en

Canon EOS 7D Kit

- Support for interchangeable lenses: lens mount Canon EF/EF-S

- Type autofocus: phase

- Camera type: mirror

- Size: 148x111x74 mm, without lens

- Maximum resolution: 5184 x 3456

- The type of matrix: CMOS

- The total number of pixels: 19 million

- Flash: built-in, to 12 m, the suppression of red eye, Shoe, sync, bracketing, E-TTL II

Reviews

Apr 21, 2015 by

I believe I know what you are asking and based upon my understanding of what you are asking, the 7D gives you the choice of shooting RAW, JPG or a combination of both (the camera saves both a RAW and JPG image of the same shot). wow, just saw you asked the question 5 years ago. Do you even still have your 7D? LOL!!!

Oct 19, 2010 by

Hi Cliff, Once in a while I revisit old reviews particularly of gadgets I have already bought or the ones I have an eye on and this time it was the 7D I have been using. There is always new stuff and settings one learns even though it has been a year I have been using the camera. And today while reading again your review on 7D I stumbled upon the RAW/JPG button you mention on the 7D. Am I missing something here or you got it wrong when you mention that you can change from RAW to JPG using that button? I have tried it and read the manual also and as far as I can understand that button just adds the other format by pushing it, if you are shooting in RAW as I usually do when that button is pushed it gives the next shot with the usual RAW setting but one more JPG image, so rather than saving memory space you are just taking it more. If my understanding is correct I think the function of that button is to give one the idea of how the normal JPG in camera setting would look for an image while shooting RAW, or just a quick usage of a JPG image while on location and still maintaining the RAW file. Have I missed something here or there is a way around this to shoot the JPG without the RAW file as you mention it would be quite good to have that possibility of shooting raw format only to get the feel of exposure for a few sequences and then finally shooting in raw. Thanks Amin

Apr 21, 2015 by

I believe I know what you are asking and based upon my understanding of what you are asking, the 7D gives you the choice of shooting RAW, JPG or a combination of both (the camera saves both a RAW and JPG image of the same shot). wow, just saw you asked the question 5 years ago. Do you even still have your 7D? LOL!!!

Dec 18, 2009 by

I am considering buying the 7D as a partner to my 40D. I am interested in the video side of the camera as well as stills. I have seen various reviews that suggest that the video is not as good as has been suggested and am therefore a little concerned that I would be disapointed with such a large investment. The value of using good glass for vid's is obviously attractive as I like pic's of wildlife such as bird life etc. I am more than happy at present with the results of the 40D which some have said is as good as the 50D which followed it especially as prior to this I was only using a 350D with poor glass - plastic mounted lens in kits don't match camera quality do they ! I am happy enough with the 'S' lens crop which I believe does utilise the 'sweet spot' mentioned in other comments here and which works out as a cheaper option to getting good kit. A friend has sold his Digi camera in preference to a T90 (a camera which I still own and love - film is not yet dead for me!) I would be interested in more info on the film side of things in respect to this camera pre purchase which would give a definative trustworthy review. I am not considering the purchase JUST for vid's but it would be a good adjunct for me but who's comments to take seriously I am not sure. Looking at the pics on teh review against those of the 5D suggests that the 7D has not catered for the light properly on the pic of Sidmouth Sea front. The signage on the side of the Hotel seems burnt out. Is this to do with the quality of the lens or problems with the light meter readings of the camera?

Nov 16, 2009 by

Great review. Now that Canon seem to have mastered such a well reviewed camera that takes great shots in virtually all situations and with such a respectable burst rate at the top setting (8fps)i'm pleased. Personally, now all i'd like them to do is produce this performance in a full frame digital SLR with the same MP rate as the EOS 5D MK11 ( maybe even introduce a DIGIC 5 processor and bung two in, if that's what it takes to maintain the same burst rate or even 10fps perhaps?) and then i would be willing to part with my hard earned! And yes, i'd even be willing to part with a bit more money for this as long as it delivered the goods as with the 7 D.

Nov 10, 2009 by

@ red. Many thanks for your specific observations. I totally agree that looking through a viewfinder or a lens is not yet beaten, not in the smaller format that most digital cameras use, though I don't think the "35mm format"/template will replaced in the nearer future, just tinkered with and creating many more discussions.

