If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400
In article , android wrote:
Sandman Who's the winner? 09/17/2014 "Uh, the D7100 beats the 7D in most areas. The 7D has slightly better ISO performance and shoots at 10fps compared to 6fps for the D7100, other than that, it's utterly trounced." I.e. I was already well aware of the two small advantages the 7D has, and seeing how small the difference is with ISO, it's really just one advantage. Almost twice the frame rate, five times the RAW buffer and clearly better high ISO. Slightly higher frame rate, and barely noticably better ISO performance. That's $500 for you. That's what action photogs want. I'd say that's it not the 7D2 thats humiliated. It's the poster that confuses it with a five year old camera. When did you confuse it with a five year old camera? Either way, you're humiliated, I agree. -- Sandman[.net] |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400
In article ,
Sandman wrote: In article , android wrote: Sandman Who's the winner? 09/17/2014 "Uh, the D7100 beats the 7D in most areas. The 7D has slightly better ISO performance and shoots at 10fps compared to 6fps for the D7100, other than that, it's utterly trounced." --- That's what action photogs want. I'd say that's it not the 7D2 thats humiliated. It's the poster that confuses it with a five year old camera. When did you confuse it with a five year old camera? Either way, you're humiliated, I agree. You can't read your own writing then... In article , Sandman wrote: If you can't read English, do not participate in a written medium. That's what he wrote... -- teleportation kills http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400
In article , android wrote:
In article , Sandman: Sandman Who's the winner? 09/17/2014 "Uh, the D7100 beats the 7D in most areas. The 7D has slightly better ISO performance and shoots at 10fps compared to 6fps for the D7100, other than that, it's utterly trounced." --- android: That's what action photogs want. I'd say that's it not the 7D2 thats humiliated. It's the poster that confuses it with a five year old camera. Sandman: When did you confuse it with a five year old camera? Either way, you're humiliated, I agree. You can't read your own writing then... I can, when did you confuse it for a five year old camera? -- Sandman[.net] |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400
In article ,
Sandman wrote: In article , android wrote: In article , Sandman: Sandman Who's the winner? 09/17/2014 "Uh, the D7100 beats the 7D in most areas. The 7D has slightly better ISO performance and shoots at 10fps compared to 6fps for the D7100, other than that, it's utterly trounced." --- android: That's what action photogs want. I'd say that's it not the 7D2 thats humiliated. It's the poster that confuses it with a five year old camera. Sandman: When did you confuse it with a five year old camera? Either way, you're humiliated, I agree. You can't read your own writing then... I can, when did you confuse it for a five year old camera? You can take him now... -- teleportation kills http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400
In article , Whisky-dave wrote:
android: That's what action photogs want. I'd say that's it not the 7D2 thats humiliated. It's the poster that confuses it with a five year old camera. Sandman: When did you confuse it with a five year old camera? Either way, you're humiliated, I agree. What I'd like to know (sandman) yet again is what camera you're actully talking about the old canon 7D or the NEW canon 7D2 it's not clear. The topic is the new version of the 7D, which is all I've been talking about, naturally. Like I said yesterday: Sandman 7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400 09/21/2014 "It's all you've got, troll. I've been talking about the Mark II the entire time. I just think Canon's naming scheme is stupid. It's the new version of the 7D. Focus on irrelevant things instead of staying focused on facts, Android." Sandman: "Uh, the D7100 beats the 7D in most areas." Which 7D are you talking about The one the thread is about. -- Sandman[.net] |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400
In article , Whisky-dave wrote:
android: That's what action photogs want. I'd say that's it not the 7D2 thats humiliated. It's the poster that confuses it with a five year old camera. Sandman: When did you confuse it with a five year old camera? Either way, you're humiliated, I agree. Whisky-dave: What I'd like to know (sandman) yet again is what camera you're actully talking about the old canon 7D or the NEW canon 7D2 it's not clear. Sandman: The topic is the new version of the 7D, which is all I've been talking about, naturally. So the sentance "Yeah, like I said - the 7D is trounced by the D7100," tells us that does it. No, all the information I posted that only apply to the second version of the 7D does, plus my clarification that I quoted. Easy for someone fluent in English to understand. Sandman: Like I said yesterday: So from now on every time you type 7D we are to substitute 7D mark II Why would you do that? When was the last time I talked about the 7D? It's