# CANON 7D vs NIKON D7000



## bobbyknight

Which one would you prefer most in all aspects?
They say the D7000 blows right past the 60D and heads straight at the Canon 7D. Do you agree about this? lol


----------



## RockstarPhotography

I would......but i'm biased so better wait for someone more knowledgable about cannon......


----------



## inaka

I just got my D7000 from Amazon tonight, so I don't think it's fair if I vote.


----------



## Jarmo

I don't have first-hand experience from either but here's a funny video about it.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11

I think that the d7000 beats the 60d, but not quite the 7D. To me, the only thing it has over the 7D thats worth noting is the dual card slots.


----------



## bobbyknight

Confused which would I get between the two
What I like the most about 7D is it's pure magnesium alloy body(though it's not bad for semi built D7000), dual digic 4 processor(faster processing in which it's also better in low light conditions or high iso)
On the other hand the D7000 has a slight larger sensor 15.8 x 23.6mm (APS-C) against 14.9 x 22.3mm (APS-C) of the 7D this will result in better image quality over all. Pixel density on the D7000 is better. Larger pixels, more light gathering capabilities.


----------



## KmH

Flip a coin. *Purchasing either one would be a correct choice*. :thumbup:


----------



## bobbyknight

:mrgreen: I actually love that very concise answer! :thumbup:


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11

Its really going to come down to personal taste, regardless of what anyone else tells you. However, I will add that the 7D also has better video (aside from the NIKON doing the continuous focus thing ) and AF. The Nikon has more points but the 7D has all cross-type points. Considering BHphoto has the d7000 body for $1200 I got my 7D body for $1450. I think I definately got $250 worth of more camera just in the solid construction, faster frame frate and better video. Once you consider the dual digic processors, the all cross type AF, higher resolution its really an easy decision.


----------



## KmH

bobbyknight said:


> ...pure magnesium alloy...


An oxymoron.

If it's pure, it cannot be an alloy. If it's an alloy, it isn't pure.


----------



## bobbyknight

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> Its really going to come down to personal taste, regardless of what anyone else tells you. However, I will add that the 7D also has better video (aside from the NIKON doing the continuous focus thing ) and AF. The Nikon has more points but the 7D has all cross-type points. Considering BHphoto has the d7000 body for $1200 I got my 7D body for $1450. I think I definately got $250 worth of more camera just in the solid construction, faster frame frate and better video. Once you consider the dual digic processors, the all cross type AF, higher resolution its really an easy decision.



More AF points for Nikon yet out of 39 it has only 9 cross type just like 60D. So I guess 7Ds 19 point all cross type can match of that D7000 if cannot outshine. I found this video though for D7000 and I realized it is having a hard time to auto focus. There's also a comparison with 7D video.
Definitely love the dual digic 4 processor of 7D!


----------



## bobbyknight

Nikon D7000 vs Canon EOS 7D - ISO Noise Comparison on Vimeo


http://vimeo.com/16639320


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11

Definately handles the noise slightly better in the video than the 7D. I would rather cap the video at 1600 ISO or even 3200 and be able to shoot at 30fps in 1080P which is broadcast standard. Here is a good article on the two...

Nikon D7000 vs. Canon 7D : Cheaper AND Better? » Light and Matter

Does anyone know if the D7000 can actually shoot 6 fps RAW? and not JPEG? The D300s advertises 8fps but can only do 2.5fps with RAW.


----------



## bobbyknight

Regarding the dead or hot pixels on the D7000, I assume it does exist with all older units of Nikon? I meant those who were assembled earliest upon launching.


----------



## fokker

Have you picked up either of these cameras yet? Pretty sure that few people told you to do that on the last poll you started. Once you hold both cameras and have a bit of a fiddle with them you should know instantly which one you want. Or just keep starting polls, I guess.


----------



## bobbyknight

Tbh not yet :mrgreen:
Will do, thanks for reminding me though lmao
but more than the grip or grasping I'm weighing down the differences, advantage and disadvantages
this is narrowed down than the first poll.


----------



## daarksun

You would be smokin' with either the D7000 or the 7D. I have the 7D but I am not biased to either product. I believe Pentax and Sony can also give incredible results. I find the 7D the best all around camera and the D7000 would be hot on its heals. 

It about you and what you want, where you want to go. Learn your camera and you will blow your mind with what comes out.  

Make sure the choice can do what you want now and maybe a ways down the road. You'll want to spend money on glass later so get the best "body" you can afford now. If you want video figure that in too. The new setup for the D7000 video is Nikon's best, but still not as nice as the results from the 7D or 5DmkII.  Personally, I have used the video side once just to try it out. But, it's there if a I need later.


----------



## bobbyknight

Exactly, get the best body that you can afford and I guess I made up my mind and I'm going for 7D. This will satisfy me for quite sometime. 
This is my first DSLR tbh. xD
Primarily the reason I'm going for this one is because of it's magnesium alloy construction and the dual digic 4 processor. I think it can be considered as a professional camera except for the missing full frame sensor still it is being complemented by other features, not a big deal without it.


----------



## mjhoward

bobbyknight said:


> *Can someone please enlighten me about the line of lenses for Canon    and  Nikon, cause I think there are differences between the two and you     should consider this also before choosing sides.*



Canon has a little bit wider selection of lenses (especially on the long end) and in general the newer models are a bit cheaper than the newer model Nikon equivalents.  The problem with Canon is that their older lenses (pre-'87) will not work on any new body.  Canon also has two different current mounts, the EF and the EF-S.  An EF-S lens mount is for a crop body only, you cannot mount an EF-S lens on a FF Canon.  

OTOH, a Nikon lens that is designed specifically for DX (crop) will work on an FX (FF) body, you'll just have to crop the image and discard the black and vignetted areas.  You can also use any older lens on any new body.  Most older lenses have screw drive AF where the AF motors are not built into the lens but instead the driver is built into the camera body.  The D7000 has the screw drive built in, so on these older lenses, you'll still have AF and be able to save a bundle over new lenses.  Older lenses are also very capable so don't think they get outdated like the electronics/tech on a camera body.

Canon also has a 1yr warranty and Nikon has a 5yr warranty.


----------



## bobbyknight

12 vs 14?! hmmm..


----------



## Village Idiot

KmH said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...pure magnesium alloy...
> 
> 
> 
> An oxymoron.
> 
> If it's pure, it cannot be an alloy. If it's an alloy, it isn't pure.
Click to expand...

 
Pure magnesium would be pretty on fire!


----------



## bobbyknight

Village Idiot said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...pure magnesium alloy...
> 
> 
> 
> An oxymoron.
> 
> If it's pure, it cannot be an alloy. If it's an alloy, it isn't pure.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Pure magnesium would be pretty on fire!
Click to expand...



I wonder if someone has tried to pour water
directly to D7000?

7D can handle this kind of test. Just stressing it out.


----------



## DxAxN

bobbyknight said:


> Village Idiot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KmH said:
> 
> 
> 
> An oxymoron.
> 
> If it's pure, it cannot be an alloy. If it's an alloy, it isn't pure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pure magnesium would be pretty on fire!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder if someone has tried to pour water
> directly to D7000?
> 
> 7D can handle this kind of test. Just stressing it out.
Click to expand...


buy a D7000 pour some water on it an let us know how it goes


----------



## bobbyknight

DxAxN said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Village Idiot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pure magnesium would be pretty on fire!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder if someone has tried to pour water
> directly to D7000?
> 
> 7D can handle this kind of test. Just stressing it out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> buy a D7000 pour some water on it an let us know how it goes
Click to expand...


Wow what a brilliant idea you have!


Nah, I'm asking anyone else over here if they knew this test has performed before on D7000. Thank for your suggestion though lol


----------



## DerekSalem

bobbyknight said:


> Exactly, get the best body that you can afford and I guess I made up my mind and I'm going for 7D. This will satisfy me for quite sometime.
> This is my first DSLR tbh. xD
> Primarily the reason I'm going for this one is because of it's magnesium alloy construction and the dual digic 4 processor. I think it can be considered as a professional camera except for the missing full frame sensor still it is being complemented by other features, not a big deal without it.



Err full frame sensor isn't what makes it a Pro camera...the 1D series isn't full frame either and it's the highest-end body that Canon makes (the 1Ds series is full frame, but also around $10k at launch). The 7D *is* a pro camera though (mainly designed for sports photography).


----------



## DerekSalem

bobbyknight said:


> DxAxN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder if someone has tried to pour water
> directly to D7000?
> 
> 7D can handle this kind of test. Just stressing it out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> buy a D7000 pour some water on it an let us know how it goes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow what a brilliant idea you have!
> 
> 
> Nah, I'm asking anyone else over here if they knew this test has performed before on D7000. Thank for your suggestion though lol
Click to expand...


I doubt anyone has since it's not weather-sealed...but that doesn't mean it couldn't handle a bit of rain. Even with the lowest of Rebels you could walk out in light rain without a problem. As long as you're not dousing it with water it'll keep functioning.

The difference, of course, comes if you want to walk out in hard rain, snow, or at locations that might get a lot of splashes (beach, boat, etc...)


----------



## bobbyknight

DerekSalem said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly, get the best body that you can afford and I guess I made up my mind and I'm going for 7D. This will satisfy me for quite sometime.
> This is my first DSLR tbh. xD
> Primarily the reason I'm going for this one is because of it's magnesium alloy construction and the dual digic 4 processor. I think it can be considered as a professional camera except for the missing full frame sensor still it is being complemented by other features, not a big deal without it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Err full frame sensor isn't what makes it a Pro camera...the 1D series isn't full frame either and it's the highest-end body that Canon makes (the 1Ds series is full frame, but also around $10k at launch). The 7D *is* a pro camera though (mainly designed for sports photography).
Click to expand...



Right, you actually made sense tbh 
Kudos!


----------



## bobbyknight

DerekSalem said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DxAxN said:
> 
> 
> 
> buy a D7000 pour some water on it an let us know how it goes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow what a brilliant idea you have!
> 
> 
> Nah, I'm asking anyone else over here if they knew this test has performed before on D7000. Thank for your suggestion though lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I doubt anyone has since it's not weather-sealed...but that doesn't mean it couldn't handle a bit of rain. Even with the lowest of Rebels you could walk out in light rain without a problem. As long as you're not dousing it with water it'll keep functioning.
> 
> The difference, of course, comes if you want to walk out in hard rain, snow, or at locations that might get a lot of splashes (beach, boat, etc...)
Click to expand...



They say it's a weather-proof camera(D7000)
THOUGH it's magnesium alloy is only at the upper and rear area.


----------



## bobbyknight

Just a thought:

the 60D is a much better action photography camera than the D7000.  If  you shoot Large/Fine JPEG, the d7000 fills up its buffer after about 15  to 18 frames.  Then it drops to 1 frame per second.  the Canon 60D on  the other hand will keep on firing at full frame rate for a  significantly longer period of time.  don&#8217;t be misled by the marketing  hype.  In order to get the 100 frames per second on the D7000, you have  to reduce image quality.


----------



## flea77

The magnesium on the D7000 appears to be the entire rear, entire top, and at least a small section of the front:







The 7D adds magnesium to the front:





Both have magnesium alloy in their grips. Both cameras are weather sealed. Here are some of the Nikon seal points:






Either camera will do a fine job, the D7000 is probably a little better at high ISO, the 7D is probably a little better at video. Both Nikon and Canon make excellent lenses for pretty much any occasion, both have excellent flashes. The Nikon is slightly less expensive for the body. 

If you want to compare prices, be sure you pick the lenses you will want from both manufacturers as well as flashes, then add the body and see who comes out cheapest.

Personally, how the camera fits in my hand, and how I like the menus and button layout means far more than some statistics, quantity of magnesium, price point, etc. I recommend you get both in your hand, play with them, and choose the one that YOU like better.

Neither one of these is going to make you a better photographer. Someone with a 7D may shoot far inferior images to someone with a D7000, or it could be the other way around. It is how the photographer interfaces with the camera with his skill and knowledge that makes the image.

Allan


----------



## flea77

bobbyknight said:


> Just a thought:
> 
> the 60D is a much better action photography camera than the D7000. If you shoot Large/Fine JPEG, the d7000 fills up its buffer after about 15 to 18 frames. Then it drops to 1 frame per second. the Canon 60D on the other hand will keep on firing at full frame rate for a significantly longer period of time. dont be misled by the marketing hype. In order to get the 100 frames per second on the D7000, you have to reduce image quality.


 
You are correct, one should not believe marketing hype, one should also be suspicious of people on forums 

Just for the sake of conversation I placed my D7000 right here in high speed mode, pointed it and held down the button. I got about 40 frames at full speed in large JPG, then it dropped to about 2 frames per second. 

Now even with all the sports I shoot I am having a hard time figuring out a scenerio where I would need almost seven seconds of continous firing with no pauses, which is probably why with two months of sports shooting under my belt with this camera I never even knew it would run into a wall at about fourty frames, LOL!

I should also note that I was in auto WB, full Dlighting, in a dark room pointed towards a light source so I would bet I could squeeze a little more out of her under different conditions with different settings.

