# Why brag about 70D?



## tecboy (Oct 11, 2013)

Yes, 70D is far better than Rebel series. However, I have deep respect for Rebel camera.  If it weren't Rebel, I wouldn't go for 7OD. Just because 70D is newer and has STM lens and touch screen doesn't mean you will become a better photographer.  Next couple of years, there will be new line up far better than 70D.  Be happy what you have right now if it is not 7OD DSLR.


----------



## SCraig (Oct 11, 2013)

Shoot what you like, like what you shoot.


----------



## Overread (Oct 11, 2013)

Am I permitted to brag about my 7D still?


----------



## tecboy (Oct 11, 2013)

Huh? Are you a site moderator?  You tell me.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 11, 2013)

There are many Canadians who brag about their country's skunky, so-so macrobeer like Molson's...as if it were somehow better than the swill that it really is... they even have some hockey fans that talk up the Edmonton Oilers too... people brag about the dumbest chit...the 70D is LEAGUE'S better than Molson's skunk water or those icky old Oilers...  :meh:


----------



## Dao (Oct 11, 2013)

What's wrong with brag about something you like?


----------



## shaylou (Oct 11, 2013)

One reason not to brag about it would be that there are many MUCH better cameras out. Would you brag about a 7d to a guy with a 5D markIII?


----------



## Steve5D (Oct 11, 2013)

What, exactly, is the point in bragging about your gear?


----------



## jaomul (Oct 12, 2013)

If you want to brag about your gear fair enough. Most will just ignore anyway, others will take it as a personal shot at their gear.


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Oct 12, 2013)

The 70D has 63 more Ds than a 7D!  Shut it!


----------



## DarkShadow (Oct 12, 2013)

I love my 60D and don't need the latest and greatest. I rather learn the gear I have and learn it to it's full potential to the best of my ability and practice on getting better photographs that I can be proud of. Bragging is for show offs. Someday I would like to have some of the very best lenses and body but still don't need to brag about it if I did. Be happy with what you have.


----------



## Danmunro_nz (Oct 12, 2013)

70D is probably a fine camera, but from what I've seen I still think my 7D is a better camera for my needs. 
It's just a rugged workhorse that does the job, when it has the 70-200 F2.8L coupled to the front it's just epic!


----------



## sashbar (Oct 12, 2013)

If you brag about your camera, most probably you do not have any photographs to brag about.


----------



## Overread (Oct 12, 2013)

Robin_Usagani said:


> The 70D has 63 more Ds than a 7D!  Shut it!



No no no you're getting confused. It's like apertures  and f numbers. More Mega pixels = less Ds! 

Thus less D's is always better!!! Go for the wide open D's!


----------



## Overread (Oct 12, 2013)

tecboy said:


> Huh? Are you a site moderator?  You tell me.



But you're the one telling me I can't or might not be allowed to in the opening post. 

Or are you saying that I can brag, but only where I'm a site moderator?


----------



## goodguy (Oct 12, 2013)

Derrel said:


> There are many Canadians who brag about their country's skunky, so-so macrobeer like Molson's...as if it were somehow better than the swill that it really is... they even have some hockey fans that talk up the Edmonton Oilers too... people brag about the dumbest chit...the 70D is LEAGUE'S better than Molson's skunk water or those icky old Oilers... :meh:


Hey, hey Derrel don't disrespect us up here north of ya.
Thank god I really don't like Hockey, I think its as stupid as American football.
As for beer There are some good American beers out there but my favorite is Sleemans Cream Ale and not because its Canadian but because it taste best for me.


----------



## weepete (Oct 12, 2013)

It's nice to have a good bit of kit and who better to appreciate it than other people that own nice kit. Utlimatley a good photographer can pull off a decent shot with a poor camera (see digital rev's pro tog cheap camera series) because they know how to work their kit and use it within it's limitations or how to get round those limitations.

Any of these top end cameras are really great bits of kit and really we just compare minor details which are only really important to a very few guys or girls who are shooting something that needs it (like sports shooting or wildlife photograpers) where they get one shot at one moment and they need to nail it. For most of us there are work arounds and I'll bet that the guy shooting great photos with the 1Dx or whatever would produce great photos with 1000d or a D3000 or whatever.


