Looks like the 7D. Great features, soft results.
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.
From what I can see, the higher ISOs are clearly as good as the 5D3. [qote]
They're not even close, and even further from the 6D.
but again I found myself learning the painful lesson of cropped sensors.
This is why I'm telling myself not to fall into the 7D2 trap as I did previously with the 7D. If you are really discerning, and used to full frame quality, there's no 'budget' option to get good quality 'reach' I'm affraid.
I think the 6d+7d MkII combo only works if you think in two 'mindsets', the 6d for landscapes and the 7d MkII for long reach and wildlife. d out, the 85mm 1.8 is a very good lens and used is around $300- so why an extender on a 50mm?)
Only if the wildlife you shoot is tame and/or slow.
High burst rate and solid tracking AF are really important for a ton of wildlife shooting, not just small birds. I would absolutely rather have a 7DII over a 6D for wildlife shooting because I would rather have sharp shots of peak moments with slightly worse IQ than soft shots of missed moments with slightly better IQ.
Personally, I'd chose the 6D. The advantage of the 7D Mark II is for wildlife shooters.
I wouldn't have hesitated, but then your experience is identical to mine with the original 7D. Let's hope your replacement is much better.
Don't get me started on the original 7D. You can probably find my 4 year old posts in here somewhere, ranting about how awful my experience was.
It gives me palpitations just thinking about it.
it's giving me sweats (and nightmares of my old 7DI, which was a victim of the melted-hay syndrome, even after 4 replacements from Canon Irvine).
So far I've been pretty dissapointed with this camera. It seems as though the majority of the photos are coming out soft or out of focus. I can't keep chimping at my photos to make sure that they are right when I'm shooting portraits, etc.