# Canon 70D vs Nikon D7100 Epic Shootout



## MichaelTheMaven (Sep 8, 2013)

As promised on my one of my other threads about the 70D (yes the one that got ugly) here are my findings about both cameras. I appreciate all of your inputs and any suggestions for future improvements are welcome, enjoy!

http://youtu.be/bOM4r1gxsbs

The 70D's moire & low light focusing are it's weak points. Wish it had a head phone jack, but other than that....holy wow, the 70D is a GREAT camera.


----------



## Random Orbits (Sep 9, 2013)

Thanks for the review. Highly informative and balanced.


----------



## MichaelTheMaven (Sep 9, 2013)

Thank you Orbits!


----------



## duydaniel (Sep 9, 2013)

Hey
Thanks alot.
I enjoy the video and wish you best luck with your business!!!


----------



## Zv (Sep 9, 2013)

Great review, very thorough!


----------



## coreyhkh (Sep 9, 2013)

Awesome review one of the best I have seen.


----------



## drjlo (Sep 9, 2013)

Great job on these videos, which obviously must have taken tons of time. 
When CaNikon comparisons are done, it must not be just me wishing to stuff the Nikon sensor into Canon body


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Sep 9, 2013)

Hi Michael ... nice to have you back on CR ... that is one hell of an AWSOME intro 8) 8) 8)
Very nice review, well balanced, precise and factual. Although I am primarily a Canon shooter I shoot with Nikon D7100 for bird photography (something I recently got into) ... the main reason for choosing D7100 over Canon is for the extra crop factor, also I am not a high fps person, my photographs of birds are more deliberate and I don't shoot more than 3 or 4 shots in burst mode. I recently had a chance to play with the 70D and noticed the same things you did (of course not as thorougly as you did). 

PS. After seeing this review, I just bought the "Nikon D7100 Crash Course" video from your website (it is still downloading part 1) ... I bought it not because I thought I needed it (I kinda think I already know pretty much everything about D7100 ) but because people like you, who put in a lot of dedication to bring out such AWESOME reviews, deserve to be supported.
Once again great job and all the best for all the good work you do. 

PPS. This is for everyone on CR ... I do not work for or know Michael (as I live, several thousand miles from the US of A, in the middle east) and nor do I gain anything, from him, for saying anything nice ... having said that, it is nice for those of us (of the photography community) to support dedicated and hard working people like Micheal and Canon Rumors eg. we can use the buy from links on CR like B&H and other such stores listed on CR
Peace


----------



## MichaelTheMaven (Sep 9, 2013)

Wow thank you so much for your support, everyone. I really appreciate it. Cameras and photography are all I do for a living full time. 

When I was first getting started, my training videos were being pirated so frequently that I barely survived, I was selling a couple a month while the files were being distributed everywhere. It was only because of a handful of few honest supporters that also gave me referrals that I was able to survive, so I truly appreciate everyone's support where ever it comes from, so thank you very much!! 

The first "epic" video I did on the Canon 6D vs the Nikon D600 took about 6-7 weeks, simply because I had never done anything like it and had to figure out what the best ways were to do things. This last one only took about 10 days, but it was non-stop during those 10 days. 

Ive also gotten some important feedback from CR users, so it has been a very much win-win.

I think Rienz you must be very happy with your D7100 and I especially appreciate your support, even if the video may not help you due to your experience- it means a lot to me. The D7100 especially surprised me with its Moire performance and overall image quality. All that said, the 70D is so much FUN to use- just a great shooting experience. 

If you guys have any suggestions for future testing I am all ears. I would like to do these videos when I can and make them the very best, reliable I can.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Sep 9, 2013)

MichaelTheMaven said:


> Wow thank you so much for your support, everyone. I really appreciate it. Cameras and photography are all I do for a living full time.
> 
> I think Rienz you must be very happy with your D7100 and I especially appreciate your support, even if the video may not help you due to your experience- it means a lot to me. The D7100 especially surprised me with its Moire performance and overall image quality. All that said, the 70D is so much FUN to use- just a great shooting experience.