----------



## manaheim (Oct 12, 2013)

I shall pose an alternate question.  Why post a thread complaining about other people being excited about what they have?


----------



## goodguy (Oct 12, 2013)

tecboy said:


> Yes, 70D is far better than Rebel series. However, I have deep respect for Rebel camera. If it weren't Rebel, I wouldn't go for 7OD. Just because 70D is newer and has STM lens and touch screen doesn't mean you will become a better photographer. Next couple of years, there will be new line up far better than 70D. Be happy what you have right now if it is not 7OD DSLR.


You are missing the point.
Each camera is directed to different crowd, if you are happy with your Rebel then you got your match and don't need to look elsewhere.
The 70D is more modern and gives you more in many ways but if you don't need more then you are in photographic heaven and don't need to get more advanced camera.
ALL new DSLR are capable to produce good pictures and even the simplest like the Canon T3 or Nikon D3100 are very good.

You are happy with a Rebel then god bless you for that, my attitude is different, I own the D7100 and love it but if I had the cash to get the D610 I would in a heart beat, if I could afford the D800 I would get that over the D7100 and D610.
We had a debate very close to this one comparing the D5200 to the D7100.
Different cameras for different people, you choose what you want and can afford and then go and have fun.
If I would buy a Canon and would choose between a Rebel or a 70D I would go with the 70D but that's me 

Enjoy your camera.


----------



## tecboy (Oct 12, 2013)

Every camera has pros and cons.  If I say something about cons, you guys going to get angry at me.  If everyone says buy this particular model because it is very good, would you buy it?  What if I buy a particular model because everyone said so, and turned out I'm not happy with this camera?  It would be nice to hear some cons instead of pros all the times.


----------



## Steve5D (Oct 12, 2013)

sashbar said:


> If you brag about your camera, most probably you do not have any photographs to brag about.



Quoted for truth...


----------



## Steve5D (Oct 12, 2013)

manaheim said:


> I shall pose an alternate question. Why post a thread complaining about other people being excited about what they have?



There's an ocean of difference between being excited about a piece of gear and bragging about it...


----------



## manaheim (Oct 12, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > I shall pose an alternate question. Why post a thread complaining about other people being excited about what they have?
> ...



And yet my point remains unchanged.


----------



## SCraig (Oct 12, 2013)

tecboy said:


> Every camera has pros and cons.  If I say something about cons, you guys going to get angry at me.  If everyone says buy this particular model because it is very good, would you buy it?  What if I buy a particular model because everyone said so, and turned out I'm not happy with this camera?  It would be nice to hear some cons instead of pros all the times.


This is where my comment becomes very, very important.  Get what *YOU* want and not what someone else recommends you get.  There are posts on this forum every single day asking what camera to get or what lens to get or what bag to get or what this or that to get.  NOBODY can answer that question because the only one who knows the answer is the person asking the question.

I got slammed once because someone asked what camera to get and I recommended the Nikon D4.  There is nowhere to go from there except down.  There is nothing truly "Better".  In my opinion it was a valid answer to the question.  The fact that it costs $6k is moot in my opinion.

Everyone has to decide what is best FOR THEM.  Buy it, use it, learn it, never look back.  When you reach the point that your camera body is holding you back YOU will be the first to know.  Until that time comes, shoot what you like and like what you shoot.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 12, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> sashbar said:
> 
> 
> > If you brag about your camera, most probably you do not have any photographs to brag about.
> ...



What if a guy's web handle is his birth name and then the name of the camera he shoots? How does that fit in, Mr. 5D?  

But, back to the question of why brag about the 70D??? I dunno...maybe the new AF while shooting video and the touch-screen system of autofocusing during video shooting has given some new owner a major woody?? Seems likely that there's at least one new owner out there who's convinced himself that a new technical innovation is going to give him some kind of an "edge" in his shooting.


----------



## shaylou (Oct 12, 2013)

Overread said:


> No no no you're getting confused. It's like apertures  and f numbers. More Mega pixels = less Ds!  Thus less D's is always better!!! Go for the wide open D's!



