Here's some direct comparison shots to help you decide:
http://teamspeed.smugmug.com/Electro...67387802_ypMiz
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=760469
http://teamspeed.smugmug.com/Electro...03550341_2wv8N
My impression is that the 7D seems to handle shadows/highlights a bit better and a bit better in low light high ISO but it seems pretty minor.
In fact even the 40D versus 7D was a bit surprising to me. Its a pretty minor improvement over the 40D.
Perhaps its like APO telescopes. The differences between scopes at a certain high level becomes quite minor and not major.
Looking at those I would not update to either from a 40D. I'd want a major improvement not just slightly better or better in the other bits and pieces of the camera like AF and screen size etc.
Its kind of what I suspected. I suspect a 5DMK11 is a major improvement over the lower models. It seems the lower models have sophistications in true Japanese marketing style which is the little fussy details which no doubt are good but not much of a reason to upgrade.
Do you really need 19 pont AF? My 40D has never shot an image out of focus.
Greg.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotspur
Great-wondered how you were going Jason,with the 7D.
Still pondering this different D/SLR body question.
Is a 7D really going to be much of a difference for my wildlife/birding photography over my 50D?I am quite happy with the results from it,and really not sure if there would be in any meaningful improvement,with the 7D.
I did ponder a 5DII,but really do very little landscaping and astro these days.Mainly interested in bird photography,and using the 400L all the time.
|