Allan


----------



## bobbyknight

flea77 said:


> The 7D adds magnesium to the front:


*This is actually the backside of the camera, also its lens mount is made of metal.*


flea77 said:


> Both have magnesium alloy in their grips. Both cameras are weather sealed. Here are some of the Nikon seal points:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Either camera will do a fine job, the D7000 is probably a little better at high ISO, the 7D is probably a little better at video. Both Nikon and Canon make excellent lenses for pretty much any occasion, both have excellent flashes. The Nikon is slightly less expensive for the body.
> 
> If you want to compare prices, be sure you pick the lenses you will want from both manufacturers as well as flashes, then add the body and see who comes out cheapest.
> 
> Personally, how the camera fits in my hand, and how I like the menus and button layout means far more than some statistics, quantity of magnesium, price point, etc. I recommend you get both in your hand, play with them, and choose the one that YOU like better.
> 
> Neither one of these is going to make you a better photographer. Someone with a 7D may shoot far inferior images to someone with a D7000, or it could be the other way around. It is how the photographer interfaces with the camera with his skill and knowledge that makes the image.
> 
> Allan



*Tried them both and they felt solid on my hands. Good grip as well.

Most of the people are being blinded through prices comparisons anyway I guess. D7000 cannot be denied it is tbh a very good camera for an even very good price point that's why.* *
It's the reason why people are choosing it.
If you will look further, I guess it will incur you more money since Nikkor lenses are way pricey than Canon's with the same quality.
Thanks for your feedback.*


----------



## bobbyknight

flea77 said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just a thought:
> 
> the 60D is a much better action photography camera than the D7000. If you shoot Large/Fine JPEG, the d7000 fills up its buffer after about 15 to 18 frames. Then it drops to 1 frame per second. the Canon 60D on the other hand will keep on firing at full frame rate for a significantly longer period of time. dont be misled by the marketing hype. In order to get the 100 frames per second on the D7000, you have to reduce image quality.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flea77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are correct, one should not believe marketing hype, one should also be suspicious of people on forums
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *lmfao again you're making a lot of sense! sometimes they intend to be biased because they're using that specific model.*
> 
> 
> flea77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just for the sake of conversation I placed my D7000 right here in high speed mode, pointed it and held down the button. I got about 40 frames at full speed in large JPG, then it dropped to about 2 frames per second.
> 
> Now even with all the sports I shoot I am having a hard time figuring out a scenerio where I would need almost seven seconds of continous firing with no pauses, which is probably why with two months of sports shooting under my belt with this camera I never even knew it would run into a wall at about fourty frames, LOL!
> 
> I should also note that I was in auto WB, full Dlighting, in a dark room pointed towards a light source so I would bet I could squeeze a little more out of her under different conditions with different settings.
> 
> Allan
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *That is very unbelievable!*:hail:
> *40 frames?!*eacesign:
Click to expand...


----------



## flea77

bobbyknight said:


> flea77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 7D adds magnesium to the front:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *This is actually the backside of the camera, also its lens mount is made of metal.*
Click to expand...

 
Yep, that is why I said that the 7D _*adds*_ magnesium to the front, as in they both have Mg tops, they both have Mg backs, but the 7D _*adds*_ a Mg front as well. Both of them to my knowledge have metal lens mounts, the 7D is just Mg. Sorry for the confusion.

Allan


----------



## DerekSalem

Ok...Shooting in JPeg the D7000 shoots at 6fps and can sustain that for 40 frames. My 7D shoots at 8fps and can sustain it for 126 frames (I've personally hit around 135 before it started stuttering down to like 3-4fps). That doesn't matter at all because nobody's going to come to within even 40% of that most likely (the 40 frames...maybe, but not 126).

The problem comes in when you're using RAW. In RAW mode on Burst it only manages 15 frames before it starts to slow down (to around 2-3fps). Yes, that's still sufficient...but the D7000 only gets off 1/5 of that probably before it starts slowing down. For people doing Sports photography that's not sufficient...

But that's why the 7D is designed as a Sports photography camera. If you're shooting Sports you'll have a hard time finding a camera on the planet that will beat it unless you look at newest of the 1D-series.


----------



## bobbyknight

flea77 said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flea77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 7D adds magnesium to the front:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *This is actually the backside of the camera, also its lens mount is made of metal.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep, that is why I said that the 7D _*adds*_ magnesium to the front, as in they both have Mg tops, they both have Mg backs, but the 7D _*adds*_ a Mg front as well. Both of them to my knowledge have metal lens mounts, the 7D is just Mg. Sorry for the confusion.
> 
> Allan
Click to expand...


As far as I know the lens mount of D7000 is made up of plastic or polycarbonate resin, having said that, of course it's not just like your ordinary plastic lol


----------



## bobbyknight

D7000:


JPEG (Fine): 6 fps for 22 frames, then 2 frames at 3fps  captured every second (approx) up to 100 frames in total. Approx 10  seconds to recover.
JPEG (Normal): 6fps for 32 frames, then 4 frames at 4fps  (approx) followed by 2-3 frames at 5fps (approx) up to 100 frames.  Approx 10 seconds to recover.
RAW: 6 fps for 10 frames, then 2 frames at 2fps captured every 2-3 seconds.  16 seconds to recover.
RAW+ JPEG (Fine): 6 fps for 10 frames, then around 0.5 fps. Approx 22 seconds to recover.
       All tests conducted at 1/250 sec in AF-S mode with a 16GB Lexar Professional 133x Class 10 SDHC card.


----------



## flea77

bobbyknight said:


> *If you will look further, I guess it will incur you more money since Nikkor lenses are way pricey than Canon's with the same quality.*
> *Thanks for your feedback.*


 
In some cases that may be true, but in others not so much:

Canon 70-200 2.8L $1,376
Nikon 80-200 2.8D $1,099

Canon 70-300 4-5.6 IS USM $549
Nikon 70-300 4.5-5.6G VR $519

And you can't forget the DC lenses from Nikon that Canon has none of. Of course, you may not care about DC lenses so that may not matter. 

I would also argue your statement about them both having the same quality. Some lenses will be better from Canon, some from Nikon. That is why I would suggest you get a list together of not only bodies, but lenses and flashes and see not only the price difference, but quality, performance and ergonomics.

There is no "right" answer. There is no "this one is better than that one" except for each person. What works great for me may stink for you. Personally, I would take my D7000 over a 1Ds or 5D any day of the week because I can't stand Canon ergonomics, but that is a very personal choice, it has nothing to do with which body can take better pictures other than if I hate the camera I wont take ANY pictures, heh.

Allan


----------



## flea77

bobbyknight said:


> D7000:
> 
> 
> JPEG (Fine): 6 fps for 22 frames, then 2 frames at 3fps captured every second (approx) up to 100 frames in total. Approx 10 seconds to recover.
> JPEG (Normal): 6fps for 32 frames, then 4 frames at 4fps (approx) followed by 2-3 frames at 5fps (approx) up to 100 frames. Approx 10 seconds to recover.
> RAW: 6 fps for 10 frames, then 2 frames at 2fps captured every 2-3 seconds. 16 seconds to recover.
> RAW+ JPEG (Fine): 6 fps for 10 frames, then around 0.5 fps. Approx 22 seconds to recover.
> All tests conducted at 1/250 sec in AF-S mode with a 16GB Lexar Professional 133x Class 10 SDHC card.


 
My tests were at 1/2000 sec in AF-C mode (AFS may not fire if it does not think the subject is in focus and is a little slower IMO). I am also using a SanDisk Extreme 30MB/s card as opposed to your 20MB/s card. Lastly, I was shooting at ISO180 and I hear the higher the ISO the slower the shooting. Funny how the littlest things can make the biggest difference 

Allan


----------



## Sam6644

Anybody who thinks the D7000 is anywhere near the same league as the 7D has not used both bodies. And definitely hasn't used both of them for an extended period of time. 

There is A LOT more to comparing camera bodies than what you read on a specifications list or see on a chart. 


I agree that the 7000 and 60D are similar, but the 7D doesn't belong in that mix.


----------



## bobbyknight

DerekSalem said:


> The problem comes in when you're using RAW. In RAW mode on Burst it only manages 15 frames before it starts to slow down (to around 2-3fps). Yes, that's still sufficient...but the D7000 only gets off 1/5 of that probably before it starts slowing down. For people doing Sports photography that's not sufficient...
> 
> But that's why the 7D is designed as a Sports photography camera. If you're shooting Sports you'll have a hard time finding a camera on the planet that will beat it unless you look at newest of the 1D-series.



JPEG is the most common file format that we have today especially in  photographs due to its good quality to compression ratio. As stated,  JPEG is a compressed file format for storing realistic images like  photographs or paintings. Raw, on the other hand, is not necessarily a  file format. It is simply the output of direct from the sensor written  into a file without any processing or compression. In short, raw files are bigger.

D7000 cannot be justified it is closed of having competing with 7D.
People are being blinded by it's price point. 
I'd agree that maybe it surpasses 60D but it won't come close with 7D.


​


----------



## bobbyknight

flea77 said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> *If you will look further, I guess it will incur you more money since Nikkor lenses are way pricey than Canon's with the same quality.*
> *Thanks for your feedback.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In some cases that may be true, but in others not so much:
> 
> Canon 70-200 2.8L $1,376
> Nikon 80-200 2.8D $1,099
> 
> Canon 70-300 4-5.6 IS USM $549
> Nikon 70-300 4.5-5.6G VR $519
> 
> And you can't forget the DC lenses from Nikon that Canon has none of. Of course, you may not care about DC lenses so that may not matter.
> 
> I would also argue your statement about them both having the same quality. Some lenses will be better from Canon, some from Nikon. That is why I would suggest you get a list together of not only bodies, but lenses and flashes and see not only the price difference, but quality, performance and ergonomics.
> 
> There is no "right" answer. There is no "this one is better than that one" except for each person. What works great for me may stink for you. Personally, I would take my D7000 over a 1Ds or 5D any day of the week because I can't stand Canon ergonomics, but that is a very personal choice, it has nothing to do with which body can take better pictures other than if I hate the camera I wont take ANY pictures, heh.
> 
> Allan
Click to expand...



Agreed :thumbup:


----------



## bobbyknight

flea77 said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> D7000:
> 
> 
> JPEG (Fine): 6 fps for 22 frames, then 2 frames at 3fps captured every second (approx) up to 100 frames in total. Approx 10 seconds to recover.
> JPEG (Normal): 6fps for 32 frames, then 4 frames at 4fps (approx) followed by 2-3 frames at 5fps (approx) up to 100 frames. Approx 10 seconds to recover.
> RAW: 6 fps for 10 frames, then 2 frames at 2fps captured every 2-3 seconds. 16 seconds to recover.
> RAW+ JPEG (Fine): 6 fps for 10 frames, then around 0.5 fps. Approx 22 seconds to recover.
> All tests conducted at 1/250 sec in AF-S mode with a 16GB Lexar Professional 133x Class 10 SDHC card.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My tests were at 1/2000 sec in AF-C mode (AFS may not fire if it does not think the subject is in focus and is a little slower IMO). I am also using a SanDisk Extreme 30MB/s card as opposed to your 20MB/s card. Lastly, I was shooting at ISO180 and I hear the higher the ISO the slower the shooting. Funny how the littlest things can make the biggest difference
> 
> Allan
Click to expand...


:smileys:


----------



## flea77

Sam6644 said:


> Anybody who thinks the D7000 is anywhere near the same league as the 7D has not used both bodies. And definitely hasn't used both of them for an extended period of time.
> 
> There is A LOT more to comparing camera bodies than what you read on a specifications list or see on a chart.
> 
> 
> I agree that the 7000 and 60D are similar, but the 7D doesn't belong in that mix.


 
I certainly don't mean to dump on your personal choice of bodies, but I will have to disagree. You can check out:





 
Canon 7D vs Nikon D7000 - Flammable Comparison

Nikon D7000 vs. Canon EOS 7D - Could it be a 7D Killer? - DigitalRev.com

Nikon D7000 Vs Canon 7D - It's Not a Fair Contest Between Two Very Good Digital SLRs

It seems an aweful lot of people (including me) disagree with you and that the 7D is indeed a direct competitor to the D7000, in some cases being better than the 7D, in some cases not. Most of this will be a matter of personal choice, but to infer that the 7D is somehow in a league above the D7000 and is too good to directly compare, well that is just fantasy.

Allan


----------



## bobbyknight

If you are a huge fan of shooting in dark situations between the 7D and D7000 I would say the processing power of the 7D will keep it in check and  between the 7D and D7000 there might not be much difference. 
Even D7000 features a new 2,016-segment RGB light metering system, it still suffers from over exposure in a very bright lit environment and its focusing mode is inaccurate and contains error.
Out of 39 point AF system, it has only 9 cross types while 7D has 19 all of them.


----------



## mjhoward

DerekSalem said:


> The problem comes in when you're using RAW. In RAW mode on Burst it only manages 15 frames before it starts to slow down (to around 2-3fps). Yes, that's still sufficient...but the D7000 only gets off 1/5 of that probably before it starts slowing down. For people doing Sports photography that's not sufficient...



I get 14 Frames at 6fps on 14-bit RAW + Fine JPEG before the buffer fills and it gets around 1fps.  Unless you've got absolutely horrible timing on hitting that shutter, it's plenty for most people.



Sam6644 said:


> Anybody who thinks the D7000 is anywhere near the same league as the 7D has not used both bodies. And definitely hasn't used both of them for an extended period of time.



You are clearly misinformed.  Is it the higher dynamic range of the D7K that doesn't put it in the same league?  Or perhaps the larger sensor?  Maybe it is the better metering and flash system?  Sure the 7D has its strengths, but you might want to take off the Canon fanboi blinders and realize the strenghts of the D7K as well.  If ergonomics is your argument, its a highly subjective one and my experience has shown Nikon to have better ergonomics.  Your experience clearly differs.


----------



## flea77

bobbyknight said:


> If you are a huge fan of shooting in dark situations between the 7D and D7000 I would say the processing power of the 7D will keep it in check and between the 7D and D7000 there might not be much difference.


