Canon has just announced the new EOS 7d into its DSLR lineup. Where does it fits in the marketplace is quite clear, it is going to fight Nikon D300 in a head to head competition. The two brands now have compatriots in every equal segment, D3x versus 1Ds Mark III, D700 versus 5D Mark II, and now D700 versus EOS 7d.

Being a Canon addict, using old Canon QL as my first camera some 20-30 years ago, then came back to Canon after a while with Nikon in my early digital day, I do believe in its quality. However,  I personally do not think that Canon EOS 7d will yield significant success like the old Canon 5D or even its Nikon rival, D300.

Unfortunately as a brand new one, I am not seeing something meaningful, something that makes it stands the competition. It is a personal opinion, of course. Following are attributes exposed as the selling points of this new camera:

(1) 18MP, nice to have, but how large you want to print your photos anyway. Those who needs to print their photos very large would have gone to full frame, or even large format.

(2) And Ahhh … yes. Full HD video. Nice to have. But again, others have started to offer it a year ago.

(3) APS-C, this is the catch. At least I, and I believe most of us who are used to full frame, will personally say NO to APS-C. It only worth as a second camera if not a backup one. Many said that wedding photographers and those focusing on portrait needs APS-C. Wrong. Only those who are not used to larger format will say that. Why do you think professional model photographers goes to either Hasselblad or Mamiya? Or at least Canon 1Ds or Nikon D3? The only ones which slightly benefit from smaller factors are wildlife photographers or paparazzis needing to shoot their target from a very long distance. Pictures resulted by APS-C are slightly better that those taken by full frame then getting cropped on post production to get the same magnification. It is true even if we take into account the megapixel figures.

(4) Dual Digic4 processor. Hmm. Is it a real need or just a sales pitch? When Canon introduced a camera with Digic3, I mentioned that have never had any complain of using the camera powered with Digic1 processor. So who will feel the difference of running the older Digic3 or the new Digic4. I believe it does not that critical like processor powering your notebook.

(5) 8 frames per second. Well, not bad. But I have never need anything faster than my old 5fps camera. And those needing speed, like photojournalists, will need something even faster than 8fps. So if they want it to be a considerable benefit, they should have made it more.

(6) ISO range expandable to 12,800 this is fabulous. Well, depends on how good the grain is, of course. But my assumption is if it can go higher, than at least it give better performance in lower settings, sat 3,200 or 6,400.

(7) 3 inch LCD, 920K resolution. Cool. Cramming large MP into that small of screen does not make 920K a significant different, but cool. However, most of the new DSLRs have it already. So what?

(8) New viewfinder with 1.0 magnification and 100% coverage, is something I have always wanted. Not so essential, but a definite decision making parameter. For me it can make or break my decision to buy.

So, I personally do not think 5D fits perfectly in the market. Advanced amateurs will go to D50, entry level professionals will go for 5D Mark II. Nikon has similar situation with its D300 actually. I think advanced amateurs will go to D90 whilst entry level pros will go for D700. But at the time it get launched, Nikon had a perfect situation. Canon did not have competing product with similar specification, whilst its full-frame and cheaper 5D was aging up. And, Nikon had a predecessor to replace, D200. So D300 was something long awaited. Going up was a long leap. At that time, D3 was the next class, D700 was not exist yet.

Having old 5D in hand, I have no intention at all to buy 7D of course. In fact, I do not even seeing crucial reason to replace my 5D with 5D Mark II. It will be nice to have a backup, but when I buy one, I think I will go for 50D instead. I believe that advanced amateur will be happy enough with 50D, and when they are going pro, they will go for 5D Mark II. 7D will be skipped behind. If for financial reason, 50D users could not afford to go up to 5D Mark II, they will prefer to wait and save more, I guess.

Related Content

Subscribe to the post comments feeds or Leave a trackback