fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1 2 3 4

6 end

Archive 2012 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #1 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

abqnmusa wrote:
7D is aa non-stop battle with noise
I gave up and sold it
grainy ISO 100. Etc

What you should have done is taken it back, because mine had a similar issue and Canon agreed and fixed it. I now find ISO 400 essentially grainfree and I rarely need to do NR other than a small amount in LR. I also found I had to greatly change my sharpening settings for the 7D. I was using a similar setting as for the 5D II and it was exacerbating the graininess. LR3's detail setting will cause a graininess in smooth textures, sky etc if you use more than about 10-15 up to ISO 400 and you also need to use around 35-40 mask. If you do you get nice clean shots.

Jan 22, 2012 at 05:25 PM

DmitriM
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #2 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

mttran wrote:
40D is one of the best crop canon has made - some mid range iso sample

Sorry to derail the thread

What the heck was that about? A $100 PS camera can provide absolutely the same images.

Just as weird as people who post not cropped 700pix wide shots they took to prove how awesome the ISO of their camera is and how sharp the pictures are.

Jan 22, 2012 at 06:52 PM

Liquidstone
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #3 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

R Royse wrote:
IMO the 7D isn't a serious tool for professional bird photography.

I disagree.

I bring my 1D4, 5D2 and 7D to the field, and I won't hesitate to use the 7D (over the 1D4 or 5D2) if I need extra reach.

Romy

Jan 22, 2012 at 07:32 PM

Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #4 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

Liquidstone wrote:
I disagree.

I bring my 1D4, 5D2 and 7D to the field, and I won't hesitate to use the 7D (over the 1D4 or 5D2) if I need extra reach.

Romy

Yeah, what would know Romy.

Jan 22, 2012 at 08:09 PM

mttran
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #5 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

DmitriM wrote:
What the heck was that about? A $100 PS camera can provide absolutely the same images.

I love to get one PS that you mentioned ...do me a favor, show me the name and its images

Jan 23, 2012 at 12:27 AM

Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.5 #6 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

AJSJones wrote:
I agree with you that there is risk that they are normalizing the data and it is misleading. I will read it again. However, intuitively it makes sense that a full frame will outresolve a 1.6x crop because the lens will be a limiting factor in resolving. If the lens is the limiting factor ( and it make sense that it would be) magnifying the image (which a 1.6x effectively does) will cause less apparent resolving power.

Jan 24, 2012 at 10:18 PM

Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.5 #7 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

R Royse wrote:
IMO the 7D isn't a serious tool for professional bird photography. It has nothing to do with the amount of noise or resolution capable from the sensor. The 7D simply doesn't have trhe dynamic range of the 1D4 (and 1D3). It is very difficult to extract fine details from the bright areas of a bird (whites, yellows, etc.) with RAW files from the 7D.

Funny, if you believe this you should own a 1diii, because it has much better dynamic range and ISO than 1div.

You are overstating slight differences to the extreme - exaggerating.

While it is true that idiv at ISO 1250 is equivalent to iso 800 on 7d, for dynamic range, this is modest difference.

Jan 24, 2012 at 10:49 PM

kirry007
Offline
• • •
[X]

p.5 #8 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

Schlotkins wrote:
Hello all:

After thinking about this a bit more, I'm not so sure so I was hoping those that have shot with both cameras could chime in. The primary reasons I thought the change would be good is due to better AF and IQ.
Thanks,
Chris

Hi, Chris,
Reading this thread from top/bottom, appears that you have made your decision in the first 8-9 replies

. 1dmk4.

I don't frequent these forums as regularly as I used to in the past( Blame the pics of the new EOS 5Dx that made me come back :-D) . I shoot semi-professionally, have my 2 cents to add. I have used both the cameras you mention extensively in the field and I think I might have some input that might help you save some $$$$, if not, enjoy the purchase of the 1dmk4. The grass is always greener on the other side....right, in this case, it's the same side :-) ?

Of course, please ignore those who say the 40D is a better camera than the 7D...
I do recognize some usernames in this thread who bought the 7D along with me on the day it was released back in 2009 (?).