 
Actually, in dark areas is where the D7000 will shine, with it's superior latitude and much better high ISO performance.



bobbyknight said:


> Even D7000 features a new 2,016-segment RGB light metering system, it still suffers from over exposure in a very bright lit environment and its focusing mode is inaccurate and contains error.
> Out of 39 point AF system, it has only 9 cross types while 7D has 19 all of them.


 
While it is true that the 7D has more cross type sensors, this is only useful at f2.8 whereas the vertical sensors work at other f-stops as well. This actually give the advantage to the D7000. Even if cross types were twice as effective, that gives the 7D 38 lines (19 cross types x2 lines each) where the D7000 would have 48 (9 sensors at 2 lines = 18 lines, plus 30 for a total of 48 lines) with a newer and better metering computer to back them up.

Now you may think that the cross type sensors being better for sports would make the 7D a better sports camera. I disagree. When I shoot sports (Baseball, basketball, football, swimming, cycling, etc) I typically use either a single point or a very small area so the number of points makes no difference at all, but the advanced AF computer on the D7000 can. With huge masses of players at different distances all filling up a frame I use a single point usually to make sure the one with the ball is the one in focus, I sure don't want the other players in focus because a few cross type focus points suddenly decided that player is the one to watch.

Allan


----------



## bobbyknight

flea77 said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you are a huge fan of shooting in dark situations between the 7D and D7000 I would say the processing power of the 7D will keep it in check and between the 7D and D7000 there might not be much difference.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flea77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, in dark areas is where the D7000 will shine, with it's superior latitude and much better high ISO performance.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *"There might not be of much difference" *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even D7000 features a new 2,016-segment RGB light metering system, it still suffers from over exposure in a very bright lit environment and its focusing mode is inaccurate and contains error.
> Out of 39 point AF system, it has only 9 cross types while 7D has 19 all of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flea77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> While it is true that the 7D has more cross type sensors, this is only useful at f2.8 whereas the vertical sensors work at other f-stops as well. This actually give the advantage to the D7000. Even if cross types were twice as effective, that gives the 7D 38 lines (19 cross types x2 lines each) where the D7000 would have 48 (9 sensors at 2 lines = 18 lines, plus 30 for a total of 48 lines) with a newer and better metering computer to back them up.
> 
> Now you may think that the cross type sensors being better for sports would make the 7D a better sports camera. I disagree. When I shoot sports (Baseball, basketball, football, swimming, cycling, etc) I typically use either a single point or a very small area so the number of points makes no difference at all, but the advanced AF computer on the D7000 can. With huge masses of players at different distances all filling up a frame I use a single point usually to make sure the one with the ball is the one in focus, I sure don't want the other players in focus because a few cross type focus points suddenly decided that player is the one to watch.
> 
> Allan
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *This is very lame, you're implying here that D7000 is better as a sports camera, have you forgotten 7Ds 8fps continuous shooting pairing with its dual digic 4 processor, you have no idea how powerful it could be.
> About the AF systems, I'd say D7000 can at least compete to 7D but not entirely beat it.*
Click to expand...


----------



## DVC Mike

The Canon 7D is a great camera. I happen to have a Nikon D7000, but I'd be perfectly happy with a 7D.


----------



## flea77

bobbyknight said:


> *"There might not be of much difference" *


 
Ahh, but there is quite a difference. At least to my eyes.




bobbyknight said:


> *This is very lame, you're implying here that D7000 is better as a sports camera, have you forgotten 7Ds 8fps continuous shooting pairing with its dual digic 4 processor, you have no idea how powerful it could be.*
> *About the AF systems, I'd say D7000 can at least compete to 7D but not entirely beat it.*


 
No, I am saying that in the real world, the D7000 AF system is as good or better than the 7D _when shooting sports_. The 7D has the advantage in FPS, the D7000 has the advantage in high ISO, the 7D has the advantage in better build, the D7000 has the advantage in dual card slots, etc etc etc.

Allan


----------



## DerekSalem

flea77 said:


> Sam6644 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anybody who thinks the D7000 is anywhere near the same league as the 7D has not used both bodies. And definitely hasn't used both of them for an extended period of time.
> 
> There is A LOT more to comparing camera bodies than what you read on a specifications list or see on a chart.
> 
> 
> I agree that the 7000 and 60D are similar, but the 7D doesn't belong in that mix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I certainly don't mean to dump on your personal choice of bodies, but I will have to disagree. You can check out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Canon 7D vs Nikon D7000 - Flammable Comparison
> 
> Nikon D7000 vs. Canon EOS 7D - Could it be a 7D Killer? - DigitalRev.com
> 
> Nikon D7000 Vs Canon 7D - It's Not a Fair Contest Between Two Very Good Digital SLRs
> 
> It seems an aweful lot of people (including me) disagree with you and that the 7D is indeed a direct competitor to the D7000, in some cases being better than the 7D, in some cases not. Most of this will be a matter of personal choice, but to infer that the 7D is somehow in a league above the D7000 and is too good to directly compare, well that is just fantasy.
> 
> Allan
Click to expand...


Uhh...once again the 7D was made with a very specific purpose in mind: Sports Photography. Try photographing sports with both bodies and find out they're not even *remotely* in the same class.

8fps burst is the second highest burst in the game (with the 1D-series beating it at 10fps). The D300s can burst at 8fps but only if you buy the "power pack" and put in an higher performance battery or connect it to the wall for power. *FULL* weather-sealing (which becomes necessary for many sporting events). Better type of noise (they're almost on par in terms of low-light ability...but the noise that the D7000 puts out is *very* hard to correct whereas I can quite easily correct the noise my 7D puts out at ISO12800). CompactFlash card. No fighting it CF still takes the cake in terms of memory cards. Full Magnesium-alloy body...not just the frame. The *LENS MOUNT* isn't even magnesium-alloy on the D7000...do we not think that's important??

I'm not hating on the D7000, but it's not in the same league as the 7D for Sports photography or any type of photography that utilizes it's strengths. The 60D is more on par with the D7000.


----------



## DerekSalem

mjhoward said:


> DerekSalem said:
> 
> 
> 
> The problem comes in when you're using RAW. In RAW mode on Burst it only manages 15 frames before it starts to slow down (to around 2-3fps). Yes, that's still sufficient...but the D7000 only gets off 1/5 of that probably before it starts slowing down. For people doing Sports photography that's not sufficient...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I get 14 Frames at 6fps on 14-bit RAW + Fine JPEG before the buffer fills and it gets around 1fps.  Unless you've got absolutely horrible timing on hitting that shutter, it's plenty for most people.
> 
> 
> 
> Sam6644 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anybody who thinks the D7000 is anywhere near the same league as the 7D has not used both bodies. And definitely hasn't used both of them for an extended period of time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are clearly misinformed.  Is it the higher dynamic range of the D7K that doesn't put it in the same league?  Or perhaps the larger sensor?  Maybe it is the better metering and flash system?  Sure the 7D has its strengths, but you might want to take off the Canon fanboi blinders and realize the strenghts of the D7K as well.  If ergonomics is your argument, its a highly subjective one and my experience has shown Nikon to have better ergonomics.  Your experience clearly differs.
Click to expand...


Hmm...much of your post is contrary to what almost all reviews say...I'll break it down:

14 frames of RAW+JPG? Really? I haven't seen a single reviewer that has ever gotten over 10 (usually lower). I'll admit, I don't use RAW+JPG so I never tested it when I was playing with the D7K but even shooting *JUST* RAW I didn't break 10fps.

As for the rest...what? Considering mostly every review on the planet (and my own tests and research) have found the IQ of both camera bodies to be nearly identical (both using kit lenses...which makes the tests somewhat skewed) I have a hard time caring about the slightly larger sensor (the Nikon is 23.6x15.6 and I think the Canon is like 22.9x14.7 or something). Better metering and flash system? I'm sorry...what? What exactly is better about the metering and flash system...since I've never seen a difference and nor has any reviewer that I've read. Higher Dynamic range? I'm also almost positive this isn't true...it just includes higher saturation and vibrance by default.

In terms of ergonomics...very few people would agree with you that the Nikon is better in terms of form. Even the video flea keeps linking talks about the better form of the 7D multiple times. They *also* continuously say that the 7D focuses faster and better. He says he doesn't have the facts to back it up but the 7D feels much more responsive and focuses almost instantaneously.


----------



## cfusionpm

flea77 said:


> Now you may think that the cross type sensors being better for sports would make the 7D a better sports camera. I disagree. When I shoot sports (Baseball, basketball, football, swimming, cycling, etc) I typically use either a single point or a very small area so the number of points makes no difference at all, but the advanced AF computer on the D7000 can. With huge masses of players at different distances all filling up a frame I use a single point usually to make sure the one with the ball is the one in focus, I sure don't want the other players in focus because a few cross type focus points suddenly decided that player is the one to watch.


 
There's a setting for that in the 7D. C.Fn III: Autofocus/Drive, option #3: AI Servo AF tracking method. 

Choices are Main focus point priority ("The active AF point will switch to the main focus point and start focusing the closer subject. Convenient when you always want to focus the closest subject") 

and Continuous AF track priority ("Any closer subject appearing in the picture will be ignored as an obstruction. The main focus point does not take priority, so the tracking of the target can continue and switch to an adjacent AF point based on the preceeding focusing result. Convenient when obsticals such as telephone poles go in front of the target subject.")

Found on pg 210 of the EOS 7D manual.


----------



## flea77

DerekSalem said:


> Uhh...once again the 7D was made with a very specific purpose in mind: Sports Photography. Try photographing sports with both bodies and find out they're not even *remotely* in the same class.


 
I have, thank you very much. My wife's boss uses 7Ds and I have used them. 



DerekSalem said:


> 8fps burst is the second highest burst in the game (with the 1D-series beating it at 10fps). The D300s can burst at 8fps but only if you buy the "power pack" and put in an higher performance battery or connect it to the wall for power.


 
I have several times acknowledged the 7Ds superiority at FPS, it is just not that important to me. Some how I still manage to get my shots with two less FPS. Would I _like_ the D7000 to have more? Sure, why not. Is it more important to me than high ISO performance? No way!



DerekSalem said:


> *FULL* weather-sealing (which becomes necessary for many sporting events).


 
I have never seen this as necessary. When it is pouring down rain, I will use the correct rain gear for myself, and my equipment, just like I have done since the mid eighties.



DerekSalem said:


> Better type of noise (they're almost on par in terms of low-light ability...but the noise that the D7000 puts out is *very* hard to correct whereas I can quite easily correct the noise my 7D puts out at ISO12800).


 
Completely disagree. The noise I saw from the 7D looked like abstract art. My D7000 puts out fantastic images from 6400, and useable from 12800 with one pass of Topaz Denoise 5 (for sports, weddings and commercial is a whole different story with the D7000 still one stop better). Admittedly the images from 25600 look pretty poor, even after noise reduction, I would test the 7D at that ISO but since it can't go that high, I can't.



DerekSalem said:


> CompactFlash card. No fighting it CF still takes the cake in terms of memory cards.


 
I will take dual SD over single CF any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Automatic, real time backup. A card completely fails you in your 7D right after a game, you look like a moron to your client. A card completely fails me right after a game, I laugh, whip out the second card and carry on. And forget sports here, what about a wedding?



DerekSalem said:


> Full Magnesium-alloy body...not just the frame. The *LENS MOUNT* isn't even magnesium-alloy on the D7000...do we not think that's important??


 
Not going to argue that it sure is something I would _like_, but then I never had a lens come off my FG, FA, FM, N90s, D70, D80, D90 or D7000 and I use 80-200s sometimes with 1.4 teles on them, 24-70 2.8s, etc, so I am not real sure how much I would really _need_ it. 



DerekSalem said:


> I'm not hating on the D7000, but it's not in the same league as the 7D for Sports photography or any type of photography that utilizes it's strengths. The 60D is more on par with the D7000.


 
And I am not hating on the 7D, but virtually every review I have read, and my personal experience with the 7D and D7000, say the two are very evenly matched. If you disagree with me and all the reviews I linked to, that is your right of course.

Of course we probably should not even get into the D7000's superior metering, superior AF computer, or it's superior latitude with no speed penalty.

As I have always maintained, they are both excellent cameras, and they both can do an excellent job. Both have pros and cons, and neither is clearly in a league above the other. In my opinion, anyone who thinks one clearly stomps the other is simply a fanboi.

Allan


----------



## flea77

DerekSalem said:


> As for the rest...what? Considering mostly every review on the planet (and my own tests and research) have found the IQ of both camera bodies to be nearly identical (both using kit lenses...which makes the tests somewhat skewed) I have a hard time caring about the slightly larger sensor (the Nikon is 23.6x15.6 and I think the Canon is like 22.9x14.7 or something).


 
Yep, I agree, right up to ISO 6400 (see the video review I quoted you for a side by side comparison). In that review it is so small it is hard to see the 6400 differences, but the 12800 is very obvious even in that little tiny video.



DerekSalem said:


> Better metering and flash system? I'm sorry...what? What exactly is better about the metering and flash system...since I've never seen a difference and nor has any reviewer that I've read.


 
D7000 uses the world's first 2,016 segment RGB meter. The 7D uses a 63 zone system with color measurement (probably a B&W meter with luminance). 

As for the flash system, I really don't know as I have never used Canon's flash system. The Nikon CLS is really cool and all but I am more of a manual flash kind of guy.



DerekSalem said:


> In terms of ergonomics...very few people would agree with you that the Nikon is better in terms of form. Even the video flea keeps linking talks about the better form of the 7D multiple times. They *also* continuously say that the 7D focuses faster and better. He says he doesn't have the facts to back it up but the 7D feels much more responsive and focuses almost instantaneously.


