When the 7D came out, it was marketed as a sports and wildife camera and it was highly regarded with 8fps and 19 crosstype AF points. Now, 19 crosstype points is what they're putting on the Rebels. Are 19 crosstype points really good enough to do pro quality work with anything action related? Or do I really have to step it up to a 5D Mark III with its 61 points? What do the keeper rates tend to be for these cams? And for those of you who'd say that a 5D Mark III is necessary for pro work, how did the pros survive before the 5D Mark III?
7D Classic Good Enough for Pros?
- Thread starter supaspiffy
- Start date
A Rebel in the right hands is plenty good enough for pros. Unless you're shooting sports, wildlife, or some other fast moving subjects in low light, or need a camera to survive the battlefield the 5DIII and 1D X aren't necessary. Even then, with a fast lens and good reflexes, even the cheapest DSLR can work. Some of my best wildlife shots were taken with my Rebel XSi/450D. Equipment is just part of the equation.supaspiffy said:
Obviously pros took many, many great photos with the 7D and many other "lesser" bodies before the newer models came out. I had the 7D for a while and really liked it. For photos up to ISO 1600, it works well and the Zone AF works quite well with AI Servo for birds in flight and other subjects. It's built very sturdy and 8FPS is plenty fast.
There's no need to feel inferior or like you can't produce great work unless you have the latest greatest camera and lenses. The "pro" gear helps, but only so much - you have to know how to use your equipment and be in the right place at the right time. I would rather be on a safari with a Rebel and 75-300 than sitting home with a 7DII and a 100-400II
Upvote
0
In my opinion, NO.
Today, new cameras are EVOLUTIONARY, not REVOLUTIONARY. How did pros survive? By using the best tool available at the time. I have a 16x20 print on my wall taken with the original 1d. A 4 megapixel camera. It's still pretty but I would NOT choose that camera today. The 1dx would be in my bag.
I used the 7d, it was a good camera, but I sold it and moved on. The focus was okay, but it did let me down at times.
I also had trouble getting color the way I liked on some shoots. (Yes even in raw) maybe it was me, but I moved over to newer technology when I could.
Today, new cameras are EVOLUTIONARY, not REVOLUTIONARY. How did pros survive? By using the best tool available at the time. I have a 16x20 print on my wall taken with the original 1d. A 4 megapixel camera. It's still pretty but I would NOT choose that camera today. The 1dx would be in my bag.
I used the 7d, it was a good camera, but I sold it and moved on. The focus was okay, but it did let me down at times.
I also had trouble getting color the way I liked on some shoots. (Yes even in raw) maybe it was me, but I moved over to newer technology when I could.
Upvote
0
supaspiffy said:
Poppycock (I like that word
), a friend of mine works as a freelancer for a major german news agency and he's using a 7d1 even for indoor/concert shots. He has to buy his own gear, and being "pro" is about EARNING money, not SPENDING it.The most important thing is that the subject is in focus, and the 7d is good at that. Other potential weaknesses like mediocre high iso performance and baning are of absolutely no concern if you target web & newspaper print sized images.
Upvote
0
The camera and hardware is way down the list of requirements for a professional photo. The subject matter takes up the first 25 places.
That said, Professional photographers like many here, like fine tools and buy the best they can afford that has the capabilities that they need. In some cases, a Iphone might be the best tool, and, in fact, a photo tales with a iphone placed in the top group of World Press photos. Its based on the subject, more than fine nuances of IQ, they don't care which camera was used.
That said, Professional photographers like many here, like fine tools and buy the best they can afford that has the capabilities that they need. In some cases, a Iphone might be the best tool, and, in fact, a photo tales with a iphone placed in the top group of World Press photos. Its based on the subject, more than fine nuances of IQ, they don't care which camera was used.
Upvote
0
we bitched alot...well at least i did.
the focus system in the 5d series was the number one improvement i was looking for since the release of the 5dC. before the 7d came out a very expensive 1 series camera was your only option for a really good focusing system. i could never afford the 1 series cameras...
i never invested in the 7d as i personally loathe a cropped form factor. of those professionals i knew who had them, they were luke warm over the camera. it was good in some respects...no so good in others. all of them dumped their 7ds in favor of the 5d3 when it came out.
light is up there at the top for me. great light makes for great photographs. great subject in crappy light? probably not getting a portfolio piece out of that scenario. in truth those two probably go hand in hand...
