| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Opinion: Mark III and D7....
Stan Cochrane, Photographer
 |
Charlotte | NC | USA | Posted: 11:33 AM on 01.16.11 |
| ->> Looking for comparative feedback on the above two cameras. Have a new D7 in my future from a production contest at my other job. Shoot 90% college athletics. Seriously considering posting classified to trade for Mark III free of focus issues. Would the owners of both cameras provide pros/cons of such a trade (in light of what I shoot) or would you recommend keeping the D7? I found no feedback in equipment profiles for the D7 (have reviewed many out side SS reviews). I have no interest in the video feature of the D7. Thanks in advance for your replies. |
|
Mark Peters, Photographer
|
Highland | IL | USA | Posted: 1:27 PM on 01.16.11 |
->> http://www.sportsshooter.com/gear_profile.html?id=228
Stan - I think your use of D7 is keeping you from finding good search results. Try 7D instead.
FWIW, I've owned both, but only currently have the mkIII. The 7D was ok, but I certainly would never replace my mkIII with it. |
|
Peter Buehner, Photographer
|
Orono | ME | USA | Posted: 1:29 PM on 01.16.11 |
->> are you referring to a 7D or a D700? As for the 1DIII I had one for a year and it worked for me just fine shooting college sports. There was only one location where the ISO 6400 limit pretty much shut me down. If you are talking about the Canon 7D, you might get a hold of SS member Monty Rand. He had a mark III, 7D, mark IV, 5DII so ought to be able to give you some comparisons.
Peter |
|
Corey Perrine, Photographer
|
Augusta | GA | USA | Posted: 1:41 PM on 01.16.11 |
->> I've owned both.
Choose the Mark III. |
|
Stan Cochrane, Photographer
|
Charlotte | NC | USA | Posted: 1:43 PM on 01.16.11 |
| ->> Yes, 7D, sorry for the typo. Thanks Mark for the correction, didn't even notice it. Should I be happy just picking up a free 7D, or should I seek a possible trade? |
|
Corey Perrine, Photographer
|
Augusta | GA | USA | Posted: 1:50 PM on 01.16.11 |
| ->> Trade. The 7D blows. Anything past ISO 800 your file falls apart. |
|
Svein Ove Ekornesvaag, Photographer
|
Aalesund | Møre og Romsdal | Norway | Posted: 1:55 PM on 01.16.11 |
| ->> Well, I wouldn't choose the 7d over the 1dIIn. So I guess I also would choose 1dIII over 7d, but I have not tried 1dIII. I rarely shoot at higher iso than 1250. |
|
Stan Cochrane, Photographer
|
Charlotte | NC | USA | Posted: 2:31 PM on 01.16.11 |
| ->> I have read nothing but good reviews for the 7D, I can receive a 7D kit, with a 28-135 f/3.5-5.6, I have no interest in the video. I (if I choose to seek trade) will be looking or some one interested in getting rid of a Mark III (seen listed on SS for as little as $1,600, $1,500 if you bought both), who may be looking to perhaps get into video. The 7D kits lists for $1,699.985 at b/h. It's wants/needs, value would appear about equal, certainly when you consider the 7D will be new in box never opened. Am I crazy, will it never happen, would you keep the 7d, or do you have an interest? |
|
Peter Tarry, Photographer
|
croydon | Surrey | England | Posted: 2:40 PM on 01.16.11 |
| ->> got both, love the 7d. |
|
John Green, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
BAY AREA | CA | | Posted: 3:42 PM on 01.16.11 |
| ->> The 7D is great little camera for the price |
|
Adam Bettcher, Photographer
|
Minneapolis | MN | USA | Posted: 3:43 PM on 01.16.11 |
| ->> I shot numerous MK III'S professionally (NFL) along with 5D MK IIS and 7Ds. The 7 is a nice camera but anything above 1250 iso is really noisy. Even though the MK IIIs are focus problem ridden, join cps and you're covered. That being said, I love my 1D MK IV over all of them. |
|
Mark Peters, Photographer
|
Highland | IL | USA | Posted: 5:32 PM on 01.16.11 |
->> Stan -
What body are you shooting with now? Have you considered selling the kit (you'll likely be seeing less than $1,600 for it based on what's offered out there today) and buying a IIN and putting $600 +/- in your pocket? I prefer the IIN to the 7D.