 
Ergonomics, that is VERY personal and subjective. For me, I would rather dig a ditch to earn the money to buy a D7000 to use rather than be given a 7D for free. I hate the ergonomics of all Canon equipment and have since the AE-1 Program. I am not saying that means Nikon has superior ergonomics, I am saying that means Nikon has superior ergonomics _for me_.

I believe the video states he _thinks_ the 7D _feels_ faster but he has no proof to back that up. Of course feeling is part of what makes you like or dislike a camera, but then it would depend on lens speed as well would it not? Not once did I hear him say the Nikon was slow, or that the 7D was _substantially_ faster.

I am sorry you can not see that the D7000 has some advantages over the 7D, but it seems you have no problem seeing the advantages the 7D has over the D7000. Interesting you own the 7D is it not?

Allan


----------



## flea77

cfusionpm said:


> There's a setting for that in the 7D. C.Fn III: Autofocus/Drive, option #3: AI Servo AF tracking method.


 
I never meant to imply the 7D could not do what I did. I was mearly pointing out that when you set your AF to a very small area or one single point for sports photography like I do, the number of cross type sensors becomes a non-issue. This means in sports, the way I shoot them, the 7D is actually at a disadvantage to the D7000 as far as AF goes (the AF computer on the D7000 is more advanced, mainly because it is a year and a half newer, than the one on the 7D).

Allan


----------



## prodigy2k7

flea77 said:


> D7000 uses the world's first 2,016 segment RGB meter. The 7D uses a 63 zone system with color measurement (*probably a B&W meter with luminance*).



Its dual layer, 63 zone system, pretty sure its not B&W. The auto focus system is tied into the metering system as well. Even if you only use 1 auto focus point, all of the actual points are always active and relay information to the metering system on whats in focus, and what isn't. The metering system is able to better identify the subject and how much of the frame it takes up etc...


----------



## AverageJoe

Why isn't the Fun Saver up for the poll?


----------



## cfusionpm

flea77 said:


> I never meant to imply the 7D could not do what I did. I was mearly pointing out that when you set your AF to a very small area or one single point for sports photography like I do, the number of cross type sensors becomes a non-issue. This means in sports, the way I shoot them, the 7D is actually at a disadvantage to the D7000 as far as AF goes (the AF computer on the D7000 is more advanced, mainly because it is a year and a half newer, than the one on the 7D).
> 
> Allan


So does that mean the D7000 has better and more accurate AF than the 1DmkIV or D3s? Since it's more than a year newer than both of those, it should be better, right? Going by that logic? 

In all seriousness though, I think it would be interesting to see some kind of AF comparison tests.


----------



## Destin

bobbyknight said:


> Just a thought:
> 
> the 60D is a much better action photography camera than the D7000.  If  you shoot Large/Fine JPEG, the d7000 fills up its buffer after about 15  to 18 frames.  Then it drops to 1 frame per second.  the Canon 60D on  the other hand will keep on firing at full frame rate for a  significantly longer period of time.  dont be misled by the marketing  hype.  In order to get the 100 frames per second on the D7000, you have  to reduce image quality.



I wanna know how often anyone really needs to shoot 18 frames at full speed. I can't think of a sport where that is needed. You usually go for a burst of MAYBE 5-10 frames. Unless of course your just holding the shutter down for the entire play like a moron.


----------



## Destin

prodigy2k7 said:


> flea77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> D7000 uses the world's first 2,016 segment RGB meter. The 7D uses a 63 zone system with color measurement (*probably a B&W meter with luminance*).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its dual layer, 63 zone system, pretty sure its not B&W. The auto focus system is tied into the metering system as well. Even if you only use 1 auto focus point, all of the actual points are always active and relay information to the metering system on whats in focus, and what isn't. The metering system is able to better identify the subject and how much of the frame it takes up etc...
Click to expand...


All Canon meters are B&W meters. None of their camera's have color meters, at least to my knowledge. I read this somewhere, but I don't remember where. I wanna say it was in the D7000 review on dpreview


----------



## cfusionpm

Destin said:


> prodigy2k7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flea77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> D7000 uses the world's first 2,016 segment RGB meter. The 7D uses a 63 zone system with color measurement (*probably a B&W meter with luminance*).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its dual layer, 63 zone system, pretty sure its not B&W. The auto focus system is tied into the metering system as well. Even if you only use 1 auto focus point, all of the actual points are always active and relay information to the metering system on whats in focus, and what isn't. The metering system is able to better identify the subject and how much of the frame it takes up etc...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All Canon meters are B&W meters. None of their camera's have color meters, at least to my knowledge. I read this somewhere, but I don't remember where. I wanna say it was in the D7000 review on dpreview
Click to expand...

 
The color-aware iFCL Metering system is used in every camera since the 7D (550D/Rebel T2i, 7D, 1DmkIV, and 60D). 

"_The EOS 7D SLR features an iFCL 63-zone Dual-layer Metering Sensor. The FCL stands for Focus, Colour and Luminance and hints at the fact that the metering system not only measures colour and luminance data, but also analyses the data provided by each point of the AF system. _

_The metering sensor has 63 measurement zones and is a Dual-layer design with each layer sensitive to different wavelengths of light. Electronic sensors in general are more sensitive to red light. This means when photographing subjects with lots of red in them  skin tones for example  the sensor receives a stronger signal as it only detects brightness levels. This can lead to the wrong assumption that there is more light than there really is. _

_The Dual-layer system overcomes this by having one layer sensitive to red/green light and one layer sensitive to blue/green light. Both these layers measure the light in their respective spectra and the metering algorithm then combines the two to provide an accurate light reading. In this way, accurate exposures can be attained in a wide range of shooting situations and irrespective of the colour of the subject being metered. _

_To work with the iFCL metering sensor, the EOS 7D also features a specific metering algorithm. The EOS 7D always measures focus with all AF points regardless of the selected AF mode. During the exposure reading the EOS 7D looks to see which points, in addition to the selected point, have achieved or almost achieved focus. This information lets the camera know which part of the image is the subject. It then takes metering readings from the zones corresponding to the AF points that have achieved (or almost achieved) focus and combines them with readings from all the other zones. This allows for consistent shot-to-shot exposure, even in complex situations  for example, where there are reflections from a models glasses._ "

Canon Professional Network - iFCL metering

May not be as advanced as Nikon's brand new metering system, but it doesn't sound black & white to me.


----------



## bobbyknight

Destin said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just a thought:
> 
> the 60D is a much better action photography camera than the D7000.  If  you shoot Large/Fine JPEG, the d7000 fills up its buffer after about 15  to 18 frames.  Then it drops to 1 frame per second.  the Canon 60D on  the other hand will keep on firing at full frame rate for a  significantly longer period of time.  dont be misled by the marketing  hype.  In order to get the 100 frames per second on the D7000, you have  to reduce image quality.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wanna know how often anyone really needs to shoot 18 frames at full speed. I can't think of a sport where that is needed. You usually go for a burst of MAYBE 5-10 frames. Unless of course your just holding the shutter down for the entire play like a moron.
Click to expand...



I'm not implying if how often or anyone does really needs to shoot 18 frames at full speed, I'm just stating and signifying the *fact. 
*Don't *delude* the significance of what you just quoted.*eacesign:
*


----------



## bobbyknight

flea77 said:


> D7000 uses the world's first 2,016 segment RGB meter. The 7D uses a 63 zone system with color measurement (probably a B&W meter with luminance).
> 
> 
> 
> Allan


Its funny and ironic how even D7000 features a new 2,016-segment RGB light metering system, and its being claimed as the best and more sophisticated, suffers from over exposure in a very bright lit environment and  its focusing mode is inaccurate and contains error.

Canon 7D's iFCL, or Intelligent Focus Color Luminosity metering system has 63 zones, and they are linked to the 19 autofocus points. Sound  familiar? The metering sensor has two layers: the top is sensitive to  Red and Green, and the bottom layer to Blue and Green. So it can measure  a full spectrum of RGB, rather than just luminosity; and when it  compares the data between the AF system and its own color system, the  Canon 7D has a better understanding of the image area; not only what  colors there are, but what is where.  They make up for the normal foibles of silicon sensors by detecting Red  and compensating for silicon's red sensitivity, which gives it a  tendency to overexpose red objects. The Canon 7D's meter, now having  color vision, can make the necessary change.

The Canon 7D also uses the color information to better identify objects,  merging that information with the AF sensor data -- which tells the  Canon 7D not only which AF areas are in focus, but which areas are out  of focus -- to calculate an object's total range of distances; in that  way it can set the aperture to keep that object in focus, if desired. 
The color information also becomes important when trying to focus more  accurately when shooting under unusual light sources, like sodium  lights, whose unusual spectrum often fools AF systems into back-focusing  significantly. When light sources like these are detected, though, the  Canon 7D can compensate.


----------



## flea77

bobbyknight said:


> Its funny and ironic that even D7000 features a new 2,016-segment RGB light metering system, and its being claimed as the best, suffers from over exposure in a very bright lit environment and its focusing mode is inaccurate and contains error.


 
What's funny is that any camera, and I mean ANY camera, when faced with enough latitude will either lose data in the shadows, or blow out highlights. On the Nikon, turn on ADL and except for very extreme conditions I have no problem with over exposure.

As for the focus, I find it to be dead on and fast as heck. Just as fast, and just as accurate as the 7D I have used.



bobbyknight said:


> Canon 7D's iFCL, or Intelligent Focus Color Luminosity metering system has 63 zones, and they are linked to the 19 autofocus points. Sound familiar? The metering sensor has two layers: the top is sensitive to Red and Green, and the bottom layer to Blue and Green. So it can measure a full spectrum of RGB, rather than just luminosity; and when it compares the data between the AF system and its own color system, the Canon 7D has a better understanding of the image area; not only what colors there are, but what is where. They make up for the normal foibles of silicon sensors by detecting Red and compensating for silicon's red sensitivity, which gives it a tendency to overexpose red objects. The Canon 7D's meter, now having color vision, can make the necessary change.
> 
> The Canon 7D also uses the color information to better identify objects, merging that information with the AF sensor data -- which tells the Canon 7D not only which AF areas are in focus, but which areas are out of focus -- to calculate an object's total range of distances; in that way it can set the aperture to keep that object in focus, if desired.
> The color information also becomes important when trying to focus more accurately when shooting under unusual light sources, like sodium lights, whose unusual spectrum often fools AF systems into backfocusing significantly. When light sources like these are detected, though, the Canon 7D can compensate.


 
Now what is really funny is that this is a direct quote from Canon EOS 7D Digital Camera - Full Review - The Imaging Resource! which you failed to mention, and then you omit certain things, such as



> Nikon uses this same type of data to track objects moving through the image area, augmenting their continuous focus mode. Canon does not. They have other fish to fry. First, they make up for the normal foibles of silicon sensors by detecting Red and compensating for silicon's red sensitivity, which gives it a tendency to overexpose red objects. The Canon 7D's meter, now having color vision, can make the necessary change.


 
So according to the article you were so kind to quote, Nikon uses the same type of color data merged with it's AF system. Note in the first paragraph you quoted the comment about "Sound familiar?" The comment is made because the 7D adopted the same principle that Nikon was already using. If the Nikon system was so bad (pre D7000), why would Canon copy it? So would you rather use the all new D7000 metering/AF system or the Canon copy of the older Nikon system? 

Now all this aside, and despite all the errors and problems you report with the D7000, I have been using mine for months now and have had nothing but stellar results. The high ISO performance stomps the images I was getting from the 7D, the AF and metering from BOTH cameras provided me with excellent results. No matter how much you try to bash the D7000 it still keeps on providing images that both my clients and I are proud to have. And that my friend, is all that really matters.

Allan


----------



## flea77

cfusionpm said:


> So does that mean the D7000 has better and more accurate AF than the 1DmkIV or D3s? Since it's more than a year newer than both of those, it should be better, right? Going by that logic?
> 
> In all seriousness though, I think it would be interesting to see some kind of AF comparison tests.


 
I am sincerely hoping all that was in jest, because if not, well I think it speaks for itself.

Allan


----------



## bobbyknight

DVC Mike said:


> The Canon 7D is a great camera. I happen to have a Nikon D7000, but I'd be perfectly happy with a 7D.


Kudos!


