# 60D vs 7D with FF in the near future:



## Kuscali (Feb 9, 2011)

I recently parted with my Sony A700, I had enough of Sony and their pellicle mirror shenanigans (I know Canon made them too but there is a reason that is not the case anymore). My eventual goal is to get a Full Frame, as a matter of fact, I need a full frame for it's hi iso capabilities. Problem is though I cannot finance it before I go off to vacation, so a crop body will have to do, and will suffice as a backup in the future. I am facing 2 problems, I cannot make up my mind between the 60D and the 7D, and I do not know if the hi iso capabilities of theses cameras will impress me, and if I should just brown bag it more to get a 5D mark II/ (or Mark III, but almost surely going to be inflated early adopter price as well as no availability). 

The lenses I plan to purchase are:
UWA: 
Either the Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5 II (the new one that was released recently by Sigma) or the Samyang 14mm f/2.8
Fast standard prime:
50mm f/1.8 (tried and true)
Midrange zoom & portrait lens:
24-105mmL IS (will this be good for low light? 3 stops of shutter speed improvement vs f/2.8?) 

Thoughts? 

Thank You


----------



## c-law (Feb 10, 2011)

Remember that the IS on the 24-105 will only help with stationary subjects. So if you are shooting portraits with that lens you are better off with the one stop faster 24-70 for subjects that can move + you'll get better subject isolation from the shallower DOF.

As for which camera to get, I'd go with the 7D myself but that is more my personal preference than an specific knowledge of the ISO comparison between that and the 60D.

Chris


----------



## Admin US West (Feb 10, 2011)

c-law said:


> Remember that the IS on the 24-105 will only help with stationary subjects. So if you are shooting portraits with that lens you are better off with the one stop faster 24-70 for subjects that can move + you'll get better subject isolation from the shallower DOF.
> 
> As for which camera to get, I'd go with the 7D myself but that is more my personal preference than an specific knowledge of the ISO comparison between that and the 60D.
> 
> Chris



I certainly would not want to hang a 24-70mm L on a 60D. It is so front heavy that it is difficult to hold still, and you need a high shutter speed, while with a 24-105 you can get away with slow shutter speeds. There is also the lottery that you go thru with the 24070. I had 5 of them, but sold all since they could not match my 24-105. Even if you get lucky and get one of the good ones, its still a mismatch.

The 17-55mm EF-s is a much better match for a 60D, even then, those used to the 18-55mm IS complain its heavy.


----------



## amarlez (Feb 10, 2011)

A lot of people think simply being full-frame makes a camera leaps and bounds better than an APS-C or -H sensor, and the more I post on here, the more you'll hear me harp about how not true that technically is. 

Here's my set up. All I need after this is a 70-200, a fast portrait prime and maybe a fast wide angle prime and I'm set.

Canon 7D
50mm 1.4
Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC (image stabilizer)

When it comes to the mid-range zoom, there's no reason to trade off f/2.8 for image stabilizer because Canon has an EF-S that covers what 24-70 would that has image stabilizer and is about the price of the 24-104. I got my Tamron with a nice rebate for about half that.

As far as which body, that depends on what you're planning to do with it. I bought the 7D before the 60D came out, so the choice was easy. After holding a 60D a few months ago in Best Buy, though, I can see they really "rebelized" the xxD line-up, starting with the plastic body.

My argument against the full-frames has always been that, yes, they're better in low light, but that bigger sensor requires a smaller aperture to focus on the same depth anyway, which essentially means you have to shoot at a slower shutter speed for the same depth of field. Comparison shots show all signs point to full-frame as the way to go, but in some practical settings (not all), APS-C cameras are a better bet. That and you can use all the lenses can offers. And you don't have to worry about vignetting as much (I always thought that should be left to something you add on photoshop). 

And when you factor out the sensor, what does the 5DII have on the 7D? Not autofocus, frames per second, a leg up on video abilities or even shutter cycle life. 

Everybody out there thinks they want a 5DII with better autofocus and maybe some other gadgets. What they actually want is a 7D... with a full-frame sensor.


----------



## Orangutan (Feb 10, 2011)

I did quite a bit of research on the differences between the 60D and 7D before I bought my 60D in November. All of the "objective" and subjective tests and reviews concluded that the image quality, at all ISO's, is virtually indistinguishable. Some suggested that maybe the 60D had a slight edge, but you have to peep pixels for it even to become a legitimate question. The same can be said of the T2i: it's basically the same sensor.

