|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#11 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,636
|
Impressive. Really nice looking and an excellent review at DPReview. Never thought I'd see 8 frames a second in a camera at this level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,380
|
Greg - for what it's worth I think the review is nice but here's where I find it lacking. Cameras like the 7D, D300s and Pentax K-7 are aimed SQUARELY at sports and wildlife shooters. Yes other people use the cameras but as you saw the 8 fps, Canon isn't doing that for the macro shooters of the world. General reviews are great for entry level gear. But the more you move up the food chain I think the more you need to taylor the reviews. If you're a sports or wildlife shooter you know one of the critical aspects of a camera's ability is it's AF ability - especially tracking a moving subject. Here is what the DP Review had to say about the AF performance:
Quote:
Even when you look at high ISO tests there they have a caveat that they compared various cameras based on default settings but noted in-camera noise reduction is customizable. Seriously, how many pro-sumer DSLR buyers are shooting their cameras on default settings? That's like shooting everything in auto mode. I just think the bar for HOW reviews are done needs to go up as you move up the ladder for it to be useful. Again, I'm fairly confident that there are pro shooters out there who would be perfectly happy to field-test these prosumer and pro DSLRs - as I think it's unrealistic to expect various sites to have pro level sports/wildlife shooters on staff. Just my opinion. YMMV. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,636
|
Absolutely makes sense to me. Sites like DPreview are big enough that they probably need someone on staff, or some outside contributor, who is more dedicated to sports photography with the ability to add the page or two needed to report in more detail on the AF system's ability to work that type subject when it comes to cameras obviously designed to be used for that type subject, with some good sample images (single shots as well as bursts) to boot.
Yes, the part about using default settings is often unrealistic, I do agree, but I can also see that being a no-win scenario in terms of never making at least 30% of the readers happy because they did not do this or that in either setting up the camera or processing the image afterwards. I'm glad I just read them! Last edited by Greg Chappell; Nov 6, 2009 at 1:57 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5
|
Love my 7D, I never saw the issues that caused the need for the firmware upgrade, but camera is still pretty new. I did upgrade the FW and it went smoothly by following the instructions.
Tom
__________________
First SLR, Exacta VX500, since then, all Canon AE-1 EOS 650, D-Rebel, (D300) now EOS 7D |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Dickson, Tennessee
Posts: 415
|
I replaced my 50D with the 7D and so far it was worth it. With it I shoot news and nature/wildlife.
The review mentioned was pretty useless and in my testing not so accurate. The image quality is outstanding and noise..... what noise? I don't use DPP at default settings. DPP kind of sucks, just my 2 cents. The color and resolution are awesome, as any camera with dual 14 bit processors should be. Noise only becomes evident at 6400 and up and is easily controlled with any program other than DPP. AF tracking speed is programmable in the menu and in my use has been very much spot on. Overall, this is not an entry level camera. This is a serious tool for serious photographers. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|