nikon D7000 or canon 7D

[ddutta]

Hello everybody.. I am new in photography and I use canon 1100D with EFS18-55mm and 75-300 mm f/4.0-5.6lens... I want to upgrade to higher speed camera..
I am confused what should be good for me... 1. Nikon D7000 (6fps) or 2. Canon 7D (8fps).
I know that canon 1D Mark IV is there sitting with 10fps but I don't have enough budget for that...
Please suggest if I am going to loose the colour sensitivity if I buy canon 7D over nikon D7000?
Also the nikkor lenses with high aperture and good zoom seemed to be more costly than there canon counterpart..
Please please suggest the best choice...nikon D7000 or canon 7D ??????

[ktuli]

ddutta (you may want to put your first name in your profile if this isn't your name so we can be a bit more friendly),

Honestly, I'm not sure what you mean by the Nikkor lenses being more expensive than their equivalent Canon counterparts - I don't compare too often, but they usually seem spot on identical when I do.

Regardless, I think one point to consider is that with the 7D you get to continue using your existing lenses, so the cost will be somewhat less. Moving forward, all of your lenses would work on both cameras, so the 1100D would work well as a backup body.

I shoot with the 7D and absolutely love it. But I've only even worked briefly with Nikons (checking out friends' cameras and such).

For me, the biggest thing would be budget, and being able to continue using my existing lenses is a huge factor.

- Bill

[Polar01]

I know some will not believe this coming from a Nikon shooter, but why do you want to buy different set of lens they are the expensive things. Are you looking for frames per second because you want to shoot sporst, if that is so, save you money, buy the Canon camera, and than get a 2.8 f zoom len. If you buy the Nikon you still have to buy lens, if you want them for sports then you really need 2.8.. That all said, it is not the camera or the lens it is the shooter, you state that you are new, to photography, get out and shoot, shoot, shoot and shoot and then shoot some more. Once you get the composition in the viewfinder, the correct exposure in camera, process that image in RAW, and begin getting more keeper's than grabage that is the time to think upgrading. I was on a course today, and after it two of us when over to a nearbye church to shoot. The other guy has a new D3, 24-70mm 2.8, 70-200mm 2.8, 85mm 1.14D lens a top of the line light meter all to take better images. He complains to me that the image on the back of the camera does not look correct, he has the WB set to the wrong conditions, I tell him, just set it to auto, as you process your RAW Files in LR you can set the WB there. Then he shows me a shot, states that this happens a lot, I took the camera, looked through the viewfinder, it was set to manual, I adjusted the F-stop and shutter speed, shot it again and it was find. He asked how did I do that, I said you were in manual, and the dial in the view finder said that it was overexposed, so i adjusted it to bring it back to the correct exposure, and said that you need to see the histogram on the back of the camera to see if the exposure is correct. I never look at the image, but the histogram, if it is too far to the right I bring it back, and if too far to the left I bring it forward simple. What I am trying to said, it is not the new camera, the $6,000.00 in top of the lines lens it is knowing how to get what "YOU" want the camera to give you, then upgrade or you are simply giving the camera salesman a great commission.

Allan

[GrahamH]

Great response Allan.
Ddutta, apart from recommending you re-read Allans response, I would add that until you get out and shoot quite alot of images, you don't really know what you want a camera to do. There is a reason that so many makes of cameras are out there from each and every camera manufacturer. Each one has a specific set of abilities. Landscape, portrait, sports as well as non-specific (usually entry level).
All these different camera bodies can do a bit of everything, but perhaps not QUITE as well as a more specialist one.
For example, if you want to do landscapes, are not big and strong but want to hike long distances, perhaps a lighter body is more important. If you are a birder without the big lens budget ($8-12k for a top of the line lens), perhaps a crop sensor will give you the reach you want.
Add the this the fact that some camera related technology can come along and change the playing field, may also count for something. For example, the new Canon flash with the built in radio transceiver. Or the WiFi SD cards (therefore no need to go tethered (one thing I would love to have, but can't afford the pro spec cameras that would give me that).

So, in summary, you need to find out to a greater extent what you want, then your answer will become more self evident. The more you knwo what you want, the less choices you will have until one becomes THE ONE.

Graham

[rpcrowe]

Ddutta,

I am a Canon shooter and one of the cameras that I use is the 7D (the other being an older 40D). I love the 7D but, I have not used a Nikon D7000. I am very well set with Canon lenses so I don't make it a habit to peruse the capbilities of other brand cameras. I am not the type of guy who believes that a new brand of camera is going to make me a great photographer.