----------



## bobbyknight

flea77 said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> Its funny and ironic that even D7000 features a new 2,016-segment RGB light metering system, and its being claimed as the best, suffers from over exposure in a very bright lit environment and its focusing mode is inaccurate and contains error.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's funny is that any camera, and I mean ANY camera, when faced with enough latitude will either lose data in the shadows, or blow out highlights. On the Nikon, turn on ADL and except for very extreme conditions I have no problem with over exposure.
> 
> As for the focus, I find it to be dead on and fast as heck. Just as fast, and just as accurate as the 7D I have used.
> 
> 
> 
> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> Canon 7D's iFCL, or Intelligent Focus Color Luminosity metering system has 63 zones, and they are linked to the 19 autofocus points. Sound familiar? The metering sensor has two layers: the top is sensitive to Red and Green, and the bottom layer to Blue and Green. So it can measure a full spectrum of RGB, rather than just luminosity; and when it compares the data between the AF system and its own color system, the Canon 7D has a better understanding of the image area; not only what colors there are, but what is where. They make up for the normal foibles of silicon sensors by detecting Red and compensating for silicon's red sensitivity, which gives it a tendency to overexpose red objects. The Canon 7D's meter, now having color vision, can make the necessary change.
> 
> The Canon 7D also uses the color information to better identify objects, merging that information with the AF sensor data -- which tells the Canon 7D not only which AF areas are in focus, but which areas are out of focus -- to calculate an object's total range of distances; in that way it can set the aperture to keep that object in focus, if desired.
> The color information also becomes important when trying to focus more accurately when shooting under unusual light sources, like sodium lights, whose unusual spectrum often fools AF systems into backfocusing significantly. When light sources like these are detected, though, the Canon 7D can compensate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now what is really funny is that this is a direct quote from Canon EOS 7D Digital Camera - Full Review - The Imaging Resource! which you failed to mention, and then you omit certain things, such as
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nikon uses this same type of data to track objects moving through the image area, augmenting their continuous focus mode. Canon does not. They have other fish to fry. First, they make up for the normal foibles of silicon sensors by detecting Red and compensating for silicon's red sensitivity, which gives it a tendency to overexpose red objects. The Canon 7D's meter, now having color vision, can make the necessary change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So according to the article you were so kind to quote, Nikon uses the same type of color data merged with it's AF system. Note in the first paragraph you quoted the comment about "Sound familiar?" The comment is made because the 7D adopted the same principle that Nikon was already using. If the Nikon system was so bad (pre D7000), why would Canon copy it? So would you rather use the all new D7000 metering/AF system or the Canon copy of the older Nikon system?
> 
> Now all this aside, and despite all the errors and problems you report with the D7000, I have been using mine for months now and have had nothing but stellar results. The high ISO performance stomps the images I was getting from the 7D, the AF and metering from BOTH cameras provided me with excellent results. No matter how much you try to bash the D7000 it still keeps on providing images that both my clients and I are proud to have. And that my friend, is all that really matters.
> 
> Allan
Click to expand...


And that is what it is called, sarcasm my friend :mrgreen:
I'm not trying to bash D7000, just making a point on some sensible facts, thankies.


----------



## cfusionpm

flea77 said:


> cfusionpm said:
> 
> 
> 
> So does that mean the D7000 has better and more accurate AF than the 1DmkIV or D3s? Since it's more than a year newer than both of those, it should be better, right? Going by that logic?
> 
> In all seriousness though, I think it would be interesting to see some kind of AF comparison tests.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am sincerely hoping all that was in jest, because if not, well I think it speaks for itself.
> 
> Allan
Click to expand...

It's all in jest.  I'm just poking fun. :cheers:


----------



## mjhoward

DerekSalem said:


> Hmm...much of your post is contrary to what almost all reviews say...I'll break it down:
> 
> 14 frames of RAW+JPG? Really?



I checked my camera, the 14 continuous shots I was remembering was for JPEG Fine only.  I do get 9fps (according to the remaining buffer indicator) with 14 Bit RAW + JPEG Fine.  Still a lot more than the 1/5 or 3 continuous shots you originally stated and still plenty for most people that need to 'spray and pray'.



DerekSalem said:


> I have a hard time caring about the slightly larger sensor (the Nikon is 23.6x15.6 and I think the Canon is like 22.9x14.7 or something).



You may not care about a larger sensor, but with the pixel pitch of the 7D being 4.16um and the pitch of the D7K being 4.73um, I'll take the extra ~29.3% light collecting abilities that the D7K sensor offers.



DerekSalem said:


> Better metering and flash system? I'm sorry...what? What exactly is better about the metering and flash system...since I've never seen a difference and nor has any reviewer that I've read.



Really???  Are you sure you've used both systems?  It's a pretty well known fact that Nikon has a much more consistent and reliable flash system.



DerekSalem said:


> Higher Dynamic range? I'm also almost positive this isn't true...it just includes higher saturation and vibrance by default.



Here is a chart showing objective test results of only the sensor.  This does not include any camera settings as only RAW data is analyzed:









DerekSalem said:


> In terms of ergonomics...very few people would agree with you that the Nikon is better in terms of form. Even the video flea keeps linking talks about the better form of the 7D multiple times. They *also* continuously say that the 7D focuses faster and better. He says he doesn't have the facts to back it up but the 7D feels much more responsive and focuses almost instantaneously.



Says you.  Again, ergonomics is subjective.  I happen to find the ergonomics of Nikon to be better.  The video linked provides one man's opinion... just like mine.

BTW, the argument for whether or not the 7D is a better sports shooter might be better answered by asking whether or not you need faster shutter speed or better low light (high ISO) capabilities rather than FPS in burst (Spray and pray).


----------



## flea77

bobbyknight said:


> Destin said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wanna know how often anyone really needs to shoot 18 frames at full speed. I can't think of a sport where that is needed. You usually go for a burst of MAYBE 5-10 frames. Unless of course your just holding the shutter down for the entire play like a moron.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not implying if how often or anyone does really needs to shoot 18 frames at full speed, I'm just stating and signifying the *fact. *
> Don't *delude* the significance of what you just quoted.*eacesign:*
Click to expand...

 
Actually no you are not. I can not make my D7000 stall after only 18 frames, it is MUCH higher. Maybe you have an issue with your card, or with your settings, but either way you have some kind of problem, it is NOT the D7000. Instead of arguing the point with you, I will put a video camera where my mouth is:





 
In the video you can clearly hear way more than 18 frames, and if you actually care to count you should count 71 clicks, the last two or three being stuttered to about 2FPS which leaves at least 68 or so solid frames at 6FPS. 

Allan

PS. run the video at 720HD and pause at 59 sec to read the screen that shows it to be JPG, Fine, Large on the menu.


----------



## flea77

mjhoward said:


> Here is a chart showing objective test results of only the sensor. This does not include any camera settings as only RAW data is analyzed:


 
Thanks, I could not for the life of me find that stupid chart!

WOW! +2 EV around ISO100, that is HUGE!

Allan


----------



## DerekSalem

flea77 said:


> cfusionpm said:
> 
> 
> 
> There's a setting for that in the 7D. C.Fn III: Autofocus/Drive, option #3: AI Servo AF tracking method.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never meant to imply the 7D could not do what I did. I was mearly pointing out that when you set your AF to a very small area or one single point for sports photography like I do, the number of cross type sensors becomes a non-issue. This means in sports, the way I shoot them, the 7D is actually at a disadvantage to the D7000 as far as AF goes (the AF computer on the D7000 is more advanced, mainly because it is a year and a half newer, than the one on the 7D).
> 
> Allan
Click to expand...


Actually the focusing "computer" completely covers exactly what you're saying it doesn't. You seem to quote a lot of specifications or facts about the bodies but in reality they don't matter...it's the results. On the 7D you can set an area-spot type focusing system (basically it uses Spot focus, but also enables the 4 points surrounding it so that even if you're not following the target 100% of the time it'll continue to track it...even if it goes behind something else for a short time. This is *FAR* more advanced than anything enabled on the D7000 and much more useful for sports).

And you're going to quibble over the fact that the guy said "he has no proof"? If it feels faster...that's about all that matters. Having used both bodies for full events (you said your wife's boss owns a 7D...but that doesn't mean you've used it for more than 5 minutes) I can say that the 7D seems to focus *much* quicker (using comparable lenses - both 70-200 f/2.8 top of the line from the respective companies). How do I know? Because when I was using the D7000 there were times that while focusing on something I was wishing I had my 7D. Yes, I realize how subjective and possibly bias that is...but I'm not the first person to say it. One of my good friends is a Nikon user (professional wedding photographer...and by professional I mean part-owns a company that does more business than any other Cleveland company I know of) and agreed with me completely. He owns a D7000 and when we traded for a day (both of us were at the game) he said more than a few times how impressed he was at the focusing system.

Overall, you're calling me a hypocrite for telling you *why* it's in a different level as far as Sports photography goes. I'm not saying the D7000 is a bad camera...and I'm not saying it's on par with the 7D in many respects...I'm just saying that if you're going to use one or the other for Sports photography...there's no choice. Would I use my 7D for a wedding? Well I have before...but if I didn't own either and I had to choose...I'd go with a full-frame anyway.


----------



## DerekSalem

mjhoward said:


> DerekSalem said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm...much of your post is contrary to what almost all reviews say...I'll break it down:
> 
> 14 frames of RAW+JPG? Really?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I checked my camera, the 14 continuous shots I was remembering was for JPEG Fine only.  I do get 9fps (according to the remaining buffer indicator) with 14 Bit RAW + JPEG Fine.  Still a lot more than the 1/5 or 3 continuous shots you originally stated and still plenty for most people that need to 'spray and pray'.
> 
> 
> 
> DerekSalem said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have a hard time caring about the slightly larger sensor (the Nikon is 23.6x15.6 and I think the Canon is like 22.9x14.7 or something).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You may not care about a larger sensor, but with the pixel pitch of the 7D being 4.16um and the pitch of the D7K being 4.73um, I'll take the extra ~29.3% light collecting abilities that the D7K sensor offers.
> 
> 
> 
> Really???  Are you sure you've used both systems?  It's a pretty well known fact that Nikon has a much more consistent and reliable flash system.
> 
> 
> 
> DerekSalem said:
> 
> 
> 
> Higher Dynamic range? I'm also almost positive this isn't true...it just includes higher saturation and vibrance by default.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here is a chart showing objective test results of only the sensor.  This does not include any camera settings as only RAW data is analyzed:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DerekSalem said:
> 
> 
> 
> In terms of ergonomics...very few people would agree with you that the Nikon is better in terms of form. Even the video flea keeps linking talks about the better form of the 7D multiple times. They *also* continuously say that the 7D focuses faster and better. He says he doesn't have the facts to back it up but the 7D feels much more responsive and focuses almost instantaneously.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Says you.  Again, ergonomics is subjective.  I happen to find the ergonomics of Nikon to be better.  The video linked provides one man's opinion... just like mine.
> 
> BTW, the argument for whether or not the 7D is a better sports shooter might be better answered by asking whether or not you need faster shutter speed or better low light (high ISO) capabilities rather than FPS in burst (Spray and pray).
Click to expand...


Well I admit I was incorrect on the dynamic range...that's impressive. I didn't know there was a difference like that. I never noticed much of a difference in my own shots but I'll have to go back and check. Pretty impressive stuff.

As for the flash system...I didn't use use the flash system with the D7000 so my own testing was seeing the differences with Nikon's other bodies and end results of the D7000 from one of my friends. The flash system seems to be identical to the wireless E-TTL that I use on my 7D...and no reviews mention a superior flash system. The wireless E-TTL that the 7D is finally on par with the wireless system Nikon's been using for quite awhile. It's the first (and I believe the only) body that Canon makes that handles the system internally (as opposed to needing a "Master" flash or unit).

And yes, ergonomics are subjective...but that was definitely not the only review saying the 7D felt better. Out of the 5-6 major reviews I read all of them either said they liked the feel and ergonomics of the 7D better or didn't mention the topic at all more than saying they're both good.

As far as shutter speed and iso capabilities...ISO25600 on the D7000 is utter trash unless you put *HEAVY* PP into it and make nothing bigger than a 4x6. You can't possibly say the 7D doesn't have ISO25600 as a con...since it's just as worthless on the D7k. At ISO12800 both bodies produce *completely* usable images straight out-of-camera if you meter correctly. The difference is that the type of noise I get out of my 7D was much easier to remove (while retaining detail) than the noise I got out of the D7000. I know flea said otherwise...but all I can go off of is my own testing on this one. Yes, it's easy to remove the noise on either camera...but removing noise is trivial if you can't retain the detail of the image.


----------



## DerekSalem

Forgot my first point in the reply...you don't actually get ~29.3% extra light...That would mean it's a full third-stop brighter...which isn't the case. It's not a linear line of some kind. At the same shutter speed, same aperture, and same ISO setting...both cameras seem to let in the same amount of light. That means the extra distance between pixel points on the sensor is irrelevant. Considering at 100% crop there's no decrease in IQ it really doesn't matter that the sensor is slightly smaller


----------



## bobbyknight

Check out the differences with their continuous burst 

D7000:





60D:





Which is better? Not referring about the speed...


----------



## flea77

bobbyknight said:


> Check out the differences with their continuous burst
> 
> D7000:
> 
> 60D:
> 
> Which is better? Not referring about the speed...


 
The problem here is I have no idea what the settings are, or what card is used. They don't say a word. I will assume that since you went finding other people's videos on YouTube that you don't actually have a D7000 to test with the settings I showed you in my video.

However if you want to see videos of the D7000's burst rate with no real information as to what the settings are, so be it! Check out:





 
at 8:06 or so you can clearly hear WAY more than 18 frames at 6fps.

Allan


----------



## bobbyknight

flea77 said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> Check out the differences with their continuous burst
> 
> D7000:
> 
> 60D:
> 
> Which is better? Not referring about the speed...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem here is I have no idea what the settings are, or what card is used. They don't say a word. I will assume that since you went finding other people's videos on YouTube that you don't actually have a D7000 to test with the settings I showed you in my video.
> 
> However if you want to see videos of the D7000's burst rate with no real information as to what the settings are, so be it! Check out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> at 8:06 or so you can clearly hear WAY more than 18 frames at 6fps.
> 
> Allan
Click to expand...


There's no problem about third party videos and reviews, at least you can be sure of nothing's biased? I can clearly hear those music to your ears :mrgreen:


----------



## bobbyknight

Destin said:


> prodigy2k7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flea77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> D7000 uses the world's first 2,016 segment RGB meter. The 7D uses a 63 zone system with color measurement (*probably a B&W meter with luminance*).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its dual layer, 63 zone system, pretty sure its not B&W. The auto focus system is tied into the metering system as well. Even if you only use 1 auto focus point, all of the actual points are always active and relay information to the metering system on whats in focus, and what isn't. The metering system is able to better identify the subject and how much of the frame it takes up etc...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All Canon meters are B&W meters. None of their camera's have color meters, at least to my knowledge. I read this somewhere, but I don't remember where. I wanna say it was in the D7000 review on dpreview
Click to expand...