$1,600 mkIII's are rare to find - and I'll venture there's a reason they're selling at that level, when most are still going for $1,900+, particularly with a high serial number (out of the "affected range".) I would venture that most mkIII owner's looking to pick up a 7D would see it as a trade down and want cash on top of the deal (and less likely to have interest in the 28-135). My point is only you can decide if you are able/willing to put $300-$500+ with the 7D kit to get a mkIII. |
|
David Seelig, Photographer
|
Hailey | ID | USA | Posted: 6:39 PM on 01.16.11 |
| ->> I have owned both I like the 7d as a a second camera. Get the mk111 if you can. |
|
Mike Doran, Photographer
|
Petaluma | CA | U.S.A. | Posted: 1:37 AM on 01.17.11 |
| ->> I have both and like both of them. My MIII has a little over 270,000 frames and the 7D has been my work horse this past year and has not let me down. I opted for this as the Mark IV was out of my range at the time, |
|
Jeffrey Nycz, Photographer
|
Warsaw | IN | USA | Posted: 11:18 AM on 01.17.11 |
| ->> Definitely the MKIII. I have a MKIIn, MKIII, MKIV, 5D MKII and a 7D. 7D images, in my experience, have more noise, even at lower ISO’s than my MKIII. Of course the MKIV is the best of all for sports photography. Plus, my first 7D broke after 7 days, in the middle of a NASCAR assignment! I thought having the 1.6 crop sensor in the 7D would give me additional reach with my long lenses, which it did, but at the cost of unacceptable noise. |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 12:00 PM on 01.17.11 |
->> Stan,
I have to agree 100% with those who have stated that the noise is unacceptable on the 7D. I like smaller, lighter-weight bodies so when the 7D came out I bought 2 of them, and I also tested 2 of them from CPS, for a total of 4 bodies that I put through their paces. I shot some MLB, some NBA and the Daytona 500 with them as well as some general news assignments (always with my MKIII bodies around too) and found that the overall image quality was, to say the least, lacking.
It's a shame too, because I loved everything else about the bodies. In fact it wasn't just the noise. There was something, and I'm not much of a camera aficionado so I don't know how to describe it, but the images just looked, well, *odd* to me. I couldn't manage to tone them either. My Canon rep walked me through some settings that he thought might help but the image quality just remained noisy at any ISO and, well, just overall 'strange'.
In the end I went back to my MKIII bodies until upgrading from there. Also, and I'm not sure if this is an issue for you, but the lack of a voice tag feature was a problem for me when shooting sports (particularly with someone else editing my take). |
|
Robert Klein, Photographer
|
South Easton | MA | USA | Posted: 4:14 PM on 01.17.11 |
| ->> Well, I sold my Mark III, which actually did not have major focus issues, and went with two 7D's. I have NOT experienced noise at the high ISO's and found that there was less noise than with the Mark III. I will say that at the high ISO's white specs appear after using unsharp mask in Photoshop, but a lot of my images have been sharp and I have just skipped that step or sharpened using a third party filter that does a high pass enhancement, which seems to eliminate the white spots. I shot this past season's home games of the Patriots, with the exception of the Jets' playoff game, with the 7D's and found them to be fine using them in early afternoon, late afternoon and night games. They also worked well shooting college basketball and hockey. The one thing that you have to get used to is the 1.6 focal factor vs. the 1.3 of the Mark III. What seems evident here is that there is not a consistency in the cameras, which may be Canon's fault or due to the user not setting them up. I just do not know. |
|
Daniel Malmberg, Photographer
|
Huskvarna | Sweden | Sweden | Posted: 8:13 PM on 01.23.11 |
->> Some 7D images from (team) handball World Cup in Sweden.
