Compare D400 & 7D Mark ll
Nov 17, 2014 20:19:06 #
sirlensalot
Loc: Arizona
SharpShooter wrote:
Ahhhhh! br Sir, if your primary concern is only lo... (show quote)
First reports of the 7D MKII indicated a camera ideal for sports with great low-noise/high ISO results. That is what started me on the research road. Now that reports and test scores are filtering in, I see now it is not (in my opinion) as advertised. My photography is turning towards low-light indoor sports under sometimes very poor lighting. Perhaps I expected too much from an APS-C sensor, but when comparing to even a few older Nikon models, the II falls short. I am confused by your argument that a sports machine should not do well in low light? Arguably, the lens can help a lot. I use both a FF an crop sensor in these situations. Lenses are adequate, cameras are not. Just looking for the best value. Will probably wait until spring to make final choice unless a good deal surfaces.
Nov 17, 2014 23:28:13 #
Longhorn wrote:
No animosity,huh? And where did I say that the 7DII was my camera or that I wanted one? It appears you discuss topics based on feelings and assumptions rather than facts and experience so it is pointless to try to discuss this topic with you. Have a good day.
Look up the definition of the word IF.
Then go back and re-read the quote from me that you posted. ;)
You SHOULD be able to understand the general theme of the sentence in question... that is, if YOUR feelings don't get in the way of your ability to understand data compiled by people who do it for a living.
If you can manage to keep your emotions in check you'll see all sorts of measurable factors that demonstrate the superior performance (for less cost) of the competition when compared to the 7DmkII.
Any reasonable person would understand that if yours shoot 10 and mine shoots 12, mine shoots more than yours... logical right? :roll:
Nov 17, 2014 23:35:36 #
dsmeltz wrote:
Hey, don't sweat it. He doesnt care about actual results only theoretical. He can't differentiate between a camera designed for landscape and one designed and advertised for sports and wildlife. Go look at his other posts. His myopia is evident in most of his comments. He perfers partial information and loves to jump to conclusions based on limited, but easy to follow models. Complex issues confuse him. As do simple comparisons of actual photos.
Says the guy who CLAIMS that tests don't count if they aren't done in the "real world."
I'll let the complex irony of this conveniently over looked fact slip right over your head... :lol: :lol: :lol:
Nov 17, 2014 23:53:57 #
CHOLLY wrote:
I have ZERO experience with the 7DII.
I do have experience with the Sony and Nikon.
But that is beside the point. IF you look at almost every review by independent reviewers, they ALL come to the SAME conclusion; the 7DmkII is about 2-3 years behind the competition in most categories... and to me that's a shame considering the premium price Canon is asking... you know; as if the 7DmkII were a class leader. :roll:
Do you own research... see for yourself. ;)
I do have experience with the Sony and Nikon.
But that is beside the point. IF you look at almost every review by independent reviewers, they ALL come to the SAME conclusion; the 7DmkII is about 2-3 years behind the competition in most categories... and to me that's a shame considering the premium price Canon is asking... you know; as if the 7DmkII were a class leader. :roll:
Do you own research... see for yourself. ;)
Jeez Cholly, you certainly have a lot of hatred and animosity toward Canon, and especially the 7D MK II. I am a Canon shooter and have absolutely no hatred what so ever for folks using Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Olympus of what ever, as it is the equipment they prefer. Is there some underlying factor for your absurd statements regarding Canon, like did a Canon guy steal your wife away from you? Just askin'. :lol:
Nov 18, 2014 00:00:27 #
:roll:
My animosity is towards people who make really silly statements you know? ESPECIALLY when they use a quote to make their point that decidedly demonstrates the opposite. :roll:
Shame on you sailor. :thumbdown:
My animosity is towards people who make really silly statements you know? ESPECIALLY when they use a quote to make their point that decidedly demonstrates the opposite. :roll:
Shame on you sailor. :thumbdown:
Nov 18, 2014 00:12:21 #
CHOLLY wrote:
:roll:
My animosity is towards people who make really silly statements you know? ESPECIALLY when they use a quote to make their point that decidedly demonstrates the opposite. :roll:
Shame on you sailor. :thumbdown:
My animosity is towards people who make really silly statements you know? ESPECIALLY when they use a quote to make their point that decidedly demonstrates the opposite. :roll:
Shame on you sailor. :thumbdown:
Have fun there my little good buddy. I'll back out now so you can continue your silly absurd Canon bashing non-sense. :lol:
Nov 18, 2014 08:36:30 #
sirlensalot wrote:
First reports of the 7D MKII indicated a camera id... (show quote)
There seems to be quite a misunderstanding of the benefits of the APS-C sensor in low light sports settings. For the price, the 7DII rules this area.
The APS-C packs more MP in a smaller area. This means that when taking a shot where you need reach, you can fill the frame, utilizing the whole sensor with a shorter and less expensive lens.
For example when using a 200mm lens you have an effective reach of 320mm ON THE WHOLE SENSOR. To match that on a full frame you would need to buy a 300mm lens and crop a little. Just cropping the FF 200mm shot only utilizes around 10 MP of a sensor of the same base MP (you would have to get up into the 40+MP crop to a similar sensor efficiency).
So for the cost of lens (f2.8 for low light) and camera you are getting shots you would need to spend three times as much to get using full frame.
The comparisons here are 7DII @ 1,799 + EF 70-200 f/2.8L @1,449 = 3,236 vs. 5DII @ 3,199 + EF 300mm f/2.8L @ 6,599 = 9,798
This is why this is the ideal camera for low light sports for the non-rich mom or pop taking pictures of sporting activities.