Upvote
0
do pros care much about equipments? somewhat but probably not whole lot... emily soto still use her 7d to deliver her images, zhang jingna proved and used her canon 350d to deliver outstanding quality of images, see link below...
http://blog.zhangjingna.com/2010/10/equipment-and-where-money-comes-from.html#.VOTl0y5c7Lg
but do pros need new high end cameras, i think the answer is yes... it is probably all about business...
i am NOT a pros, i am more like a HOBBYIST; who like to learn more and more, daily. i care more about learning techniques, so i have learn a lot from number of people in this forum and other pros (absolutely at no cost... lol... that is my wife's rule when letting me learning photography.)
however, if i can deliver these following examples with canon 7d, i bet you that there are number of pros still can... (note: those noise are mine...
)
http://blog.zhangjingna.com/2010/10/equipment-and-where-money-comes-from.html#.VOTl0y5c7Lg
but do pros need new high end cameras, i think the answer is yes... it is probably all about business...
i am NOT a pros, i am more like a HOBBYIST; who like to learn more and more, daily. i care more about learning techniques, so i have learn a lot from number of people in this forum and other pros (absolutely at no cost... lol... that is my wife's rule when letting me learning photography.)
however, if i can deliver these following examples with canon 7d, i bet you that there are number of pros still can... (note: those noise are mine...
)Attachments
Upvote
0
RLPhoto
Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
I made some great money with my 5Dc. I know some guys who still have rarely shot a wedding with a 20D when something happened to their main bodies. Its really shocking but when I saw the end product, It was just fine for the prints they made.
The 7D is still a great camera, I wouldn't use one above 3200 ISO for color and 6400 for B&W. It still has a fantastic AF system that really got me to love canon again and made me wish the 5D2 had its AF. My only complaint is it wasn't FF but canon fixed that with the 5D3.
The 7D is still a great camera, I wouldn't use one above 3200 ISO for color and 6400 for B&W. It still has a fantastic AF system that really got me to love canon again and made me wish the 5D2 had its AF. My only complaint is it wasn't FF but canon fixed that with the 5D3.
Upvote
0
Good idea ishdakuteb. Here are some of my photos shot with the 7D - I didn't have it that long, but I think these shots show that it can produce good work, even with challenging subjects like wildlife and macro:
Upvote
0
mackguyver said:
glad that you still like your canon 7d as i (also love canon 30d beside my 5d mark iii) and others do. i love your first image...
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 7828
Guest
I "upgraded" from a 60D to a 7D a couple years ago. Although it was a (significant) upgrade in speed and durability, it was almost a step back in pure IQ - the pics were softer (needed +6 sharpening by default!! I rarely go above +4 on my other cameras) and noisier. And the AF was really a mixed bag. I couldn't wait to replace it with the 7D2...
That said, I'd be lying if I said the 7D didn't give me some awesome shots (as well as the 60D before it). Many were even print-worthy. Even the SL1 has given me some real nice ones - many among my favorites (and also most liked/viewed on Flickr).
If I were truly in it as a pro, I'd likely be much more conservative in what I purchased and what I needed. The 7D still got me good shots, good enough to satisfy the vast majority of people. I'd probably still be using it today. As it is, as a hobbyist and being in this purely for myself, I tend to be much more picky...and that pushes me to get the best that I can afford.
That said, I'd be lying if I said the 7D didn't give me some awesome shots (as well as the 60D before it). Many were even print-worthy. Even the SL1 has given me some real nice ones - many among my favorites (and also most liked/viewed on Flickr).
If I were truly in it as a pro, I'd likely be much more conservative in what I purchased and what I needed. The 7D still got me good shots, good enough to satisfy the vast majority of people. I'd probably still be using it today. As it is, as a hobbyist and being in this purely for myself, I tend to be much more picky...and that pushes me to get the best that I can afford.
Upvote
0
7D is still a good camera and depending on what you are shooting could still be professional. I have a friend whose photos are better than mine and she is with a 7D.
Just be prepared to buy another body soon enough, unless you are tough with GAS.
You would tempt to when you can't get where you want to go and you put the blame on something else, starting with your gear.
Just be prepared to buy another body soon enough, unless you are tough with GAS.
You would tempt to when you can't get where you want to go and you put the blame on something else, starting with your gear.
Upvote
0
Short answer:
Yes, the old 7D is good enough for professional use.
Long answer:
If you do not need to shoot without a flash in dark places ...
