July 18, 2018, 07:57:51 PM

Author Topic: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon  (Read 17383 times)

amorse

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 118
    • Flickr
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #30 on: December 11, 2017, 11:49:15 AM »
A lot of reflection on Canon's good and not-so-good value for product in here today!  Seems like perspective in here is that the 5D IV is a good upgrade, but not worth the investment - and that may be fair.   

I just wanted to say that as a 5D IV owner, I can certainly admit there are points of frustration but if I could begin my path of camera investment all over again, I would do almost exactly the same thing - centring around the 5D IV again.  That camera has not let me down even once.  I have not taken even one photo that didn't turn out which I could blame on the 5D IV.  The camera has survived full on downpours, recovered well-under exposed images (whoops - my fault), taken auto focus perfectly in very low light conditions, and given me more processing room than I need (usually).  Honestly, I'd be nervous to switch systems because I have so much trust in the camera.

Not to say it isn't over-priced for what it is, but I just wanted to note that there are indeed happy 5D IV owners out there!
We have plenty of 5D MKIV cameras in our rental fleet, Ive used one of these multiple times before I bought the 6D MKII for personal use. The 5D MKIV is a great camera but in my opinion doesn't justify the £ 1,300 over the 5D MKIII and that's my issue. The 5DS had a number of the improvements that went into the 5D MKIV that were not in the 5D MKIII and its all about matching your requirements to your needs / desires and why Canon has five different full-frame cameras (6D MKII, 5D MKIV, 5DS, 5DSr, 1D X MKII).

Absolutely agree.  I think the 6D II and 5DS together could have given me a better over-all result, but I could only afford one camera change, and the 5D IV ticked most of my boxes.  I won't disagree that it is an expensive upgrade to the 5D III, but I was upgrading from a 6D and moving to a 5D III and then waiting for another upgrade cycle seemed pretty unpalatable to me.  Everyone's needs are different, and in at least my situation the 5D IV was certainly the best solution.  I would of loved the resolution of the 5DS (or sR) but I would have missed the low light performance.

I'm not trying to disagree with the sentiment in the room, I just wanted to note that the 5D IV is a perfect solution for some needs despite its shortcomings (price included)!

canon rumors FORUM

Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #30 on: December 11, 2017, 11:49:15 AM »

AlanF

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3629
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #31 on: December 11, 2017, 11:49:40 AM »
Canon is doomed. It didn't win a single favourite gear of the year award, was trounced by Sony and beaten by Nikon.
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/2992226438/dpreview-products-of-the-year-2017
5D IV, 5DS R, 400mm DO II, 1.4xTC III, 2xTC III, EF 1.8 STM,  EF 24-105, 100-400 II, EF-S 15-85, Sigma 150-600mm C, EOS-M5 15-45, f/2 22, 11-22, Samyang 8mm f/2.8 fisheye: sold 7D II, EOS-M, Powershot G3 X,  Sigma 10-20, EF 300/2.8 II, 70-200/4 IS.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ***************
  • Posts: 22828
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #32 on: December 11, 2017, 01:39:29 PM »
Three people. No one who actually uses the Nikon D500 and two who don’t even use the 7DII. Not exactly a representative or relevant sample.

First, let me acknowledge that I expect to see improvements in sensor performance and autofocus, that’s a reasonable expectation. I don’t consider it any kind of test for Canon however as I know that the only relevant test for any company is whether or not their products sell and earn a profit. I can assure you that Canon’s market research exceeds three random people.

+1, and if I had a nickel for every person who claimed, "If brand X doesn't do Y, I'm switching to brand Z," but did nothing of the sort, I'd use the proceeds to buy...Canon (or at least, Leica).   ;)
EOS 1D X, EOS M6, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

FramerMCB

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 238
  • Canon 40D & 7D
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #33 on: December 11, 2017, 04:01:08 PM »
I find it humorous that the main thrust of the OP's query has gone mostly, ignored. And that was simply, as Canon users on this forum (the supposition anyway) what would we like to see - as USERS - in Canon's next iteration of the 7D (Mk III).

Then he made a note of sharing from his own experiences in speaking with other USERS that he has come into contact with - Canon shooters mostly with a smattering of Nikonians - some topics that have come up concerning these other shooter's perspective of their own equipment and some of their perceptions concerning the "Other Guy's" (other manufacturers) stuff.

