LOL, sorry, but I find that completely illogical. It's also an unqualified statement...so I have to ask. WHY, in very specific terms, would you choose the 50D or 40D over the 7D for bears (or anything, for that matter)?
First, I'm not sure if you just had chocolate or a Red Bull, but chill a little bit.
I've owned all of these cameras, and filmed ursine and ungulates in crepuscular conditions. Photographing a brown bear running on a brown hillside is much different than filming a sporting event with brightly colored subjects.
In these low light, low contrast conditions, I found the 40D and 50D to simply have superior auto focus consistency with L telephoto lenses. On top of the auto focus, the 40D and 50D also seemed to have less substantial AA filters, which required less processing. The 7D RAW files also feel significantly more "rough", and require more processing all around than even my 40D. The 7D's colors appear drab compared to my 40D and 70D.
My keeper rate plunged significantly with the 7D's I used. Blue channel noise is disturbing on the 7D, even at low ISO's. AI Servo, when combined with high speed burst mode seems to be especially problematic, getting focus, then not, then getting it again.
These numerous issues combined to make unpleasant RAW files. Sure, the 7D has a beautiful build and is a joy to hold and operate. And some of the features are nice. But who cares if the files are weak?
When I compare the 7D files to my 50D, 40D, 70D, 6D, and 5DIII, I simply shake my head. They're a mess.
When you're out shooting the Bob Marshall Wilderness for a month, and you have these cameras side by side over thousands of images, its easy to see what camera can hack the conditions and what does not. Once in a while, when conditions were perfect and everything went right, the 7D really came to life. But that can be said for any cheap smart phone, too. The real test of a camera is how it does when conditions are crap.