Would you buy a 7d mk ii if you own a 1DX
- Thread starter kyle86
- Start date
So you have a new toy.
So you can post images in all the 7D MkII threads.
I doubt the 1.6 crop factor will actually amount to any more actual image resolution over a cropped 1DX file in real world shooting anyway, so in truth, unless you need another camera, the answer to your question must be no.
So you can post images in all the 7D MkII threads.
I doubt the 1.6 crop factor will actually amount to any more actual image resolution over a cropped 1DX file in real world shooting anyway, so in truth, unless you need another camera, the answer to your question must be no.
Upvote
0
Well, I have the 1DX and I have ordered a 7DII. There are three reasons for this.
The first is to use the 7DII with the long whites for reach limited cases. Yes, I know that a cropped 1DX image, from a pure IQ perspective, in many cases will be just as good, especially higher ISO. But I mostly shoot lower ISO, where the IQ difference is minor and I expect the AF system on the 7DII to improve my focus on long reach. It will also give me more pixels for larger prints. I also had the 7D MkI, which I never used for this purpose, due to its inferior AF system and IQ.
The secondary reason is size and weight. When I go for long hikes in the mountains, looking for birds and wildlife, a 7DII/200-400 f4L IS 1.4x combo will cover all of my needs. And it is both lighter, smaller and more flexible than carrying the 1DX and the 600 f4L IS II, with extenders.
The third reason is for my wife to use with a Tamron 16-300 super zoom, when we travel. She does not like to change lenses ...
The first is to use the 7DII with the long whites for reach limited cases. Yes, I know that a cropped 1DX image, from a pure IQ perspective, in many cases will be just as good, especially higher ISO. But I mostly shoot lower ISO, where the IQ difference is minor and I expect the AF system on the 7DII to improve my focus on long reach. It will also give me more pixels for larger prints. I also had the 7D MkI, which I never used for this purpose, due to its inferior AF system and IQ.
The secondary reason is size and weight. When I go for long hikes in the mountains, looking for birds and wildlife, a 7DII/200-400 f4L IS 1.4x combo will cover all of my needs. And it is both lighter, smaller and more flexible than carrying the 1DX and the 600 f4L IS II, with extenders.
The third reason is for my wife to use with a Tamron 16-300 super zoom, when we travel. She does not like to change lenses ...
Upvote
0
Eldar said:
Hi Eldar
Thanks for the reply!
Hmm I feel I change my mind on this every 5 minutes hahaha... omg please let me know how it goes with a 200 -400? I have a 200 f2 as my longest lens but am thinking either the sigma 150-600, canon 300mm with the 7d mk ii or the 200-400 and just cannot decide... so i would love to know how you find the 200-400 with it
Upvote
0
For me almost the same as for Eldar.
I ordered the 7D2 for following reasons:
More reach on the long whites. I knew in high iso, the 1Dx will still overclass the 7D2. However, other threads on this forum indicated that the 1.6 factor of crop to FF is in reality lower (1.2 to 1.3) because the IQ is much better for the FF. The 7D2 has at least 10% more pixels compared to the 18mp versions. For that reason, I think the 1.3 to 1.4 gain compared to FF should be possible. So the 7D2 with a 300/2.8 will be real good I presume, and will give me a nice increase of focus length. This will be a nice backup camera for the 1Dx for action photography, if the light is decent. And just as Eldar, I did not use any longer the 7D after I bought my 5D3 because of AF and IQ.
The 5D3 is according to my preferences more difficult to handle with a big white on top. I prefer for sure an extended height, so my 7D2 will be gripped. The difference in weight is small. a 7D2 + 200-400 or a 1Dx+ 200-400 is a difference of 0,5 kgr on 5 kgr. Gripped the difference is gone. But as mentioned I love the bigger camera for the big whites. So in combination with the big white I don't see there for me any advantage on size or weight.
Size and weight if used with a general zoom lens like 18-270. So for a family trip this could give a nice combo.
I ordered the 7D2 for following reasons:
More reach on the long whites. I knew in high iso, the 1Dx will still overclass the 7D2. However, other threads on this forum indicated that the 1.6 factor of crop to FF is in reality lower (1.2 to 1.3) because the IQ is much better for the FF. The 7D2 has at least 10% more pixels compared to the 18mp versions. For that reason, I think the 1.3 to 1.4 gain compared to FF should be possible. So the 7D2 with a 300/2.8 will be real good I presume, and will give me a nice increase of focus length. This will be a nice backup camera for the 1Dx for action photography, if the light is decent. And just as Eldar, I did not use any longer the 7D after I bought my 5D3 because of AF and IQ.