My findings:

1. The IQ difference between the 7D and the 1Dmk4 is very-very less, to my eyes (below ISO 800). Exposed correctly, both cameras perform equally well till ISO 800, for my IQ standards.
3. I could not really tell a lot of difference between the AF speed/accuracy between the two( I do use some of the best L lenses Canon makes - 70-200 2.8 II, 300 2.8 IS L and, recently, the 500 f/4 L IS). I do play a lot of video games and have very fast reflexes as well, that might be helping me here, perhaps.

.
4. The 7D has better ergonomics, *for my hands *(And I love the video/Liveview function with its own buttons unlike the mk4).
5. Of course, the 1dmk4 is sturdy and is the only camera that did not fail in my recent Africa trip. The 7D did fail... with error 40 :-). Got it fixed, works fine again...

So much depends on your distance from the subjects, no lens is ever enough/perfect.

Recently, I shot Baldies with a 1Dmk4 and 500 with 1.4x, trust me, I missed the extra reach of my 7D.

Although I am a mammal/nature photog, I've also shot some really decent shots of birds (action) with the 7D and 400 5.6 L. I believe, it all comes down to technique and practice.

If possible, stay with what you have, like someone said above, it's a "bang for the buck" camera.

PS: I've also shot tack-sharp Northern Harriers (with snakes) in flight against the backgrounds you mention with the 7D... :-)

Jan 24, 2012 at 11:17 PM

alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #9 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

In a fixed focal length and fixed distance scenario, when one workflow yields better results with higher pixel density, and another workflow does not, what can we learn from that?

Jan 25, 2012 at 07:05 AM

Eyvind Ness
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #10 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

alundeb wrote:
In a fixed focal length and fixed distance scenario, when one workflow yields better results with higher pixel density, and another workflow does not, what can we learn from that?

That you have "extra reach" with a crop camera is a documented myth (esp. at high ISOs).

Jan 25, 2012 at 07:29 AM

alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #11 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

AJay wrote:
Here's a comparison of images from the 5DM2 (no cropped sensor), the 1D Mark IV (1.3x) sensor and the 7D (1.6x). In this test, a pheasant feather was photographed from 40' using the Canon 600mm f/4 lens. As in the real world of bird/wildlife photography, you cannot move closer to the subject and must shoot from a set distance. (All three images were taken at ISO800. Results were the same at other ISO settings.)

5DM2:
http://iwishicouldfly.com/iwishicouldfly/images/5dm2.jpg

Mark IV:
http://iwishicouldfly.com/iwishicouldfly/images/Mark4.jpg

7D:
http://iwishicouldfly.com/iwishicouldfly/images/7d.jpg

In my work flow, after I photograph a bird, I use Photoshop to reduce the noise, crop the image and then apply a bit of sharpening....Show more →

In this comparison, you show us crops that correspond to about 50% of native 7D resolution. It would be interesting to see crops scaled to the native 7D resolution (the other cameras interpolated).

Jan 25, 2012 at 07:55 AM

alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #12 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

Eyvind Ness wrote:
That you have "extra reach" with a crop camera is a documented myth (esp. at high ISOs).

If I understand you correct, the implication of this is that any extra resolution in any camera is always wasted, and not only in this single focal-length limited case?

Jan 25, 2012 at 08:20 AM

jaredmizanin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #13 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

jbregar wrote:
What pure unmitigated bullshit...

Personal foul!

Mr. Royse was just giving his opinion...and one gander at his photography site will show that he knows what he's talking about. I'm not saying I agree or disagree; I haven't fully tested out my 7D myself or compared it with my 1D3.

Jan 25, 2012 at 05:48 PM

abqnmusa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #14 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

Well I have done some testing with my 7D RAW files & some 7D RAW's from others

I think the ISO 100 noise, and overall noise issues may have been due to two problems
-- very early 7D camera, I had one of the first ones
-- lack of maturity in RAW processing software for 7D

The recent 7D camera RAW files I have do not have as much noise as my 7D had
Even my old 7D RAW files process well in the latest DPP, ACR, Apterture 3 workflow

So I will eat some crow, or Pigun for Petkal
and order a brand new 7D

for the pixel density "reach" and focusing ability

Seems the latest Canon lenses beyond 400mm F5.6 are no longer affordable
At least for a hobbyist like myself

Jan 25, 2012 at 06:18 PM

dehowie
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #15 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

Chris just wondering but why would you go for the new 600 over the 800??
If your length limited the 800 is clearly the best quality 800 you will ever get.
The new supers are not delivering better IQ but other advantages like weight and IS which the 800 already has.
Personally I'd keep the 7D for uncropped reach and buy an 800 you can't go wrong.
A 600II will never match a pure 800 in IQ there is simply very little room for IQ improvement in the original 600..I'd be getting the 800 and I'd buy mine again in a heartbeat over the new 600.

