Curious Question for 7D Owners

[Bill Binder]

Two questions:

How many of you actually wanted to buy a 5D2 but went with the 7D because of the lack of 24p and 60p on the 5D2 (even despite the fact the 5D2 is supposedly getting an eventual update)?

Of those folks, now that you have a 7D, how many of you plan on ditching it and getting a 5D2 once the new firmware comes out?

(Note: I know some us will go for both bodies, so that complicates things a bit, but mention that if that's your scenario...)

[Christian Huaux]

I choosed the 7D because of the 60p over the 5D
and over T1i because of the external mic plug.

I'm mostly filming car race & drag racing.

No plan to change now.

[Michael Simons]

I bought the 7D because I liked the price better.

[Jay Houser]

I already had a 5D and 5d mkII, bought the 7D mainly for the extra reach of the 1.6 crop.

[Jon Fairhurst]

I stuck with the 5D2, which I bought in December 2008. The lack of fast wide primes for the 7D, and my faith that Canon would deliver 24p, led me to stick with it.

[Ger Griffin]

Pal land here, had no choice. happy now though. It was a painful wait watching all that lovely 5dmk2 footage and not being able to use it.

[Burk Webb]

The price and frame rates were the deciding factor for me. I bought it as an experiment and as a back up camera. Now I can't put the thing down -

Oh, and the nice HD HDMI out when recording.

[Brian Brown]

I bought the 7D because:

- 24p/29.97p now

- I could get it "same as cash" for 6 months @ BestBuy (and I didn't have enough credit line to get the 5D2)

- some better video-centric features

- lovely HD HDMI output for studio monitoring

After shooting a bunch of video with it, I know now I'd also like a 5D2 body for the wide stuff. Because wide & fast glass is expen$ive (nod to the 5D2) and long and fast glass is expen$ive (nod to the 7D). And full-frame? Who doesn't want some of that?

I shot some corporate interview stuff with my 7D today, using my old XH-A1 as my second-cam... and I really can't see using that old cam anymore. Cutting to the 7D footage is just so much better. My A1 is just an over-priced field recorder for me now... and all of the zebras, XLR inputs, form-factor benefits, ergonomics ... you name it, just don't make up for that glorious super-35mm image. I'll put up with the hassles to get it.

Besides, it makes my clients feel like they're in a Hollywood feature when I slap that slate in their face!

Hope this helps,
Brian Brown
BrownCow Productions

[Ben Winter]

7D here, just bought a few days ago. The only reason I wanted the 5Dmk2 was the full frame DOF (not sure what you mean Brian but 7D isn't super35, it's APS-C which is a good deal smaller) but a 7D with a fast lens isn't shabby either. Some people would complain about sharpness of wide-open lenses, but 1920x1080 recording on a 18mp sensor skips so many lines that the sharpness of a photo lens for video becomes a moot point.

7D also has fantastic low light performance--beats RED even!

Of course it also depends on your lens choice--I have a tamron 17-50 f/2.8 with IS, about $650. Very fast, very pretty image. Fast lenses for 5D are the L series, which are $1k+ ($$$)

A side note about 24p vs. 30p: a friend of mine shot a spec commercial for Nike on RED, and also on Canon 5D (this was before 7D). The guys at Nike actually preferred the 5D 30p footage!

[Bill Pryor]

The APS-C chip is very close to Academy 4-perf, but smaller than Super 35. The 5DMKII is closer to 65mm film, I believe. I went with the 7D because of that chip size, 24p and slomo. I don't want any shallower depth of field than what I get with the 7D. Sometimes I have to work a bit to get it deeper when I need to. If I were primarily a still photographer who does some video, then I would have got the 5D, but I'm a video guy who does some stills and for me the 7D works for that. The bigger chip, of course, has a bit better resolution, a bit better low light performance, and as mentioned it's easier to get wide angle lenses. However, lenses like that Tokina 11-16 are good, sharp, reasonably fast at f2.8 and affordable.

I haven't had my XH A1 out of its bag since I took delivery of the 7D the first part of October. Originally I bought the 7D because it was time to upgrade my still camera (from a 20D) and I thought the video capability would be nice to have as backup, especially for out of town trips where a problem with the XH A1 would be disastrous. However, after initial testing, the XH A1 became the backup camera. On local shoots I don't even take the XH A1 with me anymore, though it goes on out of town shoots and stays in its bag. I have some Steadicam work coming up soon and haven't done that since getting the 7D. I may use the XH A1 for that because of the higher depth of field, which is good for Steadicam shooting.

