February 26, 2015, 11:32:08 PM

Show Posts

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.

Messages - Richard8971

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 26
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D autofocus system vs 7D....
« on: December 24, 2014, 06:28:58 PM »
My 70-300L focuses instantaneously on the 6D despite being f/4-5.6. Have you compared AF speed with the 7D using the same lens?

I own the EF 70-300L and on the 6D focus is almost instant, even indoors. (I.E. lower light) I don't know if I would really be able to tell it apart from my 7D. I know my Tamron 1.4x teleconverter works a little better on my 6D even with my 70-300L.

I love both cameras, they have certain advantages and disadvantages over each other but together they make a great team.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / 6D autofocus system vs 7D....
« on: December 23, 2014, 12:26:17 AM »
I know a lot of discussion has been floating around about how "limited" the AF system is on the 6D. I just purchased a 6D and so far I love it. I had a 5D2 (sold it) and I find the 6D to be a great FF camera.

A word on the AF system. I only use the center point 95% of the time anyway. It allows me to be a little more accurate on what I want my camera to focus on and then I recompose. For objects in motion I still find the center focus point to give me the best results. I have shot that way on my 7D and have been really happy with the results. I have used the center point on my 6D and the AF system seems to be fast, very fast actually. I think it's just as fast, if not faster than my 7D.

Anyone done any tests on this? If the burst rate were higher, the 6D could easily replace my 7D. Well, not really, I own a crop body for several reasons, but I am really liking my 6D.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.


I bought a 5D MK III before the 6D arrived.  Otherwise, I'd be quite happy with one, since low light photography is my thing.  My 7D was fine at low ISO's, which meant that high shutter speeds with f/5.6 telephotos was a problem due to a lot of noise. 
I think the camera will work out well for you.

Oh believe me I have wanted a 5D3 for a long time, it's just the price tag kept me away. I think you are right, the 6D will do perfect for the kind of FF shooting I will be doing.


As there has been a lot of discussion in the past two weeks about bashing the marvellous 7DII and everybody who wrote something not positive, was called a troll, I wonder, why no one called the owner of this thread a troll?   ;)

My 7D still works fine too. It will work fine, until the 5DIV will appear on the horizon  ;D

Maybe I have been turning a little green lately. It's time to take a bath! :)

The 7D2 is a fantastic camera, but the other day when I was visiting Adorama I was 2 seconds away from clicking the "Buy it now" button on a brand new 7D2 but I stopped myself before I could and I'm glad I stopped myself from making a mistake.

Instead, I took advantage of the $300.00 rebate and bought a new 6D. :) Now I have a fantastically speedy crop sensor for sports and wildlife (my old 7D) and a perfect FF sensor for portraits and low light (high ISO) photography (my new 6D).

I'm super stoked.


I currently use a 7D1 as my main camera body. I shoot mainly wildlife and so far the 7D has done everything and more that I have wanted it too. However, I know that there are advantages of having a nice FF so after doing my homework and talking to several camera buddies I bought a 6D.

I have owned the 5D2 and have tried out the 5D3. I already have a camera that works perfect for wildlife so I cannot justify spending 3 grand on a FF body, nor will I ever. The 5D2 is an amazing camera and nice bodies can be found used for around $1300-$1400. The recent rebate on the 6D makes that camera body look at lot more attractive, so I went ahead and bought one.

It is a little smaller than my 7D and is a lot lighter but it does not feel like a "cheap" camera in any way. I was a little nervous about the AF system but after trying it out, it seems to work perfectly. AF is very fast and accurate and works fantastic in low light, much faster than my 7D. I use the center point 99% of the time anyway, so lack of focus points does not really matter to me...

The only other thing that bothered me was the 1/4000s max shutter speed. But when I really thought about it, I rarely ever need that fast of a shutter speed anyway!

This isn't a discussion about the 6D being better than any other camera, Canon or otherwise. If you bought a 5D3 and it's amazing then good for you. I didn't want a FF for sports or wildlife, I already have a great camera for that. I wanted a FF for portraits and low light photography like lightening and night shots and also to have a true wild angle camera. Again I can't (and don't have) justify spending 3 grand on a camera body. 

The buttons feel good and the lack of joystick is not really a problem. It's a little different than the "normal" EOS layout but feels natural if you are used to Canon bodies.

If you have ever wanted a FF and have been nervous about buying this camera because some people have called it "cheap" or are trying to pressure you into a camera you don't need then ignore them. You won't be unhappy with the 6D. The images are AMAZING!!!

Just my 2 cents.


I missed that it was the original 7D.  Unless it can be fixed for $300 or less, I'd consider buying a refurb 7D thru CLP for about $700.  You will get a near new camera with a 1 year warranty.  Broken ones go for $200-$300 on ebay depending on condition, so spending $400 or $500 to fix it is a losing bet.  Chances are that the buyer can fix it for $100 and flip it for a profit.