Hi Michael, you are most welcome ... I wish I could do more or influence more people to support dedicated professionals like you ... photography is just a hobby for me but I understand the importance of supporting those who make it their profession, coz I've learned so much from professionals like you on youtube ... and it feels nice when I can buy their products (even though my contribution is very small, it still feels nice... wish I could do more). 

All the best for your future videos.


----------



## WD (Sep 9, 2013)

Thanks a lot for this video!

In my opinion the portrait test images of the 70D look slightly sharper then the D7100. Otherwise I like the details in the whites from the D7100. Right conclusion is that it's very personal which camera is the better one for your shootings.

Offtopic: Since a few days I'm a proud owner of a 70D and really love the camera! With the 70-200 2.8 IS II it's very hard to beat by other aps-c sensor camera's. And hello to this forum!


----------



## Random Orbits (Sep 9, 2013)

MichaelTheMaven said:


> If you guys have any suggestions for future testing I am all ears. I would like to do these videos when I can and make them the very best, reliable I can.



I like the servo segment, which tested AF and buffer performance. Quantifying the hit rate with outer AF points was a good feature, and seeing the Canon 19-pt AF provide better point performance than the Nikon xx-point system provides validates that the AF system is more than just the number of points. One question that I'd like to see answered in future camera reviews is how the cameras AF'ed using off-center points with fast glass for stills.

Servo accuracy would also be nice feature in lens reviews too. There are many sites that show resolution, bokeh, etc, but few use it for sports and then quantify servo performance (TDP usually mentions it but doesn't quantify it).


----------



## Famateur (Sep 9, 2013)

Michael, thanks for the thorough review. The work that you put into it shows in the quality of the video and the insights/conclusions you presented. Well done.

A few random thoughts:


The moire for the 70D was as disappointing as the Nikon was impressive. 
AF performance (particularly servo) of the 70D eclipses any of its weaknesses (for me).
For the buffer test, it would have been nice to see RAW-only performance (rather than RAW+JPEG).
I like the way you tested outer AF points (very useful info for me).

Anyway, thanks again for the very helpful review. I'm pretty certain the 70D will be my next camera purchase, and it's nice to know its weaknesses going into it. Its strengths (in my opinion) far outweigh the weaknesses for my purposes, and it will be a big leap forward from what I have right now.

I'm excited!


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Sep 9, 2013)

WD said:


> Offtopic: Since a few days I'm a proud owner of a 70D and really love the camera! With the 70-200 2.8 IS II it's very hard to beat by other aps-c sensor camera's. And hello to this forum!


Congratulations on your purchase of a 70D ... may it serve you well ... and WELCOME to CR.


----------



## sdsr (Sep 9, 2013)

Thanks, Michael – much of that video was useful and interesting (and, if my decision were based on your review and I were in the market for an APS-C camera, I would have no hesitation choosing the Canon unless there were Nikon APS-C lenses I particularly wanted). 

A few thoughts on just one topic, for whatever they’re worth:

The problem with overall image quality comparisons made by taking a JPEG of the same model/scene in the same light etc. with two or more cameras is that while one may look obviously better than the other(s), the differences aren’t necessarily explained by any inherent feature of either camera, even assuming the same lens is attached to each (was it, by the way?). 

Take, for instance, that sickly green that the Nikon added even to things that aren’t green at all (such as the model’s skin) in your examples. Presumably that can be fixed by adjusting the color balance in the JPEG settings by using a similar tweak to that provided by Rockwell for fixing the green bias he’s complained consistently about in the D800 and D600 since the day they were released. I suspect each camera’s JPEG settings could be tweaked so that the results look much the same as each other in terms of tone, sharpness, noise, etc. 

In other words, all such comparisons show is how two sets of JPEG settings compare; and since each camera provides a wide range of settings to choose from, and allows you to customize each one further, I’m not sure that proves anything useful at all - except perhaps to a novice intimidated by the prospect of changing color, noise reduction, etc. settings and who wants to compare cameras based on their unaltered factory JPEG settings (are they the JPEG settings you used?).

