Opinions on this camera? Canon EOS 7D SLR

[xchairity_casex]

So, Since i have begun doing Photography Full time.I am DEFF in need of a new camera.
I have been looking at the Canon EOS 7D SLR.

Any opinions? pros? cons? etc?

Would be interested in hearing everyone's input.

 

[xchairity_casex]

or this one?
Olympus OM-D E-M1

 

[Mark-60]

I have a 7D. If I were going to go pro, I'd look for a 1D mark III or IV if you can afford it. I'll come back and explain more when I have a real keyboard

 

[Alliegirl]

Look at the Canon 6D if you're committed to Canon. I use a Canon 5Dmarkii for work and plan on getting the 6D at some point for my personal arsenal. (I am not in a rush because I use Sony/Minolta in my personal biz so I have plenty of gear) Sony makes a great full frame as well, the a99, or you can probably get a fantastic deal on a closeout a77 since the a77ii is just released.

Micro 4/3 is awesome if you want mirrorless but have limitations when it comes to studio lighting, if you want to expand, and can be a tad slower to focus which is important if you're shooting moving objects. If you want mirrorless, then the Sony a6000 is the best on the market for low light and speed and the Olympus OMD is a good second.

A lot is going to depend on your budget. Lenses are a better investment than bodies, so if you have a set amount to spend, get better glass and a good body. If shooting animals, definitely a nifty 50, a 70-200/2.8 and a 24-70/2.8

So really it depends on what you are shooting for your business, your budget, and your goals. IE, Shooting wildlife has vastly different needs than wedding photography. I shoot newborns in my day job and my needs for that are much different than my needs when I am shooting pets.

 

[PocketPal]

Look at the Canon 6D if you're committed to Canon. ... I use Sony/Minolta

Hmmm...I'm a Nikon Fanboy thru and thru so I'm biased, but I'll just address the last post, then I'll ask OP to specify her photographic needs/budget before I get to her pick of cameras.

I just returned from a journalism convention and the student press room was outfitted with five Canon 6D with a mixed bag of pro glass for the photojournalist students invited to the convention. Just as well, i spent the weekend with NatGeo photog Michael Yamashita and we got to discussing Sony's cause he's sponsored by them and is totally outfitted with every Sony cameras and lens you can think of.

Below is my shot of the Shwedagon Pagoda in Naypyidaw, the new official capitol of Myanmar. Not the one in the old capitol of Yangon/Rangoon. Nikon D800, 24-70 2.8, B+W CPL (circular polarized lens) nothing special, set on P-mode and shoot (dust on sensor and all), I think my twilight night sky says it all (all rights reserved by ISL Studio)

 

[PocketPal]

Hey...what happen to my pict? here it is again side by side with Mike's(top photo)

 

[Alliegirl]

Both pictures are great, IMO. You can't really compare them unless you are sure that you used the same settings etc. Looking at Yamashita's blog, the second picture in is much richer in colors and closer to your example.

These days, most DSLR systems are pretty comparable and it becomes a matter of preference/taste.

 

[PocketPal]

Both pictures are great, IMO. You can't really compare them unless you are sure that you used the same settings etc. Looking at Yamashita's blog, the second picture in is much richer in colors and closer to your example.

These days, most DSLR systems are pretty comparable and it becomes a matter of preference/taste.

Thx for the compliment, but i beg to differ. This being my craft and livelihood, i don't face the board of editors and publishers when they ask for my opinion by replying, "well...this picture is prettier." This may not be the forum for me to lay out the arguments but...yes you can compare and settings have nothing to do with it unless you want to pixel-pick at the level of sharpness with a test chart and that's for lenses, not cameras or it's sensor. In all fairness you are correct, since i don't know the camera or the setting that was used...BUT I do know enough to tell that it is most probably a Sony DSLT because the Digital Single-Lens Translucent technology that Sony uses robs their image of 1 1/2 stop of light...thus the appearance of "black" luminance in the night sky.

The following is a comparison of the histogram and file size of the two images showing a larger dynamic range with peaks at both gamut of the spectrum...and a larger file size for the Nikon image on right. Simple but objective enough for this thread (although to Mike's and Sony's defense, pro-photog's never put their best work on the net, nor is mine as i said it was set to the camera's default setting of P-mode)

 

[Alliegirl]

You're comparing photographs and the photographers, not equipment.