Nov 9, 2009 by

@diehappy I didn't think your comments were rude, maybe a little terse but you explained everything far more concisely than I did. Frank noted you used a great deal of civility, as you did, in presenting your arguments (unlike one other poster above whom I alluded to earlier). No worries. Yes, swings and roundabouts. APS-C and H for speed and FF for resolution may not be so clear cut a choice in future. I often wonder which direction development will go in, seeing as how old the 35mm format is and how dated and limiting the SLR mirror system is though you can't beat looking through the lens rather than at the back at a monitor (imv). Always trade offs it seems. Ultimately, image quality depends on the ability of a lens and camera to gather light, and someone who knows how best to capture a worthwhile image.

Nov 9, 2009 by

Wow guys - only after reading all these comments about 'ads' did i actually realise the dominance of Canon adverts surrounding the review. I honestly didn't notice it first time round.. but that may just be me :-) Cliff - great review! Cheers ! TR is the main review site for me. I have based my monitor - my 'point-and-shoot' camera - external HD - and other component & peripheral decisions based on their initial opinions on products. They have never let me down before - and i don't see TR doing so in the forseeable future.

Nov 9, 2009 by

@red: As Frank noted, my comment on your explanations were a little bit rude, that was not my intention, I'm sorry. I just wanted to note in short, that one cannot tell whether APS-C cameras or FF-Cameras have less lens problems but that they both face different problems.

Nov 9, 2009 by

@diehappy Re sensor size and crop factor. Yes you are right that 1.62 crop factor is the difference in diagonal not sensor area, I should have read my own links. 26.7mm is the length of the diagonal on APS-C sensors (Canon) and full frame is 43.3mm. My comment starting "APS-C sensors are 62.5%..." is erroneous when compared to area. Respective areas of APS-C and full frame are 329mm² and 864mm², more than 2.5x as you said. For anyone wishing to quickly follow it up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format#Table_of_sensor_sizes We are agreed about the sweet spot advantage, though you summarised it far more clearly than I did. I laboured the point that people could not get additional reach from their lenses because of this crop factor and disagree that everyone knows this as clearly there is great confusion about the issue. I was responding to an earlier post since it looked as if the original commentator literally believed they were getting better reach than was the case. The advantages to APS-C are quite small I think (greater dof, sweet spot etc) and I much prefer using full frame and getting the whole field of view my lenses are capable of, even if I do get increased vignetting etc. Yes, it requires the need for higher quality glass since the FF sensor will be making full use of the entire lens circumference/area. A good trade off I think is APS-H as I believe too much is thrown away on APS-C, unless what you're binning is rubbish from low grade lenses of course. @Noodles - both excellent cameras (D300 + D300s). Trust your own judgment and buy the spec you think you'll need rather than paying over the odds just to have the very latest tech thrown in. Even though the ISO tests here clearly showed the 7D's shots were somewhat out of focus and more resolution could certainly be achieved with better glass it's still a great camera. There have been reports of autofocus issues with the 7D and a firmware update released, hopefully fixing them. Plenty of people complain about the 5D MkII and presence of unsightly noise in shadow areas at low ISOs but it's still a good camera. You buy what you can reasonably afford now with the acceptance there will be some issues and do your best to overcome them. Then later on there will be something else coming out. It's often said good lenses prove a wiser investment because of this. What I'm saying is we ought not ot get too hung up on laboratory testing and hearsay and neither on the need for the latest and greatest as that's constantly changing with new models being released all the time. @Frank - what camera are you hoping to buy? Personally speaking, though the 7D is certainly a significant evolution in terms of features and especially AF performance, I think it's very over-priced for an APS-C body and would pay the extra £300 for the 5D Mk II every time. That said, this camera's price should fall into line sometime after Christmas. I think it's a great camera but not quite worth the asking price (you can get the ID MkIII for around 2k, albeit b stock/secondhand etc). It'll be interesting to see what price-point this camera settles at (AF is expensive so I'm guessing it'll remain £1000+ like the D300, maybe £1200?).

Nov 9, 2009 by

Re the ad's, surely its a fact that the system has reconized keywords? rather than any delibrate placement?

© 2016 ScanRewiev. | Contact us | Privacy policy and cookie

Binomo lừa đảo