7D - buy now or hold off?

[K3nt]

Hi,

New to this forum, and generally DSLRs in general. I've been coveting the 7D for some time now however, I noticed that that particular model has been released in September of 2009.
Now the question is, if I get it now, will there be a new model in two weeks (making a point, could be 3-6 months) or is it a safe bet?
Also some comments from people that have and use the 7D would be appreciated.
I'll be mostly taking pictures of my dogs outdoors, and they go really fast, ideas on setup (lenses etc)? I guess the 430 flash would suffice for the regular indoor photography as that's something I only do for the occasional party what have you not...
Nature and landscapes are also something I plan on shooting.

Thanks to everyone in advance.

 

[Loswr]

There will be a 7D Mark II when Canon announces one, and not a moment sooner. Historically, the xD series bodies (1D, 1Ds, 5D) are on an update cycle of approximately 3 years, meaning the second half of 2012 for a 7DII. However, the 1Ds series is currently running at 3.5 years from the last update. Also, there's never been an xD camera with a 1.6x crop sensor.

The bottom line, though, is that if you need/want a new camera (or lens, or whatever) now, the time to get it is now. Keep in mind that with Canon bodies, the newest releases are often difficult to get in the first few months, and you'll pay a premium in terms of price as an early adopter. The 7D is an excellent camera as it stands right now.

 

[Macadameane]

I have a 7D and it is great. For your purposes, which we'll call "wildlife" photography, it would do you well. Get it now, no reason to wait unless you want a lower fps full frame camera.

 

[FatDaddyJones]

For a crop sensor camera, there is no finer machine than the 7D. Several of its features top the 5D MkII. Even if you were to buy one now and find that Canon has released a newer model, it doesn't lessen the value or performance of the 7D. The only drawback to that scenario would be the eventual drop in price for older models. I purchased my 7D very shortly after it was released and I have had not one single complaint about the camera. My advice: get it! It's worth every penny, and though other cameras may be introduced this year that might best the 7D, it's doubtful a Mark II version of this camera is coming anytime in the near future. Though, I probably should leave the prognostications to the official posts of this site.

 

[Fleetie]

I agree. From what I've been reading here, the 7D is unlikely to be upgraded for quite a long time yet.

I have one, and it oozes "quality". It is a genuine pleasure to use.

You click - the picture gets taken. FAST.

It's so FAST, that you can "click" pretty much as fast as you like, and it will keep responding to each "click".

It has a nice big viewfinder with a proper pentaprism, and not a pentamirror. The viewfinder is lovely. It feels great to hold. I won't be that bothered when they eventually do bring out the "mark 2" version;' it won't degrade the performance of my lovely 7D.

I've had mine since 30th April 2010, and I still get "the buzz of quality" every time I click the shutter with it. Its quality is just that high. I am really glad I got it and not the 550D, even though it was twice the price.

My "focus" for the next year or two will be to accumulate some nice Canon glass to use with it. First stop will probably be the EF 24-70 2.8 L , or maybe the EF-S 17-55 2.8 , though more likely the former.

Martin

 

[EYEONE]

I'd say there is no reason to hold of unless you are interested in a 5D3 possibly.

I actually just got my 7D Tuesday. I upgraded from a Rebel XSi
I have to say, I love love love this thing. It's heavy (a good thing), solid, fast, sharp, detailed and feature packed.

On my XSi I just used the center AF point and recomposed. But, so far, I haven't been able to confuse the 7D's 19 point array. I'm sure it's possible for it to be wrong sometimes, but it seems to know what I want to focus on every time. It makes composition much faster.

 

[kubelik]

wanted to chime in with the others here.

expect a 7D Mark II in late 2012.

buy a 7D now, and enjoy shooting with it.

I've rarely seen people regret purchasing gear they really want. I've often seen people regret not purchasing items and then regretting missed opportunities.

 

[Loswr]

My "focus" for the next year or two will be to accumulate some nice Canon glass to use with it. First stop will probably be the EF 24-70 2.8 L , or maybe the EF-S 17-55 2.8 , though more likely the former.

