would you change a 1D mark III with a 7D?

[Paolo Piazza]

I would like to know some opinions about my question; in case you own a 1D mark III would you make the change with a 7D for bird photography? at the moment I am :confused:
you can answer with smilie if you like

bye bye ;)

[Charles Glatzer]

In a word, NO! Wait to see how the new AF fairs in the real world before doing anything. And, by then the Mark IV may be announced ;).

Chas

[Axel Hildebrandt]

The 7D might complement the Mark III nicely when more reach is necessary and the light is good but I would not replace the Mark III.

[Michael Wolf]

In a word, NO! Wait to see how the new AF fairs in the real world before doing anything. And, by then the Mark IV may be announced ;).

Chas

Hoping against hope that the smilie wink is from someone in the know, you know!?

I too have a Mark III but I am getting the 7D for my 500 for the extra reach as the 1.6 crop
is a bonus. Never thought their would be much of a difference between a 1.3 & 1.6 crop but there is!

[Michael Pancier]

I've only tested the 7D with moving cars from a 15th story window. The 19 points is a major improvement. But still need to try it out with the birds to see how it fares.

[arash_hazeghi]

Wait until Monday...

[Roger Clark]

I too have a Mark III but I am getting the 7D for my 500 for the extra reach as the 1.6 crop
is a bonus. Never thought their would be much of a difference between a 1.3 & 1.6 crop but there is!

This is a common misconception. There is only a field of view difference between different sized sensors, not a reach difference. The difference in "reach" or pixels on subject is die to pixel pitch, not sensor crop. The 7D will give more pixels on the subject with the same lens because the pixel spacing is less than that in the current 1.3 crop sensors. Whether that smaller pixel spacing translates into more resolution depends on the lens resolution and technique. Better technique will be required with the smaller pixel pitch sensor.

The 7D looks interesting.

Anyone get the feeling that the camera manufacturers are dribbling out the camera improvements trying to get everyone to buy the next model, but that model is not quite good enough, so you'll want the next model? The 5DII should have had faster readout with better AF. Now the 7D has that but smaller sensor. They are baiting us! ;) And why do the pro cameras lag in features from those of the lower consumer models?

Roger

[Vivek Khanzode]

Amen! If they sold a 1D class product in a 7D style case, then I don;t need another camera! Canon (and to a lesser degree Nikon), I have a feeling, don't like the sound of that.

-- V


This is a common misconception. There is only a field of view difference between different sized sensors, not a reach difference. The difference in "reach" or pixels on subject is die to pixel pitch, not sensor crop. The 7D will give more pixels on the subject with the same lens because the pixel spacing is less than that in the current 1.3 crop sensors. Whether that smaller pixel spacing translates into more resolution depends on the lens resolution and technique. Better technique will be required with the smaller pixel pitch sensor.

The 7D looks interesting.

Anyone get the feeling that the camera manufacturers are dribbling out the camera improvements trying to get everyone to buy the next model, but that model is not quite good enough, so you'll want the next model? The 5DII should have had faster readout with better AF. Now the 7D has that but smaller sensor. They are baiting us! ;) And why do the pro cameras lag in features from those of the lower consumer models?

Roger

[Matty Fidler]

Myself and a friend both chucked our mk3's for 5D mk2's and we are wildlife togs.
The bloody things were more trouble than good. :(