# Is the 7d still a good body?



## Naish27 (Jan 4, 2014)

I am starting from a nikon d3100 and am looking to upgrade. I want to upgrade to a canon body and have been looking around. I really enjoy shooting landscapes, sunsets and really want to get into shorebreak/surf photography in the water. I have a friend that makes custom housings so that will not be an issue. I was wondering if the 7d was still a good body even though it is old? Also the 70d came out recently so I was wondering which camera body is better ? Is the 7d still a very capable body that I can shoot with for 3/4 years before having to upgrade or should I go with the 70d which is quite a bit newer.
Thanks,
Jesse Reid


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jan 4, 2014)

Canon 7D remains an advanced camera, but today there are options with better image quality at high ISO and autofocus in live view, as the new 70D. Currently, the advantage of 7D is more images per second, and perhaps some sales with very low price for its class.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 4, 2014)

The 7D has a superior af system in normal use, but inferior in live view. It has better sealing and a slightly higher frame rate.

The 70D delivers better iq, higher iso, touchscreen, wireless, and now costs about the same as a 7D. Unless you NEED a slightly faster frame rate in the rain for quick moving objects, it may be the better choice over the 7D.

A lot of people are waiting for a 7D2, which should be clearly better than the 70D.


----------



## ashmadux (Jan 6, 2014)

No. Get a 70d. Thats all folks.


----------



## Richard8971 (Jan 11, 2014)

I love my 7D. Unless you are a obsessed pixel peeper and love blowing up your images on your PC to sizes that no normal people would make prints at, you don't notice "noise" from any of the images taken even at high ISO's. 

Too many people are way over concerned about noise and pixel peeping than taking photos, in my opinion. I took the photos I posted at ISO 1000 and 2000 and under normal PC viewing and in 11 x 14 prints they look awesome.

I don't know too many people who make regular prints above 11 x 14 unless you are in the advertising business or for some reason it is your JOB and you NEED to make prints above that size. So unless it is your job, stop worrying about noise.

I set my ISO at "auto" and get the shot, because that is all that really matters in the end.

7D's are fast, responsive cameras and they are cheap right now. Get a 7 and you won't be disappointed. I'm sure plenty of people will answer that the 7 sucks, but oh well. It's built like a tank and 8fps is hard to beat, not to mention that the AF is super fast. It's almost $2000 cheaper than the 5D3 and I have seen refurbished bodies with a 1 year warranty for under a grand at Adorama. It really is a hard camera to top for the cost.

Even if the 7D2 comes out this year I don't plan on upgrading. The 7 fits my needs and I shoot mainly wildlife which for the most part "requires" a fast camera, in the AF department and fps. I already have a great camera, so I don't need to replace it anytime soon. 

D


----------



## rpt (Jan 11, 2014)

There is a 7D vs 70D thread that you can look up.


----------



## TexPhoto (Jan 11, 2014)

7D is the poor man's pro sports camera.




Untitled by RexPhoto91, on Flickr


----------



## dude (Jan 12, 2014)

I would slap a DO NOT BUY label on it as it is time for an upgrade. If you are shooting sports in daylight, it is a good camera. I nit pick the AF system a bit but understand I compare it to a 5D iii. 

I use a 7D to compliment a 5D iii to photograph football.


----------



## TexPhoto (Jan 12, 2014)

dude said:


> I would slap a DO NOT BUY label on it as it is time for an upgrade. If you are shooting sports in daylight, it is a good camera. I nit pick the AF system a bit but understand I compare it to a 5D iii.
> 
> I use a 7D to compliment a 5D iii to photograph football.



I can't believe your 7D is sucking up to your 5DIII. What does it say?

I shoot side by side with many pro sports photographers, and there are guys with 2-3 1DXs, but there are plenty of guys with a 7D as a primary or secondary camera. 

I really doubt it's the right camera for Naish27, but it's a great camera.


----------



## dude (Jan 12, 2014)

The usual stuff form a camera released in *2009*. High ISO imaging stinks and please use me in good lighting.

It is a "good" camera in 2014 but is do to be put out to pasture so why buy five year old technology? 

When I am on the field at a football game, a lot of "professionals" have 60D's, 30D's, etc. hanging off them. In the end, they are all good cameras but time moves on and the capability compared to current offerings starts to really show. It was not a knock on the 7D but an impartial look at it compared to today's cameras. 

I own and use a 7D. It makes my 300mm ii L a beast and that is why I always will believe Canon will have a C sensor camera in the offering.




TexPhoto said:


> dude said:
> 
> 
> > I would slap a DO NOT BUY label on it as it is time for an upgrade. If you are shooting sports in daylight, it is a good camera. I nit pick the AF system a bit but understand I compare it to a 5D iii.
> ...


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 12, 2014)

That we are debating this about a five year old camera speaks volumes for how good the 7D was when it came out.... can you imagine this debate over another 4 1/2 year old camera?


----------



## Ruined (Jan 12, 2014)

I would not purchase the 7D, its sensor is too dated.

Either buy the 70D (~$1099) or wait for the upcoming 7DII (~$1999).


----------



## silvestography (Jan 12, 2014)

If you're interested in landscapes and sunsets, a 6d is probably a better choice. Better IQ at low ISO, much better DR. To echo what others are saying, the 7d is a bit dated and other cameras like the 70d or the mythical 7d2 will end up being a better choice if you want to stick with crop.


----------