Unless you're planning on going FF very soon, from an optical standpoint I'd recommend the 17-55mm over the 24-70mm for the 7D. Personally, I think 24mm on a 1.6xis not wide enough for a 'general purpose zoom' since it starts at 38mm FF equivalent, which isn't even wide angle. On a crop body, the 17-55mm is sharper and has less CA than the 24-70mm (although it does have more barrel distortion at the wide end, and more vignetting wide open). Also, even though the focal length is relatively short, I find IS to be a big help (for static subjects only, obviously). However, if you plan to shoot a lot in the rain the 24-70mm definitely makes sense (as would the 241-105mm f/4L IS, which is what I added to my kit to use on the 7D in the rain, but I still used the 17-55mm much more often, at least until I got a 5DII).

 

[kubelik]

My "focus" for the next year or two will be to accumulate some nice Canon glass to use with it. First stop will probably be the EF 24-70 2.8 L , or maybe the EF-S 17-55 2.8 , though more likely the former.

Unless you're planning on going FF very soon, from an optical standpoint I'd recommend the 17-55mm over the 24-70mm for the 7D. Personally, I think 24mm on a 1.6xis not wide enough for a 'general purpose zoom' since it starts at 38mm FF equivalent, which isn't even wide angle. On a crop body, the 17-55mm is sharper and has less CA than the 24-70mm (although it does have more barrel distortion at the wide end, and more vignetting wide open). Also, even though the focal length is relatively short, I find IS to be a big help (for static subjects only, obviously). However, if you plan to shoot a lot in the rain the 24-70mm definitely makes sense (as would the 241-105mm f/4L IS, which is what I added to my kit to use on the 7D in the rain, but I still used the 17-55mm much more often, at least until I got a 5DII).

yet another alternate approach is to use the 16-35 f/2.8 L II on the crop body; that's what my wife is currently doing on her T2i. it's extra weight and size but not horribly so, and it means you'll have a fantastic wide-angle lens to use on a FF camera should you chose to upgrade.

 

[unfocused]

I'll echo what other 7D owners are saying. I love this camera and have absolutely no regrets. It is impossible to predict when any camera will be updated, but from what I can tell from this site and others, there is no reason to believe a 7D upgrade will come any time soon.

Right now, the 7D is selling in the U.S. at an all-time low (below $1,500), so it's a good time to buy. Price drops seem to be incremental and marginal, so I doubt if you will save big bucks waiting and you may actually see a price increase.

Canon has been careful not to cannibalize the major features of the 7D and the things that count (resolution, auto-focus, frames per second, etc.) are still at the top of the line on the 7D.

One thing that I think is very telling: On this and other forums, you'll almost never find comments from disappointed 7D owners. I haven't seen any ratings, but I suspect that it has an extremely high rate of customer satisfaction.

You mentioned the 430 EXII. Because the 7D has a built-in infrared trigger, you can buy the 430 EXII and use it off-camera as a slave or remote if you want.

Someone else on the forum put in a pitch for the 17-55 f2.8 EF-S lens. I will also recommend the 15-85 mm EF-S lens.

It's a matter of personal preference, and comes down to which is more important to you: the constant f2.8 aperture of the 17-55 or the wider range of the 15-85mm. I came down on the side of the versatility of the wider range. Others want the speed. I use other lenses when speed is the deciding factor. The fact is, I dutifully fill my bag full of lenses and then find at the end of the day that I've used this lens for almost everything.

Just a few thoughts. Main one though is: Buy the 7D. You won't regret it.

 

[ronderick]

The bad thing about 7D is it's been around since 2009; that's also the good thing about it. If there's any problem with the body, they would have fixed it by now. So if there's no recall or complaints found all over the net, I would say it's pretty safe to get one (of course, provide you don't plan to switch over to FF bodies soon...)

Like what most folks here already pointed out, the expected replacement won't be due for another year.