This is completely false.


----------



## Ginu

I think both cameras have their ups and downs; personally I would go with a Nikon just because I like the way it fits in my hand, menu setup, layout of the body and lets not forget the lens collection. 
What good is a Cannon D7 if I have 4k+ invested into Nikkor lens and vice-versa?

The common denominator is they both take awesome photos, just depends on the hand taking the photos for the most part.


----------



## bobbyknight

Now you're talkin'


----------



## kasperjd4

I chose the D7000 over the 7D a few months ago. Since everything was pretty close I chose the D7000 because I really liked the way it fit in my hand and how the buttons were set up. With the 7D I felt like I had to constantly take the camera away from my face to see what buttons I was pushing. The D7000 just seemed more ergonomic to me. I really think it's personal preferance when it comes down to it between the two.


----------



## inaka

I went with the D7000 as well. It's hard to explain but it just "feels right" in my hand when shooting. I personally don't think you can go wrong with either, but you have to remember that you're locking yourself into that brand of lenses in the future in case you have access to older lenses for sale, etc.


----------



## UUilliam

If canon added the noise handling like Nikons, I would deffo go canon.

I am a canon man but the noise is a problem!
However, I have developed my own method (which is quite reliable for noise reduction so, it isn't too much of a problem for me now .)
to get rid of noise.

but i say nikon.


----------



## bobbyknight

kasperjd4 said:


> I chose the D7000 over the 7D a few months ago. Since everything was pretty close I chose the D7000 because I really liked the way it fit in my hand and how the buttons were set up. With the 7D I felt like I had to constantly take the camera away from my face to see what buttons I was pushing. The D7000 just seemed more ergonomic to me. I really think it's personal preferance when it comes down to it between the two.




This is entirely on personal preference. 


What will you choose between the two, with a good ergonomics but a not so good quality of features and results 
or a not so good ergonomics with a good features and results?


----------



## bobbyknight

UUilliam said:


> If canon added the noise handling like Nikons, I would deffo go canon.
> 
> I am a canon man but the noise is a problem!
> However, I have developed my own method (which is quite reliable for noise reduction so, it isn't too much of a problem for me now .)
> to get rid of noise.
> 
> but i say nikon.




You own 450D, hmmmm...
So, you're saying that between the two giant manufacturers there is a  modest difference with the noise in low light still images?:scratch:


----------



## flea77

bobbyknight said:


> This is entirely on personal preference.
> 
> 
> What will you choose between the two, with a good ergonomics but a not so good quality of features and results
> or a not so good ergonomics with a good features and results?


 
Fortunately, I personally got both with the D7000, excellent ergonomics for me, and great quality of features and results.

But, to answer your question, ergonomics is the top priority because regardless of how good a camera is, if it is a pain in the rear to use, I won't use it, regardless of results. If all I was ever concerned with was quality I would always be shooting large format film (except sports of course), but my large format stuff only comes out to play in commercial and fine art(LOL) work.

Allan


----------



## bobbyknight

flea77 said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is entirely on personal preference.
> 
> 
> What will you choose between the two, with a good ergonomics but a not so good quality of features and results
> or a not so good ergonomics with a good features and results?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fortunately, I personally got both with the D7000, excellent ergonomics for me, and great quality of features and results.
> 
> But, to answer your question, ergonomics is the top priority because regardless of how good a camera is, if it is a pain in the rear to use, I won't use it, regardless of results. If all I was ever concerned with was quality I would always be shooting large format film (except sports of course), but my large format stuff only comes out to play in commercial and fine art(LOL) work.
> 
> Allan
Click to expand...


It's good to hear you got it both with D7000 xD

Personally, it should be balanced.
So you earn a living from it.
Will you post some of your work if you wouldn't mind.


----------



## o hey tyler

OP: YOU CAN'T GO WRONG WITH EITHER CAMERA. THERE'S A LOT OF INACCURATE INFORMATION IN THIS THREAD. JUST GET THE CAMERA YOU ARE LEANING TOWARDS, WHICH SOUNDS LIKE THE 7D. 

Anyone who's trying to make you buy a particular brand over another is really just showing brand loyalty and is unable to look at it from a 3rd person perspective.


----------



## bobbyknight

o hey tyler said:


> OP: YOU CAN'T GO WRONG WITH EITHER CAMERA. THERE'S A LOT OF INACCURATE INFORMATION IN THIS THREAD. JUST GET THE CAMERA YOU ARE LEANING TOWARDS, WHICH SOUNDS LIKE THE 7D.
> 
> Anyone who's trying to make you buy a particular brand over another is really just showing brand loyalty and is unable to look at it from a 3rd person perspective.



:thumbup: 
lmfao I guess you're correct. I realized people on here intend to just base their perspective, the proper or accurate point of view or the ability to see it is kinda blurred and biased to the brand they've been into.
*Better judgement has been clouded.*


----------



## o hey tyler

Jeeze, while reading this thread I was thinking that you must be more deterred to buy a Nikon solely based on the persistence of actual Nikon owners. On top of that, Nikon owners that were citing false information about Canon without looking up actual facts. 

Whichever camera you get, you'll be happy with it. My girlfriend is currently saving for a 7D herself to upgrade from her T1i. Good luck on your buying venture. :thumbup:


----------



## bobbyknight

o hey tyler said:


> Jeeze, while reading this thread I was thinking that you must be more deterred to buy a Nikon solely based on the persistence of actual Nikon owners. On top of that, Nikon owners that were citing false information about Canon without looking up actual facts.
> 
> Whichever camera you get, you'll be happy with it. My girlfriend is currently saving for a 7D herself to upgrade from her T1i. Good luck on your buying venture. :thumbup:




haha yeah! People really intend to be ridiculously funny at times.
Thanks Tyler! Regards to your lady. :hugs:


----------



## flea77

bobbyknight said:


> Will you post some of your work if you wouldn't mind.


Here is one from today:







There are lots more at the link to my website in my sig line below.

Allan


----------



## bobbyknight

kewl.
so for this particular shot, i assume you used the D7000?


----------



## Talihubba

I my self, like the 7D over D7000.
Imo it has a better grib, better sound (lol that's just canon overall) better "looks".
Butter camera wise, i think it's the same


----------



## UUilliam

bobbyknight said:


> UUilliam said:
> 
> 
> 
> If canon added the noise handling like Nikons, I would deffo go canon.
> 
> I am a canon man but the noise is a problem!
> However, I have developed my own method (which is quite reliable for noise reduction so, it isn't too much of a problem for me now .)
> to get rid of noise.
> 
> but i say nikon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You own 450D, hmmmm...
> So, you're saying that between the two giant manufacturers there is a  modest difference with the noise in low light still images?:scratch:
Click to expand...


I am not sure what you are trying to say.
Are you asking for my opinion or stating that I do not have a valid opinion as I own a 450D (and a 20D if you looked at my signature)?

It is just a fact, nikon handle noise much better than canon.
Watch the video links posted earlier and you will see the difference.
as I stated though, I have developed my own method to reduce nois, but it is not efficient to do it to all my images, therfore, the less noise in the original image,the better.


----------



## bobbyknight

UUilliam said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UUilliam said:
> 
> 
> 
> If canon added the noise handling like Nikons, I would deffo go canon.
> 
> I am a canon man but the noise is a problem!
> However, I have developed my own method (which is quite reliable for noise reduction so, it isn't too much of a problem for me now .)
> to get rid of noise.
> 
> but i say nikon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You own 450D, hmmmm...
> So, you're saying that between the two giant manufacturers there is a  modest difference with the noise in low light still images?:scratch:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am not sure what you are trying to say.
> Are you asking for my opinion or stating that I do not have a valid opinion as I own a 450D (and a 20D if you looked at my signature)?
> 
> It is just a fact, nikon handle noise much better than canon.
> Watch the video links posted earlier and you will see the difference.
> as I stated though, I have developed my own method to reduce nois, but it is not efficient to do it to all my images, therfore, the less noise in the original image,the better.
Click to expand...



And you're referring to all the models of Canon?

Maybe I am trying to say that your opinion is invalid lol


----------



## bobbyknight

Noticed you have that link for Recuva, my external hard disk was being damage and all the files contained cannot be opened, I'm currently using Minitool Power Data Recovery Free Edition but it takes forever to retrieved my files it is very slow.

I wonder if Recuva is better?


----------



## bobbyknight

Is the weight of 7D a big deal?


----------



## o hey tyler

bobbyknight said:


> Is the weight of 7D a big deal?



I carry around a gripped 5D, so I probably wouldn't be too put off by the weight of the 7D. 

Keep in mind, my girlfriend is getting a 7D, and she uses my 5D regularly. The weight shouldn't be an issue, unless you're a girl (and a very out of shape one at that).


----------



## DirtyDFeckers

I have been using a 7d for quite some time to shoot basketball games for our local paper.  Love it.  It feels amazing in your hands.  If you go to cameralabs.com, they did an in depth review of the d7000 and tested each of its features.  I would check it out.  But more importantly, I would go somewhere and get both of them in your hands... whichever one feels better is the one i would go with, as they are both amazing pieces of equipment.


----------



## hrry

Check out Chase Jarvis testing the d7000.


----------



## bobbyknight

o hey tyler said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is the weight of 7D a big deal?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I carry around a gripped 5D, so I probably wouldn't be too put off by the weight of the 7D.
> 
> Keep in mind, my girlfriend is getting a 7D, and she uses my 5D regularly. The weight shouldn't be an issue, unless you're a girl (and a very out of shape one at that).
Click to expand...

 

lmfao I'm pretty sure I'm not a girl.

Maybe you'll get used to it's extra weight over time, I guess.:thumbup:


----------



## bobbyknight

DirtyDFeckers said:


> I have been using a 7d for quite some time to shoot basketball games for our local paper.  Love it.  It feels amazing in your hands.  If you go to cameralabs.com, they did an in depth review of the d7000 and tested each of its features.  I would check it out.  But more importantly, I would go somewhere and get both of them in your hands... whichever one feels better is the one i would go with, as they are both amazing pieces of equipment.




I've done that already and I'd say they're both good feel in the hands but I like 7D better, good ergonomics.
Just been bothered by its extra weight, but given and justified by its entirely made body of magnesium alloy which I like and prefer the most because its surely is tough and durable not to mention its speed and dual digic processors.
Maybe I'll get used to its extra weight over time.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11

bobbyknight said:


> DirtyDFeckers said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have been using a 7d for quite some time to shoot basketball games for our local paper. Love it. It feels amazing in your hands. If you go to cameralabs.com, they did an in depth review of the d7000 and tested each of its features. I would check it out. But more importantly, I would go somewhere and get both of them in your hands... whichever one feels better is the one i would go with, as they are both amazing pieces of equipment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've done that already and I'd say they're both good feel in the hands but I like 7D better, good ergonomics.
> Just been bothered by its extra weight, but given and justified by its entirely made body of magnesium alloy which I like and prefer the most because its surely is tough and durable not to mention its speed and dual digic processors.
> Maybe I'll get used to its extra weight over time.
Click to expand...

 
For the love of god, buy the 7D and let this  thread die already. :gah:


----------



## bobbyknight

D7000 original straight out of the card








D7000 processed and edited






D7000 original straight out of the card






D7000 processed and edited


----------



## o hey tyler

The photos you just posted can be achieved though any camera body. Whether it be 7D or D7k.


----------



## o hey tyler

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> For the love of god, buy the 7D and let this  thread die already. :gah:


 
Also, this. ^


----------



## bobbyknight

o hey tyler said:


> The photos you just posted can be achieved though any camera body. Whether it be 7D or D7k.


 

Yeah I know, that's from Chase Jarvis review of the D7K. While maybe it's true that it performs well in the low light, it also have some like over exposed images in the broad daylight.


----------



## DerekSalem

UUilliam said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UUilliam said:
> 
> 
> 
> If canon added the noise handling like Nikons, I would deffo go canon.
> 
> I am a canon man but the noise is a problem!
> However, I have developed my own method (which is quite reliable for noise reduction so, it isn't too much of a problem for me now .)
> to get rid of noise.
> 
> but i say nikon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You own 450D, hmmmm...
> So, you're saying that between the two giant manufacturers there is a  modest difference with the noise in low light still images?:scratch:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am not sure what you are trying to say.
> Are you asking for my opinion or stating that I do not have a valid opinion as I own a 450D (and a 20D if you looked at my signature)?
> 
> *It is just a fact, nikon handle noise much better than canon.*
> Watch the video links posted earlier and you will see the difference.
> as I stated though, I have developed my own method to reduce nois, but it is not efficient to do it to all my images, therfore, the less noise in the original image,the better.
Click to expand...

 
What on God's Earth are you talking about? You're generalizing entire brands? LOL most ridiculous thing I've read on this forum in quite awhile. Every single model performs differently...some Canon beat Nikon, some Nikon beat Canon.

On a separate note, it's a proven fact that Ford cars are faster and better looking than Chevy cars.


----------



## bobbyknight

DerekSalem said:


> UUilliam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> You own 450D, hmmmm...
> So, you're saying that between the two giant manufacturers there is a  modest difference with the noise in low light still images?:scratch:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not sure what you are trying to say.
> Are you asking for my opinion or stating that I do not have a valid opinion as I own a 450D (and a 20D if you looked at my signature)?
> 
> *It is just a fact, nikon handle noise much better than canon.*
> Watch the video links posted earlier and you will see the difference.
> as I stated though, I have developed my own method to reduce nois, but it is not efficient to do it to all my images, therfore, the less noise in the original image,the better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What on God's Earth are you talking about? You're generalizing entire brands? LOL most ridiculous thing I've read on this forum in quite awhile. Every single model performs differently...some Canon beat Nikon, some Nikon beat Canon.
> 
> On a separate note, it's a proven fact that Ford cars are faster and better looking than Chevy cars.
Click to expand...


:lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## bobbyknight




----------



## DxAxN

SO... have you decided which one you are going to buy?


----------



## bobbyknight

Just curious, how do you do the noise reduction processing, like for example you're just using some point and shoot camera 
I assume through some sort of software like photoshop. 
Any tutorials xD


----------



## ghache

lol, this thread is ridiculous, plenty of people have a 7d and are hppy with it. get over it. these are 2 great camera.


----------



## ToMaNyToYsJf

These whole thread just royaly screwed w my head. I was just getting ready to post a thread on which camera I should go with next lol. With my original budget being up to $1500 I started to look at the canon 60d and the D7k. One thing I really loved having was the pop out LCD. It's so little and un important to most but idk I loved it on my previous. Anyways I went to best buy and saw a canon 7d and started to play with that and was impressed so while in bb I found this thread and just got overwhelmed lol. Now idk what to do! I was really leaning on the 60d arghhhh


----------



## mhk1058

It all depends what you want the camera for. If you are concerned about image quality and rarely print above A4, save a bunch of money and get a D90 and spend the money on what will really make a difference to your pictures. Low light quality is on a par with the D7000 as well. If you need HD movies, slightly higher max FPS, part mag alloy body and the (very) few other extras, get the D7000.


----------



## ToMaNyToYsJf

I really don't care about video. For some reason I thought the 60d was an upgrade from the 90?


----------



## loveDSLR

I shoot with a Canon 7D. In love with it.


----------



## bobbyknight

ToMaNyToYsJf said:


> These whole thread just royaly screwed w my head. I was just getting ready to post a thread on which camera I should go with next lol. With my original budget being up to $1500 I started to look at the canon 60d and the D7k. One thing I really loved having was the pop out LCD. It's so little and un important to most but idk I loved it on my previous. Anyways I went to best buy and saw a canon 7d and started to play with that and was impressed so while in bb I found this thread and just got overwhelmed lol. Now idk what to do! I was really leaning on the 60d arghhhh


 

So what was your decision? I hope this thread helped you? 
Before I was opting for 60D but I realized when Ive been doing some research about its specs its more likely a just a little upgrade from 550D which is more cheaper I think its not wise to opt for 60D. So I'm down to 7D or D7k. If you'll buy 60D then I think you just better go for 550D. I'd agree that D7K is superior a bit than 60D with its features.


----------



## Village Idiot

The 5D MKII is better.


----------



## TylerV85

I have the Canon 5d Mark II. I believe it to be superior to the 7d for what I do, which is wedding photography. However, I'm looking to buy a 7d to start shooting sports. The 5d Mark II is extremely slow in my opinion and is not very good for sports.

For those who have used the 7d, my questions involves a review I read from Ken Rockwell. He states the biggest flaw of the 7d is that when the autofocus points generates the black circles/ovals (not sure which, I have never used it) the points do not disappear even after you have established focus and are ready to shoot. He claims that because the points do not disappear it is a distraction to his composition. He even claims that he sometimes can't even tell what his subjects expression is after he is focusing because he can't see them? I'm guessing this is a bit of an exaggeration. But, I was wanting to know the thoughts of those who own the camera and what you think of this.

By the way, this thread is a bit crazy. It doesn't really matter what camera is better. Today, cameras are so much better than what they were yesterday. In general, there are MUCH more important things to consider when you are trying to improve your photographs. Lenses are 1000% more important than cameras. Lighting is 1000% more important than cameras. Before you have what you need in those categories stick to your old nikon or canon before upgrading. I'm pretty sure I can still make some great images even with an older 20D, but I could not without my 24-70 f/2.8L Of course, this is just my opinion.

Tyler
Wedding and Portrait Photography


----------



## bobbyknight

The only quite significant advantage of 5D Mark II over 7D would be the full frame sensor.
It compensates with other advanced features and can say 7D can compete with this full frame sensor body.


----------



## RockstarPanda1718

I vote for the canon!!!


----------



## bobbyknight

haha did you already one or just planning to buy yet? xD


----------



## DerekSalem

TylerV85 said:


> I have the Canon 5d Mark II. I believe it to be superior to the 7d for what I do, which is wedding photography. However, I'm looking to buy a 7d to start shooting sports. The 5d Mark II is extremely slow in my opinion and is not very good for sports.
> 
> For those who have used the 7d, my questions involves a review I read from Ken Rockwell. He states the biggest flaw of the 7d is that when the autofocus points generates the black circles/ovals (not sure which, I have never used it) the points do not disappear even after you have established focus and are ready to shoot. He claims that because the points do not disappear it is a distraction to his composition. He even claims that he sometimes can't even tell what his subjects expression is after he is focusing because he can't see them? I'm guessing this is a bit of an exaggeration. But, I was wanting to know the thoughts of those who own the camera and what you think of this.
> 
> By the way, this thread is a bit crazy. It doesn't really matter what camera is better. Today, cameras are so much better than what they were yesterday. In general, there are MUCH more important things to consider when you are trying to improve your photographs. Lenses are 1000% more important than cameras. Lighting is 1000% more important than cameras. Before you have what you need in those categories stick to your old nikon or canon before upgrading. I'm pretty sure I can still make some great images even with an older 20D, but I could not without my 24-70 f/2.8L Of course, this is just my opinion.
> 
> Tyler
> http://www.kvtphoto.com]Wedding and Portrait Photography[/url]


 

Well I own the 7D and I've used the 5D Mark II and the focusing system is no more noticeable in the 7D than the 5D. It doesn't get in the way at all and absolutely would never make it so you couldn't see the expression on someone's face...it's a hair-thin line that could not possibly block any amount of sight. I don't get why he would say that.


----------



## bobbyknight

So Nikon D5100 arrives, what about this one?


----------



## ghache

bobbyknight said:


> So Nikon D5100 arrives, what about this one?



Lets say it not that appealing. Considering the buttons layout and controls.


----------



## o hey tyler

OH my **** just buy a camera already! 
7D or D7000, both are good! STOP BUMPING THIS THREAD.


----------



## Overread

I think what o hey tyler is trying to say it that you're really overthinking this choice and its been several months already . At this rate well be onto the 7DM2 and whatever the D7000 upgrades to before you've made a choice. 

Just put both names into a hat - go to the shop - pick one out of the hat and buy that one - and then get shooting


----------



## ghache

he didnt bought one yet? zomg.....


----------



## Overread

If he has then he hasn't made a thread about it - and if its a comment its lost in 9 pages of stuff


----------



## BJPhotography

I just bought the D7000 about three weeks ago.


----------



## Stradawhovious

BJPhotography said:


> I just bought the D7000 about three weeks ago.



Cool.  Now will you please mail it to BobbyKnight so this thread will die?

Thx.


----------



## bobbyknight

lol I'm not bumping this thread matter of fact I do rarely check this now I didn't bought one yet as I'm waiting for the new model that will be coming out whichever from the two brand names, I think it'll be really interesting for the next model considering the specs of the two xD


----------



## kvskpin

TylerV85 said:


> For those who have used the 7d, my questions involves a review I read from Ken Rockwell. He states the biggest flaw of the 7d is that when the autofocus points generates the black circles/ovals (not sure which, I have never used it) the points do not disappear even after you have established focus and are ready to shoot. He claims that because the points do not disappear it is a distraction to his composition. He even claims that he sometimes can't even tell what his subjects expression is after he is focusing because he can't see them? I'm guessing this is a bit of an exaggeration. But, I was wanting to know the thoughts of those who own the camera and what you think of this.
> 
> Tyler
> Wedding and Portrait Photography


 
Hi,
Mr. Ken Rockwell is a proven Nikon fanboy. So, take his comments on Canon SLRs with a pinch of salt. I personally own a 7D and it makes for an excellent camera. True that the AF-points are big and they don't disappear, but, I never faced a problem because of them. Never. The flip side of it is, it is rather an advantage than a disadvantage, because you have a continuous idea of where and what the camera is focussed upon, right from the time the subject is focussed to the time the snap is taken. If the AF point was to disappear after focussing, then, you may tend to loose of it. And it is certainly not annoying as Ken has concluded.

My most preferred mode of AF on the 7D is spot focus with a single point AF and i have programmed the joy stick to shift the AF point - Works like a dream.

If you are 5D user, I am sure you cannot differentiate between both of them, the feeling in the hand and the controls (other than the on-off button that is) are amazingly similar. And I bet, under normal ISO ranges (100-800), they perform alike. You will be at ease with the 7D

Cheers
Prasad


----------



## Southtown57

I vote 7D but you need to match it against Nikon's D300s to be in the same league. Both are excellent cameras though, just pick one and be happy with it.


----------



## kvskpin

I own a 7D and have tried the D7000 on atleast 5 different occasions in various camera stores. Each time I held the D7000, I tested it, tried it for atleast 30 mins with multiple settings and here are my observations. With due respect to Ken Rockwell and a few others who have given a thumbs up to the Nikon D7000, I have to admit that all is not well with the D7000. Agreed that the sensor is new and produces less noise at ISO 3200 and up when compared to any other camera in the market, I want to ask everyone, how much work is carried out at the dizzy ISO levels upward of 3200?? And again, the performance if the other SLRs is not that bad - an amateur cannot pick the difference between the results and only pixel peeping on snaps shot above 3200 will suggest for some minute difference - Big deal !! Having said that, one has to appreciate Nikon for a step in the right direction, however small or big.

Coming to the real issues on the D7000. I want to meet a professional shooter who is least interested to know the ISO before and while a shot is taken. If you are one of them, D7000 is for you. Please look elsewhere otherwise for Nikon thinks that ISO is not an important parameters to notify the shooters about it on the viewfinder before a shot is taken. What a bummer !! What it means is everytime you take the camera out of the bag, you need to have a look at the LCD screen, then compose the image, then re-adjust the ISO by looking at the LCD and then take your shot. By not having the ISO setting on the View Finder, Nikon has goofed it up big time. Cannot imagine people having to toggle between the LCD (which by the way is on the top and the view finder).

The next issue on the same lines with the ISO is probably more generic to the Nikon SLRs in general and the same thing getting on with the D7000. Nikon has been miserly in terms of adding buttons on the cameras - They prefer to use the same button for multiple purposes rather than have an easier way of having dedicated buttons for some of the critical functions. One of the example being, to change ISO, you would need to press the ISO button and move the jog dial when the button is pressed. You cannot do that with a single hand. It gets even more complicated as the view finder doesn't show the info on ISO. So, you need to invariable start looking at the LCD, keep the ISO button pressed and then start to move the dial to change the ISO - All of this can be done on any Canon with your right hand alone, without having to take off your eye from the viewfinder and on the fly. Button layouts on the Nikon are tad difficult. The shutter button is another suspect - It is too soft according to my liking and has a tendency to take a few shots accidentally. With technology so advanced these days, wonder why companies cannot let the shutter softness / hardness be set by the user - believe it is going to be very basic.

This is probably the most debated point about the D7000 and related to the metering aspect of it. Take it this way, the D7000 not just tends to, but, seriously blows the highlights. To get any detail out of brigher areas of the photograph, one would need to keep it atleast 1-1.5 stops below normal. At it's default settings, ideas to shoot on a bright sunny day need to be reconsidered. Not just on a bright sunny day, even indoors if there is any area of high contrast. While it is true that this can be adjusted to a fair degree and we can get good results, but, at the default settings, it is a really bad idea to shoot contrast. Get an ND4 filter by default on all your lenses !!

In terms of AF speed, yes, the AF looks exceptional on paper, but, on all instances, the 7D pipped the 7000D in terms of focus speed. In terms of AF accuracy, there is absolutely nothing to differentiate between the two. Some might argue that the 15-85 mm is a USM. I have fitted the 18-55mm kit lens on the 7D and infact, the 7D responded back with pretty fast, though noisy focus speeds. D7000 took a tad longer on all instances. Bot hthe 7D and D7000 came with similar AF accuracy. So, D7000 is better on paper with the AF, but, in practice, not better than the 7D in any stretch of imagination.

That's my take of the D7000. A few people have really spoken big about this camera and infact, at one point, I was myself considering to make the switch to the D7000 after selling my entire Canon kit and moving over to the Nikon. However, after having tried it in various settings, taking multiple shots and seen through the D7000 versus my own 7D, I can definitely say that the D7000 is a great camera, but not close to the 7D as many has concluded to believe. It is not correct to compare 2 cameras which are differently implemented. I have to say that other than having a sensor that gives the benefit of 1-stop in noise, the 7D blows it away in all other aspects. On paper comparisons may tell a different story though. In practice, the story has been a lot different.

Cheers
Prasad


----------



## Sharfy

I am super satisfied by my D7000

a Canon user friend of mine have this say and comparison on color issue

NIkon = oil based
Canon = Water based

I just don't know much about it becuase i am really a newbie too..... But all i know is my Nikon d7000 is sharp ^^


----------



## fuzzyhead

If someone is still undecided, and is fed up with the fight between the two brands, pick up Pentax K-5 
Few pages back, there was a chart, comparing dynamic range between 7D and D7k. Here is a link to that comparison plus Pentax K-5
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Camera-Sensor/Compare/Compare-sensors/%28appareil1%29/619|0/%28appareil2%29/680|0/%28appareil3%29/676|0/%28onglet%29/0/%28brand%29/Canon/%28brand2%29/Nikon/%28brand3%29/Pentax

@kvskpin
In D7k's viewfinder ISO is displayed in exactly the same place as it is in 7D. Next time try to look more carefully  Nikon lets you map front buttons to whatever function you like, if standand button is not to your liking. As for light metering, I find D7k's best there is. My D700 sometimes overexposure in difficult situations (0,3-0.7), but D7k is always accurate. Zones IV and VI are where they were supposed to be. 

