to save some money, you can buy used. There is a risk involved (no warranty), but I've bought all my gear used except for one lens, which I bought refurbished. Speaking of refurb, check out Canon's refurb site: cameras and lenses. Lots out of stock, but there are some good deals. Refurbs are like new, better than new imho, because they're thoroughly inspected and tested and guaranteed to work. Moreso than the "new" ones.
But since the 7D already has 8 FPS on it's own, and since I'm pretty sure the D7000 does NOT get up to 8 FPS with a grip, the point is moot.
A couple other un-answered questions:
* Both the Canon and Nikon have the same shutter speed capabilities, I dunno why the Canon 7D is listed as only 1/60 sec but it can certainly do 30+ second exposures.
* Full frame is the larger sensor format compared to the 7D and D7000, which is certainly an advantage for achieving shallow depth and shooting in low light. However for sports and portraits you can still do a great job with the 7D. In low light, the 7D is still quite formidable, and it is mostly going to be the photographer's skills that limit the results, not the camera. For the most part, even if you eventually do add a 5D mk2 or similar to your camera bag someday to conquer the world of low-light and shallow depth, you'll still want to keep the 7D around for it's speed and extra reach. So, bottom line, you can't really go wrong with a 7D now...
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
I think the exact opposite. I think for sports, at least at this point in time, Nikon is in the lead. And buying a system, this is something to consider.
If you want FF, then yes, for sports Nikon is in the lead. Nikon's current full frame cameras are much better suited to action than Canon's, although Canon's are usable.
But for crop, the best offerings are the 7D and D300s. I don't want to get into a debate about those two, but the OP was looking at the 7D and D7000. The 7D is better suited to sports. Now if it was 7D vs D300s, it'd be different.
Anyways, I would pick the 7D for fast action sports compared to EITHER the D300s or the D7000. Having shot with the D300 for years, I have to say I would rather NOT trust it's autofocus for serious sports photography...
But, like I said earlier, maybe the Nikon D400 will change that when it is released. Who knows! But either way, in the 7D's price range, it's the best sports camera.
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
For sports /action Canon 7D
but the cheaper 50D and 60D are still pretty good
http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2011/01/lab-test-canon-60d?quicktabs_1=2#quicktabs-1
or go all out for the Canon 1D series
I would look at both and look at the lens and body choices for the future and then decide. Pick what feels good in your hands and has controls that make sense to you. In the end they are both killer cameras with killer lens options. It is a tough choice for sure.
Other factors such as lenses, flash technology, etc, etc, etc should all come into play. You are definately making the right decision between the two brands, but a little harder between the two cameras. If it were me, I'd frankly probably wait until after August 24th when Nikon is expected to make some new major announcements (may or may not effect your decision). I'd also probably lean Nikon as I think others that have pointed out here, the scaling of the lenses and Nikon's high end offereing seems to give a little more than on the Canon side. But this is rally a Coke vs Pepsi / UPS vs FedEx discussion...
One last thing, I hear people say the X is better for portraits, the Y is better for sports, etc, etc.. This logic assumes one of the cameras is somehow inferior in either and that's just not the case. Nikon's take great portrait pictures as do Canon's and vice versa.. It's the person holding the camera and operating the camera. Spend less time making this decision and more time learning your camera very very well and you'll be best off regardless of what choice you make here..
With all that said... Go Nikon :-)
The feel is really important. My first DSLR I swore would be a Canon. I love Canon P&S cameras. But I couldn't stand the layout and menus of the Canon DSLR
Have fun!
The 7D is Canon's competitor to the Nikon D300s, and the Canon 60D competes against the Nikon D7000. However, the 7D is older, and the D7000 (though lower in the market than the 7D) is newer, so they're kinda similar (tech advancements). I still think the 7D and D300s are better for sports than the other two, though.
After you've decided whether Canon or Nikon feels better in your hand, if it's Canon then go for the 7D, if it's Nikon then it might be D7000 vs D300s.
As a 7D owner, I can say that it's a great body for sports & all purpose shooting. From what I've read, the Nikon equivalent stands on its own as well. As previously noted, it is important to test both bodies while in store. Being able to hold both cameras in your hands & touch, feel the controls/ergonomics is essential. When I first began looking at DSLR's, I went to Penn Camera & held both cameras. The Canon felt better to me. Equally you are buying into a system & at some point will be heavily invested in lenses, flashes etc. Because both bodies have a crop multiplier (7D is 1.6x & D700 is 1.5x) any mid-range fast lens would be great for portraits. Considering that you are not trying to break the bank, I'd highly recommend a 50mm 1.4 for around $400+. On the 7D, it becomes 80mm & on the Nikon, it becomes 75mm. I use mine extensively & the fast aperture allows you to shoot in really low light. However, 50mm is not so great for sports because the focal length is too short (in some cases). Shooting horses in low light will require a fast aperture lens (nothing less than 2.8) & there is an associated cost. For sports, I'd recommend the 70-200mm f2.8 (Canon, Nikon, Sigma & Tamron all make a version of this lens). This should cover everything you need. I hope this helps!
twin Mark IV's & a bunch of "L" glass
site ∙ facebook
Matt: You are correct. The 7D will shoot at 30 seconds & much longer in Bulb.
twin Mark IV's & a bunch of "L" glass
site ∙ facebook
what fits you the best
what menu structure do you feel more comfortable with,
what glass do you plan on using,
Good Luck
It's not what you look at that matters: Its what you see!
Nikon
http://www.time2smile.smugmug.com