Canon's EOS 7D is a pretty grandiose piece of image-recording equipment, whether you're talking about its size, features or price. You're probably aware of the
18 megapixel APS-C sensor and
dual DIGIC 4 processors already, but we've all had to be a bit more patient than usual in waiting for the pro reviews to come out.
Dpreview doesn't disappoint though, with a thoughtful 31-page tome awaiting the keen reader, and we've also got more digestible video reviews from
DPhoto Journal for the less patient among you. If you're after direct comparisons against competing models, such as the
Nikon D300s, you'll find those sprinkled in among the reviews as well, with
Cameratown throwing in a direct head-to-head with Canon's own
5D Mark II. The 7D was found to produce "virtually no visible noise" all the way up to ISO 1600, and scored further points for its gorgeous 100 percent frame-covering viewfinder and fast 19-point AF. With a weather-sealed, highly ergonomic body design, ridiculously fast processing and a sensor so good that "in most situations the lens, rather than the camera, is likely to be the limiting factor," the only thing reviewers could criticize was the somewhat uncompetitive pricing, but that's likely to soften with time anyway. Read on... if you dare.
Read - dpreview review
Read - Photography Blog review
Read - Tech Radar review
Read - DPhoto Journal video roundup
Read - Cameratown comparison with 5D Mark II
posted November 7th 2009 4:52PM
Anyone who says these cameras aren't useful for "Film Making" and never used a DSLR for for this purpose are dumbasses. There's nothing out there that even remotely stacks up in the price range unless you shoot actual film, then you have to develop it. The DOF adapters don't count. (Mr. DOF is useless guy... Why are these things so popular then) They lose way too much light and resolution to be comparable at full size. Sure, if your final delivery is a Youtube video and no one can see the difference there, then use your overpriced adapters. To be honest it's difficult to say which camera is best, as the 5D does work a little better in low light, but everyone wants 24p... There's this firmware update, but that could be several months away. the Mark IV is about 2 stops better, but it's 5 grand and doesn't come out until next month... What an amazing camera that is, though. If Nikon had added 1080 video to their camera they'd be in the running too... I have always liked Nikon, and I wasn't able to part with any of mine... I was all set to sell the D300, but I couldn't do it. As a still camera, it is a stellar performer. F-ing Sony, with their high end cameras... If someone else made Nikon sensors, they'd have 1080, and quite possibly a better codec.
I didn't say D-SLR's aren't useful for filmmaking. I said they make more sense for photographers who want to shoot video sometimes than for filmmakers. They make perfect sense for a photojournalist who wants to throw in a video from time to time. However, they make less sense, given the limitations of the D-SLR form factor, for someone who is primarily concerned with making films. That is not to say they cannot be used to that end. Obviously they can produce impressive video. However, the cameras lack the physical controls and connectors that are indispensable to many filmmakers and wouldn't be missed by most photographers. Maybe Canon will address this in future iterations, but I doubt it. They wouldn't want to cut into the profits of their own video cameras after all.
I also didn't say that depth of field is useless, although I should point out that saying depth of field isn't very descriptive as it can either be shallow or deep or somewhere between and we both seem to be referring to shallow depth of field. The reason people purchase depth of field adapters and are so obsessed with producing shallow depth of field is because they get it into their heads that that's the most important visual characteristic of 35mm film cameras. Now there are tons of videos being produced by these D-SLR's where it seems painfully obvious that user is just trying to show off how shallow they can make the depth of field, even if it means that the subject in the shot is out of focus. As many filmmakers have said again and again, the narrative itself is the most important part of a film and everything else is subservient. If the narrative requires deeper depth of field, a filmmaker should have the sense to realize it.
I will agree that some of these D-SLR's produce a very impressive image at their price point, limitations of workflow aside. They make sense for a lot of people on budgets.
Well I work in the field... Whatever the DSLRs are missing, no one who hires for side jobs seems to miss it. I always say, use the right tool for the job. If you're making a TV show, a 5D, 7D or Mark IV is a terrible idea. Short films, small budget features, documentaries (That don't require extended shooting) wedding shooters, etc. are perfect for this thing, as well as photojournalists who need to bring video cameras with them. The cameras fill a niche that's been needing to be filled for quite some time. a DSLR isn't a replacement for any kind of camera I know of that I use, even a Red cam. That being said, I've got 5 video cameras ranging from full size ENG to little Sony Z1Us, and everything that isn't a Canon DSLR is gathering dust... DOF has been the micro budget filmmaker's holy grail for easily the last 10 years or so... For filmmakers who couldn't afford to shoot on film, of course. Cinematically DOF plays a huge role in creating a more three dimensional look, allowing a subject to be accented via a shallow DOF. Every show I've shot over the last 5 years has used a DOF adapter if the camera's sensor wasn't 35mm size. (Or it wasn't film) The look is indispensable in the realm of drama.
Not sure what control they're missing that I can't add on, either...
At the end of the day, they have kind of a narrow use for video in my opinion. But it's a particular use that has been lacking for a really long time, as is evidenced by the wild popularity of HDSLRs. If someone can shoot on something more expensive with the same look, then go for it... There's advantages to that as well. The manufacturers know exactly what they're doing... If they made something cheaper that was just as good as the much more expensive verision, that wouldn't make a lot of sense
/jealous.