Equipment comparisons are done scientifically, using the same conditions including focal length, ISO etc, not artistically. Settings absolutely matter when comparing cameras, but means diddly squat when critiquing an image (same for camera, lens etc)

The camera is simply a tool. They all have their strengths and weaknesses. Knowing how to use your tools is what makes you a good photographer, not your gear. A good image is a good image, regardless of what tool you used to capture it.

 

[PocketPal]

all due respect, I'm not comparing myself to an award winning photographer that makes more money with his images than i do with mine. For all intense and purposes, the blog photograph could be metering the pagoda vs the people or what have you. If you read my comment, I was referring to the camera's interpretation of the cloudless sky...regardless of setting, focal length, field of view or what have you, a blue sky is a blue sky. Unless you're putting techniques like shooting against the sun in effect to create deep blues out of the sky, I can very well compare the ability of two different camera's sensor and processors interpretation of an evening sky. Just as well, you don't seem to be aware of your own camera brand's use of a proprietary technology...which was my point so that OP can have an insight to the various options she has to choose from...from the very different camera's ...from very different companies. This is by no means a personal opinion abt you or your equipment...This is why SonyFan's are hated on the photo forums

 

[Novy]

The 7D is a great camera. Certainly can't complain with mine. I'd like to go full frame some day, more to gain a bit of higher ISO performance in low light than anything. But as mentioned, the lens investment is far more critical. The 60D had just released at the time that I purchased my 7D and I was torn between them for a while and really in the end the small difference in the price of the cameras is minute compared to what I have invested in lenses, and this is just a hobby for me. I've got the 70-200f2.8IS MKII, Sigma 18-35f1.8 and Tokina 11-16f2.8. I had about 200 shots on the kit lens (18-135) before I got the 70-200 and after that it collected dust. If I had to do it all over again, knowing what I know now I would certainly economize on the body rather than lenses if I was on a budget.

 

[Alliegirl]

The gear is just that, gear. It doesn't take my pictures for me, I still control that aspect of it (for now anyways). And I've never been "hated" on ANY photography forum simply because I use Sony (until now apparently).

Again, comparing two different images taken at potentially different ISO DOES make a difference in dynamic range and noise, as does metering method and of course, sensor. And even WITHIN brand, the dynamic range available for a specific sensor/camera model can vary wildly. The DSLRs available today at the entry level are better than what was available as a pro model 5 years ago. The differences in IQ between today's DSLR/DSLT's is minimal across the board for all brands when compared for the same level (ie when comparing entry level to entry level, prosumer to prosumer etc) and you can even throw many of the mirrorless systems in the pool too.

I personally get just as good an image from the Canon system I use as I do from the Sony system I use. But I despise the inability of the 5d Mark ii to quickly focus in lower light, something my Sony does with ease. Frankly, I have Sony because I shot Minolta and reinvesting in all my gear wasn't realistic (hey, I'm not Michael Yamashita, I have to pay for mine) and because I happen to have a love affair with built in Image Stabilization and my almost 30 year old Minolta 50/1.7. It is not without it's limitation, but neither is any system.

Gear is gear.

Light is light.

A good image is a good image.

And at the end of the day, when I show you an image, you'd be hard pressed to tell what system I used to obtain it without looking at the EXIF data.

I posted to help the OP with some options about gear for her needs, not get into a Nikon vs Sony debate. Those debates are circular and end up doing nothing more than causing aggravation. I also happen to make my living with a camera, including a Sony. Please don't talk down to me or make assumptions that I don't understand something just because I happen to use Sony and you don't like Sony. I personally don't like Nikon for any other reason than I don't find the controls intuitive but I certainly wouldn't diminish your abilities or look down on you for using one. Different strokes and all.

 

[PocketPal]

To be completely straight forward
A) there's a level of profession where you should be covered for your gear i.e.my reference to the student press room and their very cool brand spanking new Canon 6D and L lenses. And...most agencies/companies offer Canons to their staff

B)I didn't want to open up a can of worm...but wanted OP's input on her photographic needs/budget before i make my comment about her two very specific camera (because i don't own either of them) I threw in my Nikon "pro"sumer D800 in the mix since other brand of cameras were mentioned.