So, I would find it more helpful if such comparisons were made via RAW files run through the same software – LR, DxO etc. - with minimal or no tweaking. While such software can of course be used to make the photos look as different or similar (up to a point) as you like, thereby making comparisons useless, at least if the RAW files are left untweaked or minimally tweaked (e.g. LR’s default import settings), one should get a better idea of what each camera is “really” doing. Do the Nikon’s RAW images have the same green bias? Does that “makeup” look you refer to go away if you look at minimally processed RAW files? Does Canon have a high ISO advantage merely because Canon uses more aggressive noise reduction at the JPEG settings you used? Etc.

Finally, a question: Is that green bias visible in the viewfinder and on the monitor? A while ago I rented a D600 and a D800 and was rather put off to see that the viewfinder in each had an olive green tint, almost as though I was wearing sunglasses (same for the monitors on both). Luckily I noticed little or no green bias in the RAW files I shot. So I’m wondering how similar the D7100 is to the two FF cameras (I think Rockwell’s review of the D7100 said that there was no such bias on the monitor; but I would rather it were there than in the photos!).


----------



## Harald Wiking (Sep 9, 2013)

The green/yellow cast in Nikon, which profile did you use in the test?
nice work anywhay


----------



## MichaelTheMaven (Sep 10, 2013)

All good questions. I will try to answer them the best I can:

- The lenses used were both 24-70 2.8 from their respective companies, in the case of the Canon it was the L II
- I used AWB (Ill explain why in a second)
- I used the Standard, default picture style on both cameras
- Could the green tint be fixed by shifting the WB, styles, or other settings? Probably, the one problem there is being able to say "this is how you do it in every case" as many users may be having different experiences depending on their lighting, lens, subject matter etc. So I try to stick more with "this is what I am seeing"

I believe the green cast is part of the camera's processing for 2 reasons:

1. Im not seeing it through the lens when the picture is taken.
2. The intensity of the green shade seems to be amplified with greater ISO. If you look carefully at the ISO color charts, you can visibly see this amplification happening each step up, both in the green swatch as well as the black border. It is also demonstrated with the ISO of the model at 400. 

The suggestion on the RAW files is also appreciated and I know where you are coming from. I think the next time I do a buffer test it will be with JPEG only and RAW only. 

I am hesitant to use many RAW images for analysis in these comparisons for a few assumptions (which also may be incorrect):

1. Everyone has a different way to process RAW, and in many cases, some people will be more or less effective & creative in processing RAW files than others. The variation you can get between someone who really knows what they are doing in RAW vs someone who doesn't is pretty wide. 
2. Even converting the RAW files into JPEGs to display in the video often changes how they look comparatively. 
3. I'm more interested in what the processors are doing in camera, as the typical user (example: soccer mom) wont even use RAW files.

Part of my shooting philosophy is that the more changes you have to make to a camera right out of the box, for example, changing WB for every lighting condition, changing & tweaking picture styles, converting RAW files a certain way is all useful and relevant, but the vast majority of users of these cameras do not want to have to change anything. 

They want to open the box, shoot and get results and that is what I try to stick as close to as possible, what the "real world experience" with the camera will be, not so much how someone with an advanced knowledge will be able to "tweak it". I personally do not like changing WB and if I have a camera that requires it, I see this as a disadvantage, so I tend to shoot with AWB on both cameras to see how they differ. If that makes sense. 

Im absolutely open to any ideas you guys have in terms of testing, and have implemented many. I really do want to make these tests as high quality as possible, so I certain appreciate your comments & feedback. 

M


----------



## thgmuffin (Sep 10, 2013)

Thanks for the informative review Michael!


----------



## sdsr (Sep 11, 2013)

MichaelTheMaven said:


> I am hesitant to use many RAW images for analysis in these comparisons for a few assumptions (which also may be incorrect):
> 
> 1. Everyone has a different way to process RAW, and in many cases, some people will be more or less effective & creative in processing RAW files than others. The variation you can get between someone who really knows what they are doing in RAW vs someone who doesn't is pretty wide.
> 2. Even converting the RAW files into JPEGs to display in the video often changes how they look comparatively.
> 3. I'm more interested in what the processors are doing in camera, as the typical user (example: soccer mom) wont even use RAW files.