If you do not need more than 8 frames per second ...
If you do not need continuous AF in Live View ...
If you do not need to go above ISO1600 ...
If you can settle for a lower hit rate than current cameras ...
If you will not feel inferior to have an old camera ...
So yes.
The old 7D is good enough.
Yes, the old 7D is good enough for professional use.
Long answer:
If you do not need to shoot without a flash in dark places ...
If you do not need more than 8 frames per second ...
If you do not need continuous AF in Live View ...
If you do not need to go above ISO1600 ...
If you can settle for a lower hit rate than current cameras ...
If you will not feel inferior to have an old camera ...
So yes.
The old 7D is good enough.
Upvote
0
ajfotofilmagem said:
Great answer!
The OP and some posters give extreme examples such as 1D X and 5DIII not being always necessary and how a Rebel in a safari is better than a 7DII at home.
But let's face it- I would use a 7D today ONLY if I couldn't even switch to a 70D. Yes, even switching to a 70D will be a considerable upgrade from a 7D.
7D was a great crop sensor camera (arguably the greatest) in its time. But that time has passed. Technology has moved on. Pros shot great images with manual focus lenses. However, you cannot expect the sharpness and IQ to be even close to the stellar lenses of today. Would you ask, how did pros shoot before AF was developed?
There are better choices than 7D depending on what you want. If they can't be had, yes, 7D will satisfice...
Upvote
0
Yes! It is a great camera even today. Would you choose it for sports over a 1DX? 1D Mark IV, 5D III 7DII? No. I shoot local pro sports, and have a 7d for a 2nd body. it's great.
How about this: You recieve a press pass for the Superbowl / World Cup Final / Whatever Sporting event you love. All your equipment was stolen and your insurance company gives you $5,000. Using only that, what are you taking to the event?
Me I do OK with the 7D:
REX78329h by RexPhoto91, on Flickr
How about this: You recieve a press pass for the Superbowl / World Cup Final / Whatever Sporting event you love. All your equipment was stolen and your insurance company gives you $5,000. Using only that, what are you taking to the event?
Me I do OK with the 7D:
REX78329h by RexPhoto91, on Flickr
Upvote
0
A good experienced professional photographer will get the job done with whatever gear he owns (or rents if necessary) ... BUT, the newest technology will allow more versatility in a greater variety of shooting situations.
A good pro will understand the limits of the technology in hand, and either upgrade if the work warrants the expense, or make arrangements to acquire what s/he needs ...
The newest technology allows a pro to accept a greater degree of challenge in the work flow as well. Can lesser technology do a great job -- yes it can. Can lesser technology create the identical results as can the newest technology -- no it can't. Understanding those limits makes the difference in the quality of the final product and the ability to meet the demands of a client.
A good pro will understand the limits of the technology in hand, and either upgrade if the work warrants the expense, or make arrangements to acquire what s/he needs ...
The newest technology allows a pro to accept a greater degree of challenge in the work flow as well. Can lesser technology do a great job -- yes it can. Can lesser technology create the identical results as can the newest technology -- no it can't. Understanding those limits makes the difference in the quality of the final product and the ability to meet the demands of a client.
Upvote
0
Much depends on what you define as a professional, we could debate that point alone for years.
At it's introduction, the 7D was a solid camera with reasonable IQ and handling, excellent speed and fair AF. It had it's draw backs though, the high ISO IQ was fair at best, I found it to produce soft images generally, and the AF would miss too often to be completely reliable. I had 2 of them, thinking the first one might have been a bit of a lemon, but the 2nd pretty much performed the same as the first, so I just figured that was just what the camera was like. The best thing the camera had was durability and ruggedness, but it was no match for a full frame (as no cropped sensor really is), and even lagged in IQ to it's contemporary Nikon cropped sensor counterparts (D300 and in particular D7000). For a hard working professional, it was at best a backup/emergency use camera. Not an everyday camera that most pros would pick as their preferred number one camera. For a couple of years I used one as a backup, 2nd body to a 1DmkIII for wedding photography. The IQ of the 1DmkIII was clearly better, as was the AF. The only thing I preferred about the 7D was the lightness in weight, and when the photos became less important I would switch to the 7D to reduce the wear and tear on my wrist after a long day of shooting. When the 5DmkIII was released, it immediately replaced the 1DmkIII, and the 7D was soon replaced by a 6D when those came available.