not that difficult to get such things right is it ? I suppose in your world when you talk about eh canon 5D you are actually refering to the 5D mk II or do you mean the 5D mk III ? I would be in reference to the latest version of it, just as I would if I was talking about the Nikon D4. Sandman: "Uh, the D7100 beats the 7D in most areas." Whisky-dave: Which 7D are you talking about Sandman: The one the thread is about. and how is that worked out then...... from wht you type or what;s rattling around in your head No, what the thread is about. You can read it yourself, it's written with text in English. Android: "Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100 at ISO 6400..." Me: "Yeah, like I said - the 7D is trounced by the D7100" Drunk Dave: "Eh, why is he talking about a different camera? I don't understand!" -- Sandman[.net] |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 10:12:41 +0200, android wrote:
In article , Sandman wrote: In article , android wrote: In article , Sandman: Sandman Who's the winner? 09/17/2014 "Uh, the D7100 beats the 7D in most areas. The 7D has slightly better ISO performance and shoots at 10fps compared to 6fps for the D7100, other than that, it's utterly trounced." --- android: That's what action photogs want. I'd say that's it not the 7D2 thats humiliated. It's the poster that confuses it with a five year old camera. Sandman: When did you confuse it with a five year old camera? Either way, you're humiliated, I agree. You can't read your own writing then... I can, when did you confuse it for a five year old camera? You can take him now... There are pretty good reviews and discussions on the 7D2 all over the web and on-line forums that give good information on the new camera, minus all the invective and pointless arguing that we have here. So if it's INFO you want, go to those places. If you want to argue about everything EXCEPT the 7D2, you have found your ideal place here in the newsgroup. The only people who inhabit these newsgroups are those who like to insult and challenge, and who enjoy being abused in that way. Sandman, how would you compare the 7D to the 7D? W |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
JPEG? Means nothing.
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 09:28:00 +0200, android wrote:
http://www.imaging-resource.com has got a "Beta" of the 7D2 and posted jpegs of their test targets in their camera "comperometer". Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100 at ISO 6400... The Canon's on the left: http://tinyurl.com/mhpwv5m I'm a RAW kind of guy but it's a preview. "Half frame" fanatics should be ecstatic! All you're comparing is JPG engines, which have so many variables that with a few tweaks you could shift "better" from one camera to the other in minutes. Show me the raw files and then we'll know. This is for the curious, but really says nothing. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
JPEG? Means nothing.
On 23/09/2014 5:48 a.m., Bowser wrote:
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 09:28:00 +0200, android wrote: http://www.imaging-resource.com has got a "Beta" of the 7D2 and posted jpegs of their test targets in their camera "comperometer". Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100 at ISO 6400... The Canon's on the left: http://tinyurl.com/mhpwv5m I'm a RAW kind of guy but it's a preview. "Half frame" fanatics should be ecstatic! All you're comparing is JPG engines, which have so many variables that with a few tweaks you could shift "better" from one camera to the other in minutes. Show me the raw files and then we'll know. This is for the curious, but really says nothing. Only if the raw files aren't "cooked". Fuji are the latest culprit, with raw files from X-trans sensor models showing less shot noise than would be possible if quantum efficiency was 100%, kicking in at settings above ISO 1600. In fact, raw data analysis shows exactly the same amount of shot noise from ISO 1600 to ISO 6400. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400
In article , Wally wrote:
There are pretty good reviews and discussions on the 7D2 all over the web and on-line forums that give good information on the new camera, minus all the invective and pointless arguing that we have here. So if it's INFO you want, go to those places. If you want to argue about everything EXCEPT the 7D2, you have found your ideal place here in the newsgroup. The only people who inhabit these newsgroups are those who like to insult and challenge, and who enjoy being abused in that way. But enough about android now. Sandman, how would you compare the 7D to the 7D? I don't use Canon, I dislike their control interface. I think it's too bad that the new 7D doesn't have better ISO performance, and that even an old Nikon model outperforms it in most ways while being $500 cheaper. -- Sandman[.net] |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Nikon new release D7100 | Rob | Digital Photography | 159 | March 15th 13 11:09 AM |
6400 on the D3? How about 12,800 on a little P&S? | RichA | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | January 24th 08 08:29 PM |