MT Shooter wrote:
I use the Nikon S6500 for a pocket camera, it meets all your specs, including price. Great image quality and a touchscreen too.
Or if you want to go Canon, the whole powershot elph line is in this range. From around $99 to $170 for that strange little PowerShot N Facebook Ready thing.
But both Nikon and Canon have cameras that will service. You might just want to check Best Buy and Amazon to see what the current deals are.
rpavich wrote:
Oh I know..but SD is the BEST Mexican food :)
It's a proven fact...
Take pictures of the food. Esp the fish tacos.
sirlensalot wrote:
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.
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.
sirlensalot wrote:
I was not, apparently you were.
Using a non sequitur is the equivalent of admitting you are wrong. It is noble of you to admit you were wrong.
JCGammack wrote:
No they aren't and never will. Each has it's key advantages and weak points. If you want the best of both worlds, invest in both worlds.
Advantage Mirrorless- Size is smaller, Lighter.
Advantage DSLR- Faster , Lens and system flexibility and availability.
This annalists does not include personal preferences or prejudice. Those arguments will go on forever.
Ultimately, I think they will overtake DSLR. As EVF tech improves, the advantages of lighter full frame mirrorless cameras will just make the choice no-brainer. Just as digital took over from film. the DSLR advantages you site are all based on current product availability. There is no technological or economic reason that mirrorless lenses cannot or will not be produced that rival or exceed what is currently available for DSLR.
Do you have any lenses now? Is this your first canon?
And the big question, What is you budget?
sirlensalot wrote:
<snip>I am curious as how you analyze DxO as being better at testing and reviewing one aspect of a camera over another. Love to see any data that supports your opinion.
<snip>.
DUH!!!
Try there own site where they same that what they are comparing are camera sensors and or camera lenses. Show one place where they claim to be comparing the whole camera. Come on. Just one.
I am not saying what they do is not valuable, just don't confuse what they do with a full review of a camera.
Photographer Jim wrote:
I'm not allowed to use crayons anymore as the last time I did I got one stuck up my nose! :oops:
I don't know what you mean.
I have never done that.
Nor have I ever had to deal with two days of funny colors running through my mustache while people snicker behind my back.
It really hurt!
Not that it ever happened.
sirlensalot wrote:
<snip> I find it not only disheartening but disgraceful that Canon advertises this as their "flagship".
<snip>.
Where do they say that??? I think I have seen it referred to as their "flagship APS-C" but not their main flagship product. I think that is still the 1D.
imagemeister wrote:
Why use a "camera" - why not cell phone ??
Why not just memorize what you see and use a crayon and draw it later on? :wink:
sirlensalot wrote:
<snip> Based on DxOMark scores only<snip>
You have a faulty review process. Please look at some of the earlier links that explain what the 7DII can do in the real world. It is not designed as a studio camera. DxO is very uesful for choosing a camera for studio settings where things like low-light high-ISO and focus tracking are not important. The 7DII is designed for sports and wildlife shot outside of a studio.
creativ simon wrote:
Normally limited edition prints would have the number on them like 12/25 etc. Bit late if you have already sold a lot
Just sell as many as you can, well done
It is a decision you need to make before you sell any. 1/100 means nothing if there are 20 out there with no numbers.
Another real world look at the 7DII
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0640966241/video-capturing-nature-with-the-canon-eos-7d-mark-ii
Unless you think DPReview is paid off by Canon too.
charles dyxin wrote:
Thank you one and all, I now have to gather all the info, and make a decision. This is a great sight because you all have a lot of expertise and this is really helping me.
Charlie
Charles, in the future for questions like this, you can get more focused responses if you give a tentative budget instead of something as soft as "can't afford a new one." If you had stated a budget one of the members, some of whom are quite knowledgeable regarding the computer marketplace, might have been able to help you with more specific suggestions.
jrb1213 wrote:
It is interesting that Camera decision compares the focus points on the two cameras but fails to mention that all 65 points on the Canon are cross point type and only 15 on the Nikon are cross point. The Canon will have a higher ratio of keepers because of this. As i am learning the ins and outs of the 7D2 this seems to be true
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.