That's hilarious ! Never thought of it like that.


----------



## shaylou (Oct 12, 2013)

goodguy said:


> Hey, hey Derrel don't disrespect us up here north of ya. Thank god I really don't like Hockey, I think its as stupid as American football. As for beer There are some good American beers out there but my favorite is Sleemans Cream Ale and not because its Canadian but because it taste best for me.



"As stupid as American football"? Easy fellow your about to bite off more than you can chew....


----------



## Steve5D (Oct 12, 2013)

Derrel said:


> What if a guy's web handle is his birth name and then the name of the camera he shoots? How does that fit in, Mr. 5D?



You know, I really do hold out for the day that you're going to burp up something worth reading.

But, to your point, "Steve" was taken...



But, back to the question of why brag about the 70D??? I dunno...maybe the new AF while shooting video and the touch-screen system of autofocusing during video shooting has given some new owner a major woody?? Seems likely that there's at least one new owner out there who's convinced himself that a new technical innovation is going to give him some kind of an "edge" in his shooting.[/QUOTE]


----------



## shaylou (Oct 12, 2013)

This thread seems to have a bit of exaggeration in it. Comparing one crop sensor camera to another with the idea that it is "far better"? Sure there are advantages from one camera to the next but if the sensor is the same and the focus system is the same the rest is just bells and whistles. Give me a t3i and a 70d with the same glass and same lighting and I will produce two pics of the same quality. 

Think about what the first advise we all got when buying our first camera. Over and over it is stated that we should buy as much camera as we can afford and that is what most do. When we compare crop cameras there are a lot of cool options each model has. As you spend more you get more options but do you get a camera that can produce a better pic? I think not. If you want a better quality image you have to make big upgrades (glass excluded) to get sharper, great low light images. That upgrade is to full frame. The same goes when comparing full frame. If you need speed get the 1dx. If you don't need the extra speed and want to save money get the 5D3. 

At the end of the day you are buying what you can afford and if you are bragging about it your really bragging about your income as much as your camera.


----------



## goodguy (Oct 12, 2013)

shaylou said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> > Hey, hey Derrel don't disrespect us up here north of ya. Thank god I really don't like Hockey, I think its as stupid as American football. As for beer There are some good American beers out there but my favorite is Sleemans Cream Ale and not because its Canadian but because it taste best for me.
> ...



Well he started it


----------



## goodguy (Oct 12, 2013)

shaylou said:


> Give me a t3i and a 70d with the same glass and same lighting and I will produce two pics of the same quality.


Well then this means you have the exact camera you need and you are in your happy place.
Dont worry about other cameras then just go, shoot and be happy!


----------



## Josh66 (Oct 12, 2013)

tecboy said:


> [...]and touch screen[...]


Touch screen?  Seems like a bad idea on a camera where your nose can often be in contact with said screen, lol!


----------



## Josh66 (Oct 12, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> What, exactly, is the point in bragging about your gear?


How else will everyone know how much better you are than they are?


----------



## Juga (Oct 12, 2013)

O|||||||O said:


> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> > [...]and touch screen[...]
> ...



The camera is designed to disable the screen once the camera is brought up to your face. I had a T4i and it was never an issue.


----------



## Josh66 (Oct 12, 2013)

Juga said:


> O|||||||O said:
> 
> 
> > tecboy said:
> ...


Well, that's good.  Otherwise, I could see it becoming an issue, lol!


----------



## shaylou (Oct 12, 2013)

goodguy said:


> Well then this means you have the exact camera you need and you are in your happy place. Dont worry about other cameras then just go, shoot and be happy!



How in the world did you get that out of what I said ? That wasn't the point at all. The point is that saying one crop camera is. "Far better" (as was stated) than another crop camera is inaccurate given the fact that the sensor and the focus system are the same. And for the record I don't have either of those cameras.


----------



## goodguy (Oct 12, 2013)

shaylou said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> > Well then this means you have the exact camera you need and you are in your happy place. Dont worry about other cameras then just go, shoot and be happy!
> ...



Sorry I think the 70D is betetr and I agree that if you think that you will get same results on both cameras that means you got the right camera for you and thus you are in photography heaven.
I would go with the 70D.