There's no right or wrong answer for waiting or buy one; it's just a matter of whether you would prefer one to start shooting right now. One thing for sure: it's a durable body you can keep for a few years.

 

[BennyJ]

Now the question is, if I get it now, will there be a new model in two weeks (making a point, could be 3-6 months) or is it a safe bet?

I would like to give you a slightly different advice than my predecessors: Since you are new to DSLRs, you might consider getting a 60D instead of the old 7D. It lacks some of the high-end features of the 7D (better AF, more fps) but it still offers quite a lot of functionality and I think you can definitely use it for the stuff you described. Plus: the 60D is newer than the older 7D so you get a MUCH better display, more software capabilities etc. at a lower price. There is hardly any difference in picture quality between the 7D and the 60D as they both use an APS-C sensor with 18 MP.

So if you don't need the additional fps and more AF sensors, you could be better off with the 60D and you can sell it once the 7D MK II arrives. I wanted to get the 7D as well, but I just didn't like the idea of buying an old model and I hated the display (even the Rebels got a better one). So i decided to get a 60D and wait for the next version of the 7D.

 

[EYEONE]

Now the question is, if I get it now, will there be a new model in two weeks (making a point, could be 3-6 months) or is it a safe bet?

...60D is newer than the older 7D so you get a MUCH better display...
...I wanted to get the 7D as well, but I just didn't like the idea of buying an old model and I hated the display...

The 60D display is marginally better than the 7D. The 920k pixel displays are about as good as you can get.
I just came from a XSi with a 240k pixel display. The 7D is a thing of beauty. I think you are being a little too critical.

 

[K3nt]

Thanks to everyone for your excellent input and advice.
Nice to see people actually giving useful comments. I have booked an appointment at a local Photo specialist and we'll be going through and comparing the 7D and the 60D to find the best fit.

I have, as many others it seems, been unable to find any negative press/product returns regarding the 7D. All response have been overwhelmingly positive.

I will probably get one of the two, pending the outcome of this comparison session. I don't expect to go Full Frame anytime soon as I don't really see any massive improvement for my specific use. As I said, I'm not a professional, just an eager enthusiast.

I fully agree with the person who made the comment about: get what you want and don't skimp, you'll just feel disappointed afterwards. This is something I go by in my HiFi hobby as well. Some people say I'm nuts for spending so much on HiFi gear, but I feel I like to have the best tools for the job.

Here's what I got an offer for earlier this week:
Canon 7D Body
Tamron 17-50/2.8 OS
Canon EF 70-200/4L IS
Canon Speedlight 430EXII

Plus a bag and some accessories, mem cards etc...

To everyone, thanks a million!

 

[BennyJ]

The 60D display is marginally better than the 7D. The 920k pixel displays are about as good as you can get.
I just came from a XSi with a 240k pixel display. The 7D is a thing of beauty. I think you are being a little too critical.

the more pixels the better cause it makes it easier to evaluate the sharpness of a picture. it's not only the pixels though: let's not forget the 7D's display is not 3:2 so it doesn't match its sensor size...

but yea, maybe I'm too critical. the 7D is a great camera for sure. it just didn't make sense for me, personally, to buy it. I will rather wait for the MK II and, meanwhile, I'm quite happy with the 60D.

 

[EYEONE]

The 60D display is marginally better than the 7D. The 920k pixel displays are about as good as you can get.
I just came from a XSi with a 240k pixel display. The 7D is a thing of beauty. I think you are being a little too critical.

the more pixels the better cause it makes it easier to evaluate the sharpness of a picture. it's not only the pixels though: let's not forget the 7D's display is not 3:2 so it doesn't match its sensor size...

but yea, maybe I'm too critical. the 7D is a great camera for sure. it just didn't make sense for me, personally, to buy it. I will rather wait for the MK II.

Well, I understand that more pixels is better. I'm just saying that at 920k pixels the 60D's extra 100k pixels don't make much of a difference. I think it would take some serious peeping to tell the difference.