I could be interested in what the 7DmkII has to offer, the positive reports on that camera certainly make me curious. A few less than positive reports do make me cautious, however, and I don't expect it to really match the IQ of a full frame. But the AF does intigue me, and in better light situation, with the right glass, I would expect it to be adequate at worst. The 7D was only barely so except in the most ideal conditions, IMO.
At it's introduction, the 7D was a solid camera with reasonable IQ and handling, excellent speed and fair AF. It had it's draw backs though, the high ISO IQ was fair at best, I found it to produce soft images generally, and the AF would miss too often to be completely reliable. I had 2 of them, thinking the first one might have been a bit of a lemon, but the 2nd pretty much performed the same as the first, so I just figured that was just what the camera was like. The best thing the camera had was durability and ruggedness, but it was no match for a full frame (as no cropped sensor really is), and even lagged in IQ to it's contemporary Nikon cropped sensor counterparts (D300 and in particular D7000). For a hard working professional, it was at best a backup/emergency use camera. Not an everyday camera that most pros would pick as their preferred number one camera. For a couple of years I used one as a backup, 2nd body to a 1DmkIII for wedding photography. The IQ of the 1DmkIII was clearly better, as was the AF. The only thing I preferred about the 7D was the lightness in weight, and when the photos became less important I would switch to the 7D to reduce the wear and tear on my wrist after a long day of shooting. When the 5DmkIII was released, it immediately replaced the 1DmkIII, and the 7D was soon replaced by a 6D when those came available.
I could be interested in what the 7DmkII has to offer, the positive reports on that camera certainly make me curious. A few less than positive reports do make me cautious, however, and I don't expect it to really match the IQ of a full frame. But the AF does intigue me, and in better light situation, with the right glass, I would expect it to be adequate at worst. The 7D was only barely so except in the most ideal conditions, IMO.
Upvote
0
My first few shots with my 5D mkiii after upgrading from my 60D were... huh... I just paid $2000+ dollars (after selling the 60D and I don't see THAT much of a difference...
I was comparing good light to good light though... and the crop 18mp options were surprisingly good... but overtime I learned to love my mkiii for the AF and for the 1 fps more, and the low light performance...
I buy some older equipment here and there... and I have been able to take really nice images with an xti... so it realy depends on the job @ hand... but you can get away with using a 7D in the right situation...
And the mkiii isn't perfect... (or I'm not) because I miss my fair share of shots... and I curse and I grumble... and I have zero intention of upgrading to a mkiv or a 1dx... so I'm content.
I was comparing good light to good light though... and the crop 18mp options were surprisingly good... but overtime I learned to love my mkiii for the AF and for the 1 fps more, and the low light performance...
I buy some older equipment here and there... and I have been able to take really nice images with an xti... so it realy depends on the job @ hand... but you can get away with using a 7D in the right situation...
And the mkiii isn't perfect... (or I'm not) because I miss my fair share of shots... and I curse and I grumble... and I have zero intention of upgrading to a mkiv or a 1dx... so I'm content.
Upvote
0
I remember the excitement when the 7D first came out. For a long time, it was THE camera to buy with the best video features and the AF and build quality was as good as it got. Its a little sad to read some of the comments above, which clearly indicate that time and technological advances wait for no one.
To the OP, it is easy to say that a 1DX, 5Diii and 7Dii are better cameras. But I assume you are asking due to budget constraints? In the 7D price range, you are probably comparing it to a used 5D/5Dii, 1Ds Mkii, maybe a new 70D, 6D etc. In which case it is the ruggedness and speed of the 7D vs slightly better image quality of the FF cameras vs the benefits of buying a new 70D (which is also meant to be a good camera). The answer comes back to what features you value most, the subjects that you shoot and the environment in which you do it.
To the OP, it is easy to say that a 1DX, 5Diii and 7Dii are better cameras. But I assume you are asking due to budget constraints? In the 7D price range, you are probably comparing it to a used 5D/5Dii, 1Ds Mkii, maybe a new 70D, 6D etc. In which case it is the ruggedness and speed of the 7D vs slightly better image quality of the FF cameras vs the benefits of buying a new 70D (which is also meant to be a good camera). The answer comes back to what features you value most, the subjects that you shoot and the environment in which you do it.
Upvote
0
I'd rather have a 1D MkIII than a 7D for around the same money for completed and sold listings on eBay.
Much more of a 'pro' camera.
Much more of a 'pro' camera.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