Refurbs are running $863.00 right now. Eh, not worth it. Yes, it comes with a 1 year warranty, but I am not planning on selling my 7D. I have no interest on making profit on it. I bought it new for $1550.00 so profit isn't really anything I'm worried about. They are not worth right now even close to what I paid for it and I am not sorry about that. It has done everything I have asked and more.

I realize that this is apples to oranges but I bought my wife a refurbished Nikon D7000 directly from Nikon and it wasn't anything special. You could tell it had been used (wear was slight, but you could see it if you looked closely) and the camera had close to 25,000 clicks on it when I checked it online. I have bought plenty of refurb items but they are not new... not even close. :(



Reset the camera to see if that fixes the USB port.
Definitely tell them about every issue you are aware of.  The problem could be a failing motherboard, or just a loose flex print connection, but get it fixed.   
The sticky mirror is part of the reason for hoping that they will do away with it and go to mirrorless once the technology is ready.  Those motors and moving parts are a big hit on reliability.

Yeah, you are prob right, I will likely go ahead and get it fixed. I have reset the camera (took out both batteries) and even tried a firmware update. Still no luck.

I know the history of my camera and I know how i have treated it. It still looks brand new even though I use it as often as I can. It has never been dropped and has been well taken are of. To repair my camera, IMO, is going to be cheaper than getting another camera. It's been a workhorse and has done everything I have asked it to do. The 7D2 is a very nice camera but not nice enough to justify dropping $1800.00 to replace my 7D.

I'm just really hoping getting it fixed doesn't cost an arm and a leg. I'm hoping in the 300-500 area.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Mirror sticking and USB problem on my 7D...
« on: December 12, 2014, 11:00:53 AM »
I bought my 7D new back in Sept of 2011 and I have gone through about 60K clicks, give or take a thousand. Lately, the mirror will seem to "stick" after taking a shot. The photo comes out fine but you can hear a delay in the mirror returning. It doesn't happen all the time but enough and it happens more frequently now.

I had been meaning to send it in to be cleaned/replaced but a couple of weeks ago my USB port went out on the camera too. I have tried different cords and computers and nothing. I have tested my computers and cords with some of my other cameras and they work fine. It started out with an error saying "USB device not recognized or has malfunctioned" and now when I plug it in I don't even get that, it's like the camera is off.

Granted I don't use my USB port on my camera much anyway because I have a card reader, it just bothers me that it stopped working and may be a sign of something else going wrong.

I love my 7D and really don't want to replace it (or upgrade to the 7D2) for $$$ reasons first off. I don't want to dump $1800 on a new camera and fixing mine will still be cheaper than buying even a used 7D.

Question is, when I send it in to have the mirror checked so I even bother with the USB port? Is it separate enough of a thing that it's demise will not affect other electronic parts of my camera?

I also have a 6D that I use for when I need/want a FF camera. My 7D is when I go shooting wildlife.

Thanks for any thoughts you may have.


10 grand for a body? No way. Glass? Yes.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Do you need a really high ISO?
« on: September 17, 2014, 12:03:43 AM »
Maybe we are spoiled...however, maybe we are on the cusp of another revolutionary leap forward in IQ again. Ten years from now, we could be looking back at today, and saying the very same thing about noise levels today as we are about noise levels with film.

Yes, we have amazing technology today, and it's allowed for wonderful things. However, counter to "We have it great" is, we could have it better. And, we likely WILL have it better. Most companies are rocketing forward at lightning speed on all camera capability fronts. I know that Samsung doesn't have a great lens selection yet...but, YET. They have a 7D II killer on their hands (well, with the exception that the high speed 15fps rate is 12-bit RAW, which is kind of a Samsung killer :P). All they really need is a great lens selection and a reliable support department. Those things simply need time to accumulate and build up.

Same goes for Sony...they are redefining a lot of the market today, and like Nikon, throwing out a lot of products to see what sticks (although I actually think Sony is doing a better job with product naming and whatnot than Nikon has ever done). It is, again, only a matter of time before Sony's lens lineup bulks up, and they have the benefit of Zeiss behind their glass.

Ten years from now, 14-16 stops of DR (maybe even as much as 20...there are already video sensors that do that with multi-bucket exposures) and ultra, ultra low noise, even at ultra high ISO settings, will be so common that we'll be looking at todays cameras like we look at film. For me, I honestly wonder if Canon will be a big player in that future. They may have lenses and support, but their products, technologically, are being matched or surpassed by even the likes of Samsung....  ???

Good point. :)


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Do you need a really high ISO?
« on: September 16, 2014, 10:13:34 PM »
In the good old days of film, I shot a lot of Kodachrome64... When lighting was not good your options were to use artificial lights or stop taking pictures. My second body usually had a roll of "high speed" film in it... ISO400 or ISO800..... same problem.... loose the light and you go home.

