For MLB games, another option is a used 1D Mark IV. Supurb camera with a 1.3 crop factor. It will blow away your 7D, and can be found in the $3200-$3600 range.
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.
Though I don't see this ever happening, a 24-105 f/2.8 would be my perfect lens.Building a 4-1 zoom with a wide aperture is very difficult, and compromises will need to be made. We's want one that was excellent, but its doubtful that it would be the equal of the 3-1 zooms. (except for price - $3500)
Upgrades to the sensor will likely be lower noise for the readout, a tweak to the Bayer Filters, and more readout channels. We'd also likely see the embedded AF points as seen on the T4i. This will make live focus faster as well as enable AF during video.The delays in developing the sensor was apparently a big reason for the big firmware update for the 7D.
... as theorized by many posters in the cr forum. However something "new" doesn't necessarily mean "better", it could also just be "cheaper to produce". But since Canon isn't competitive with the current 18mp version anymore I'm very curious if they'll just upgrade the mp count or can do something about the current low and/or high iso/dr limitations.
If they want to spread three cameras across 2013, the 7d2 as the most expensive to arrive first cannot be that far away.
Thank you all for your replies.Buy a adapter for each lens, removing and installing them to change a lens, as well as spending a hour reprogramming the chip for the attached lens is not fun.
My idea is buying a D600 and 3-4 high-quality M/F primes - most likely Zeiss, Voigtländer and Samyang.
In this perspective spending 170€ for a chipped adapter by Novoflex or something similar is not a big deal, and the advantages in IQ, and long term durability and flexibility are just huge in my opinion.
I only wish I could find some information about the Voigtländer 28/2.8 for Canon/Nikon.
Again...I'm not shooting at max aperture.i never go below f4 and with portraiture i do...low light is also not and issue. I never go over iso800. The question is..Can the new 24-70 zooms be better than a prime at f5.6 and low iso... should i give up the primes or will i regret it...i know i can rent one and try but i doubt just one day can I really get my answer...so I'm hoping there are others who have already replaced their primes for a zoom and share their experience...bare in mind..I'm only looking at f5.6 and not max apertureIf you are serious about wanting a 24-70mmL, buy one from Adorama. If it is not everything you had hoped for, you have 30 days to return it. This is not a free rental deal, only serious people should do this, please don't abuse it, or it will go away. At any rate, you will only be out the shipping cost both ways and you can give it a serious workout.
Yeah, you're probably right, it could be a 4D, but the low ISO range of 100 to 12,800 and not 50 to 51,200 or 101,400 threw me. Is this going to be a $4,999 EOS 4D designed for Studio or outdoor Landscape photography where low-light is not an issue?
well i take pictures with a dslr for 7 years now.
95% of my pictures are taken with ISO under 6400.
i really don´t know what people need ISO 25600 and above.
and i wonder how these people have worked before.....
While wide open, the lenses are not super sharp, you generally do not want portraits to be super sharp anyway. If the images are really oof, try using live view and live AF. If the results are better, you need AFMA. AFMA is difficult to do properly, I messed my AF up when I first did it. FoCal gives excellent results.
There are some zooms that are sharper, but they don't open to f/1.8 either.
I am using Focal for calibration and it has improved the lens sharpness without AFMA but it's still not enough.
And i don't shoot anything below F4 so i'm not bothered about zooms not going to f1.8..because the 24-70 goes to f2.8, and with IS..it's as good as 1.8
If your 7D did not match the 7D at the seminar, have your lens / body aligned by Canon. Its almost certainly a issue with less than perfect AF alignment, or a damaged lens.7D is your best answer. There is no Mark II model in the near future, maybe never. Several threads keep popping up with the same question.
As a alternative, a good used 1D Mark III might be in the same price range, and is a big step up from the 7D. You can also buy used 5D Mark III's for a reasonable price. If you want a crop, a 1D Mark IV is the best crop body Canon has made.
Even a 5D Mark II is better all around, except for the better AF on surrounding AF points, so it might be limited for birds in flight
If in the USA, check the Canon refurb store. At 12 AM sunday, they have a additional 20% off.
Any camera better than a 7D is going to cost more, its just a matter of how much more.
As to noise, shoot in raw and use one of the better raw converters. They do a far better job now than they did three years ago. The new firmware for the 7D also updated the jpeg processing, so that is better as well.
Thaks a lot!
I do not want an 7D again. I joined an photographic seminar, where Canon showed us their products and we worked 1 week with them. I took the 7D and was disappointed. The image quality was not nearly good as the 7D I was testing at the seminar.
I shoot only RAW.
Maybe Canon will create an fast Camera, as we were told at this years seminar.
Let us hope...