[Bill Binder]

So, my real question is quite simply this:

Who here would have rather had bought a 5D2 but bought a 7D instead because of the framerates, and now that you have the 7D, are plenty happy and have no intent to upgrading to a 5D2 once the firmware comes out.

What I'm trying to get at (Canon are you listening?), is whether Canon is losing money because of the drawn out wait for the firmware. I personally know two people in this camp, and I was curious how many of you might also be in that camp (e.g., you would have happily paid $1000+ more for the 5D2 if it had the framerates, but since it didn't you went with the 7D, pocketed the extra, and are perfectly content now and won't be upgrading when the firmware comes out)?

[Brian Brown]

According to this:
http://blog.tylerginter.com/wp-conte...or-size-71.png

Super-35mm (1.85): 24 mm x 12.98mm
4-perf. (1.85): 20.96mm x 11.33mm

Compared to:
7D sensor: 22.3mm × 14.9mm
5D2 sensor: 36mm x 24mm

At any rate, compared to my previous 1/3" sensor world... the 7D is a whole 'nuther world, indeed.

[Brian Brown]

Bill, let's not forget that Canon sells these cams to primarily STILLS shooters. Probably by a factor of 10,000:1. So the small subset of us that want to use 'em primarily to shoot video is not a very large contingent for them to worry about losing $1,000/body.

The 1DMkIV is a much bigger fish for them to sell to pros. And the choice of a pro-sumer full-frame or crop body on the way down to the Rebel series makes for a nice vertical offering from them.

So "are they listening?" Probably not, compared the the masses of stills shooters out there. Why would they?

[Michael Winget]

I have yet to buy my 7D, but have chosen it over the 5DmkII mainly for the lower price and slo-mo options. With that extra $1K, I can get another really nice lens. A common practice among 7D owners.

How cheap would the 7D be if many of the still photography features were stripped down/completely removed, while maintaining the same video capabilities? What if those still features were REPLACED with additional video capabilities (i.e. built-in audio monitoring/mixing, zebras, scopes, longer clip limit than 12 min., etc.) but still kept it simple? how much would that camera cost? Interchangeable lenses on video isn't new, but the ability to use the wide gamut of lenses on such a small and stripped-down unit is, and another quality that attracted me to the 7D (versus the bigger cameras like the EX1 and so forth).

Give us a small, simple, but CAPABLE camera that shoots the 35mm look without an adapter, and if it shoots stills too, that's cool. Just don't raise the price for the stills stuff!

To clarify...the size of the 7D, the simplicity of what it does, and the amazing moving images it captures are what we love about it, right? All we want are a few more small features. If Canon could keep the price down by taking away some of the still shooting aspects, making it a "video camera that takes nice stills" (as somebody on the forum so eloquently put it), that's a camera I'd be interested in.

[Bill Pryor]

Bill, I think it's a bit inaccurate to talk about the 5DMKII or the 1DMKIV as "upgrades" to the 7D. Each one is a different beast. If you're a photojournalist, National Geographic photographer, or military photographer shooting in the sandstorms in Afghanistan, then the 1DMKIV is the best tool for the job--excellent in low light, and as close to airtight as any camera made. For still photography and 30p video the 5DMKII is excellent. Some cinematographers are using it and going through the big hassle of 24p conversion just for that extra resolution--it's a great look. The 7D hits another market--filmmakers who want the latitude and depth of field control.

There are some people out there who have all three cameras and use each one when it's the best for what they're doing. I think these hybrids are very much like the RED, in that each camera is a "brain." You buy the one you prefer for what you're doing, and the nice thing is that if you decide you need a different "brain," that's all you have to buy--all your lenses, rods support system, mattebox, sound gear, etc., will work on any of the cameras (assuming you're using "full frame" lenses).

I know quite a number of filmmakers around here who are now using the 7D for the reasons I mentioned in the earlier post--good control of DOF without being ruled by it, 24p capability, and 60fps slomo capability. Nobody seems to talk about price as that big a factor, because once they get the necessary lenses and all, they've spent more than what an XH A1 cost a couple of years ago. I've already doubled the price of my camera and don't even have a follow focus system yet (which I'm coming to believe is essential if you use any of the DSLR zooms because of the short focus throw they all have--my ancient Nikkor lenses are much better in that regard).

By the way, here's the latest film being made with a 7D (only half a million dollar budget, but sounds pretty good):
http://www.reelchicago.com/story.cfm?storyID=2683