My first digital DSLR was unusable at ISO800 and topped out at a very noisy ISO1600. Now there isn't a DSLR (or mirrorless) on the market that does not produce better results at ISO12,800 than film did at ISO800.... and the numbers are slowly creeping upward.

Last night I mounted a laser pointer on the top of my camera and tried taking pictures of the cats chasing the red dot. You could not see the red dot. I turned the lights down low and cranked up the ISO to 12800 and it worked very well. These are shots that were impossible before and I have come to accept this as normal.... so yes, I need high ISO....


+1 again.

This is very true. Good cameras have always been expensive and out of the hands of most people. Now however, we in the digital age have gotten spoiled some with the advances in technology and I think the "noise" comparisons between film and digital are largely being forgotten.

I don't really stop and think about what ISO I need my 7D to be at to get the shot. I use whatever ISO I need to get the shot I want. I have said this in the past that I have shot as high as ISO 3200 with hummingbirds in flight and after processing the images look fantastic, both on screen and in print.

Guys are doing today with digital that could never have been accomplished with film back in the day. I think noise levels today are very acceptable even with crop sensors and you should buy the camera body that you need at the price you can afford and then use the heck out of it.

I also think because of computers too many people have become "pixel peepers" and look way too closely at the images they take. I usually print my photos at 11 x 14 and even at higher ISO's with my 7D they look great. Looking at an image zoomed in at 100% will destroy just about any image and I think any camera would have a hard time holding up to someone who is convinced that viewing them at that large of size is the only way to judge a camera's worth.

The way I look at it is, once I have processed my RAW image (regardless of what ISO I used on my 7D) and converted it to Jpeg and if the image looks good on screen, then make a print to be sure... good to go!
My 2 cents.


EOS Bodies / Re: How excited are you about the new 7D II?
« on: September 16, 2014, 12:34:23 AM »
I think it's a pretty impressive camera, even though it may be a year or two late. But then again, up until the 70D and the Nikon D7100 (and maybe even the D7000) the 7D really didn't have much competition in the APS-C world and still sold very well at the price range over the past couple of years. I have seen the price drop to as low as $1000 for a new body, that's an incredible price for such a capable camera. A lot of my photography friends shoot with the 7D, and I mean ALOT!

Now it looks like the 7D2 will raise the bar yet again. Everything about it looks good. The thing I am waiting for? I need to SEE how good the image quality is at higher ISO's. Do I expect it to be as good as FF? Not at all, but I want it to be better than my current 7D. I think the image quality will be good, or at least I'm hoping it will be.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Do you need a really high ISO?
« on: September 16, 2014, 12:16:42 AM »
In daylight shooting, I have gone as high as ISO 3200 for super high shutter speeds (1/4000s ~ 1/8000s) with my 7D to capture hummingbird wings in flight and the photos have been fine with a little post processing. Usually though, I rarely go over ISO 1600.

I have shot indoors with poor lighting and not being able to use a flash and I used a friends 5D mark 2. I shot at ISO 6400 and the photos were VERY usable, very clean. I could have NEVER pulled that off with my 7D.

A professional photography friend of mine showed me some wedding shots she got with her 5D3 at ISO 102400 and they looked amazing in print. I would have never guessed they would have been so good.

It all depends on what you shoot and when. For the most part, I shoot wildlife in decent lighting so my 7D works just fine 99% of the time.


Everyone (including myself) seems to be searching the internet for reviews on the new 7D2. It looks like an impressive camera, kind of like how the 7D looked impressive back in 2009 when it was first introduced.

Well, I find myself wanting a new 7D2, but... my now 3 year old 7D still works perfectly and still takes amazing photos... What's my point?

My point is, I will probably upgrade to the 7D2 eventually, but not today. I love my 7D and it still does today what it has always done for me, take fantastic photos. It's still lighting fast and I love the image quality, even at high ISO's. No it's not a low light camera and it was never designed to be, but with a little post-processing images even taken at ISO 3200 are very nice, especially when they are of a hummingbird's wings frozen in time...

I am forcing myself to remember that it is the photographer that makes the photo, not his or her equipment. Yes tools give a workman more options BUT any camera in the hands of a skilled workman (or woman) is an amazing thing. You can capture a moment in time and share it with your friends, family and even make a living doing so.

I love my 7D. I don't see me getting rid of it anytime soon.


Third Party Manufacturers / Re: How do you say Nikon
« on: September 14, 2014, 09:10:18 PM »
Hmm, never really thought about this.

I would just say that the general accepted pronunciation is "Ni-kon" just like the vast majority of Americans say it. Maybe it's changed over the decades but does it really matter?

"Kan-won" has changed also... Nobody seems to mind the way we say it today. :)


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 26