Well.............actually I would get the D7100 but if I had to choose between a Rebel or the 70D I would go with the 70D.


----------



## grafxman (Oct 12, 2013)

shaylou said:


> One reason not to brag about it would be that there are many MUCH better cameras out. Would you brag about a 7d to a guy with a 5D markIII?



Actually I would. I have used the 7D for several years. I recently bought a full frame camera, the 6D. I promptly discovered that there is a paucity of lenses available for the full frame camera compared to to any APSC camera. The 6D is much better in high ISO situations however because of lack of versatile lenses compared to my 7D I often find it very frustrating to use. Other than the noise issue I am  much happier with my 7D.


----------



## shaylou (Oct 13, 2013)

grafxman said:


> Actually I would. I have used the 7D for several years. I recently bought a full frame camera, the 6D. I promptly discovered that there is a paucity of lenses available for the full frame camera compared to to any APSC camera. The 6D is much better in high ISO situations however because of lack of versatile lenses compared to my 7D I often find it very frustrating to use. Other than the noise issue I am  much happier with my 7D.



Sure there are a lot of garbage ef-s lenses that won't work on a ef mount but why would you want to use an inferior lens on a good body? The L lens line covers the focal length and is far better than the ef -s line. (Excluding the 17-55) that's a great lens. Sure you don't get the ridicules focal lengths like 18-200 but who wants that on a full frame anyway . I'm surprised that you even bring this matter up. At the end of the day you get what you pay for and that's why the ef -s line is do much cheaper .


----------



## jaomul (Oct 13, 2013)

On another note page 7 of all camera manuals states that when one has dropped cash on the particular model the manual represents that you have indeed copyright to bragging rights. So to you all, my camera is the best


----------



## Steve5D (Oct 13, 2013)

shaylou said:


> Sure there are a lot of garbage ef-s lenses that won't work on a ef mount but why would you want to use an inferior lens on a good body? The L lens line covers the focal length and is far better than the ef -s line. (Excluding the 17-55) that's a great lens. Sure you don't get the ridicules focal lengths like 18-200 but who wants that on a full frame anyway . I'm surprised that you even bring this matter up. At the end of the day you get what you pay for and that's why the ef -s line is do much cheaper .



I had a Sigma 17-70mm which, if it worked on my 5D, I would still have. It's an EF-S mount and, in my opinion, it outperforms just about anything that Canon produces is the same price range.

You ask why someone would want to use an "inferior" lens. One reason, and it's the first reason anyone considers, is cost. "L" Series lenses are not inexpensive. Yes, they produce wonderful image quality, but that image quality comes at a very deep price. Also, an "EF" designation doesn't necessarily mean that a lens is of super quality. Take a look at the Canon 50mm f/1.8. It's not an "L" Series lens, is under a hundred bucks, and produces perfectly acceptable results. They're not going to blow anyone's skirt up, but they're fine results nonetheless. On the other hand, the 85mm f/1.8 also isn't an "L" Series lens, is also an EF mount, and produces ridiculously fine image quality. It _should _have a red ring on it.

Your post also suggests that, since you believe a full-frame body is a "good" body, that you believe a crop body is, somehow, inferior. I own both. Both perform equally well in their respective tasks...


----------



## Overread (Oct 13, 2013)

A lot of garbage efs lenses? Canon only makes something like 9 EFs lenses in their line up and of them most are high quality options.

Also comparing 18-200mm lenses to 70-200mm f2.8 IS L MII lenses is stupid. Of course one is superior to the other in image quality, the price difference is massive as is the features offered. An 18-200mm lens is fantastic as putting a single affordable lens on the camera and doing nearly everything most people will need. Yeah it takes an image quality hit, but its still very usable. 

3rd party companies also make a range of good quality EF-s lenes and many of the time they are specifically for the EF's market - offering wider angle (super wide); often offering better zoom ranges (18-55 instead of 24-70mm - and 50-150mm instead of 70-200mm). 


