
So for the past few days I’ve been doing quite a bit of research on a new digital SLR body. Since I already own Canon lenses — most of which have no resale value — the smartest thing for me to do was focus primarily on Canon camera bodies (just to put it out there: if I could get good money on the lenses I own now, I’d probably make a major switch to Nikon).
Anyway, my current digital SLR is way out of date and I decided recently that it’s about time I get some new gear in my hands. Camera technology and picture quality has changed dramatically over the last 5 years since I last purchased an SLR which means that the gap between high-end professional SLRs and pro-sumer SLRs are becoming narrower.
For example, below is a comparison chart between the Canon EOS 7D and the Canon EOS 5D Mark II (green boxes indicate superior specs).
While the 5D Mark II is the higher-end camera, it seems like the 7D is the camera that actually gets all the goodies I’d actually make use of. Sure, the 5D’s full-frame sensor is a huge deal, but at this point, I feel like I’m willing to compromise in exchange for a generally more sophisticated feature-set in the Canon 7D. Specifically, here are the things I’m sold on in terms of the Canon 7D being a “better” choice: 8fps shooting, dual Digic 4 processors, better auto-focus system, built-in Speedlite transmitter, on-camera flash, and 100% viewfinder coverage just to name a few — all of these features are missing from the higher-end 5D Mark II for some reason (but I have no doubts that they’ll make an appearance on the 5D Mark III).
I guess the question for me is whether or not I’m willing to pay an extra $1000 for a full-frame camera with less features. At that price, I’m leaning towards a no.