Since you're considering a 5D2 (or future 5D3) and a bunch of lenses, I'll assume that <=$200 savings on a T2i (vs. a 60D) is not significant to you. My analysis goes like this:

Buy a 7D *only if* one of the following applies:

You prefer heavier bodies
You prefer the feel of the 7D over the 60D
You will use the new body under really adverse conditions (the 60D is tough, but not as tough as the 7D)
You need 8fps (vs 6.3fps)
You plan to photograph fast-moving objects (birds, athletes, flying pigs, etc)
You make real money on photography; i.e., it's a job, not a hobby that pays for itself.

If one of the above does not apply, get a 60D and save a few hundred bucks towards a lens or better body.

As for low-light, I've been impressed: it's a very noticeable step-up from my 20D.


----------



## c-law (Feb 10, 2011)

scalesusa said:


> c-law said:
> 
> 
> > Remember that the IS on the 24-105 will only help with stationary subjects. So if you are shooting portraits with that lens you are better off with the one stop faster 24-70 for subjects that can move + you'll get better subject isolation from the shallower DOF.
> ...


I wouldn't want one on a 60D either. The 17-55 is a good recommendation. It just didn't occur to me as I was recommending the 7D and was thinking of something he could use on full frame when he gets it eventually.

I'm sorry to hear you have had such trouble with the 24-70. My only experience with it is my own copy and my friend's copy both of which are absolutely great copies of it. Other than those two I've never had experience with other people's experiences with it.

Chris


----------



## djjohnr (Feb 10, 2011)

Option C - used 5D Mark 1. You can pick one up in great shape with low actuations for around $900.


----------



## SportsPicGuy (Feb 10, 2011)

Save your money.

I have both a 7D and a 5D-mk2.

Get the 5D-mk2 kit with the 24-105 L lens.

I use the 5D-mk2 with a 24-105 L as my main go to camera for everything.
Day or night. Sports, vacation, nature, weddings, parties, holidays, everything.

I find that the 8 fps of the 7D didn't make me a better sports photographer, and sometimes
the shots are just too noisy for my taste.

That being said I am considering switching to a 7D with the new Tamron 18-270 PZD lens as a vaction camera just because it is a lot lighter than the 5D-mk2 with the L glass on it.

Plus I would hate to do something stupid on vacation and screw up my 5D-mk2, lose it, gets stolen, etc. I wouldn't feel quite as bad if I did that to my 7D.


----------



## mogud (Feb 10, 2011)

I've read so many replies to the question you are asking about "which" lens that I had to reply. I agree that the 17-55mm is a fast and capable lens. I almost bought it last fall until I looked at what images the lens produces. To my eyes, the images are rather cold or bluish looking. There seems to be not enough contrast or color saturation for me. I'm sure these issues could be fixed in PP, but I come from the film era where that option was not available. On the other hand, the 24-105mm produces very good contrast and color saturation along with a sharp image. My other problem with the 17-55mm was the build quality and zoom action. At first check in the store, the zoom action was really stiff especially at the start of the zoom, around 20-24mm. Then the action was smoother. I rented the 17-55mm for a weekend and discovered that this zoom action was rather sloppy with significant lens creep on the rental copy. I opted for the 24-105mm and have been very pleased with the results. Right out of the box the build quality was excellent with very smooth focusing and zoom action. I use the lens on the 7D and 50D and have been very happy. 

As far as the 24-70mm is concerned. it is a big heavy lens (950g vs. 650 for the 24-105) with a huge lens hood. The hood comes all the way down the lens when mounted in reverse. I store all my lenses in Lowepro lens cases when not in use and this lens stored in the 4S case was awkward to remove. The IQ is a little better than the 24-105mm. I didn't buy the 24-70mm, but may later once/if I go FF.

I own the 7D and it is quite the camera. I've picked up the 60D and it felt very comfortable in my hands without the grip. The 7D needs the grip. Without the grip, the camera feels bulky. The 7D requires a lot of manual reading time and complete understanding of it's AF system. Be prepared to spend some time. Get the PDF version of the manual and put it into a binder and read the thing from cover to cover.

As far as which lens to consider, other than the 24-105mm, read the following review from DP.com

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-15-85mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

The review is of the 15-85mm and the 17-55mm. The reviewer does a lens comparison test which is very well done and helped me to decide on the 15-85mm. The reviewer also owns the 15-85 and the 17-55. I have both the 24-105mm and the 15-85mm because my wife and I use the 7D/50D and she likes the 24-105 and the 15-85 is on the 7D. Hope this helps.


