7d - buy ?

Reasons to buy

All this stuff is desposable, I could flog my 5d and get the 7d it for nearly nothing, (but would need a new wide zoom)

I could stop framerate stress, hit a few more focus marks and get some range without lugging my 400 2.8

S
 
Kholi said:
Already sounds like you've made your decision, though. Are you looking for someone to tell you something different?
Click to expand...

Not at all clear in my head

I actually preordered on the first day and have a buyer for my 5d

interesingly (to me) the 5d buyer is also the guy who has loaned me the 24-105 - so intead of buying that I could get a different wide to normal zoom at no cost

I think that I just am already missing the 14mm fullframe and 50 at 2 that I would lose
 
Well, it all comes down to taste. It's true, it's pretty easy to get an Ultra Ridiculous Wide with Full Frame. If you use it often, then go for it.

14mm on the wide end of an APS-C sized sensor is nothing to scoff at, 11mm less so. An 11-16/2.8 Tokina can be had at a fair price and works wonders. The Canon Version would allow you to adjust the aperture manually via electronic controls.
 
I also shot this at the weekend..

http://www.vimeo.com/6480091

Being an event it was different for me..

I was digging my EX1 on my rig for simplicity and also once the light went even my 5d footage is noisy

My thought at the mo is probably that all these cameras are flawed in some way so I should just move the chess peices to allow me to have the best trade value at the point when a real winner occurs and that means keeping my stuff new

S
 
Kholi said:
Well, it all comes down to taste. It's true, it's pretty easy to get an Ultra Ridiculous Wide with Full Frame. If you use it often, then go for it.
Click to expand...

well my lenses are also used for stills on my D3, so going APS (35 1.4 etc) is a PITA

im not a great fan of the 14 apart from it is just occasionally a killer esp in a water housing or tight corner POV

11 X 1.5 is 17 ish - not the same park really

ps cross postings all the way !

S
 
I think you probably have to decide whether you want a video camera primarily or a still camera. If you want stills, keep the MKii. I have no interest in the MKii look for video. It's not being closed minded, it just doesn't look right to my eyes.

If it does yours, then there's no reason to argue with yourself. Just keep it.
 
I have shot 10,000 clips on my 5d,

and one stills shoot where the LV needed for framing and I needed to outresolve my D3

I have a Blad and a nikonD3 for stills

But my lens investment is cross platform where possible for both reasons of finance and portability

using APS one becomes interested in different lenses

eg 35 1.4 instead of 50 1.4 and also different wides

over the years I have been very happy to keep my cash in FF Nikkor glass, even when shooting APS (D1,2) nikon and currently with the canon,

the market was flooded with cr&p nikkor D glass when the D3 came out

---

on your point of " it just doesn't look right to my eyes"

I think as stated above that there is a difference between 'holywood' - simple built and planned sets, even two sides rooms, where a some DOF looks 'right' - every item in the set is used to tell the story

.. and cramped undressed indy sets where the ability to blur out the sh1t is a useful tool (as is the ability to blow highlights in a nice manner) -im most likely to work in the latter !

S
 
Last edited:
No matter how much "background blur" you do, it's going to look exactly like what it is: unfunded, unplanned and in serious need of some set design.

No camera is going to save that.

Anyway, for me there's really no question about it. If there was an in-camera window ability (RED) from FF to S35 then it would be a no brainer: have both.

In lieu of the fact that there isn't, an APS-C sized sensor gives me exactly what I know I want out of an image. The 7D is the tool I suggest for cinematic narrative or commercial work. On that note, I skip out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top