How good is D7000 AF-C compared to Canon 7D? (2 Viewers)

[kristoffer]

Hi. I have used 7D with Canon 400 f5.6 for bif quite a lot and the combo is great. Love the AF with focus limiter. For different reasons I now instead own a Nikon D7000 and I wonder how good the AF-C is compared to ai servo on the 7D? Naturally I need good glass too on the Nikon but first I wanna know if the body is reasonably good for bif. Anyone tried both?

 

[the black fox]

i have used both ,the 7d is my sons ,and i mainly used a 50d ,i have now switched to nikon as i consider the D7000 to be a far more versatile all rounder the sheer amount of b.i.f i get in focus is proving the point for me .
but as you so rightly point out the camera body is only as good as its glass just wish nikon made low end lenses like the 400 f5.6 or 100-400 but they don't . so think about it hard before changing .

 

[Dave Williams]

i have used both ,the 7d is my sons ,and i mainly used a 50d ,i have now switched to nikon as i consider the D7000 to be a far more versatile all rounder the sheer amount of b.i.f i get in focus is proving the point for me .
but as you so rightly point out the camera body is only as good as its glass just wish nikon made low end lenses like the 400 f5.6 or 100-400 but they don't . so think about it hard before changing .

Not exactly low end glass ( after all the Canon 400f5.6 =£1089 and the 100-400 = £1249 currently at WEX) but you could consider a Nikon 300mm f4 (£977)plus a 1.4TC at £308 to compete with the 400mmf5.6 or the superb 70-200 VR f2.8 at £1629 plus a 2.0xTC (£459) to compete with the 100-400. You could also consider the 1.7TC as a cheaper alternative to the 2.0TC too.
Those prices might be bettered elsewhere as well.

 

[Keith Reeder]

i have now switched to nikon as i consider the D7000 to be a far more versatile all rounder the sheer amount of b.i.f i get in focus is proving the point for me.

Dunno what you're doing wrong then - I can't remember the last time I missed a BIF with my 7D and 100-400mm:

 

[Dave Williams]

Dunno what you're doing wrong then - I can't remember the last time I missed a BIF with my 7D and 100-400mm:

Not missing them isn't the same as getting them in focus Keith but that's still quite a claim you make ! I wish I was as successful, when there is background I often mess up BIF with my D300s.

 

[Roy C]

i consider the D7000 to be a far more versatile all rounder the sheer amount of b.i.f i get in focus is proving the point for me .

That is very surprising to me Jeff as the 7D is a brilliant Camera especially for BIF - just wondering if you had it set-up right for AI servo stuff - tracking sensitivity, 1st 2nd image priority, Servo AF tracking method, were you set-up to using single point expansion and Zone AF (not enabled as a default) have you tried back button focussing .... the list of options goes on.
I agree with Keith on this one, I know with my 400/5.6 and 7D for BIF it is so easy compared with previous non 1 series Cameras - it is pretty difficult to screw up (unless you are trying to shoot at ridiculous slow shutter speeds)

 

[Hor Kee]

Welcome back Keith! It has been a while. I have been using a 600D & 400mm F5.6 for BIF and it works well so far. Been using AI-Focus all the while. Any tips to get even better results with this setup (although this is a very long way from a 7D/D7000)?

 

[Roy C]

Welcome back Keith! It has been a while. I have been using a 600D & 400mm F5.6 for BIF and it works well so far. Been using AI-Focus all the while. Any tips to get even better results with this setup (although this is a very long way from a 7D/D7000)?

I have a great tip for you - stop using AI- Focus it sucks!!!. Use AI Servo.

 

[MJN]

Jeff, you state that you mainly used the 50D, perhaps your opinions are based on that cam rather than on the 7D.
Nothing I have read would indicate that the D7000 is superior to the 7D for BIFS.

I miss quite a lot of BIFS with the 7D, but I still get a vast amount more than I got with the 40D which has the same AF as the 50D.