----------



## 87vr6 (Feb 10, 2011)

djjohnr said:


> Option C - used 5D Mark 1. You can pick one up in great shape with low actuations for around $900.



This is what I would do if you want/need to get into FF cheaply. 

Check here often, they're slowly selling off their 5D's, and last one I saw was rated 8.5/10 and was selling for 9ish

http://www.lensrentals.com/buy

Also, check up on Adorama and B&H photo in the used sections as they sell them too, though they do not have any currently.


----------



## 87vr6 (Feb 11, 2011)

scalesusa said:


> and you need a high shitter speed



lolz


----------



## tombo (Feb 12, 2011)

Lots of fiber in my diet, but don't know about speed. Seriously, am very happy with both my 10-22 and 17-55. Both used to reside on my T1i, while my 70-200 graced my Xsi. With the receipt of my 7d, the wide zooms will go to the 7d, and the 70-200 on the t1i. Can't compare to something I've never used, but the 11-55 gave me good color, and fast focus out of the box. Can't wait to put it to work on the 7d. The better focusing, will eliminate my need to do center spot focus, and recompose. Crop frame forever!!! Ol 6x7 guy.


----------



## unruled (Feb 12, 2011)

just a note: investing in EF-S glass doesnt make much sense if he will go fullframe within the foreseable future


----------



## Kuscali (Feb 12, 2011)

Thanks for all of your replies, unfortunately the EF-S 17-55mm is not an option, as I am going to go to Full Frame December of this year/ or when the 5D mark III comes out in 2012. I found a 28-75mm Tamron for sale at a good price and I plan to get that. Also planning on getting the Tokina 11-16m, which apparently works on full frame at 16mm, Canon 50mm f/1.8, and maybe (big maybe a 55-250 Ef-s, I rarely use telephoto but might need it). 

How does this arrangement look to you guys?


----------



## S P (Feb 12, 2011)

SportsPicGuy said:


> Get the 5D-mk2 kit with the 24-105 L lens.
> 
> I use the 5D-mk2 with a 24-105 L as my main go to camera for everything.
> Day or night. Sports, vacation, nature, weddings, parties, holidays, everything.
> ...



+1 on the 5D2 and 24-105L combo, but on equipment loss that's what insurance is for. 8) I'm looking forward to taking my 5D2 and 24-105L combo to Hawaii in just under two months. Will be taking the 70-200/4L and the 17-40L as well. No kids, just the wife and I for a week, so a little extra weight will be manageable.

I love the 5D2 and 24-105L. If I knew how much I was going to like it I would have bought the 24-105L in a kit with the 5D2, but instead I bought it separately later. I too have found that the 5D2 body has been more than up to the task for anything I've thrown at it, including sports and action. For as much criticism as the 5D2 gets for its AF system, I've yet to have any real complaints with it aside from it simply quitting in lower light a bit sooner than some other bodies, and most of my Nikons. Really though, that's not a big deal. I'm rarely shooting in nearly pitch black conditions.

For the OP: If a full-frame is what you want then just save up a little more and get it now. Don't buy a 60D or a 7D if you know you're eventually going to want a 5D anyways. Plus I think the 5D3 when it comes out is not only going to be hard to get, but also priced at over $3000 USD body only. If you can't quite swing a 5D2 yet but need something to "take pictures" in the meantime, I'd be looking at maybe the new Rebel T3 or T3i that came out, or possibly a used 50D or Rebel T2i. Get a cheaper or used body for now to save $$$, while sinking the bulk of it into the FF glass you want in the meantime.


----------



## S P (Feb 12, 2011)

Kuscali said:


> Thanks for all of your replies, unfortunately the EF-S 17-55mm is not an option, as I am going to go to Full Frame December of this year/ or when the 5D mark III comes out in 2012. I found a 28-75mm Tamron for sale at a good price and I plan to get that. Also planning on getting the Tokina 11-16m, which apparently works on full frame at 16mm, Canon 50mm f/1.8, and maybe (big maybe a 55-250 Ef-s, I rarely use telephoto but might need it).
> 
> How does this arrangement look to you guys?


I owned the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 on Nikon mount and can vouch that it does indeed cover full-frame at 15-16mm. However I ended up not caring for the lens too much because I didn't like the narrow range. In ultra-wides I prefer the ability to get out to the "almost normal" range which on a crop is the xx-24mm lenses. Personally I'd skip the 55-250 and get an EF 70-200/4L non-IS instead, but if you rarely use telephoto maybe just skip it for now. The Tamron 28-75/2.8 is supposed to be quite a good lens if you get a good copy. Paired with an ultra-wide of some sort that's a pretty nice setup to have on a crop body.