There are two lenses that I own and absolutely love which I don't believe Nikon has the equivalent of (Nikon folks, please correct me if I am wrong). These are the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and the 70-200mm f/4L IS. These two lenses on a pair of 1.6x cameras are my standard general photography and travel photography kit. I believe that I can shoot 90-95% of my imagery with these two lenses. The f/2.8 aperture and IS in the mid-range zoom make it unique to Canon and the price, IS capability, and quality of the 70-200mm f/4L IS lens also make it unique to Canon.

Lenses are, IMO, one of the primary factors in image quality. I would much prefer shooting with a less expensive camera rather than sacrifice top-line lens quality. In fact, I shot with a combination of the 30D and 40D cameras for many years until I purchased the 7D.

If I were in your position, I would not let my present lenses influence my decision as to which brand camera I would shoot with. Neither of your lenses are top-line, so you should be looking for new glass as a primary purchasing parameter. In fact, if cost is a limiting factor, a used 40D might be a good choice. Although the top burst speed of the 40D is around 6-6.5 FPS, that is actually fast enough for a lot of work.

If sports is your venue of choice, IMO, you would be better off shooting with a 40D and a used 70-200mm f/2.8L lens than with your 75-300mm and a 7D.

[ddutta]

Thank you for your good advice Bill..
My first name is Dibakar. Yes it is indeed a good thing if I can use my all the lenses in both the cameras..

[ddutta]

Thank you Allan and Graham for the advice..
Yes I do believe that it is better for me to get one f2.8 lens with 70-200 mm zoom or a f4.0 IS with 70-200 mm zoom for having better picture quality. That is also why I was thinking twice before buying a nikon D7000 over the canon 7D. I wanted to be sure if I will not loose any thing regarding the colour quality if I chose canon 7D over nikon D7000. I have attached one picture with this reply that I took with canon 1100D with 75-300mm f4-5.6 without IS lens ().

[benm]

...which I don't believe Nikon has the equivalent of (Nikon folks, please correct me if I am wrong). These are the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS...
Nikon does have a 17-55 f/2.8 though not with IS. I don't feel that a lens in this focal range really needs IS.

[ddutta]

Thank you Richard for your information. What if I use 70-200mm f4.0L IS instead of f2.8( this one is more expensive!) with a canon 7D?

[Polar01]

Dibakar the sensor in the D7000 is the same one in the new D800, but smaller, the K5, and the new sony as it is their senor, as for the colour quality there is no second to none, in my opinion.

Allan

[Dave Humphries]

Dibakar the sensor in the D7000 is the same one in the new D800, but smaller, the K5, and the new sony as it is their senor

Hi Allan,

Did you mean to say the sensor in the D7000 is not the same one in the new D800?

I would agree the Nikon D7000 and Pentax K5 use the same 16 MP DX format Sony sensor though.

Cheers,

[ddutta]

Thank you once again Allan for the information...

[Polar01]

Dave from what I understand is, it is the same sensor, in as much as in the D800 it is full size as to the c size in the D7000. Maybe I should said, technicality the same, however made to a larger size.

Allan

[Geoff F]

With regard to lenses, Dibakar.

A Canon 70-200 L lens is greatly superior to the 75-300. But unless you go for the IS version, which is fairly expensive, you may occasionally have problems when handheld.

I have the F4 IS version and it does everything that I need. But if you intend photographing flying birds regularly, it is a bit on the small size. Although anything bigger becomes expensive. And, of course, the F2.8 lenses are considerably dearer than F4.

For longer reach, I use the Sigma 150-500; but that is a bit long and heavy to use as a general purpose everyday lens.

So your choice will probably depend largely on exactly what you wish to photograph - and your budget.

If a slightly faster shooting speed isn't really going to make that much difference and you are on a tight budget, keeping your existing camera and getting better lenses may be an alternative.

You can always upgrade the camera at a later date.

For me, the shooting speed is virtually meaningless as I rarely shoot multiple shots.

[thequacksoflife]

Dave from what I understand is, it is the same sensor, in as much as in the D800 it is full size as to the c size in the D7000. Maybe I should said, technicality the same, however made to a larger size.

Allan

Alan - I think you'll find it isn't the same sensor. if the sensor in the d800 was cropped to dx size it would be slightly smaller.

given they have similar pixel pitch people have said you can get some idea of minimum high iso performance of the d800 by comparing it to the d7000. that doesn't mean it's the same sensor. it's undoubtedly new. not sure who makes it though.

