excellent job, thank you for doing this.
The 7D is one i have interest in.
Thanks for sharing.

Great review Brian

I found it to be very informative and highlights both the pros and cons of the camera (and using another system) very well. Hopefully the rumored A77 will show Sony is on fighting form. If not, there are good models available from other manufacturers such as Nikon, Pentax and Canon if needed.

Thanks for sharing this and the images in the gallery look fab.

No doubt it is a great camera. If $ was not an object, I would have one :)

I was surprised though to learn that such a hi spec-ed (and accordingly priced) camera does not have AF illumination and has no 2nd card slot. Those are brake dealers for some, especially if it would be their only body.

Before I switched to Sony. I tried it out in the store several times. It is an amazing camera but the images seemed soft to me straight from the camera. I also didn't like the fact it doesn't have auto focus assist. That's an important feature when photographing people and pets. They don't like a blinding flash shining in their eyes. The red beam works much better and I don't know who came up with the idea of changing such an important feature. I'm seeing it on a lot af brands now. Other than those two things, it's a great camera.
The thing I liked most about it is the way it feels in your hand. I have never picked up a camera and felt like it was made for my hand the way this one did. I love a bigger camera and this one is just right! I just got an email yesterday from Calumet Photo announcing the Canon 60D. It looks like a nice camera for a cheaper price than the 7D so I'm going to compare the features.

I don't know how much of a problem the lack of af assist light would be. The nikon d3 hasn't got one but the af is still superb - even in low light. Perhaps advances in af tech are making them less important than they used to be?

The time I find it always comes on is late in the evening outdoors and in the studio under studio lights. Some lighting setups in a studio aren't real bright.
I think a lot of the manufacturers still have the feature but they have switched to the pulsing flash. I hope they switch back to the red light on the front of the camera. That's just my wish. They had it right in the first place and I don't know what the reasoning is behind the pulsing flash. Can someone explain it to me. The other thing I don't like is when the flash automatically pops up unexpectedly.
Maybe you are right and the AF systems are getting better and there is no need for it. If so , that would be great but I haven't used a camera yet that doesn't need it.
Brian, in your time with the 7D, have you come across times you need the focus assist feature?

I agree about the AF assist light. The red is the better solution IMO and I am constantly impressed with the film 7 and being able to AF on pretty much impossible targets, such as a white wall because it can project the red pattern onto it and confirm AF.
I don't know why makers don't go back to this very strange esp on higher end bodies.

is the Cybershot V3 and F828 which had a laser grid AF assist that spread a pattern wider than the typical red zebra pattern we see with the A700. That was by far and away the best AF assist lamp ever. Why? Because it spread wider, you could achieve focus closer up than any other system. Hologram AF Laser Assist I believe is what they called it, simply marvelous.

There was a small lawsuit that scared Sony away from using it in the future, a ridiculous one if you ask me. The laser was very low power and doesn't hurt retinas or anything. Someone needs to put that thing back on a camera. ;)

Carl

to add AF assist to a camera? I don't know why they didn't include it on these new models that are coming out unless it is the cost. I know they don't usually put this feture on this level of camera but why not? Sony could be the first one to do it. I think it would make them even more attractive; especially the 580 and the 55. That's just a thought but it may cost too much to add it.

I hope it helps.

I'm sure I have probably missed things, but I believe most of the important features are compared. I realize now that there is no comparison of flash systems. It's worth mentioning that the 7D does posses a wireless flash system similar to that of Sony's. This feature is not found on previous Canon bodies.

The lack of an AF light bothers me more than the lack of dual card slots. Memory is cheap enough now that it isn't a huge deal. I admit it would have been nice if Canon had included a SD slot next to the CF slot.

I honestly haven't had any problems shooting in lowlight without one. However, there will always be some instance you encounter where it would have helped. Using the flash is such a poor solution that Canon ought to have just snuck one in anyways.

I've had to use the focus assist feature in very dark environments. So long as there is some visible light hitting the subject it should be possible to get a focus lock without assistance. If your subject lacks contrast because of how dark it is, then you are stuck with AF assist to achieve focus.

Sony's F707 also had this feature. I at least think it worked a lot better than the AF assist lamp found on the A700. It's one of those Sony gadgets that was actually better than the traditional solution.

There's no doubt that the Canon 7D is a great camera. For me, the weakest part of this camera is the sensor. The first pictures of the 7D I saw (on DPReview) didn't impress me at all. OK, the resolution is great, and when illuminated correctly, it delivers top notch detailed pictures. However, in less perfect light conditions, and with sub top optics, performance is not on par with others in its class.

Using the (unnecessary high) 18 MP resolution is more a problem for the 550D that it is for the 7D, since 7D buyers are more likely to spend more money on lenses. Still I'm convinced that the 7D could have been much better when equipped with a 15 MP (or less) sensor.

I'm using Minolta for a long time. My first digital camera was a compact, but I missed the quality and the complete control over the picture. So after some research, I bought a Sony.

Sony D-SLR's (not the A230 / A330 / A380) look and feel like Minolta SLR's more than any other brand. Nikon comes close. It's different, but the buttons are in the right places, and you don't need to look up from your subject to find them. With only little effort, a Nikon feels familiar.

And there is Canon. Menu's are different, but that's not the biggest issue. During a shoot, you hardly need the menu. Problem is that all controls are misplaced! It takes a long time to get used to the completely different lay-out, which takes your attention away from your subject, resulting in missed or not perfectly times pictures.