What's interesting by far to me, when these threads get really ramped-up, is this: just a few years ago Pro's were making a living shooting with Canon 5D's, Nikon D90s, etc. etc. Then (to stay in the Canon ecosphere) with 5D Mk II's and 1Ds Mk III's and Mk IV's, etc. And they seemed to get quality results...published & paid. Can one still not get the same results today with this older equipment? And we sit and argue over this body or that body, this manufacturer vs. that one, etc, etc. The bottom line is, one can achieve great results with just about any camera/system. Today it's more about which body/system allows one to do this the easiest, or what one is familiar with, or which body fits what one predominately shoots. Which body/system can allow one to push their artistic envelope, etc.

You wouldn't enter a dump truck into a Formula 1 race (or any race) but neither would one attempt to use a Formula 1 car at a strip mine or a construction site either.

I remember reading several reviews of the 6D Mk II and how down most reviewers were on the new model. Could it have been better, sure. But does it do what the people who are buying it need it to do? Of course. Why else would you buy it? Are people getting great results from it? YES. Well how could they if it's such a 'bad' model? Simple, it's not a bad model. It's a very good model. What is/was 'bad' about it was simply this: many peoples' expectations were not met concerning certain parameters, wanted more DR, more or bigger spread of the AF points, etc. It's fine to want more whiz-bang for the buck but too many of us seem to get caught up with thinking that Canon (or any Mfgr.) needs to keep up with the other guy. When in reality, they only need to keep up with the bulk of their customer's and their target market.
The worst picture ever is the one not taken: so shoot, shoot, shoot! Know your equipment first however to avoid as much as possible, bad photos. ;-)

Shooting with a Canon 40D & 7D, w/70-200mm f2.8L IS I, EF 24-85mm f4.0-5.6USM, Vivitar Series I 400mm f5.6 Olympus mount w/Fotodiox converter.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ***************
  • Posts: 22828
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #34 on: December 11, 2017, 04:16:59 PM »
I find it humorous that the main thrust of the OP's query has gone mostly, ignored. And that was simply, as Canon users on this forum (the supposition anyway) what would we like to see - as USERS - in Canon's next iteration of the 7D (Mk III).

Close, but not quite accurate.  The OP's point was not merely to ask what we, as users, would like to see in a 7DIII –  but rather, that those wishes should drive what Canon ultimately delivers in a 7DIII:

I am under the impression that this feeling/perception explains why many Canon owners in ‘the action photography scene’ are anxiously awaiting the new 7D Mark III. And therefore on this forum their perception is a relevant consideration when assessing what the new 7D Mark III should deliver.

The problem inherent in the OP's entire premise is that his views and the views of the minuscule number of people with whom he has discussed the issue somehow represent a majority opinion within Canon's target market for the camera.  It boils down to yet another case of, "Canon had better deliver the things I want or they are doomed," although in this case, the OP was rather more verbose than the norm in making that point. 
EOS 1D X, EOS M6, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS
  • ***********
  • Posts: 6963
  • posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #35 on: December 11, 2017, 04:47:17 PM »
I find it humorous that the main thrust of the OP's query has gone mostly, ignored. And that was simply, as Canon users on this forum (the supposition anyway) what would we like to see - as USERS - in Canon's next iteration of the 7D (Mk III).

Close, but not quite accurate.  The OP's point was not merely to ask what we, as users, would like to see in a 7DIII –  but rather, that those wishes should drive what Canon ultimately delivers in a 7DIII:

I am under the impression that this feeling/perception explains why many Canon owners in ‘the action photography scene’ are anxiously awaiting the new 7D Mark III. And therefore on this forum their perception is a relevant consideration when assessing what the new 7D Mark III should deliver.

The problem inherent in the OP's entire premise is that his views and the views of the minuscule number of people with whom he has discussed the issue somehow represent a majority opinion within Canon's target market for the camera.  It boils down to yet another case of, "Canon had better deliver the things I want or they are doomed," although in this case, the OP was rather more verbose than the norm in making that point.