I think there's a bit of big sensor elitism going on here and honestly if you're going to play that game you need to be shooting medium format cameras; not tiny 35mm sensor cameras


----------



## jaomul (Oct 13, 2013)

It's all gotten very serious


----------



## grafxman (Oct 13, 2013)

shaylou said:


> grafxman said:
> 
> 
> > Actually I would. I have used the 7D for several years. I recently bought a full frame camera, the 6D. I promptly discovered that there is a paucity of lenses available for the full frame camera compared to to any APSC camera. The 6D is much better in high ISO situations however because of lack of versatile lenses compared to my 7D I often find it very frustrating to use. Other than the noise issue I am  much happier with my 7D.
> ...



Actually the Canon L lens, the 24-105mm macro that came with my 6D, is not particularly sharp. Others have mentioned this. It has an extremely limited zoom range compared to the Sigma 18-250mm macro that I often use on my 7D. It's not useless but nearly so. Unfortunately the other lens I bought for the 6D, a Tamron 28-300mm macro, while sharp enough doesn't like to focus in low light which is where I often find myself inside the museums I photograph. What you apparently find ridiculous is what I find essential. It's what I am used to with the 7D, a zoom with a wide range thus providing great versatility, and is unavailable for the 6D. I stand by every word I stated in my previous post.


----------



## Steve5D (Oct 13, 2013)

Overread said:


> 3rd party companies also make a range of good quality EF-s lenes and many of the time they are specifically for the EF's market - offering wider angle (super wide); often offering better zoom ranges (18-55 instead of 24-70mm - and 50-150mm instead of 70-200mm).



What constitutes "better"?


----------



## Overread (Oct 13, 2013)

There is a 28-300mm L lens! 

And that's about as much as I know about it - its not as popular as many others; the high price tending to mean that people with that budget tend to favour quality and reduced focal length range (or even single focal length range) over the wider range offered in the lens.


----------



## Overread (Oct 13, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> > 3rd party companies also make a range of good quality EF-s lenes and many of the time they are specifically for the EF's market - offering wider angle (super wide); often offering better zoom ranges (18-55 instead of 24-70mm - and 50-150mm instead of 70-200mm).
> ...



Good question and often the "better" just translates to giving equivalent fields of view to roughly what you'd get on the 35mm/fullframe lenses with 24-70mm and 70-200mm lenses - which for many (esp those very used to 35mm cameras) can feel too long at their shortest focal length when used on crop sensor cameras. 
It's mostly about replicating the similar experience and angles of view on offer in a different sensor format size.


----------



## grafxman (Oct 13, 2013)

Overread said:


> There is a 28-300mm L lens!
> 
> And that's about as much as I know about it - its not as popular as many others; the high price tending to mean that people with that budget tend to favour quality and reduced focal length range (or even single focal length range) over the wider range offered in the lens.



Yes, I saw that lens. It's non macro and weighs 4 lbs!! If I want to lug a 4 lb lens around 8 hrs a day for 2 weeks in a museum I'll use my Sigma 50-500mm which is probably a better lens than the Canon anyway. Plus that Canon lens costs more than my 6D camera. I've sent 3 emails to Sigma to produce something comparable and if they ever do I'll probably buy their lens.


----------



## tecboy (Oct 14, 2013)

Well my 70D is AWESONE!!!  It has Intel proccessor and a tiny Nvidia graphic card.  What does your camera has?


----------



## Steve5D (Oct 14, 2013)

grafxman said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> > There is a 28-300mm L lens!
> ...



I own the 50-500mm, and I've used the 28-300mm L. The Canon is the better lens...


----------



## memento (Oct 14, 2013)

A 70D huh? Wow, my 40D and I are out of the loop!

Oh, did I mention how awesome my 40D is?
It takes pictures!
And when I expose and focus correctly, the pictures look great!
My 40D roxorz!!!1!one!


----------



## bentcountershaft (Oct 14, 2013)

shaylou said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> > Well then this means you have the exact camera you need and you are in your happy place. Dont worry about other cameras then just go, shoot and be happy!
> ...




But the T3i and 70D do have different sensors and focus systems.  And image processors.


----------



## bentcountershaft (Oct 14, 2013)

memento said:


> A 70D huh? Wow, my 40D and I are out of the loop!
> 
> Oh, did I mention how awesome my 40D is?
> It takes pictures!
> ...