 

[kristoffer]

Not exactly low end glass ( after all the Canon 400f5.6 =£1089 and the 100-400 = £1249 currently at WEX) but you could consider a Nikon 300mm f4 (£977)plus a 1.4TC at £308 to compete with the 400mmf5.6 or the superb 70-200 VR f2.8 at £1629 plus a 2.0xTC (£459) to compete with the 100-400. You could also consider the 1.7TC as a cheaper alternative to the 2.0TC too.
Those prices might be bettered elsewhere as well.

Thanks. How is AF speed on Nikon 300 mm f4 with 1.4 tc compared to Canon 400 f5.6?

 

[Dave Williams]

Thanks. How is AF speed on Nikon 300 mm f4 with 1.4 tc compared to Canon 400 f5.6?

That, I'm afraid, I don't know.

 

[Roy C]

Thanks. How is AF speed on Nikon 300 mm f4 with 1.4 tc compared to Canon 400 f5.6?

I doubt if many people have actually done a direct comparison but I would be highly surprised if the combo with a converter would be anywhere near as quick as the bare 400/5.6 (which is renown for its AF speed anyway). I do know that the Canon 300/4 + 1.4x tc converter is certainly not as quick as the bare 400/5.6.

 

[ericbowles]

On the specific question of AF on the D7000, there are three AF modes - AF-S, AF-A, and AF-C AF-A is an auto mode where the camera selects between AF-S and AF-C if it senses subject movement. For both AF-S and AF-C you can select Release Priority or Focus priority. The defaults are Focus priority for AF-S and Release priority for AF-C. The logic is with AF-C you are likely to have a moving subject and are willing to accept slightly out of focus images rather than have the camera not fire.

I started using AF-A - the idea is the camera automatically switches between AF=S and AF-C when the subject is moving. What I found was AF-A stayed in AF-S / Focus priority when a stationary subject was showing action - for example a shot of a black bear shaking off water would not AF.

AF-C on the D7000 is very good and compares favorably with other Nikon cameras. Focus is both accurate and fast. A lot depends on the lens choice. Some lenses like the 105 f/2.8 VR (a macro lens) focus very slowly. Others like the 70-200 f/2.8 VR focus extremely quickly. The 300 f/4 AFS is at the faster end of the range in terms of AF speed. With a 1.4 teleconverter it is slightly slower, but fine for birds in flight and other moving subjects. You woul be hard pressed to find any lens wiht better image quality than the 300 f/4 and the 1.4 teleconverter. It works with the 1.7 and 2.0 teleconverters, but you need good light and good technique. Auto Focus is progressively slower as you move beyond f/5.6. The center AF sensor is much faster than other sensors. I find setting the camera for focus using the AE L/AF L button works well. With a moving subject you can simply hold down the button while you continue to shoot.

The D7000 uses the most advanced technology Nikon has on the market in a DSLR. High ISO performance is outstanding - a real plus when you are shooting under low light conditions that are common with birding.

There has been some discussion about a possible update of the Nikon 300 f/4. The new version will likely have VR, but it will also carry a higher price tag. The guess is a new VR version will cost $2000 compared to $1375 for the current non VR model. Of course, that is speculation that has been ongoing for 4 years.

I can't speak to the 7D. I will say the 400 f/5.6 is a nice lens but it is long compared to the 300 f/4. The 400 f/5.6 is also an older design - nearly 10 years old - and due for an update. With a minimum aperture of f/5.6, you will be limited in your ability to maintain AF speed with teleconverters.

 

[Roy C]

I can't speak to the 7D. I will say the 400 f/5.6 is a nice lens but it is long compared to the 300 f/4. The 400 f/5.6 is also an older design - nearly 10 years old - and due for an update. With a minimum aperture of f/5.6, you will be limited in your ability to maintain AF speed with teleconverters.

Interesting stuff Eric but I think you will find that the OP already has a Canon 400/5.6 but was trying to ascertain the difference in AF speed between the bare 400 and a Nikon 300/4 + tc.
BTW on a non series 1 Camera the Canon 400/5.6 with tc will not AF at all (unless you fool the Camera into thinking it is not there) but of course it is almost as long as the 300/4 with a converter (slightly longer if you consider the FOV on the 1.6 crop v the 1.5 crop sensors).