I took the thrust of the original post to be:

"Canon owners that are quite critical about their brand", "that this sentiment of being unhappy with Canon is growing",  "the 7D Mk II no longer is the best cropped action camera: now there is the Nikon D500", "Canon is ruled by sales managers, Nikon still gives some influence to technicians with a heart for the camera”, and so on..... leading up to if Canon does not come up with a 7D3 that beats the D500, then they are doomed.

So what does camera A beats camera B mean? what are the critical criteria? does it have to win everywhere, or is it win on 51 percent of the specs.... or just win on a few critical specs? And how do we deal with different opinions of what that answer is?

I got a 7D2 because I wanted a tough, well sealed camera. I use it outside in the Canadian winter, in the rain, on canoe trips, in salt spray.... For me, tough counted more than anything else. For the next person, we get a whole new set of criteria.... and so on.... and so on.... and so on.....

There is no such beast as the "best camera". You can only say that one sells more than the other and claim that makes it more accepted by the average buyer....... but then again, 7D2 sales are dwarfed by Rebel sales, so for the average person, does that mean that the Rebel is a better camera?

The 7D2 is "comparable" to the D500.... better at some things, worse at others, but in general, in the same ballpark. When the 7D3 comes out, it will also be comparable to the D500, better at some things, worse at others... to expect anything else would be delusional. There will be no crowds of people jumping ship in either direction.
The best camera is the one in your hands

FramerMCB

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 238
  • Canon 40D & 7D
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #36 on: December 11, 2017, 06:54:01 PM »
I find it humorous that the main thrust of the OP's query has gone mostly, ignored. And that was simply, as Canon users on this forum (the supposition anyway) what would we like to see - as USERS - in Canon's next iteration of the 7D (Mk III).

Close, but not quite accurate.  The OP's point was not merely to ask what we, as users, would like to see in a 7DIII –  but rather, that those wishes should drive what Canon ultimately delivers in a 7DIII:

I am under the impression that this feeling/perception explains why many Canon owners in ‘the action photography scene’ are anxiously awaiting the new 7D Mark III. And therefore on this forum their perception is a relevant consideration when assessing what the new 7D Mark III should deliver.

The problem inherent in the OP's entire premise is that his views and the views of the minuscule number of people with whom he has discussed the issue somehow represent a majority opinion within Canon's target market for the camera.  It boils down to yet another case of, "Canon had better deliver the things I want or they are doomed," although in this case, the OP was rather more verbose than the norm in making that point.

I took the thrust of the original post to be:

"Canon owners that are quite critical about their brand", "that this sentiment of being unhappy with Canon is growing",  "the 7D Mk II no longer is the best cropped action camera: now there is the Nikon D500", "Canon is ruled by sales managers, Nikon still gives some influence to technicians with a heart for the camera”, and so on..... leading up to if Canon does not come up with a 7D3 that beats the D500, then they are doomed.

So what does camera A beats camera B mean? what are the critical criteria? does it have to win everywhere, or is it win on 51 percent of the specs.... or just win on a few critical specs? And how do we deal with different opinions of what that answer is?

I got a 7D2 because I wanted a tough, well sealed camera. I use it outside in the Canadian winter, in the rain, on canoe trips, in salt spray.... For me, tough counted more than anything else. For the next person, we get a whole new set of criteria.... and so on.... and so on.... and so on.....

There is no such beast as the "best camera". You can only say that one sells more than the other and claim that makes it more accepted by the average buyer....... but then again, 7D2 sales are dwarfed by Rebel sales, so for the average person, does that mean that the Rebel is a better camera?

The 7D2 is "comparable" to the D500.... better at some things, worse at others, but in general, in the same ballpark. When the 7D3 comes out, it will also be comparable to the D500, better at some things, worse at others... to expect anything else would be delusional. There will be no crowds of people jumping ship in either direction.

