I am an former war refugee and worked as an teacher, now fulltime mother (3 kids) and housewife.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
If I compare the results of the 7D to my brandnew 7D Mark2, I am diappointed. The body itself is great (like the 7D is). But I can not see an major improvement in the picture quality. I can see highlighted (looks "artificial") edges, a lot of noise and mushy colours. On the positive side, the AF is superb and working well on fast objects.
Another point to critisize is the movie mode. The movies are a lot worser, than the 7Ds´. I will decide it after the weekend, if I send it back.
Strange he used the word mushy, that's what I thought only to find out its human error. I thought my first body was no good but it seems that this camera has a steep learning curve. All in all I'm very happy with these bodies.
Still thinkin some folks are way over shooting on price here. And someone else just added evidence regarding the suspicions pre-release of the 16-35 f4. $1200 steal in my opinion. 7D2, same thing. Everyone was thinkin $2500, and it came at $1799. I'm still saying this will be closer to $2k. Seems most everyone here feels the Sig or Tammy 150-600 is a much better value than a $3k 100-400. The current model is being gobbled up at $1699, I just don't think they would so radically abandon an already well-established price range. If this comes out at $3k, I'll buy the SIg Sport instead, and I think a not-so-insignificant amount of others will follow suit. Canon didn't price the 7D2 out of the target market. They won't do that to this lens either. But I will be happy admit I'm wrong if it turns out I am