----------



## Kuscali (Feb 12, 2011)

S P said:


> Kuscali said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for all of your replies, unfortunately the EF-S 17-55mm is not an option, as I am going to go to Full Frame December of this year/ or when the 5D mark III comes out in 2012. I found a 28-75mm Tamron for sale at a good price and I plan to get that. Also planning on getting the Tokina 11-16m, which apparently works on full frame at 16mm, Canon 50mm f/1.8, and maybe (big maybe a 55-250 Ef-s, I rarely use telephoto but might need it).
> ...



I was thinking about getting the 70-200mmL f/4 is when I got full frame, for the 1% of the time I use telephoto. I too would love to have a Wide angle zoom with a bit more range, but the Tokina is the fastest, widest, sharpest thing around. How sharp was the Tokina in the corners on full frame?


----------



## S P (Feb 12, 2011)

Kuscali said:


> I was thinking about getting the 70-200mmL f/4 is when I got full frame, for the 1% of the time I use telephoto. I too would love to have a Wide angle zoom with a bit more range, but the Tokina is the fastest, widest, sharpest thing around. How sharp was the Tokina in the corners on full frame?



It's actually better at 16mm on full-frame than my 17-40L is at the wide end, which considering the Tokina is an APS-C lens is pretty incredible. 

The 2.8 was indeed a selling point for me, however for a lot of the landscape shots I did in lower light I noticed what I thought might be some focus field curvature at 2.8 that went away at f/4, so I actually got better results at f/4 than 2.8 and preferred to shoot it there. That sorta defeated the purpose of the lens since I also preferred the wider range of the xx-24 lenses. On Canon I think the EF-S 10-22 and I would get along quite nicely. I also disliked the long .30m close focus distance on the Tokina. I also like to use ultra-wide lenses to get right on top of something an exaggerate perspective, and it's just not possible to do that with a .30m MFD. You really need something around 0.25m or better yet down to 0.20m like some of the primes do. I had a Nikon 14mm f/2.8D lens which would focus down to 0.20m (subject practically touching the front element) and it was fantastic for that.

So while the Tokina 11-16 is an excellent lens, for me it was better on paper than it was in the real-world.


----------



## Kuscali (Feb 12, 2011)

Ok so now I got the lenses down, only now to decided on the body. I like them both, I prefer the 7D a little more, probably the one I am going to get after the rebates roll in. I heard great things about it's AF, especially in low light. Maybe I should download the manual and get a head start, so when it comes I know what to do. Just a question, I never tried this with my A700 (12mp, I could lower it but no point at 6mp), but if I was to lower the MP's (if possible on the 7D, in the menu), to lets say 12mp from 18mp, I should get better hi ISO performance correct?


----------



## Rocky (Feb 13, 2011)

Kuscali said:


> Ok so now I got the lenses down, only now to decided on the body. I like them both, I prefer the 7D a little more, probably the one I am going to get after the rebates roll in. I heard great things about it's AF, especially in low light. Maybe I should download the manual and get a head start, so when it comes I know what to do. Just a question, I never tried this with my A700 (12mp, I could lower it but no point at 6mp), but if I was to lower the MP's (if possible on the 7D, in the menu), to lets say 12mp from 18mp, I should get better hi ISO performance correct?


I got a feeling that you are looking for a "Transitional camera" that you will be moving into FF in December. I have a suggestion that is a little bit crazy and It may work for you. Spend $450 for a used 40D and $700 for a 17-40mm F4 L lens. This is an excellent lens for APS-C sensor (I am speaking from my own experience). It should take care of most of you need (27mm to 66mm equilvalent)except when you need the telephoto usage. The lens is a true FFlens. So you will have an utawide to normal zoom lens for your FF. As for the 40D, at ISO 1600 its noise level is more that acceptable. At ISO 3200, you will see some noise.You can sell your 40D later and get most of your money back. 
Do not let the metal body to be your determioning factor of choosing between 7D and 60D. The shutter release switch may fail before the rest of the camera body. Please see other posts in this forum.