 

[ericbowles]

As far as AF speed - it depends on whether you are using a teleconverter and how much light you have. It also depends a little on the camera body but that is out of scope for this discussion.

The Nikon 300 f/4 AFS is very fast as far as AF is concerned. AF-C is more than adequate for birds in flight. If you add the 1.4 teleconverter it gives you an effective 420mm f/5.6. Image quality remains excellent with very little dropoff. AF speed is a bit slower. You could also add the 1.7 or 2.0 Nikon teleconverters. Here things are a bit interesting as you must have good light. Nikon does not represent AF works beyond f/5.6 - but in practice it works fine wiht the center sensor and good light. The 2.o teleconverter is even more demanding and I typically avoid it unless absolutely necessary.

AF speed on the D7000 is very good - as well as the frame rate. It's not what you have on higher end cameras, but very good at the price point. You can increase the frame rate by shooting JPEG. I find for birds in flight, the D7000 is just fine in RAW for a pass of 3-5 images.

So my take is your Nikon kit of the D7000, 300 f/4 AFS, and TC14E II teleconverter would probably be better than the Cannon kit in terms of image quality and AF speed. It certainly would be better at 300mm, and if you needed 400mm would be comparable or better. I'm saying this without using the Canon kit, but the Nikon kit provides a very good AF system in the D7000 camera and a very high quality lens in the 300 f/4. The Nikon kit additionally provides the option of adding a 1.7 teleconverter for an effective 510mm f/6.7 or the 2.0 teleconverter for 600mm f/8 (and I don't recommend this option).

One other thing to keep in mind. Most cameras do better if they can acquire focus and track a subject as it moves. The D7000 in particular does a nice job with tracking focus, but less so for a point and fire style.

 

[Roy C]

So my take is your Nikon kit of the D7000, 300 f/4 AFS, and TC14E II teleconverter would probably be better than the Cannon kit in terms of image quality and AF speed. It certainly would be better at 300mm, and if you needed 400mm would be comparable or better. I'm saying this without using the Canon kit

As I understand it the Nikon 300/4 is a cheaper lens than the Canon 400/5.6 so what makes you so sure that with a converter it will be faster focussing and better IQ than the bare 400/5.6?

As far as image quality goes I do know that the bare Canon 400/5.6 is right up there with the very best Canon superteles costing £5k or more(albeit it is slow at f5.6 and lacking I.S) So on this assumption you would rate the Nikon 300/4 probably better than any Canon lens.

I would personally be very surprised if the Nikon 300/4 + tc was faster focusing than the bare 400/5.6 - if it was then that would surely make the 300/4 easily the fastest focussing lens around (of any make) and I have never read this about this particular lens. I am not sure how you would measure it though as the bare Canon 400/5.6 is near instantaneous for AF speed, especially if you use a focus limiter, it is know the be one of the very fastest Canon lenses as far as AF speed goes.

I would also doubt very much if the image quality would be so good either. Like you this is pure speculation on my part but common sense says that teleconverter's both slows AF and also reduces image quality to some degree.
If you were to reverse the comparison whereby a Canon + tc was being compared against a bare Nikon lens, then I would have no hesitation in assuming that the Nikon would be faster to AF - its just common sense.

 

[ericbowles]

As I understand it the Nikon 300/4 is a cheaper lens than the Canon 400/5.6 so what makes you so sure that with a converter it will be faster focussing and better IQ than the bare 400/5.6?

As far as image quality goes I do know that the bare Canon 400/5.6 is right up there with the very best Canon superteles costing £5k or more(albeit it is slow at f5.6 and lacking I.S) So on this assumption you would rate the Nikon 300/4 probably better than any Canon lens.

I would personally be very surprised if the Nikon 300/4 + tc was faster focusing than the bare 400/5.6 - if it was then that would surely make the 300/4 easily the fastest focussing lens around (of any make) and I have never read this about this particular lens. I am not sure how you would measure it though as the bare Canon 400/5.6 is near instantaneous for AF speed, especially if you use a focus limiter, it is know the be one of the very fastest Canon lenses as far as AF speed goes.