Someone asked about speed in jpg/raw. I've found a comparison:
[original 7D test Test Canon EOS 7D - Wst, D7k test Test Nikon D7000 - Wst. There was an english version, but I can't find it]

Canon 7D, Pretec CF 333x 8GB, ISO 1600, 1/1000
http://optyczne.pl/114.3-Test_aparatu-Canon_EOS_7D_Użytkowanie_i_ergonomia.html
Scroll down, until you see pictures regarding jpg, raw.

Nikon D7000, SanDisk Extreme SDHC 30MB/s 4GB, ISO 1600, 1/1000
http://optyczne.pl/150.3-Test_aparatu-Nikon_D7000_Użytkowanie_i_ergonomia.html
Scroll down, until you see pictures regarding jpg, raw.

Test lasted for 30s or 100 shots (Nikon limit). As you can see, Canon is faster and has bigger frame buffer, but 8fps is only achieved during first second. As for one Expeed 2 vs two Digic IV ... well, Canon needed two processors to match one Nikons.
And results:
7D: 98 JPEG LARGE FINE (3.27 fps), 33 RAW (1.10 fps)
D7k: 100 JPEG LARGE FINE (3.30 fps), 36 RAW 14-bit (1.20 fps)

Autofocus comparison: 40 shots of resolution benchmark table. Histogram shows deviation from the best resolution.

Canon 7D, f 2.8, Canon EF 100m/f2.8L Macro IS USM (results on EF 50 mm f/1.4 USM and EF 85 mm f/1.8 USM were worse)
http://optyczne.pl/114.3-Test_aparatu-Canon_EOS_7D_Użytkowanie_i_ergonomia.html
At the bottom of the site.
Comparison of four Canons AF is made during normal conditions, second is under bright (front) light.


Nikon D7000, f2.8, Nikkor AF-S 24&#8211;70 mm f/2.8G ED
http://optyczne.pl/150.3-Test_aparatu-Nikon_D7000_Użytkowanie_i_ergonomia.html
At the bottom of the site.

D7k's autofocus is inferior to D300's, but I think is more than a match for 7D's.

Conclusion: buy whichever is more comfortable to you .

Competitors: Pentax K-5, Sony A-580.


----------



## Derrel

kvskpin said:
			
		

> This is probably the most debated point about the D7000 and related to the metering aspect of it. Take it this way, the D7000 not just tends to, but, seriously blows the highlights. To get any detail out of brigher areas of the photograph, one would need to keep it atleast 1-1.5 stops below normal. At it's default settings, ideas to shoot on a bright sunny day need to be reconsidered. Not just on a bright sunny day, even indoors if there is any area of high contrast. While it is true that this can be adjusted to a fair degree and we can get good results, but, at the default settings, it is a really bad idea to shoot contrast. Get an ND4 filter by default on all your lenses !!
> Cheers
> Prasad



This is the typical "I've tried the camera in the store,and really do not know how to set the camera up, and it overexposed" line of crap that I expect from Canon users (paid schills? ad agency plants?) with three posts under their belt. Parroting something they might have read. Or, just being an uninformed camera shopper, with no clue as to how to set the camera. 

Here, read some ACCURATE information from a person who actually has done more than stand at a sales counter five times and snap pictures with a store's D7000...  from Thom Hogan's review of the D7000:

"Metering System
Another surprise. The matrix meter on the D7000 is good. Real good. The old "overemphasis on focus sensor being used" has been mitigated somewhat (and really only happens when you use AF S focus). Moreover, I was surprised to see that it isn't easily fooled by large expanses of white or black. When Nikon said they tweaked the color-consideration aspect of the matrix system, they weren't kidding. The pattern recognition seems better and more refined, too. Things that completely flummoxed the D90 meter were handled just fine by the D7000. But watch your focus setting: it impacts the metering, and you need to be aware of that. The patterns and tendencies are different for single servo AF versus continuous."

"I've noticed a bit of chatter on the net about "overexposure." But that's not what's really happening with the D7000 metering system. No, it's that color matching and pattern matching coming into play. And correctly, I think. Let's say, for example, that there's a skin tone in the foreground of your scene. Perhaps the person with that skin is even a bit backlit. Well, the D7000 certainly sees that skin tone and knows where to put it on the tonal scale. But in previous Nikon matrix meters, if the background was producing values that would blow out the histogram, the matrix meter tended (but not always and not completely) to preserve highlights. I don't see as much of that with the D7000 (except in single servo AF). It's not going to preserve those highlights at the expense of what it thinks is "subject." It certainly won't preserve them as much as previous Nikon matrix meters, even when it decides to do so. Two other things play into the "overexposure" issue. First, there's gamma. People coming from older (pre-D3) Nikon bodies and seeing Picture Controls for the first time are reacting to the mid-range boost that the default Picture Control applies compared to the old style image settings. Second is contrast. The defaults (and many of the other Picture Controls) push contrast a bit, and that has a tendency to make bright seem brighter."

"The corollary is that if you pop up the flash for some fill, the D7000 seems to get that exposure just a little more on target than previous consumer cameras. Nikon's obviously done a lot of tweaking, and for those of you coming from another Nikon DSLR, there's going to be a learning curve before you manage to fully grock the new matrix patterns and tendencies."

"However, all isn't perfect. Be aware of one very big caveat: when the scene you're metering hits 16.3 EV, the matrix metering system gives up and sets its value for 16.3 EV, no matter how much more light there may be. EV 16.3 at ISO 100 is f/11 at 1/500, which is barely beyond Sunny 16. This won't occur all that often in your shooting, but it does occur sometimes, so make note of that. In really bright light conditions (snow, beach, etc.) you probably need to be in centerweighted metering."

"Color
The D7000 uses the same Picture Control system that all the current Nikon DSLRs now use. As far as I can see, the results are very close to the same as those with other Nikon DSLRs, with only some modest differences. In general, every Nikon now tends to produce near accurate color with a bit too much saturation and contrast as the default. Indeed, so much so that if you leave the camera set at the default settings you'll slightly limit the dynamic range you can capture. I strongly suggest that you be careful to not put too much oomph into your JPEGs, as it's difficult to back out contrast and saturation, once recorded. My personal preference is to set my D7000 for a more accurate, bland look (Neutral, sometimes with -1 Contrast) and add in any contrast and saturation I might want in the final image. However, many D7000 customers are likely to be shoot-but-don't-post-process photographers, and probably won't take my advice. Just be aware that you'll have a tough time with high contrast scenes if you start dialing up the controls to get that punch you want. (This usually prompts them to turn on Active D-Lighting, but the combination of too much contrast and saturation with in-camera pull-up of shadow detail tends to bring up more noise.)" --end quoted passage from Thom Hogan's Nikon D7000 review----

Nikon D7000 Review by Thom Hogan

So, if you want good information, go to a good source for accurate information, and not somebody with three posts, advocating buying what he happened to buy...just sayin...


----------



## bobbyknight

Overread said:


> I think what o hey tyler is trying to say it that you're really overthinking this choice and its been several months already . At this rate well be onto the 7DM2 and whatever the D7000 upgrades to before you've made a choice.
> 
> Just put both names into a hat - go to the shop - pick one out of the hat and buy that one - and then get shooting


 

love you already


----------



## o hey tyler

Wow, glad you waited a MONTH TO BUMP THIS THREAD AGAIN.


----------



## bobbyknight

Can someone tell me about the new D5100?

xx


----------



## o hey tyler

bobbyknight said:


> Can someone tell me about the new D5100?
> 
> xx



Nikon D5100


----------



## bobbyknight

Someone, please tell me about the upcoming Sony Alpha NEX-7?


----------



## Overread

*moving to equipment subsection*


It's been a year almost - are you ever going to buy camera? There is such a thing as too much research


----------



## dakkon76

KmH said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...pure magnesium alloy...
> 
> 
> 
> An oxymoron.
> 
> If it's pure, it cannot be an alloy. If it's an alloy, it isn't pure.
Click to expand...


Then you'd better not refer to anything that's composed of 2 elements as "pure" ... right?

So, sugar can't be pure... nor water.

Your idio-logic baffles me... yet entertains me at the same time. Thank you for being you. I'm sure all of your "friends" think you're a real expert at just about everything, don't they?

FYI, you may want to actually look up the definition of pure. All of the ones I found seem to contradict your _logic_.


----------



## bobbyknight

Overread said:


> *moving to equipment subsection*
> 
> 
> It's been a year almost - are you ever going to buy camera? There is such a thing as too much research



Hi there, i see you're already a moderator here xD
Good to know! Actually currently I am using only iPhone 4 and Samsung Galaxy S2 lol! xD
I posted a reply here so I can get more replies, apparently nobody is checking the Sony sub section thread.


----------



## mjhoward

dakkon76 said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...pure magnesium alloy...
> 
> 
> 
> An oxymoron.
> 
> If it's pure, it cannot be an alloy. If it's an alloy, it isn't pure.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then you'd better not refer to anything that's composed of 2 elements as "pure" ... right? ... FYI, you may want to actually look up the definition of pure. All of the ones I found seem to contradict your _logic_.
Click to expand...


Not taking sides here, but I think it is hilarious that the link for the definition of 'pure' that you provide lists as a synonym 'unalloyed'. :lmao:


----------



## dakkon76

While you're on the site, maybe you should look up the definition of "synonym" as well. A synonym is a word that shares all or SOME of the meaning of an associated word. Black can be synonymous with dark, for instance... but those two have very distinct differences.


----------



## Ballistics

dakkon76 said:


> While you're on the site, maybe you should look up the definition of "synonym" as well. A synonym is a word that shares all or SOME of the meaning of an associated word. Black can be synonymous with dark, for instance... but those two have very distinct differences.



Oh boy :lmao:

Some things aren't really open for interpretation, the point is an alloy is not pure. Now back to the topic.

It's ok to be wrong sometimes, it won't kill you.


----------



## Netskimmer

Ballistics said:


> dakkon76 said:
> 
> 
> 
> While you're on the site, maybe you should look up the definition of "synonym" as well. A synonym is a word that shares all or SOME of the meaning of an associated word. Black can be synonymous with dark, for instance... but those two have very distinct differences.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh boy :lmao:
> 
> Some things aren't really open for interpretation, the point is an alloy is not pure. Now back to the topic.
> 
> It's ok to be wrong sometimes, it won't kill you.
Click to expand...


I'm not sure how he meant it, but when most people refer to the 7D as having a "pure" magnesium alloy body they just mean that it is all magnesium alloy and not pieces of mag alloy and polymer bolted together. I don't know how true it is but I have watched and read several reviews that say the whole partial mag alloy vs full alloy is bs, that any impact that will break the D7k will break the D7 ect.


----------



## dakkon76

Ballistics said:
			
		

> Oh boy :lmao:
> 
> Some things aren't really open for interpretation, the point is an alloy is not pure. Now back to the topic.
> 
> It's ok to be wrong sometimes, it won't kill you.



Talk about a backfire... Here I am calling the illustrious KmH out on being nit-picky and yet I can't defend my claim without coming across as the same... So I guess I'd better digress before I sound too hypocritical. I'll stand over here with the 99th percentile who use pure as defined by dictionary.com rather than a chemists definition... For a chemist, I am not.


----------



## bobbyknight

KmH said:


> bobbyknight said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...pure magnesium alloy...
> 
> 
> 
> An oxymoron.
> 
> If it's pure, it cannot be an alloy. If it's an alloy, it isn't pure.
Click to expand...



When I said this I meant it literally like the over-all body is composed or constructed with magnesium alloy and I wasn't even referring to the element itself like "magnesium alloy is pure."


----------



## that1guy

nikon d7000


----------



## dakkon76

Both the 7d and d7000 have lots of fans, you can't go wrong with either. The 7d sounds like it's got a better af system and shoots at 8 fps. Sounds like you've been on the fence for a while now. Ignore Sony and panasonic and go with either of your original choices.


----------



## o hey tyler

dakkon76 said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh boy :lmao:
> 
> Some things aren't really open for interpretation, the point is an alloy is not pure. Now back to the topic.
> 
> It's ok to be wrong sometimes, it won't kill you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Talk about a backfire... Here I am calling the illustrious KmH out on being nit-picky and yet I can't defend my claim without coming across as the same... So I guess I'd better digress before I sound too hypocritical. I'll stand over here with the 99th percentile who use pure as defined by dictionary.com rather than a chemists definition... For a chemist, I am not.
Click to expand...


Go to the wikipedia article for "alloy" and search for "Unlike pure" on that page (CTRL+F). See what happens.


----------



## nfp

FYI: technical spec comparison of Canon 7D and Nikon D7000
Canon 7D vs Nikon D7000


----------



## dlabda

Hey guys sorry I posted before but I gave you the wrong video. I just shot a music video with both these cameras. I had a lot of unusable footage from the Nikon but the Canon D7 never skipped a beat. Not sure why but the Nikon produced a lot of flickered footage and stuff I had to chop out and this didn't happen once with the Canon after many many hours of getting footage. The music video is here 



.


----------



## jaomul

I assume all who voted here have used all 3 cameras. otherwise its like writing a review for a book you have not read.


----------



## Overread

It's a whole year old - I think its time for this poll to end its life


----------