Now make it $600. :D
Not full frame = Not interested
I wish they had put the autofocus in the 5D MKII though
Not a Red Scarlet = not interested.
Review of "The Abyss" is not a review of "National Lampoon's Family Vacation" = not interested
Sushi, not hamburger = not interested.
Seriously, what's your point? Congrats on wasting your time and ours writing that comment.
Do you know the difference between a full frame sensor and an APS sensor? Some how I'm thinking not, dickweed. If you are a pro or even an amateur that is thinking pro, you go full frame--ALWAYS. Since some people are trying to compare the 7D to the 5D MKII, which is a pro level camera (and I know several pros that have dumped their 1D MKIII for the 5D MKII), is that if IT ISN'T FULL SENSOR IT'S NOT A COMPARISON. But if you knew WTF you were talking about you would have not posted your moronic reply.
errr...I should have said 1Ds MKIII for the 5D MKII.
You know that the red one has pretty much the SAME sensor size than the 7D?
So full frame mean nothing for video, full frame is OVERKILL for video.
now, Nikon, what's your next move?
Just got mine two weeks ago, This camera is amazing. I also bought a new 16 GB 600x CF card. Images record almost instantly. I love this camera so far! I put some samples of my first test shoot on flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/josephloren/sets/72157622702948692/
I'll chime in and say I love my 7D. It's a great still camera and shoots some very unique, impressive video. I've already made a lot of use out of it shooting 1080P/24, and 720P/60.
My recommendation to anyone looking to get a 7D is to get a fast card reader. my first few imports were painful on my cheap USB reader, I've since upgraded to the Sandisk Firewire CF card reader and can ingest 8GB in 3 minutes. I also bought a pair of PNY 266x CF cards from Frys (Cheapest place I found them), http://www.frys.com/product/5902414?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG
Based on Rob Galbraith's testing, these are the fastest cards that don't break the bank. (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/camera_multi_page.asp?cid=6007-9784)
I wish they threw in the new 18-135mm IS lens rather then the 28-135.. anyone agree?
They should eventually when supply of the 28-135's run out.
the 18-135IS is one of the bundles in the UK. The other is the 15-85.
Yeah, I got the 28-135 bundle here (got it at BestBuy and it was all they had). I expected to sell the lens on eBay and get the 15-85, but the 28-135 is worth more than the $200 they're going for now. I suppose I should just do it and get it over with, but I also want to wait for the 15-85 to come down to earth in terms of pricing.
FWIW, yes the 18-135 makes more sense (newer/wider), but the reviews on the lens that I've read slot it in below the 28-135 in IQ AND it doesn't have USM AF. I'm not all that religious about the USM part, but the quick focus ring would seem pretty handy for video (use AF to start and tweak or follow with the ring without having to switch off the AF).
Then I guess my desk must have cum on it, damn!
I bought a D300S after owning a D300 for 2 years, only to be VERY disappointed with its video capabilities. Sold all my Nikon gear (not much, really), switched to the Canon 7D and could not be happier! The only thing I miss about the D300S is the dual card slots (RAW to fast CF, JPEGs to cheap SD), but that camera's rolling shutter was TERRIBLE. And it only shot in 24p (true 24 fps, not 23.976 fps that is easier to work with for final deliver as NTSC video). The 7D has only a very slight rolling shutter effect, and is really only noticeable when lighting changes in the middle of a frame (camera flashes, strobe lights).
I also shoot high-speed sequences for skateboarding and bmx photography, and the 7D has outperformed both the D300 and D300S in this area as well. It can shoot the full 8 fps at 18 MP pretty much forever in JPEG mode, and about 5x longer than the Nikons in RAW. Thank you dual Digic 4 processors!
I'm not a fanboy of either Nikon or Canon, so it was really a no-brainer to switch to the 7D - it is truly an amazing camera!
I can't wait to get one of my own to work with. I'm glad to see canon is back to making a decent enough camera for the rest of us -- though quibbling about the extra thou on a 5DII is really a moot point here, I'm just tired of people saying that only a full frame is suitable for pro work. At this point, the only differences I see is shallower DoF and use of true ultra-wide angles, which I can live without at this point. For me, good noise performance approaching ISO 1600 is enough quality for me. Though full frame has the high noise IQ to best any crop frame camera, the 7D seems to move the APS-C market closer to that level of quality. Use a fast enough lens and most of the time it doesn't matter. I like how many of the reviews make a point to mention that lens use is important, especially considering the resolution. You just can't make any camera perform with kit glass, bottom line. So for anyone who likes to pixel peep, or whatever it is they call it, use the good glass and reconsider your opinions. This camera is not for amatuers, or newcomers to photography. It should be understood that along with a step up to a semi-pro body, a step up to L series glass would be a no-brainer if you want the best results. Those sample shots are never shot with kit glass. I was also one of those people who didn't see that video made much of a difference to still photographers. I see now that there are many applications for it in the work of a lot of photographers. I guess you can never assume what is or is not popular unless you're actually using it. I can't wait to use the 7D for my work, on paper is seems a very nice prospect. Way to go canon, from a nikon guy.
We've had one of the guys in here playing with his for a while, and the stuff he's captured in incredible. The depth of field on some of the HD recording takes your breath away.
High resolution images http://lotimages.com/