Exactly. Well stated!!! (by the way, I always appreciate your comments).
The worst picture ever is the one not taken: so shoot, shoot, shoot! Know your equipment first however to avoid as much as possible, bad photos. ;-)

Shooting with a Canon 40D & 7D, w/70-200mm f2.8L IS I, EF 24-85mm f4.0-5.6USM, Vivitar Series I 400mm f5.6 Olympus mount w/Fotodiox converter.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #36 on: December 11, 2017, 06:54:01 PM »

coreyhkh

  • EOS Rebel SL2
  • ***
  • Posts: 90
  • www.flickr.com/photos/corey-hayes/
    • My wildlife photos
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #37 on: December 11, 2017, 07:10:38 PM »
I have been a loyal Canon user and used pretty much everything including the 5dmkiv and 1dx along with many high-end lenses ... 600 mkii ect and though they perform good, Canon never goes above an beyond. There last major feature was years ago with dual pixel af. I would love to see little things added two like buttons that you can see at night, higher res screens not just better sensors.

aceflibble

  • EOS 80D
  • ****
  • Posts: 268
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #38 on: December 12, 2017, 11:36:31 AM »
To illustrate this by again mentioning the D500 that obviously upsets some they lose good manners: seeing that the D500 does better in specific areas like image quality (and therefore in some specific post-processing) and AF performance (especially with specific fast and erratically moving subjects) explains why some Canon users conclude that such improvement is not impossible and therefore are not too much to ask in Canon's next high-end crop camera - the 7D Mk III.
Such wishes display a fundamental lack of understanding of how each company operates, though.

To reiterate what I said before:
- Nikon buys in their sensors and processors. This allows them more time, manpower, and money, to optimise functionality. They can get the most out of heat and power management and they can put more into focus, for example. (But in no way limited to just those features and functions.)
- Canon develops and produces their own sensors and processors. This allows them more control over production and enables them to optimise actual manufacturing, but it reduces the time, manpower, and funding they have available to make everything else work as well as possible.

Two different manufacturers operating in two different ways are going to get two different results.

It's similar to asking a PC to be as mechanically sound as a Mac. Apple buy in a lot of key parts and use a limited pool of parts to make each SKU, ensuring compatibility and consistency. PCs get made up of whateverthehell. As a result, Macs are very consistent in operation and generally have very good heat management and life expectancy, at a premium; PCs can be put together cheaper but usually are more unstable as a result, and to make them more stable requires a lot more effort and a much bigger budget.

Nikon are, essentially, Apple. Not very good at inventing anything of their own, but superb at optimising and maximising what other people have done. Canon are more like a PC; originality and a big advantage in lower-cost manufacturing, but rarely getting 100% out of the system.

 
And this is why sports & wildlife professionals in particular are still divided between the two. Nikon will (most likely) always have equal-or-better IQ and equal-or-better AF. It's going to take a bizarre stroke of genius for Canon to leapfrog Nikon in such a way that Nikon don't at least equal Canon. That said, Canon has more repair centres and repairs can often be done quicker and cheaper in most countries (at least for these kinds of bodies), and it's a lot easier to get exactly the right lens or accessory you need for Canon than it is with Nikon. Some shooters prefer the Canon service and flexibility; some will value Nikon's optimal quality more.

Whichever system you use, there will always be things another company does which you perceive to be better. Some of those will be things the system you currently use will eventually get, and it's merely a matter of waiting for the product line to be refreshed. Other functions or features are much less likely to come to your existing brand, and/or if they do they still not be quite as good as what another brand provides. That's the nature of having different manufacturers. If every manufacturer could just make everything that every other manufacturer does, there would be no differences between systems at all and there wouldn't really be much of a camera industry. If it was so easy for Canon to duplicate Nikon's IQ and AF systems, there would be no point in Nikon existing at all, and with Sony hot on their heels, Nikon would be gone by now. If it was so easy for Nikon to replicate Canon's depth of lenses and accessories, third-party support, lower-cost manufacturing, and global servicing, Canon wouldn't still be the biggest camera manufacturer in the world.

 
 
Will the 7D3's AF be better than the 2's? Yes, obviously. Will the IQ be better? Yes, obviously. Will it match the D500? There's a fair chance. Will it exceed the D500? Very unlikely. But then, if you value the D500 that highly, you'd have bought one by now. If you're sticking with Canon then it's probably because there is something else Canon offers which Nikon don't. There's your trade-off.

9VIII

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1843
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #39 on: December 12, 2017, 01:31:28 PM »

Nikon are, essentially, Apple. Not very good at inventing anything of their own, but superb at optimising and maximising what other people have done. Canon are more like a PC; originality and a big advantage in lower-cost manufacturing, but rarely getting 100% out of the system.