You mean your shots don't get gradually worse and worse every time a new model comes out?  Craziness.


----------



## tecboy (Oct 14, 2013)

bentcountershaft said:


> shaylou said:
> 
> 
> > goodguy said:
> ...



70D has new Dual Pixal CMOS.  Sounds good, right?  It has nothing to do with image quality.


----------



## grafxman (Oct 14, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> grafxman said:
> 
> 
> > Overread said:
> ...



I'm not saying the Canon lens is not a better lens than Sigma's 50-500mm. I've conducted no tests. I'll take your word for it. I'm certain it's better that the Tamron 28-300mm. I'm just saying it costs more that the 6D, it isn't macro and it weighs 4 lbs. I've not had good luck with Canon lenses. I've had excellent luck with Sigma lenses. So I'm very reluctant to spend a lot of money on the Canon 28-300mm. If I did spend the money I would probably get one that had some sort of aggravating characteristic like the push pull zoom action that I doubt I would like.


----------



## bentcountershaft (Oct 14, 2013)

tecboy said:


> 70D has new Dual Pixal CMOS.  Sounds good, right?  It has nothing to do with image quality.



I didn't mention anything about that.  That's for video and faster shooting w/live view.


----------



## tecboy (Oct 14, 2013)

I know.  I'm just bragging.


----------



## play18now (Oct 14, 2013)

grafxman said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> > grafxman said:
> ...



I'm a little confused on how you weren't saying that the Sigma was a better lens (see above).  This has gotten way off topic though.  My camera has been outdated twice and I still love it.  My lens is good too.  Yeah, it's not super sharp, and no, it doesn't have an 18-800mm range.  Somehow it always gets the job done though.


----------



## Steve5D (Oct 15, 2013)

play18now said:


> I'm a little confused on how you weren't saying that the Sigma was a better lens (see above).



I was wondering the same...


----------



## grafxman (Oct 15, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> play18now said:
> 
> 
> > I'm a little confused on how you weren't saying that the Sigma was a better lens (see above).
> ...



Sorry for the confusion. I could have been a bit more clear. I've owned 2 Canon lenses since I started into digital cameras. Both have been very annoying and generally disappointing. The first lens I ever bought for a DSLR was the Canon 70-300mm. On my first trip to a zoo I discovered it was completely inadequate. It wouldn't focus close enough or wide enough. My second Canon lens came with the 6D, a 24-105mm macro that has an inadequate zoom range and provides slightly soft photos. On the other hand I have never been disappointed in any Sigma lens I've owned and I own quite a few. So this is my experience and observations based on a few years and nearly 19,000 photos of DSLR photography: in my personal experience Canon lenses have been a big disappointment compared to Sigma lens. So now lets get to my statement which some folks are having an issue with:

_If I want to lug a 4 lb lens around 8 hrs a day for 2 weeks in a museum I'll use my _*Sigma 50-500mm which is probably a better lens than the Canon anyway.*

I will take everyone's word that the Canon 28-300mm lens is a better lens than the Sigma 50-500mm lens however from my perspective and wallet I can easily see that I would again be very disappointed with a Canon lens. I would be kicking myself for buying one. I wouldn't like the trombone action if nothing else. That's why I said the Sigma 50-500mm is *PROBABLY* a better lens than the Canon. There's a big difference in probably and certainty. Perhaps I should have said a better lens for me. I will never be certain myself because I won't buy or even rent one. After you get bit twice you tend to avoid a third time.


----------



## tecboy (Oct 16, 2013)

Isn't 70D the same as 7D?  Just drop the zero.


----------



## tecboy (Oct 20, 2013)

There is one photographer has a 5D Mark 2.  He wants to buy a 70D just like my camera.  Wow!  This is something to brag about.


----------



## 6kimages (Oct 23, 2013)

goodguy said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > There are many Canadians who brag about their country's skunky, so-so macrobeer like Molson's...as if it were somehow better than the swill that it really is... they even have some hockey fans that talk up the Edmonton Oilers too... people brag about the dumbest chit...the 70D is LEAGUE'S better than Molson's skunk water or those icky old Oilers... :meh:
> ...


what do you mean  you don't like hockey?