C) I offered some visual reference...albeit not a fair representation but a test shot vs a story invoking shot

D)I asked kindly that you don't take my comment personally and i didn't want to say FanBoy to save you from a sexist remark. I shoot Canon, but i'm not a fan...this may also apply to you i don't know? Like you said, you have a/f glass and Sony has onboard I/S perhaps the OP would like that, but I wanted her input.

E)There was/is a time when a photographer was/is hired for their gear...large format, rangefinder, infrared, timelapse w/sliders, polaroids....there's a lot more than meet the average consumer's eyes...even for paid professionals, esp professionals that are 80hrs/week wrapped up in their work hiding on top of a tree and don't get to see what else is out there until they get to the expos

F)I like Sony, but i don't like the fact that they cant offer me tech support for my DSLR/T unless I am a NatGeo photog...and that i have to toss the entire system on a job because of faulty batteries that i can't get anywhere outside of major metropolis...or that Olympus is going through one of the worse corporate corruption case in Japan even though they are on top of the game in the mirrorless..although you think it's Sony.

just putting it out there, now that OP has to sift thru all this and bias her decision before we can comment
-j

'nuff said

 

[PocketPal]

I had to open my big mouth...

To OP
Some real world review of the Olympus you mentioned and recent reviews of the Canon


OM-D E-M1
The Olympus OM-D E-M1 Full Real World Review | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS One of the best reviewer and blogger of photography and gear. It also helps his cause that he's a very respected photographer in the field…and he doesn*t take money for his reviews.

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review meh, just interesting that he ditched DSLR for m4/3

This is a paid review by a UX (User Experience) a paid person to rip into the technology in the real word, a lil too technical for real world imo
Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review: Shooting with Zuiko Digital Four Thirds Lenses

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review | Photo This That

CANON 7D current reviews 2013 forward
Pro's of the 7D start somewhere in the middle of the review if you can get past the technical crap and I disagree *1 see foot note below
Canon EOS 70D vs 7D Comparison, Whats the difference between them?

Once again too technical and spec ridden for real world *2 see note on my collection of input from associates and personal use.
Canon 70D Vs 7D - Dan Carr Photography

all other reviews are a bit dated; 2012 and earlier so I didn't include..you should search and read it on your own terms. My feelings with Canon…they're out to sell their newest camera…but if you read beyond their reviews, you can buy their older models cheap due to overstock. Nikon is hated because their cameras are usually on back-order, so you have to pre-order and put your money upfront..it's the fate of the camera industry and it sux

-j

OMD-E-M 1

• “…E-M1 is slightly bigger, quite a bit stronger and subtly faster. After using the camera I thought Olympus must have been injecting the E-M5 with steroids for the past two years to give it some beef and the E-M1 was/is the result.” *Steve Huff (what he said, why mess with the best)
• Olympus' revolutionary 5-way image stabilizer is more than a gimmick, and it allows better i/s within the camera. (the argument b4 was that motion is detected and corrected better when it is further from the sensor (simple physics), but the 5-way allows more sensitivity near the sensor…in short, every lens you use on it will now have i/s (**you HAVE TO TURN OFF i/s when using a tripod..so this is a disadvantage for landscape/long exposures edt)
• The OM-D E-M5 almost killed the DSLR market…almost
• Why micro 4/3?
  --The ability of the design to create a minimal of flange focal distance (FFD, camera lens to sensor) is significantly reduced so that you can maintain relatively sharp focus of the lens wide open (lowest aperture setting--no need to stop down)
  --form factor i.e. size
• During the 2014 CES trade show in Las Vegas, the Mirrorless Contingent announced no further news from the mirrorless market...then Sony busted out with their A6000 and shocked the world....meh, but that's mirrorless, not m4/3 mirrorless

OMD E-M1 Cons

• Small sensor
• limited studio lighting capabilities (not true…but WHO CARES! You can shoot wide open and maintain sharpness/clarity. The m4/3 is for field photographers and natural light photographers; not studio/but you can do studio.)
• limited lens choice…(not true, Olympus and Panasonic shares technology for the m4/3 market, w/Olympus (one of the two optical company in Japan, the other being Nikon… having the larger selection of glass available for the mount and Panasonic is in bed with Leica to develop Leica designed lenses…and adapters are available for m-mount (lenses made for leica's m-mount)
• autofocusing…not true, M 4/3 has an advantage of autofocusing over DSLR because of the FFD and the use of hybrid a/f technology developed 10yrs ago…something that Canikon is integrating in their DSLR lines now
• DSLR is not dead…but licking its wound and getting meaner
• you look amateurish next to someone using a DSLR with a flash bracket w/flash mounted on-top with sync cables running all along the bracket….but that's the point, so that you can sneak in, and grab the cool candid shot of someone really enjoying themselves and not the usual posey/selfie…but your client may not want to pay you serious money with that lil thing.