I would also doubt very much if the image quality would be so good either. Like you this is pure speculation on my part but common sense says that teleconverter's both slows AF and also reduces image quality to some degree.
If you were to reverse the comparison whereby a Canon + tc was being compared against a bare Nikon lens, then I would have no hesitation in assuming that the Nikon would be faster to AF - its just common sense.

Roy

Let's don't get into a discussion of speculation. It's off target from the intent of the OP. Since you have not used the Nikon 300 f/4 with or without the teleconverter, it's really not a reasonable conversation. I did use the Canon 400 f/5.6 yesterday so I can speak with some limited experience, but I don't own it.

The person I was with did have praises and some minor criticisms of the lens - it's older design and AF speed. I share those thoughts for birds in flight but could not tell you whether it was the camera, the settings, or my experience with the gear. The Nikon 300 f/4 is a fast AF lens in the scheme of things. How fast is splitting hairs as the f/2.8 long lenses from Canon and Nikon are likely a little faster. The 300 f/4 is an internal focus AFS lens so it has an internal motor that helps assist with fast AF regardless of whether or not a TC is used.

Your reference to the price of the two lenses is not correct in the US - but certainly may be the case in the UK. In the US the 300 f/4 is $200 more expensive than the Canon 400 f/5.6. Again - that is splitting hairs and is not on point for this thread.

Image quality of the Nikon 300 f/4 compares favorably to the Nikon 200-400 which is a first class zoom. It also is very close to the Nikon 300 f/2.8. When you put a teleconverter on the lens you do get a slight drop off in quality but with the Nikon 300 f/4 the drop off is much less than normal. The 1.4 teleconverter has no noticeable drop off. The 300 f/4 with 1.7 teleconverter has a minor dropoff in image quality but it is still good enough to use for critical images.

I think the point for the OP is that the D7000 is a fine camera. The Nikon 300 f/4 AFS lens is a good solution and the lens is one of the best values in the Nikon lineup. The 300 f/4 works well with a teleconverter - especially with the 1.4 teleconverter for an effective 420mm f/5.6. And the one caveat - the 300 f/4 is likely due for an upgrade to add VR (and that has been speculated for 4 years).

My take is the OP should feel good about using the Nikon combination. DXOmark.com rates the D7000 sensor higher than the sensor on the 7D. There is more to it than the sensor only. The D7000 has very good battery life compared to most models. The AF system and processor are new, presenting some challenges when moving from other models, but the enhancements are viewed favorably once you understand how to optimize settings.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Ca...brand)/Nikon/(appareil2)/619|0/(brand2)/Canon

 

[kristoffer]

Thx Eric!

 

[the black fox]

well since writing this this ,and kicking off a small furor in the process i have sold all my canon kit and settled with nikon ,i still stand by my previous statement i am getting more keeper shots with the d7000 and sigma 150-500mm set up than i was before with the canon .it took a while and i ran both systems side by side for a few months .but if there is any difference its so minute as to not matter i just feel more comfortable with the nikon set up and it does make me think more about my shots .the d7000 is nowhere near as fast as the 50d or 7d but it produces the results and thats all that matters at the end of the day

 

[momchilcha]

I have used both Canon 7d with 400/5.6 and Nikon D7000 with 300/4 + 1.4TC and to me there is no comparison - the Canon is the better (faster and more accurate) AF combination.
So far I have had 2 different copies of the Nikon 300mm F4 AF-S (used on 3 different cameras) and Sigma 100-300/4 was sharper wide open than both of the Nikons with and without TC. The difference was quite noticeable when TCs were used. The Nikon had the better AF especially when TCs were used and for close action (when the object was filling the frame), but it definitely couldn't compare to the Canon 7D 400/5.6 AF performance. Optically the 400/5.6 was quite a bit better than Nikon 300/4 + Nikon 1.4TC. It focuses noticeably faster than the Nikon 300/4 AF-S without the TC as well. I think though that the D7000 sensor is (much) better than the Canon's especially at lower ISO.