However, the aspect ratio is a valid point. I'm not sure why they haven't been matching the ratio of the sensor until now. I have a friend with a T2i and it's a nice feature.

All in all, both are fantastic screens.

 

[Fleetie]

My "focus" for the next year or two will be to accumulate some nice Canon glass to use with it. First stop will probably be the EF 24-70 2.8 L , or maybe the EF-S 17-55 2.8 , though more likely the former.

Unless you're planning on going FF very soon, from an optical standpoint I'd recommend the 17-55mm over the 24-70mm for the 7D. Personally, I think 24mm on a 1.6xis not wide enough for a 'general purpose zoom' since it starts at 38mm FF equivalent, which isn't even wide angle. On a crop body, the 17-55mm is sharper and has less CA than the 24-70mm (although it does have more barrel distortion at the wide end, and more vignetting wide open). Also, even though the focal length is relatively short, I find IS to be a big help (for static subjects only, obviously). However, if you plan to shoot a lot in the rain the 24-70mm definitely makes sense (as would the 241-105mm f/4L IS, which is what I added to my kit to use on the 7D in the rain, but I still used the 17-55mm much more often, at least until I got a 5DII).

Yes, I am really torn between these two lenses.

One the one hand:

* Yes, I *do* want to own an L-series lens, partly "just because...". Shouldn't matter, but does.
* I would often like to take just that "L" lens out, and so not worry if it rains. Both lens and body have water sealing.
* I tend not to shoot wide-angle (at least at the moment anyway), so I'm less bothered about the 17-24mm range
* I can take the "L" with me if/when I "upgrade" to FF in the (not very near) future
* The "L" will, as you say, likely exhibit less vignetting on a crop camera like the 7D

Yet on the other hand:

* You say the optical quality on the EF-S is higher - That is and should be a big, important factor
* The EF-S has IS and the EF L doesn't (yet).
* The EF-S is cheaper.

Taken together, all of those competing points create quite a dilemma!

Thanks for your thoughts!

Martin

 

[BennyJ]

* You say the optical quality on the EF-S is higher - That is and should be a big, important factor
* The EF-S has IS and the EF L doesn't (yet).
* The EF-S is cheaper.

As an owner of the EF-S 17-55mm 2.8 IS USM I can defintely recommend this lens. I think it's the best allround lens available for Canon crop cameras. Sure, you can use the EF lenses too but, as you said, due to the crop factor you can't really use them for wide-angle situations. I like the EF tele zooms though, they work perfectly on crop cameras and provide you with an enormous boost in focal length.

If you read some of the reviews about the 17-55, u'll notice that many people say it's actually an "L"-lens. It has UD lens elements, like the L lenses have, is very sharp and has a very good built quality, though it's not weather sealed. But in terms of optical quality, you get a really good lens which is also pretty fast.

So if you're not planning to go FF anytime soon, I would really consider going for the 17-55 as your "bread-and-butter" lens

 

[tombo]

Have been following this forum for some time and appreciate all the insightful remarks. Budget doesn't allow a FF body now so am looking to a 7d. Old film guy coming back to photography, so am a bit perplexed with the whole crop frame vs. FF arguments. Still I enjoy the dialog. Love my Xsi, can't wait to replace my t1i. Drooling over a 7d. Hearty cheer for the 10-22, 17-55, and the 70-200 2.8. Many will scoff, but have had great results using the kit 55-250 in my studio.

 

[archie.gsy]

I love my 7D and can highly recommend them. Full Frame has got its advantages of course and so has a cropped sensor.
It's a great camera and I feel good value for money.

My lenses consist of :

canon 10-22mm
canon 50mm f1.4
canon 15-85mm
canon 100mm f2.8L macro
tamron 18-270

Very happy with all the above lenses, and to be honest ive searched the net for reviews on them, some good and some not so good. Being fed up with making a decision on reviews I tried them out for my self, was happy with the results so got them.

The eos7D is above my needs and skills at the mo, so will be using this set up for some time to come..