If any PC/Mac analogy is going to be made, Canon is like Apple and Sony is effectively running the PC model.
Nikon is like IBM’s consumer products division...

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ***************
  • Posts: 22828
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #40 on: December 12, 2017, 01:44:51 PM »

Nikon are, essentially, Apple. Not very good at inventing anything of their own, but superb at optimising and maximising what other people have done. Canon are more like a PC; originality and a big advantage in lower-cost manufacturing, but rarely getting 100% out of the system.

If any PC/Mac analogy is going to be made, Canon is like Apple and Sony is effectively running the PC model.
Nikon is like IBM’s consumer products division...

EOS 1D X, EOS M6, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Sporgon

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3598
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #41 on: December 12, 2017, 02:21:22 PM »
Canon will respond to the D500. They'll take the (horrible) pop-up flash off the 7DIII

KeithBreazeal

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 1215
    • Keith Breazeal Photography
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #42 on: December 12, 2017, 02:30:45 PM »
A stunning photograph is the result of the photographer, not the camera make or model.
  Back in the "old days", film technology was more important to me than any one other thing.
Getting the grain levels down and more accurate color reproduction was the biggest concern.  Pushing Tri-X to ASA 1600 in the darkroom was insanity but the only way to shoot night sports.
  We are so spoiled with today's technology.  My upgrades in camera bodies is driven by what I want to accomplish next in my journey.
  Don't forget about customer support- that's really a big thing.  Canon has invested heavily in it.  When I broke a lens in half, Canon charged me $59 despite only salvaging the front lens group.  When my 100-400 lock ring started sticking, they said it would cost $250.  They actually had to replace the inner barrel assembly but stuck to their estimate. 
  I think Canon's biggest concern should be their lens performance versus price point.  I have jumped ship lately with a Tamron and Sigma.  Price point and performance is huge.  There are trade-offs, but I think Canon really needs to focus in this area. 
Canon 5D Mark IV, Canon 5DS, 5D Mark III, Canon M5, 7D, SL-1, Canon 300L 2.8, 100-400L IS, 70-200L IS, 24-105L, 10-22mm, Rokinon 14mm 2.8, Tokina 16-28 f2.8

canon rumors FORUM

Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #42 on: December 12, 2017, 02:30:45 PM »

RGF

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2617
  • How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #43 on: December 12, 2017, 02:38:35 PM »

Nikon are, essentially, Apple. Not very good at inventing anything of their own, but superb at optimising and maximising what other people have done. Canon are more like a PC; originality and a big advantage in lower-cost manufacturing, but rarely getting 100% out of the system.

If any PC/Mac analogy is going to be made, Canon is like Apple and Sony is effectively running the PC model.
Nikon is like IBM’s consumer products division...



Here is my take

Canon has become big (but not dumb, fat, and happy).  They are innovating a controlled way, goal is no screw ups.  Perhaps sort of like MS, not IBM.  Not an underdog like Apple.

Nikon is sees the light at the end of the tunnel - could their end.  They need to do things to increase their chance of survival.  Big products but limited array of them (D850).  Perhaps like Apple before the Mac was introduced.

Sony is a tease.  Great products that are not finished (or well thought out if they want to convert the current dSLR masses).  Perhaps like Sun or Digital.

snappy604

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 101
Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #44 on: December 12, 2017, 04:00:37 PM »
interesting and rather mean/condescending replies to this topic. While there is some interesting insights and differences of view, the delivery could use some work.

I'm also of the camp that I've more or less stopped investing in Canon, but haven't yet jumped ship due to investments. I normally agree that they take turns leapfrogging aspects of technology, but this cycle seems excessively long and Canon isn't innovating/giving ME what I want for the price point.

Its pretty telling their latest release the 6d mkii was on sale for $509 off and with a bonus of about $300 in accessories in less than half a year after release. I still didn't buy as it felt like a lukewarm release, it gives the impression of being behind the others and missing on a few key areas for me (such as the autofocus spread being so narrow).

I still continue to hope for something exciting given how much it costs to change, but I'm voting with my wallet and I've stopped investing in them for now.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: The Canon EOS 7D Mark III : a test for Canon
« Reply #44 on: December 12, 2017, 04:00:37 PM »