From different arenas, and therefore with different setting.
Some at ISO 2.500 and the other at ISO 5.000.
Al taken in RAW format and developed/adjusted in Lightroom 3.
To enlarge images, just click at them an navigate using the keyboard-arrows.
http://blogg.photo-it.net/?p=1962
http://blogg.photo-it.net/?p=1972 |
|
Darren Whitley, Photographer
|
Northwest Missouri | MO | USA | Posted: 11:59 PM on 01.23.11 |
| ->> All I can tell you is I don't like the dynamic range of the LCD on the back of my Mark III bodies. Things appear to be blocking up when there's more latitude than shown in the preview. I've used many other DSLR bodies that give a better image preview. |
|
Phil Hawkins, Photographer
|
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 4:28 AM on 01.24.11 |
->> Ditto on the noise on the 7D. Plus, the 1D series has shutters that last something like 300,000 actuations. The 7D will go about 150,000 at best.
If you want to see empirical evidence to help you decide, look at the DPReview comparison between the 7D, MKII, MKIV and the Nikon D3s. You can quickly see that the D3s kicks all their arses. But clearly the 7D is very bad about noise.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1dmarkIV/page17.asp |
|
Aaron Babcock, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Lincoln | NE | | Posted: 12:02 PM on 02.01.11 |
->> I shoot the Mark III with a 7D as a backup. I am pretty unhappy with the the 7D. The difference between the two is amazing. I can't stand the noise on the 7D.
I publish a magazine and I will rarely use a shot that was taken on the 7D. It just doesn't hold up. I had a choice of buying a used Mark III instead of the new 7D. I wish I could go back and change that decision. |
|
Jacob Langston, Photographer
|
Orlando | FL | | Posted: 12:25 PM on 02.01.11 |
->> The 7D is a horrible camera. I cannot get anything in focus and Canon said they fixed it, but all they did was clean the sensor and upgrade the firmware. I have heard nothing but bad things about it from others as well. Can you tell I do not like it?
There is nothing I like about this camera....except that the video looks nice. |
|
Jason Heffran, Photographer
|
Tarentum | PA | United States | Posted: 8:49 PM on 02.01.11 |
->> I agree with almost everyone here. I had two Mark II bodies and when a shutter went bad, a friend who is a wedding photographer lent me his 7D. I was shooting MLB and at night (even in that lighting) I was really disappointed with the performance at the higher ISO - even compared to the Mark II.
When I decided to upgrade the Mark II bodies I had, I searched for a while and picked up two Mark III bodies in the higher serial range and have had no problems with them. Mark makes an excellent point that a $1,600 Mark III is probably selling at that price for a reason.
I did get a CPS loaner (Mark IV) and fell in love with it but couldn't justify spending the money at the time.
So, after using the Mark III, Mark II and 7D - that's exactly how I would personally rank them. A great point about the shutter life expectancy. Can't overlook that aspect.
In fact, when I added a backup and wanted video for the sake of having it, I picked up a 60D and a grip - couldn't be happier. Saved some $$$ through this whole process as well.
Just my two cents. But, then again, there are some folks who have horror stories about their Mark III. CPS seems to be a solution to that problem. |
|
Jeroen de Jong, Photographer
|
Waalwijk | _ | Netherlands | Posted: 6:26 AM on 02.02.11 |
->> I have both. Love my 7D more than the 1D mk III.
Dynamic range on higher iso is better on the 1D, the 7D is a dissaprovement. Noise level is not better on a 7D or 1D, it's the same. In my opinion.
But the image quality of the 7D isn't so bad. Remember you buy a camera 1/3 of the price of a 1D!!!
I need to replace my 1D this year. I shot two soccer games with a 1D mk IV and I was not impressed. What was the advantage compared to my mk III. There is a big change I buy one or two new 7D's to replace the Mk III. Yes, the 1D has more custom functions, better build quality, sealing and a 1.3-crop. But compared to price/quality, I find the 7D a better camera. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|