[ddutta]

Thank you Geoff. I understand your point. Yes it is true for the handheld case it is sometimes better to have the IS. Also I found my 1100D to be quite good when used for slower objects without the need for multiple shots.. The camera becomes busy after I take 2 or three shots in raw, and there is no way you can avoid that blank but to miss the shot. That is why I wanted to upgrade.
Also thanks for the info on sigma 150-500. Can you please tell me if the sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM works with canon 1100D or canon 60D?

[inkista]

Yes, there's a 150-500 for Canon mount.

I just want to leave you with two images, both of male Northern Harriers. Both taken with the same camera body, a Canon XT/350D, which had an autofocus system in it that's worse than the one in your 1100D (only 7 AF points, with the single cross-type in the center):


Canon XT, EF 75-300 f/4-5.6 III (non-USM, non-IS) + Tamron 1.4x teleconverter. iso 400, f/8, 1/320s (I swore a lot, as I could manually focus this combination faster than the camera could autofocus it).


Canon XT, EF 400mm f/5.6L USM. iso 400, f/5.6, 1/2500s.

I actually haven't found IS to be a life or death matter, but then, I'm using my 400/5.6 prime almost exclusively for shooting birds in flight (shutter speeds of > 1/focal length needed anyway) and I live somewhere really really sunny.

Definitely would recommend a new lens over a new body for the type of performance you're probably seeking, preferably a telephoto or supertelephoto L lens with USM, if birds in flight are your thing. On the Sigma side of the fence, you probably want a lens with HSM. You could also look at the 120-400 OS, or the Canon 100-400L IS USM.

[Geoff F]

As Kathy mentioned, the Sigma 150-500 is available in a Canon version. The birds in my Project 52 post were all taken with this lens, and there are also some other shots with the Canon 70-200 L IS F4 there.

Project 52 by Geoff F

Although I find that Sigma lens can achieve good quality results, and the stabilisation works well (even handheld at 500 mm) the auto focus is a little on the slow side. But that is common with most of the 'cheaper' large zooms. The aperture, I find, is best around F8 to F11 which also has some limitations; but, once again, anything better is going to be considerably expensive.

Another option, as Kathy said, is a 400 mm lens which is popular with many bird photographers; and you could eventually get a 1.4x converter which would take you past 500 mm.

However, the downside with that option is you lose the zoom function; which may or may not be a disadvantage to you.

With regard to the shooting speed. When operating in Raw even my 7D quickly needs a bit of 'breathing space' while it deals with a relatively small number of shots. All too frequently, I find that the perfect subject appears during that period; which is why I tend to prefer single shots. But there are arguments for and against both methods.

[lorenzobix]

hy Dibakar
I'm a nikonist, i own a D700, but my advice is to keep going with canon for two reasons: the first is the budget you can save by not buyng new lenses. the second is that i read a lot in the italian nikon forum and i was really surprised when the D7000 came out. at that time there were a lot, really a lot, of new threads like "help, my new D7000 is full of hotpixels", "D7000 and hotpixels, am i the only one?", "New camera immediate problems: hotpixels on D7000" and similar.
Now, for what i read these people sent back the camera and the lucky ones received a new one, the others received the same camera after months, a lot of them didn't fix the problem. I don't actually know if this problem was linked only to the cameras arrived in the italian market, and i don't know if the firmware updates fixed it now, but i think it's very disappointing buyng a new camera that has such problems. Apart from that, the D7000 users are very happy, the camera is the first of the new generation of nikon and the specifics are, for some reasons, better than the professional D300. The D7000 is not considered professional only for marketing reasons (the D400 should appear quite fast) but the quality is absolutely professional.

[inkista]

Another option, as Kathy said, is a 400 mm lens which is popular with many bird photographers; and you could eventually get a 1.4x converter which would take you past 500 mm.

However, the downside with that option is you lose the zoom function; which may or may not be a disadvantage to you.

Um.. You lose the zoom if you go with the EF 400mm f/5.6L USM or the EF 400mm DO f/4 IS USM. But not if you go with the EF 100-400L f/4-5.6 IS USM. The 400/5.6L is generally considered the bird-in-flight lens, since its AF is a little faster, it's optically a little better and takes a TC better, and it's lighter for handholding. But the 100-400L is a more general-purpose wildlife & bird lens, and is more popular for this reason. With the 400mm prime, I run backwards a lot at the zoo. A 100-400 user would do just fine.

Juza Nature did a comparison of the Canon 100-400L vs. the Sigma 120-400 OS, the "Bigmos", the 150-500 OS, and the old classic unstabilized "Bigma" 50-500. Also, if you're reading older posts about the unreliable build quality on the 120-400 and 150-500, lensrentals pretty much reports that that was apparently an early batch issue that's since been worked out since they put those guys in their "hall of shame."