Jan 25, 2012 at 07:10 PM

KWeck
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #16 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

I went from the 7d to 1DMKIV.. The IV IQ is hands down better. The tones, colors, blacks, etc... pixel density, low noise.. I have some great shots with my 7d.. But my keeper rate with the IV is many times better then the 7d.. I guess it boils down to how much you can afford?

Jan 25, 2012 at 08:51 PM

DmitriM
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #17 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

mttran wrote:
I love to get one PS that you mentioned ...do me a favor, show me the name and its images

With all due respect...You ARE joking right?
I don't want to sound like an ass hole,but there's nothing in those images a PS camera won't do.
In fact, a PS camera will make them even better because those images will be processed better and will show even better colors.
There's more to photography than that sir.

Jan 25, 2012 at 10:47 PM

Schlotkins
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #18 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

Hi again everyone:

Thanks again so much for all of the replies... a few quick responses:

- I think the 7D is a fine camera. As I mentioned I had a 1d MKII before and the 7D seems to be pretty close to it. And yes, I can be better at stocking birds and so forth, but at the end of the day, it's sometimes just not possible to get any closer to the subject, especially for an unexpected guest or if you are limited to paths, etc. Perhaps I am just a 'bad' photographer but I figure if I am paying $1000+ to fly somewhere to shoot for a couple days only, I'm not going to have an opportunity to just give up and come back next week. I'm going to have to do the best I can with what I have so I'm trying to maximize that opportunity.

- I have actually been thinking about the 800. It's very rare that I have found the 7D + 500 f4L to be too long. I do have a 400 5.6L and could easily bring that along as well. So, I could in theory go with a 1Dx and a 800L and have the same 'pixels per bird' as I have now. I could even pack a 7D with me so if I REALLY needed reach I could have a 7D + 800L. I have no doubt that a 1Dx + 800L would give much better IQ than a 7D + 500L. (Of course a 1DIV + 600L gives about the same pixels per bird as well.)

My major concern with this setup is the 5.6. If it's at dusk or dawn I would have a chance to shoot at f4 with the other two options, which of course hurts my minimum shutter speed and probably my ability to AF. I haven't used the 800L personally, but I agree it's not that much different in terms of weight compared to the 500L I have or the 600L II as I wouldn't handhold either of those. I have to think about this option a bit more.

Finally, I am going to try the feather test this weekend. While I don't doubt some of the conclusions as I have shot with my wife's 1Ds III before, I really just find it difficult to believe that 21/1.6^2 = 8 mpx on that camera are equal to 18 mpx on the 7D if distance limited. In some sense that would imply that a 54 mpx FF sensor offers no advantage over a 21 mpx FF sensor.

Thanks again,
Chris

Jan 26, 2012 at 12:13 AM

Eyvind Ness
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #19 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

alundeb wrote:
If I understand you correct, the implication of this is that any extra resolution in any camera is always wasted, and not only in this single focal-length limited case?

For anything higher than about ISO 100, Yes, it would appear so, with the current sensor and processing technology.

Jan 26, 2012 at 02:11 AM

Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.5 #20 · 7D vs. MKIV wildlife comparison

Schlotkins wrote:
Finally, I am going to try the feather test this weekend. While I don't doubt some of the conclusions as I have shot with my wife's 1Ds III before, I really just find it difficult to believe that 21/1.6^2 = 8 mpx on that camera are equal to 18 mpx on the 7D if distance limited. In some sense that would imply that a 54 mpx FF sensor offers no advantage over a 21 mpx FF sensor.

Thanks again,
Chris

I agree. The 7D can deliver very high levels of detail.

Jan 26, 2012 at 03:37 AM

1 2 3 4 5 6 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 5 6 end