That all makes sense to me, and the "soccer mom" model may well be as good a target audience as any (assuming such a buyer seeks out reviews such as yours in the first place!); it underlines the point that comparing image quality is difficult given the almost infinite number of variables a user can play with. But maybe next time, if you have the time, you could toss in a couple of minimally processed (e.g. nothing more than LR's default import settings) RAW files along with the rest.

If you want to see if Rockwell's "fix" for the green bias works on the D7100, here's his recipe for the D600 (I've no idea how well it works there, either):

MENU > SHOOTING > White Balance > AUTO > right click to AUTO Normal > right click to the rainbow chart > click one down to M1 > OK.

Set M1, and the green goes away and the LCD looks fine. My biggest whines about this is that we ought not have to tweak it to get neutral color, and when we do tweak it, exactly like the other 2012 FX Nikons, the jump between M0 and M1 isn't fine enough to let me dial-out the green exactly how I'd like it dialed out.


----------



## GmwDarkroom (Sep 11, 2013)

Michael,

Excellent review. As a 60D user, I was very interested in the performance of the 70D for the in-field performance and the IQ -- the latter of which seems to be incremental. The AF and field handling look like winners, though.

Question: Does the live view give quick focusing on the "first focus"? I know Canon said that the smooth focus changes were there intentionally, but does it snap to the first selection between shots well?

My debate for the next camera continues to be 70D, 6D, or -- pie in the sky -- 5D3. Unfortunately, nobody can do that comparison test but me and my wallet. ;D


----------



## MichaelTheMaven (Sep 12, 2013)

GmwDarkroom said:


> Question: Does the live view give quick focusing on the "first focus"? I know Canon said that the smooth focus changes were there intentionally, but does it snap to the first selection between shots well?



Question- It kind of depends on a few things. I am learning that it helps to have your subject fill the frame, when it gets small is when it gets erratic, it isn't so much distance, its how large the subject is in the frame. The amount of contrast also seems to play a role, a hard edge seems to focus quicker than say a grey wall.



sdsr said:


> MichaelTheMaven said:
> 
> 
> > I am hesitant to use many RAW images for analysis in these comparisons for a few assumptions (which also may be incorrect):
> ...



Good info worth sharing. Thank you!


----------



## ams2d (Sep 12, 2013)

Worse video ever!

Joking! Just tossed in a contrast to the amount of accolades you’ve received for the video so far (add mine as well) and will continue to receive. 

Though the 70D was the winner there still are areas where the D7100 is better and hopefully the next versions of each will push the difference closer. IMO the decision on which one you buy may come down to what you have currently. If you have Nikon lenses then unless you are willing to sell and move to Canon, you stick with the D7100 unless you are willing to buy new glass along with the 70D body and the same applies if you have a Canon.

One question about the buffer test. Did you do, for your own information, a RAW only test for each camera? Curious if the shots where the buffer was reached was the same as the RAW+JPG or I would guess would be a few more shots.

Thank you again for the informative and balanced video.


----------



## stolpe (Sep 12, 2013)

I like your videos as well, very informative and not Canon or Nikon colored.
It still hurts that Canon haven't cought up on dynamic range and some other stuff, but wer are getting there. 
I still love my Canon 5D Mark III camera and won't change brand, it's good with competition as well. It forces Canon to be on their toes or how you say it. (Canon can we please get a focus assist light on our cameras?)

Keep up the good work Michael.

Over and out, Stolpe


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Sep 12, 2013)

Whenever I buy a new lens or a camera, I end up reading/watching reviews but invariably the reviews I read/watch, recommend the product I considered, but did not buy ... take for example my decision to buy Nikon D7100 ... I am primarily a Canon shooter but I went with the Nikon D7100, then comes Michael (and a few other reviewers) who highly recommend the Canon 70D ... what the hell? ;D ... does it ever happen to you guys that you buy something and everything you hear is for the gear you decided against?


----------