----------



## Kuscali (Feb 13, 2011)

It is not for the metal body but the 19cross type AF, on the 7D. Also I have seen hi iso results from the 7D and I have been quite impressed, so maybe after myself trying it for a month or two I will not need a Full Frame (but this is all theoretical), I have only briefly tried a 7D & 60D (loved both fit my hands so well controls nice). Maybe I might get the 60D and get the for the price difference Canon 100mm f/2.


----------



## unruled (Feb 13, 2011)

Kuscali said:


> It is not for the metal body but the 19cross type AF, on the 7D. Also I have seen hi iso results from the 7D and I have been quite impressed, so maybe after myself trying it for a month or two I will not need a Full Frame (but this is all theoretical), I have only briefly tried a 7D & 60D (loved both fit my hands so well controls nice). Maybe I might get the 60D and get the for the price difference Canon 100mm f/2.



60d vs 7d comes down to a few things:
-ergonomic differences
-AF system differences
and a few other minor things such as VF coverage and burst speeds.

To me the 60d grip is too small (I currently own a 40d which is fine). I am also a huge fan of the jogdial/joystick, which the 60d does -not- have, instead it has a fiddly dpad.

I'd say, go and try both, see what feels more comfortable to you. That said, the 7d is the best crop camera on the canon side, so even if you go fullframe, it will be an awesome 2nd body.


----------



## Kuscali (Feb 13, 2011)

unruled said:


> Kuscali said:
> 
> 
> > It is not for the metal body but the 19cross type AF, on the 7D. Also I have seen hi iso results from the 7D and I have been quite impressed, so maybe after myself trying it for a month or two I will not need a Full Frame (but this is all theoretical), I have only briefly tried a 7D & 60D (loved both fit my hands so well controls nice). Maybe I might get the 60D and get the for the price difference Canon 100mm f/2.
> ...




The joystick can it be used to select the AF point (ala A700 what I am used too)? And how good are the AF points on the very far right and left I assume as they are cross types pretty effective?


----------



## unruled (Feb 13, 2011)

You can use the jogdial, the scroll wheel, or the joystick to select AF points.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/images/7d/7d-back-1200.jpg
vs
http://currentphotographer.com/wp-content/gallery/canon-eos-60d/canon-60d-back.jpg

My friend has the 60d and I struggled to use that new dpad thing effectively. 

As far as I am aware, the 7d has the best canon AF system (2nd only to the 1d mk iv) so I would not worry about accuracy.


----------



## jebrady03 (Feb 17, 2011)

Since your heart seems set on FF, here's my suggestion.

Forget the 7D and 60D, and go with the T2i plus whatever assortment of lenses you want for WA and standard (zoom). IQ has been shown to be relatively similar between the three and the differentiation is price and features.

Here's where it gets fun and needs some "'splaining". For your telephoto zoom, snag the EF-S 55-250. It really is a very good lens, and for the priceerformance ratio, you'll be hard pressed to find something better. Once you go FF, keep the 55-250 attached to the T2i as your telephoto camera as the 1.6 crop factor (or whatever you want to call it) combined with the 250 range will give you double the reach of a 70-200 on a 5D mk ii or iii (400mm reach on T2i vs 200mm on 5d mk ___). And since you said you only use telephoto infrequently (I think you said 1% of the time), any lack of quality resulting from the lens won't be very important anyway, right?

Otherwise, I'd go with the 70-300 L over any of the 70-200's.

just my opinion


----------



## Kuscali (Feb 17, 2011)

Do you guys think the 5D Mark II can go down to $1800 when the 5D Mark III comes out? 

As for the T2i suggestion it is a good idea but, I really want a pentaprism viewfinder, that is a bigger sell to me then Full Frame, I really hate those penta-mirror viewfinders, not as much as Electronic viewfinders though.


----------



## jebrady03 (Feb 17, 2011)

Then the 60D would be the camera I'd recommend. In fact, it's a steal at $888 on bh photo and video's website as well as amazon.com.

There is a rebate rumored to be coming in the next few days although most think that the rebate will be offset by an increase in price.

Good luck in your decision!!!


----------



## Kuscali (Feb 17, 2011)

Does the 60D have the function like the 5D MII (I know the 7D does not) where on live view the viewfinder is automatically shut? Something inside of me still says get the 7D.


----------



## Admin US West (Feb 18, 2011)

Kuscali said:


> Does the 60D have the function like the 5D MII (I know the 7D does not) where on live view the viewfinder is automatically shut? Something inside of me still says get the 7D.



My 5D MK II does not have any automatic shutter for the eyepiece, there is a external eyepiece cover you must put over it to block light. Same for 7D and all the Rebels.