Nov 18, 2014 09:02:40 #
dsmeltz wrote:
There seems to be quite a misunderstanding of the ... (show quote)
Great post, easy to understand and I agree with your assesment. I shall be ordering my 7D MK II shortly. B & H has informed me, and I have been put on their email list when the Camera comes with the 24-70 f/4 IS lens I shall order, as they are advertising it at a very good price, and it's a lens I have been wanting.
Thanks again for a very well thought out and informative post. :thumbup:
Nov 18, 2014 09:44:57 #
dsmeltz wrote:
There seems to be quite a misunderstanding of the ... (show quote)
Both the Nikon D7100 AND the Sony A77II have BETTER low light performance than the 7DII, each for half or nearly half the price of the 7DII.
Additionally, the Sony has more phase detection autofocus points and a higher burst rate than the Canon.
No one is saying the 7DII isn't a good camera. Just that it isn't as good as cameras that are LESS expensive and MORE capable.
If mom and pop are REALLY interested in saving a few bucks, they'd buy something with a lot more bang for less money than the 7DII. ;)
Nov 18, 2014 10:21:41 #
CHOLLY wrote:
Both the Nikon D7100 AND the Sony A77II have BETTE... (show quote)
First they won at LOW ISO not Low Light. Low light would be HIGH ISO where the 7DII clearly beat the a77. Having a camera without the available lenses does not mean much. Nikon is just is not competitive there for sports and wildlife.
Further, and MUCH more important, is the focusing capability of the 7DII. 65 the cross points just provides a currently insurmountable action focus advantage that trumps any other advantage the other cameras might have in image quality.
Great color depth in an out of focus picture just does not cut it.
Nov 18, 2014 11:35:32 #
CHOLLY wrote:
Both the Nikon D7100 AND the Sony A77II have BETTE... (show quote)
Unless they just want a far superior all round system of technologically superior lenses that cannot be matched because they are 21st century developments and not mid 20th century relics. The overwhelming choice of professionals around the world.
Nov 18, 2014 14:51:27 #
sirlensalot
Loc: Arizona
Just checked out another Tony Northrup you tube video.
Summary of presentation - he likes Nikon bodies, but doesn't care to switch because he prefers Canon lenses and flashes.
Did not sound very bias to me. Loves the 810.
I messed up copying link. Video is 25:12 long. Easy to find on Google.
Summary of presentation - he likes Nikon bodies, but doesn't care to switch because he prefers Canon lenses and flashes.
Did not sound very bias to me. Loves the 810.
I messed up copying link. Video is 25:12 long. Easy to find on Google.
Nov 18, 2014 19:11:10 #
Jakebrake wrote:
Great post, easy to understand and I agree with your assesment. I shall be ordering my 7D MK II shortly. B & H has informed me, and I have been put on their email list when the Camera comes with the 24-70 f/4 IS lens I shall order, as they are advertising it at a very good price, and it's a lens I have been wanting.
Thanks again for a very well thought out and informative post. :thumbup:
Thanks again for a very well thought out and informative post. :thumbup:
Jake, I know that for some, purchasing any place other than B&H is sacrilege, but take a look a Cameta. Last I looked they had the 7ll in stock with an extra bundle to sweeten the deal. Just take all the useless stuff in the bundle and trade it for cards and batteries that have real value. But it will go ground, assuming you can hold your GAS that long. Good luck.
SS
Nov 18, 2014 20:05:41 #
sirlensalot
Loc: Arizona
dsmeltz wrote:
There seems to be quite a misunderstanding of the ... (show quote)
No misunderstanding at all. I can find other older APS-C models (Nikon) at lower prices with superior low light/sports scores from DxOMark. In some cases, with more MP. The only thing the 7D II rules is a premium price. I understand the cropping vs FF, but thank you for a very well done explanation.
I will say there have been some good comments about the new AF system on the II. Also opposing views (KR) that Canons best AF set-up is their older 9 point system. Just reporting one opinion, but he is a valid reviewer.
Although it may be the best mom & pop camera (your words) ever made for sports, it is still below capabilities of the competition, with a premium price tag. The exception may very well be the new AF system. Not saying it is not a good camera.
Nov 18, 2014 22:47:19 #
SharpShooter wrote:
Jake, I know that for some, purchasing any place other than B&H is sacrilege, but take a look a Cameta. Last I looked they had the 7ll in stock with an extra bundle to sweeten the deal. Just take all the useless stuff in the bundle and trade it for cards and batteries that have real value. But it will go ground, assuming you can hold your GAS that long. Good luck.
SS
SS
SS, you are absolutely correct. I do indeed shop for the best value and I was not clear in the post you have referenced.
Case in point was I ordered a Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD from Prodigital2000 from Canada. I received my lens in 4 days with a Canadian 6 year warranty. If I encounter a problem I ship it back to them and they resolve the issue. I paid $1129 for the exact same lens the lower 48 wanted $1499.
My email address is on B & H website for informational purposes. When the package becomes available I will shop everyone from Best Buy, Ebay, Amazon, Gary Camera, Cameta, Adoram or anyone else that I can get the best bang for my buck. I have purchased from each and every one above and have had excellent service from all!
PS:
I don't need to hold my gas that long, as I had a Chubbys Burrito, with extra jalapenos, and beans tonight for dinner, and it solved that dilemma. :lol:
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.