Quote:
Originally Posted by HPFREAK
I was thinking of the Minolta 7D being the 1.5 and thought the Canon was the same. Ya I looked at the 5D in the store with the 16-35 and it is really wide and produces some distortion that can look good in certain ways and is generally used for interior shots. My neighbor who just moved had one for doing real estate shoots. He said that is the only time he has really used it and keeps the 24-105 on it most of the time. I am thinking about getting the 1.4x TC at some point just because I do not want to buy another huge lens right now before I get teh 5D.
I have to say though that the Nikon D700 is one serious body and the ISO performance is much better from all the reviews I have seen. It is hard to jump to a different make though.
That is a really cool shot by the way. You have the panoramic tripod attachment or a tripod that has the degree markers built in?
|
I took that pano by hand, but my tripod has a Arca-Swiss Z1 ballhead with built in pano function and degree markers. The degrees are not critical. It's important when you're at wide angle to use plenty of overlap so that the stitching together is easy (avoiding the curved edges).
Also, RAW conversion software, like DxO Optics Pro and Lightroom, correct for the geometric distortions of the 16-35mm and the 24-105mm, so don't just look at an out-of-camera jpeg and say, "that's a lot of distortion." When shot in RAW and run through competent software, there's no issue.
The D7000 is an excellent crop-sensor camera that has better high-ISO performance than the Canon 7D, but not better than the 5D MkII. The 7D isn't bad at all. If you're going to shoot Nikon, the D7000 is what I'd recommend for wildlife.
Here's one taken with the 7D at ISO 1600, 700mm (500mm +1.4x TC), f/5.6 and 1/320th sec, HANDHELD. I don't see any noise problems or need to change systems:
Beautiful white-tail doe munching on grasses by
dcstep, on Flickr