----------



## Coasty (Oct 23, 2013)

memento said:


> A 70D huh? Wow, my 40D and I are out of the loop!
> 
> Oh, did I mention how awesome my 40D is?
> It takes pictures!
> ...




Gawd, the 40D is sooooo 2007.


----------



## goodguy (Oct 23, 2013)

6kimages said:


> what do you mean  you don't like hockey?


Well when I came to Canada I had the dubious honor to work for almost a whole year in a Hockey rink.
I ran the ammonia system was the Zamboni driver and lots more.
In the beginning I didn't get the appeal of the game, I come from a warm climate country and Hockey isn't exactly big in my home land, my co workers told me I will grow to love the game and sadly it was just the opposite.
I couldn't believe the amount of violence on the ice, there wasn't a day I didn't had to scrape blood of the ice with the Zamboni.
I don't like violence, god knows there is enough of it outside the rink and I just don't get the attraction of grown man putting armor on their bodies holding sticks in their hands getting on the ice and starting to beat each other till blood comes out even rendering them unconscious in some extreme cases.
In times it looked like people got on the ice, got into a fight and sometimes a Hockey game would start.

It never stooped to amaze me how really nice people would sit and talk to you and then the moment they put the armor on and get on the ice they would transform into the HULK, rage, anger and violence.


----------



## 6kimages (Oct 23, 2013)

goodguy said:


> 6kimages said:
> 
> 
> > what do you mean  you don't like hockey?
> ...


don't know where you were the Zamboni driver .but you are over exaggerating i would say. Now being born and brought up in Canada , spending my winters on the ice playing since i was 4 years old until i just stepped down from playing mens hockey ,I was a physical Defensemen and never dropped my gloves once , never bled or caused bleeding .It is a very fast paced game that is physical and yes stuff is going to happen when people compete physically.However it is a game you can truly only understand if you play it regularly and is part of your culture .I do understand it is not in yours


----------



## Dark5ide (Oct 23, 2013)

ive been using my 70D a lot at events. Being an average pic taker I feel important when Im using my DSLR and I must say I look pretty good with my 70D on me lol. I get compliments with some of my shots, so its a great feeling owning one.


----------



## Luke345678 (Oct 24, 2013)

I currently have a Canon T3i and while I love it there is a big difference between the two. 

As someone who has started to shoot a lot of High School Sports all around my State a lot of these games take place at night and my Canon T3i can not get the greatest of shots. I always have to edit them after the event to make them look good which can be very annoying and take up a ton of time when you have to do this for every shot you took. To determine if I wanted to pick up a Canon 70d I rented one out for a few of my events and noticed a huge difference. I could take shots with little too no noise at 6400 ISO which was very nice. It also really helped in the gym. If you haven't been in a High School Gym recently lets just say the lighting is atrocious. Don't get me wrong, in about a month when I pick up a new 70d I will still use my T3i for a ton, just it won't be my "main" camera.


----------



## centauro74 (Oct 24, 2013)

Luke 345678, have you took in consideration the 6D, it's a much better camera for low light performance and the price is close to the 70D tight now.


----------



## goodguy (Oct 24, 2013)

6kimages said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> > 6kimages said:
> ...


I guess our experience is different, the rink where I worked violence was a big part of the league they had to a point where to me it looked like some of the players came to fight and not play hockey.
Midnight shiny on the other hand was very calm with zero violence.
Not understanding the game is one thing and violence is another.


----------



## centauro74 (Oct 30, 2013)

Of course Mgjaria,  your camera is a great camera,  it's build like a tank. I was really close to buy the 7D before I bought the 70D, the decision factor was the improvement in the live view,  so my wife could use it with more ease.


----------



## Juga (Oct 30, 2013)

I recently rented the 70D for a wedding as a second body and I came away pretty impressed. The AF was fast and accurate, shoots fast and buffers pretty well. I was also pleased to see a 'semi-silent' shutter mode which was cool. It wasn't as quiet as my 6D but still nice. I had a 70-200 f/2.8 IS II on it and I was very pleased with it.


----------