For those cameras with liveview, the mirror comes up and blocks most of the light in the eyepiece, but for long exposure times, I'd still cover it.


----------



## Kuscali (Feb 18, 2011)

So today after a long while of pondering, I decided to wait save up as much as I can, and try to get the Canon 5D mark II before my Summer trip to Turkey, if I cannot reach it good, 60D with a bunch of Full Frame lenses to get for the 5D Mark III after I get back.


----------



## 87vr6 (Feb 19, 2011)

I still stand by my previous statement... if you don't want to invest too much into a camera right now because you want a 5D MKIII or whatever it is when it comes out, then find a lightly used 5D classic... Less than a grand. Again, this is if you're set on FF... Or also for less than 1g, you could go old school and grab a 1Ds:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/800759073-USE/Canon_8068A020_EOS_1Ds_Digital_Camera_Camera.html

Canon refurbished 5DII's are 2g direct from canon (i bought one, it's flawless, I don't think it was ever used), 7D's are 1350.


----------



## Kuscali (Feb 21, 2011)

So I caved and today I bought a 7D. It is on sale at Henry's and I had Mcbain's price match (both Canadian, I live in Canada). I tested out on my Tamron 28-75mm, but encountered a slight problem. @28mm f/14 their is a blob, like the (pentax K-5 stains), but at 75mm f/14 no problem, is the lens or is it camera? I would hate to already have dust on the sensor only a few hours into ownership, but I doubt it as I cannot see anything when I zoom out. I have the say though, I am shocked from the results at ISo 3200.


----------



## Kuscali (Feb 21, 2011)

I looked under florescent light very close to the camera and did not see any kind of dust or stain on the sensor.


----------



## Kuscali (Feb 21, 2011)

Anyone dust on the wide, not on the tele? Is this sensor or lens?


----------



## Admin US West (Feb 21, 2011)

Kuscali said:


> Anyone dust on the wide, not on the tele? Is this sensor or lens?



Set a very small aperture, f16 or even smaller. Take a photo of the sky or a brightly lit white wall. You will be able to see dust on the sensor, there is always some there, its the big stuff that is objectional.

To see it directly, you need magnification, I have a 5X inspection microscope with a fiberoptic ring light, a very expensive professional model with a long focus distance. even then, its not always easy.


----------



## justsomedude (Feb 21, 2011)

87vr6 said:


> Canon refurbished 5DII's are 2g direct from canon (i bought one, it's flawless, I don't think it was ever used), 7D's are 1350.



Or $1599 with the 20% loyalty rebate. 

See my quoted post from the rebate thread....



justsomedude said:


> I would suggest you consider the Canon Loyalty Program. You can take any old broken Canon camera (even a Powershot), and trade it in to Canon for 20% off their factory refurbished bodies. That's right- ANY old Canon body (film or digital, cheap or expensive, just make sure it's 100% broken). With current pricing, that works out to $1,087 for a refurbished 7D, and $1,599 for a refurbished 5DMKII. Free 2 day shipping. Local taxes apply.
> 
> Discounted prices based on Canon Factory refurb. price list, here: http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/subCategory_10051_10051_-1_29252
> 
> ...


----------



## Kuscali (Feb 21, 2011)

THe sensor must have been able to kick it off the last time, I do not see it anymore.


----------



## Kuscali (Feb 22, 2011)

So I tried it at the store with another lens, no dust (actually perfect). It is the lens, and now I actually found the spot. Don't always believe the myth that it is always the sensor and never the lens.


----------



## kubelik (Feb 22, 2011)

kuscali, I'll back up that one; I've got an old lens with an amazingly large piece of what looks like carpet fiber somehow caught between two of the lens elements -- it doesn't move when I move/rotate/mess with the lens. not sure how on earth it'd get in there; it's not a weathersealed lens but still, something that big, I've got no idea how it first worked into the casing and then from there migrated to between lens elements


----------



## Kuscali (Feb 25, 2011)

So I have to say I am impressed by the 7D, I thought I would get a marginal improvement at higher ISO's over the A700, but that is not that case, I am genuinely very impressed by the hi ISO performance of this camera, of course the AF is a whole different monster, I got myself thinking, I probably don't need the 5D mark III, the 7D will be technologically (AF, Image processor) ahead of the 5D, so I will stick to APS-C. So now I am thinking instead of the 11-16mm Tokina, 28-75mm Tamron, and some sort of tele. I am thinking about getting a Canon 15-85mm + 100mm f/2.


----------