So why did you choose the Canon 7D, and not a Nikon Dxxx?

I've no problem reading people's views on other brands I think a lot of folks have an interest in various offerings so it's nice to see a user put up some thoughts and comments.
Can't say I find Sony's offerings esp the A230-380 very Minolta ish bar the slim grip being similar to the film 4/5 series, controls wise it's not got much in common with those.
I've used a few Canon's and they do handle very differently to other makers, I think it takes some getting used to myself. Not to say they are bad in this area just different to what some people might be used to.

I think you answered your own question in your first line Frank:

"There's no doubt that the Canon 7D is a great camera. "

Also in the article, if you'd read it, is pretty revealing and obvious why Brian bought this camera. So I'll answer your question with a question:

Why are you asking "why a Canon?" ?

-C

I think it does quite well in less than ideal lighting conditions. I don't know what specific condition you're thinking of?

Canon might have been able to achieve even better lowlight performance if they had gone for fewer megapixels, but they did pretty good with 18MP. Sony's new 16MP sensor does not seem to perform any better from what I have seen.

Sony sort of abandoned the design and feel of the a100 and a700 bodies in their new bodies. This made it much easier to switch since I wasn't really losing anything. I didn't feel that any of the bodies that came afterwards were good handling designs. Canon definitely has it's own menu system and a lot more custom options but I think most people will be able to figure it out. It's not at all cryptic.

I had a wishlist for what I wanted in a a700 replacement but no replacement has ever even come. I'm really not even sure there will ever been a replacement for the a700 at this point. I guess it basically comes down to Canon building the camera I wanted the a750 to be. Canon fulfilled my wishlist and Sony abandoned the market segment all together.

Why Canon over Nikon? That mainly came down to price and lens selection. The 7D was cheaper for me to purchase than a D300s. Canon also offers a far greater selection of birding lenses, which was important to me. Most of those lenses can be had for less money than their Nikon equivalents.

The canon is indeed a very good camera, but it's a bit unfair to compare it to the a700, which is a lot older. After all the 7D from Canon is fairly new and can build on past experiences.
I expect the new Sony A77 or whatever it'll be called to be at least as good and maybe even better ;-)

Brian explained why it is a fair comparison.

When, if, Sony come out with an A77, then it can be compared to the 7D, in which case I expect you to make the same counter argument for the 7D, right?

If Sony feel that a replacement wasn't necessary and that the A700 was still viable, then that is the only camera that can be compared in this segment. It's not Canon's fault they have an updated product, its Sony's fault for not having an updated product to compete with Canon's.

Carl

I think you answered your own question in your first line Frank:
"There's no doubt that the Canon 7D is a great camera. "...

No, I did not. The Canon 7D is a great camera, but it's not the only camera with high end specs.

Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Sigma and Pentax have camera's that can deliver Canon 7D quality pictures.

If you're familiar with Sony / Minolta, and you like the way your camera operates, switching to Nikon or Pentax makes more sense.

The Canon 7D is quite good, but it could have been even better when a normal (<<18 MP) sensor was used. In about 2 years time, sensitivity & quality have improved that much that an 18 MP sensor will be better than today's 15 MP sensor, but today's 18 MP is lots better than Canon's 1.6 crop 18 MP sensor!

If you choose for a Canon 7D, there must be something else, one other thing that helped you making that decision. Avalability of specific lenses, examples you've seen from other photographers, ...

Really having a difficult time understanding your point here? Did you read the review? Brian was pretty clear why he decided on the 7D.

Carl

And in Brian's review, there is a list of pro's and con's for the Canon 7D. Most con's have to do with ergonomics, the menu system, and handling in general. Bottom line, the 7D results in a big plus compared to the A700, since Brian found more pro's than con's. That's no surprise, otherwise Brian never would have bought the 7D.

But since Brian has difficulties with the camera handling, I wonder why he didn't look at Nikon, or Pentax, or maybe even stay with Sony and use an A850/A900 as an intermediate camera (saves lots of money, since lenses can be re-used, even the DT lenses in the APS size mode).

My question "Why a Canon" has nothing to do with the quality of the 7D, but with the handling, that differs quite a lot with the other major brands.

I don't really have difficulties with the handling. It's more so that I am used to Sony's UI and logic about menu system layout. Now I could easily switch between systems and know where to find things. I don't feel the experience would be much different if I had switched to Nikon or Pentax instead. They don't have a UI or menu system just like Sony's either.

The a850/a900 are basically like the a700 with a full frame sensor. I wanted an upgrade in auto focus performance and more control over its behavior. The FF Sony's do not offer this.

What lense(s) did you use for the pictures of the kitten and girl?

Canon's 100mm f2 USM lens.

Is the 100mm f2 your favorite lens for portraits? Those pictures show great bokeh. Very pleasing to my eye.

on the 7D. Now that I have one of my own I can see why Brian chose this camera to replace his A700.

In every single aspect that I've tested it so far, the EOS 7D surpasses the performance of the A700 (and I've tested a lot about it already).

A very fine tool for the motivated photographer, probably the best camera overall that I've had my hands on yet.

Carl

Of the lenses I have it is. I actually bought it for a wedding with that purpose in mind. It's small and light compared to Canon's 70-200mm f2.8 IS USM lens. No one would be intimidated by the 100mm f2.