The 5D3 is according to my preferences more difficult to handle with a big white on top. I prefer for sure an extended height, so my 7D2 will be gripped. The difference in weight is small. a 7D2 + 200-400 or a 1Dx+ 200-400 is a difference of 0,5 kgr on 5 kgr. Gripped the difference is gone. But as mentioned I love the bigger camera for the big whites. So in combination with the big white I don't see there for me any advantage on size or weight.
Size and weight if used with a general zoom lens like 18-270. So for a family trip this could give a nice combo.
Upvote
0
I won't be getting a 7D Mark II, but I can understand why it may appeal to some.
I actually really enjoy the weight, ergonomics and overall quality of the 1D X, and would prefer two of them than mixing models.
I will most likely get the 1D X ii when it comes out, but am not in any rush as using the 1D X is still as much joy today as it was the first day I got it.
I actually really enjoy the weight, ergonomics and overall quality of the 1D X, and would prefer two of them than mixing models.
I will most likely get the 1D X ii when it comes out, but am not in any rush as using the 1D X is still as much joy today as it was the first day I got it.
Upvote
0
For wildlife I never found enough justification to go from the 1D IV to the 1D X.
When you lay out the cash for several big white lenses you find that the camera body is the accessory not the lens.
The 7D II is an expensive extender, but that reason alone isn't a reason to buy it, it's not going to give you that much.
The weight and size is the issue.
Carry around the 1D X with a 600 mm all day hiking vs a smaller compact 7D II with a new 400 mm DO and I think you would see the need.
Buying the $1799 7D II is a small price vs the overall equipment cost.
When you lay out the cash for several big white lenses you find that the camera body is the accessory not the lens.
The 7D II is an expensive extender, but that reason alone isn't a reason to buy it, it's not going to give you that much.
The weight and size is the issue.
Carry around the 1D X with a 600 mm all day hiking vs a smaller compact 7D II with a new 400 mm DO and I think you would see the need.
Buying the $1799 7D II is a small price vs the overall equipment cost.
Upvote
0
Just a few years ago the 5D MK II / 7D was a nice all around combo.
I think the 5D MK III / 7D MK II is a nice combo, but a 1Dx / 7D MK II I think is hard to beat for two body all around. 1Dx will be superior all around, and the 7D MK II gives up a little on IQ and noise, but adds in reach with crop and can keep up.
My killer two-body sports combo : 1Dx with 70-200 F/2.8 IS II, 7D MK II with Sigma 120-300 F/2.8 DG OS . Mixed reviews on the Sigma - Seems like some bad copies, but still gives you solid coverage of 70 - 480 mm on two bodies. If you wanted to be a little insane, the Sigmonster 300-800 would be interesting on the 7D MK II - 480-1280 at f/5.6 Would be interesting to see how the Sigmonster performs on the 7D MK II, but covering 500 - 1300 for around $7500 for body and lens and having potential fast 65 point AF at F/5.6 would be pretty sick
I think the 5D MK III / 7D MK II is a nice combo, but a 1Dx / 7D MK II I think is hard to beat for two body all around. 1Dx will be superior all around, and the 7D MK II gives up a little on IQ and noise, but adds in reach with crop and can keep up.
My killer two-body sports combo : 1Dx with 70-200 F/2.8 IS II, 7D MK II with Sigma 120-300 F/2.8 DG OS . Mixed reviews on the Sigma - Seems like some bad copies, but still gives you solid coverage of 70 - 480 mm on two bodies. If you wanted to be a little insane, the Sigmonster 300-800 would be interesting on the 7D MK II - 480-1280 at f/5.6 Would be interesting to see how the Sigmonster performs on the 7D MK II, but covering 500 - 1300 for around $7500 for body and lens and having potential fast 65 point AF at F/5.6 would be pretty sick
Upvote
0
I won't buy it now, because of financial calculation, but might be in the future, depending on what comes out. I shoot using live view from time to time so DPAF is highly needed.kyle86 said:Hi
Apart from the 1.6 crop factor is there any other reason to buy a Canon 7d mk ii if you already had a 1DX ?
Thanks
Besides, I cannot crop 1080 video successfully yet, so a longer reach is needed for shooting from the back of the church, as a second camera, depending on how clean is 1600 ISO. It would be a nice combination with the rumored 100-400 and a Camranger for zooming in and out from far away, for both photo and video.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
