Thinking of upgrading from my T3i.

[Liz22012]

Thinking of upgrading from my T3i. I like the 7d a lot but do I get the older 7d or wait and get the 7dii?

[flylooper]

The 7D is a full frame camera, so far as I know. That's an advantage, but...

Wow! you need to pony up $1700 for that 7D body. Aside from the $$$ you have invested in the t3i (a camera "for the rest of us") you'll be in for a sizable bundle. Consider the cost benefit: how much and the type of shooting you do has to be factored in.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@flylooper wrote:

The 7D is a full frame camera, so far as I know. That's an advantage, but...

Wow! you need to pony up $1700 for that 7D body. Aside from the $$$ you have invested in the t3i (a camera "for the rest of us") you'll be in for a sizable bundle. Consider the cost benefit: how much and the type of shooting you do has to be factored in.

---

Neither the 7D nor the 7D Mark II is a full-frame camera.

[flylooper]

My mistake. I assumed for that kind of dough, you get the real deal! 

I've got a t3i (gifted to me) and am in the process of trying to learn all this stuff about DSLRs, etc.

At my level of shooting (ultra-greenhorn) the t3i camera will take a while to completely understand. The camera seems to have lot of really nice features as it is, the only drawback is it's format being that 1.6 decrease in coverage. (There must be more but I haven't discovered them yet. But they're marvelous in what they can do, there's no doubt!

Interestingly, all this research with DSLRs has renewed my interest in film photography. I've pulled my 50 year old Pentax Spotmatic down from a shelf and may try my luck with it on an upcoming trip.

Just think—only four things to worry about: focus, speed, ASA and aperture. 🙂

Bob

[Skirball]

---

@flylooper wrote:

My mistake. I assumed for that kind of dough, you get the real deal! 

I've got a t3i (gifted to me) and am in the process of trying to learn all this stuff about DSLRs, etc.

At my level of shooting (ultra-greenhorn) the t3i camera will take a while to completely understand. The camera seems to have lot of really nice features as it is, the only drawback is it's format being that 1.6 decrease in coverage. (There must be more but I haven't discovered them yet. But they're marvelous in what they can do, there's no doubt!

 

Bob

---

Bob, a couple of comments on your post.  Of course, it's your opinion, and you're entitled to it, but I think there are a couple of misconceptions here, and you'd benefit from understanding them.

First, that Full Frame is the 'real deal', imply that crop is some sort of lesser breed.  It's not, it's just different.  Really the only significant difference is that full frame has better high iso performance (less noise) than crop.  Always will, so long as technology is the same.  But the crop factor doesn't mean squat.  In fact, if anything, I'd put it on the 'plus' side of crop cameras.  There are other, smaller differences.  In summarizing them I'm going to (intentionally) gloss over some finer details, so take it with a grain of salt:  the softening you get as you stop down your aperture affects full frame slightly less.  In other words, you can use a slightly higher aperture with full frame.  Full frame will also get you a thinner depth of field for more out of focus background, but how this impacts you in the real world is arguable.

That's really about it.  On the flip side,

• crop sensors are smaller and lighter and cheaper - in general
• they can you a whole line of (cheaper to manufacture) lenses that full frame cannot,plus all the full frame lenses
• crop sensors only use the inner part of a 'full frame lens', which is the optically superior part
• they get a crop factor "magnification" which can be very beneficial when using telephoto lenses, which get very expensive as they get long
• the max sync speed is higher, very useful to flash photographers
• it's easier to get a higher fps with crop than it is full frame
• there are several, cheap, ultrawide angle EF-S lenses that get you just as wide as a full frame can get (and costs much more to get that wide on a full frame)

As mentioned in the last bullet point, there really isn't a decrease in coverage with crop, you just use a wide angle crop lens (EF-S). The EF-S 10-22 (or the new $300 EF-S 10-18) on a crop covers about the same field of view as the 16-35 does on a full frame, it just costs less. 

[ebiggs1]

"Consider the cost benefit: how much and the type of shooting you do has to be factored in."

But it doesn't end with that.  I will add 'feel', too.  You need to handle the camera and see it is feels right.  For me the big difference between brand N and my beloved 1D Mk IV is the feel.  A 1 series just feels right to me.  Once you go 1 series you will nevr go back to any lesser camera.

Of course not to mention, Canon lenses are next to none.  They are absolutely the best there is.  Plus no other company has the extensive line of lenses as Canon.  Not even close.

But to my point, a 7D Mk II is going to have a completely different feel to it than a Rebel.  Try before you buy.