*1

• You should familiarize yourself with Canon 7D reviews of the past…It beats the pants off the Nikon D300/D300s and gave the full frame D700 a run for its money..its only complaint/advantage was it's APSC-H sized sensor.
• Larger buffer and separate Digic 4 processor, 1 for the sensor, 1 for the autofocus. You can shoot a continous burst of 3 sec before the camera stops to start catching up to the processing, only 2.25 seconds for the newer 70D which means stop-n-go every 2 sec. 3 second is along time and that's abt 25 pictures (130 pictures if you're only shooting large JPG)

*2

• Magnesium body (full-body says it all)
• Against the 1D Miii/iv “meh” do you really need/want to lug around a pro size body (up the ante on gears, tripod and bags to fit that sucker) and two of them if you're a pro. Markiii/iv has a loud mirror slap (KLAK, KLAK, KLAK, KLAK, KLAK, KLAK, KLAK,KLAK,KLAK,KLAK) try not to piss off the approaching bear or your bride-to-be with that. Do you want to color-correct 10FPS pictures of a tree in the background of your shot?
• You can use Nikon lens on Canons...A lot of pro's go that route and buy a super cheap intro-DSLR and submit it as Canon shots

Etc..etc..etc..
thx for reading
-j

 

[PocketPal]

Etc..etc..etc..

Shoot! forgot to add abt personal exp w/ OM-D E-M1 It's an Electronic View Finder, but no lag and super hi-res-but some people dislike looking at an electronic image. The controls are too tightly spaced together, even for my mid-small size hand...and get's fiddly. Nothing to add on the Canon 7D

-j

 

[PocketPal]

...pro, I'd look for a 1D mark III or IV....more when I have a real keyboard

um..I got bored. demonstrating the "run 'n gun" technique -j
click on the link below to go to the right scene
Canon 1D Mark IV vs Airsoft Gun - Shootout - YouTube

full video below
[video=youtube_share;XaKug7oTMA4]http://youtu.be/XaKug7oTMA4[/video]

 

[PocketPal]

. ...demonstrating the "run 'n gun" technique

Grammar: should read "DRTV demonstrating the "run 'n gun" blah, blah, blah." I don't have anything to do with "producing" the vid ;-T

On another note...from a blog I follow called "Life Is Good"
Caption: 20 units of 1D MkIV, 580EXII, 16-35mm f2.8L II and 70-200mm f2.8L taking delivery at The New Strait Times newspaper in Malaysia. May 26, 2010.

 

[xchairity_casex]

Alright, I am looking for- basically a "stepping stone" camera ATM right around 1,000-2,000$( for the body only and another 2,500$ for a god lens or two) to get me through the next year or two before dropping some more serious cash into a batter camera.
For work my subjects are people, indoors and outdoors.
However, I would really like a camera capable of doing nice action shots of my dogs because I love taking shots of my dogs.
And I am not hell-bent on a Canon. I used to have a Nikon coolpix that I adored.

 

[Novy]

Alright, I am looking for- basically a "stepping stone" camera ATM right around 1,000-2,000$( for the body only and another 2,500$ for a god lens or two) to get me through the next year or two before dropping some more serious cash into a batter camera.
For work my subjects are people, indoors and outdoors.
However, I would really like a camera capable of doing nice action shots of my dogs because I love taking shots of my dogs.
And I am not hell-bent on a Canon. I used to have a Nikon coolpix that I adored.

IMO, at this point your lens investment is more critical than the camera. Exactly what type of work are you going to be doing? It will have some influence on whether you should be considering zoom or prime lenses. If you're talking about roughly a $4500 investment, does that include accessories? A fast memory card, solid tripod and a decent flash can easily eat up $500.

 

[Novy]

Too late to edit. I forgot to mention editing software as well. Something else to consider if you don't presently own anything. It is nice to have a program like lightroom to make RAW conversions less tedious.