Why does Canon 7D exist? [closed]

Question

When I think about prosumer cameras the first thing that comes to my mind is the full frame sensor.

As far as my knowledge goes. The best lenses are made for the full frame cameras [which can work with crop sensor cameras even though crop sensor lenses give tunnel vision to the full frame lenses.]

Even in a corporate\capitalist standpoint. Why did they make 7D? So the prosumers could use cheaper EFS lenses?

I can't find a single reason to make a crop sensor camera that costs around a full frame camera.

Answer 1

Why does [the] Canon 7D exist?

Because there's a market for it.

When I think about prosumer cameras the first thing that comes to my mind is the full frame sensor.

While that may be the first thing that comes to your mind, it clearly wasn't the first thing that came to minds of Canon, Nikon (D500 and friends), Fujifilm (X-T3 and friends) or others. Who's more likely to be right?

I can't find a single reason to make a crop sensor camera that costs around a full frame camera.

Here's some some the more obvious ones:

1. Frame rate. The 7D Mark II shoots at 10 fps. The 6D Mark II (the only Canon full frame vaguely equivalent in price, at least if we ignore the RP for now) shoots at only 6.5 fps. For some big chunks of the market (sports!), that difference is huge.
2. Reach. If I'm shooting sports, wildlife or similar, I'm probably going to have to crop anyway. Therefore the "tunnel vision" as you call it doesn't really matter.
3. Autofocus. The 7D Mark II has a much better autofocus system (both in terms of configurability and raw number of focus points) than the 6D Mark II.

Answer 2

Because sometimes it is the most appropriate tool for the job. For a lot of shooters, it meets a need and they buy it.

The following cameras are among those I have at my disposal:

• EOS 5D Mark III
• EOS 5D Mark II
• EOS 7D Mark II

I use all of them regularly. Which one I use for a specific task depends on which one gives me the best chance of getting the image I want, or which combination of them give me the best overall setup I need to shoot an event.

In general, I often shoot with a two camera setup. I'll have:

• an EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II on the 7D Mark II (This lens "lives" on this camera. They are rarely separated.)

and either

• an EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS on the 5D Mark III

or

• an EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L on the 5D Mark III.

I might also have an EF 17-40mm f/4 on the 5D Mark II if I need or want the wider angle coverage. Or maybe I'll throw a fast prime on the 5DII.

This works well for sports and other events when there's a minimum of light that allows for somewhere around ISO 3200 (or less), f/2.8 (or narrower), and 1/500 second (or faster).

If the light is too dim for the 70-200/2.8 to work on the APS-C 7DII, it's time to pull out the fast prime lenses and use the two FF bodies while selecting from: EF 135mm f/2, EF 85mm f/1.8, EF 50mm f/1.4, or a third party 35mm f/2.

The combination of the EOS 7D Mark II and EF 70-200mm f/2.8 gives me the same "reach" and low light ability as a FF camera and a 115-320mm f/2.8 lens would. The closest thing to that is the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8, which runs around $3,600. That's still a bargain compared to the Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 IS II ($6,100), which is the cheapest option Canon offers for f/2.8 at 300mm. $3,600 is more than the 70-200/2.8 and 7D II combined.

Sure, there's a tiny bit of a hit in sensor performance with regard to noise in low light, but the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II at 200mm is also enough sharper than the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 at 300mm to give images at 200mm on a 1.6X crop body that are just as sharp as the Sigma at 300mm on a FF body with the same resolution can. Sure, the 70-200/2.8 is even sharper on a FF camera, but not after you crop it to the same angle of view as an APS-C camera. Most of the time, that's more than good enough for web distribution at typical image sizes.

Answer 3

It is difficult to compare the 7D series to the 6D, 5D and/or 1D-series, as those too vary on key features (yes, that is why there are three full frame series). The the 7D (series) compares well with the 1D (series) at the burst rate (and also, the resolution is comparable) but has less resolution than a 5D Mark III or IV (and of course 6D). Its AF coverage is impressive in comparison to all other cameras, as it uses the top-grade AF that is also used for the pricier full frame cameras. It has very good weather sealing. All this, combined with its relatively low price, make it an appealing camera not only for prosumers, but also professionals. Canon usually knows what they are doing, and since the 7D wasn't scrapped but replaced by the Mark II, it seems that the 7D series does well.

Also, crop can be very useful (with good lenses - and no, there are more good lenses than only L-lenses!). I own a 70-300mm lens and it is far too wide for a medium-sized concert hall on full frame, while on APS-C, it is perfect. Why not buy a 150-600mm (or a prime), you ask? Because it is heavy, chunky, and costs a lot of money.