people always say the 7d range is a great wildlife camera,im sure it is, af, long reach etc. but surely image quality should be paramount? otherwise why dont all wildlife photographers carry 7d's?
Some people literally have piles of money to BURN.
Or, they are professionals....
Everyone who uses a 7D would probably prefer to have a pair of 1D X's, one with an 800mm f/5.6 L IS and another with the 600mm f/4 L IS II on a 2x TC, both sitting on a pair of Series 5 Gitzo tripods. But...not everyone has forty grand to blow on the gear of their dreams. To get the kind of reach you must have when using FF, you can achieve with something like the 7D and a 400mm or 500mm lens for FAR less cost.
I'd own the very kit I mentioned above, along with a 500mm f/4 L IS II, 300mm f/2.8 L IS II, both TCs, one of those nice new land rovers with the panoramic windows, etc. if I had the option. Sadly, my funds are far more limited than that, and I've wrestled with the idea of buying the 600mm f/4 L II for about 9 months now, and still can't really bring myself to pull the trigger.
Some people just have money to burn. For the rest, the 7D with its high-density sensor and amazing reach factor, and a 100-400mm lens, fills the role of "baby 1D" quite well.