PDA

View Full Version : 7D or 300Ds



KCK
March 6th, 2010, 10:01 AM
I know there's Canon fans and Nikon fans. Based only upon the products not what lenses you may already own. Which one would you buy?

ColoradoSkier
March 6th, 2010, 10:13 AM
What are you going to use it for?

Jeffro600
March 6th, 2010, 10:28 AM
Lets assume im new to the game and have zero gear...ive been eyeballing these cameras for a while and while i would love to swap back to Nikon because of their full frame dominance at the moment, ive got too much invested into glass to swap right now. I shoot Canon and have on and off for several years now but i am in no way, shape or form a "fanboi".

Here are the differences ive found...

The Canon shoots 8FPS out of the box, the Nikon, 7...unless you add the grip which is another 200+, then you get 8 FPS. Advantage, albeit slight to Canon.

Canon has an 18MP sensor...the Nikon, 12. Most will say you dont need that much resolution and i agree...but it sure is nice to have if you need it and Canon finally packed a crop sensor with alot of MP's and did it without lots of noise. Resolution advantage clearly goes to Canon and will allow you much more cropping freedom.

Auto Focus...mixed bag of positives to both cameras however, the 7D is claiming to have damn near Canon 1D auto focus performance which is arguably the best in the business....after using the 7D a little, its close, but not quite up to 1D standards(my main camera is a 1D series). Based upon the features or what you need, id say draw.

The Canons movie mode is clearly better as it offers manual exposure control where as the Nikons doesnt...not that i condone video usage in a DSLR :rolleyes:, it does have its place to some users i guess. Canon advantage.

Pick them up side by side...the Canons menus more easily navigated IMO and key features are more easily accessed. The feel of the camera in my hands feels better with the 7D and i think you will find most agree. Canon advantage.

High ISO shooting is important to the game nowdays. And Nikon is the clear leader in this field, but it comes at a price as most of their cameras are 12MP's or less. Still more than enough but like i said before, its nice to have those extra ones. But the 300s had at least a half stop advantage over the Canon...probably closer to a full stop...and when your talking ISOs that are 3200...6400...a full stop is a BIG difference. BIG Nikon advantage.

The Canon has several clear and distinct advantages over the Nikon...but honestly, if i were to start completely over, id go back to Nikon is a heartbeat and i still kick myself in the ass on a frequent basis for selling all my gear and picking Canon back up. They are the dominant force in getting clean, high ISO shots and while most of the Canons can hold their own, they just dont compare in that area. Canon played the MP race game for the last couple years and it cost them dearly as several swapped back to Nikon...i do think they are starting to see the light and realize its not about how many MP's or what kinda gimmicky crap you can add to a camera as much as it is about image quality and overall camera performance.

I forgot about price...the 300s will cost you a couple hundred bucks more. You also need to take a strong look at the future of your shooting needs...since assuming you have no lenses, base your decision on who offers lenses that will suit your needs.

KCK
March 6th, 2010, 11:20 AM
I will use it mainly for shooting sports at distances of 50 feet or less both indoors and out. I think I can get them for about the same price for the body through a friend. I just don't want to feel the need for an upgrade in a couple years. I haven't bought an SLR since film days. Best lense for $600-$700 range. You guys have been very helpful, Thanks.

Jeffro600
March 6th, 2010, 11:27 AM
I will use it mainly for shooting sports at distances of 50 feet or less both indoors and out. I think I can get them for about the same price for the body through a friend. I just don't want to feel the need for an upgrade in a couple years. I haven't bought an SLR since film days. Best lense for $600-$700 range. You guys have been very helpful, Thanks.

Either camera will last you a long time as long as your not a technology whore and need the latest and greatest all the time. Both will be better than any 35mm film SLR by a country mile.

As for best lens for sports in the 600-700 dollar range...

If you go Nikon, one of the old 80-200mm F2.8 push\pulls can be had for about that price and are a very good lens

If you go Canon, a 70-200 F4 can be had used for about 450-500...arguably one of canons sharpest and best zoom lenses out there for the price. If you can flip a few hunderd more, you can step up to the 70-200 F2.8 which will be considerably better for sports, especially as the light gets less than ideal. Youll need at least 2.8 for any indoor work without additional lighting.

If youll be doing alot of indoor shooting, you might find that you want something even faster...a F1.8 prime or faster can be had in both formats in your price range.

~tc~
March 6th, 2010, 03:51 PM
Good post Jeffro, I agree completely!

If you're going to be shooting sports indoors, the higher ISO performance of the Nikon could become a big deal in a hurry.