Canon EOS 7D Master thread

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums | Canon-mount SLRs | Join Image Upload
1 2 3 … 126

127

128 … 176 177 end

Canon EOS 7D Master thread

keithreeder
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.127 #1 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

gotak wrote:

Would you say this... shows this mazing artifact?

Could be, but I had to go to 300% to see anything...

This artifact is by no means unique to the 7D or to Canon, and is a known (and apparently manageable) commodity to RAW converter providers.

Nov 03, 2009 at 07:51 PM

gotak
Online
Buy and Sell: On

p.127 #2 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

keithreeder wrote:
gotak wrote:

Would you say this... shows this mazing artifact?

Could be, but I had to go to 300% to see anything...

This artifact is by no means unique to the 7D or to Canon, and is a known (and apparently manageable) commodity to RAW converter providers.

Exactly. For everyone's info that was converted from RAW with ACR.

I think it's normal. We are talking about a digital image here which if you dig down to it's basics is a bunch of electrical signals, noise and all, coming from each sensor site on the sensor chip. Chips are not uniform things but varies from one edge of a wafer to the other. I tend to think the "banding" issue everyone jumps on is actually just the nature of the chips. You have wires etc running over the top of these doesn't surprise me there are slight variations in the resulting images. Could be as simple as a slight shadow from a power trace on the chip.

Nov 03, 2009 at 08:02 PM

jorkata
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.127 #3 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

ejmartin wrote:
It looks like DPP is producing the artifacts, at a lower level, in skibum's example. As I have always said, the fix is to do local averaging of the RAW data, so the artifacts can be suppressed at the cost of resolution. This is likely also the reason why some have been disappointed by the noise at lower ISO; the noise is a residual artifact of the hardware issues that the RAW converter was unable to filter out.

Agree.

I don’t’ think, though, that the issue limited only to certain (defective) units.

Canon seems to have intentionally made one of the green channels on the color filter more transmissive - as a way to combat noise.
ISO/noise is improved but the side effect are these artifacts that we are seeing.

With DPP the maze effect is not visible.
I’m also sure that the final versions of ACR and LR won’t produce the maze effect either.

However, the green channel imbalance seems to be causing the black & white dots in 7D images (the ‘digital dandruff’, as RG describes it) that no other Canon DSLR has.

After some experimentation with 7D images, my impression is that the black & white dots limit the amount of post-processing that can be applied to 7D images.

Sharpening and enhanced contrast make the black & white dots quite visible and it’s these dots that give the overall ‘harsh’ look to 7D photos.

Nov 03, 2009 at 09:56 PM

jorkata
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.127 #4 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

keithreeder wrote:
This artifact is by no means unique to the 7D or to Canon

Agree.

What's bothering is that the 7D is (supposedly) not in the same class as the cameras that exhibit the behavior.

Nov 03, 2009 at 10:00 PM

cameron12x
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.127 #5 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

jorkata wrote:
keithreeder wrote:
This artifact is by no means unique to the 7D or to Canon

Agree.

What's bothering is that the 7D is (supposedly) not in the same class as the cameras that exhibit the behavior.

Agreed. It's a $1700 semi-professional body, not a $300-500 point-and-shoot.

Nov 03, 2009 at 10:37 PM

BennyR
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.127 #6 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

omarlyn wrote:
hmmm...Wow, I went to check out the last couple of pages of the 7D Master Thread to see what the latest experiences are with the camera. I have to say that I am a bit shocked that people are actually viewing images at 200, 300, & even 400% to point out flaws that are ruining images!

There is NO IMAGE that can be ruined by a detail that is only be viewable at 400%! As another posted stated, "Next time I go eat in a restaurant I'm going to bring a microscope to make sure there is no bacterias at all in my food."

Omar

Agreed

Nov 03, 2009 at 10:49 PM

Pixel Perfect
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.127 #7 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

Hey what about those Yankees!

Well for something completely different, I'm amazed at the level of AF customizability on the 7D. I have now set it up so I can have 4 different settings for AF at the touch of a button. It's better than the 1D II for AF customization. Now if it works nearly as well in the field I'll be very happy.

Nov 03, 2009 at 11:01 PM

BennyR
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.127 #8 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

Pixel Perfect wrote:
Hey what about those Yankees!

Sounds like a good idea but I would forget I set it that way.

Nov 03, 2009 at 11:42 PM

Pixel Perfect
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.127 #9 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

This is my initial first try set-up:

Currently I have set it up so with * button I have centre AF point chosen, AF-ON I can switch to a registered point which is currently off-centre and with expansion, I can press the DOF preview button and have a specialised AI-servo set-up, and have set C1 for another AI servo set-up. I hope after experimentation, I can cover nearly all situations with a touch of a button or dial. I love the MFn button to allow fast changing of AF area options.

Nov 04, 2009 at 01:09 AM

skibum5
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.127 #10 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

kewlcanon wrote:
Well why not send it to Canon for adjustment ?.

thw2 wrote:
skibum5 wrote:
it's a shame since so much about the 7D sensor is so much better than the 20D 50D or 40D sensors but look above and see how smooth things are at low ISO in upper midtones with a 20D compared to a 7D.

maybe canon did do this on purpose but i don't know why they would and you can see it show through even with their own DPP in the worst cases, directly, as maze, not sure if they are directly fighting it or applying some NR in smooth areas combined with their zig-zag demosaic that makes it less apparent.

It's the infamous Canon QC at work here. While I am not plaqued by mazing, banding or other sensor artifact issues, I have an even more serious problem: horrible AF even in centre spot AF. Leaves me fuming.

i will although i know with the 5d2 they just replaced the bodies though in the end and were apparently never able to adjust them, very, very few 5D2 had mazing to a really bothersome degree

but it seems like an awful lot of 7Ds have this, maybe even most to this point

so many that it almost seems like they made them this way on purpose, but what purpose would outweigh the issues it causes?

Edited on Nov 04, 2009 at 02:38 AM · View previous versions

Nov 04, 2009 at 02:25 AM

skibum5
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.127 #11 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

abqnmusa wrote:
Seems rediculous to be examining pictures at 200% or 400%. All camera are going to have artifacts beyond 100% view.

seems ridiculous to talk about noise at all then since the mazing, at best, leaves behind more extra noise than the difference between any modern sensor

Nov 04, 2009 at 02:29 AM

skibum5
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.127 #12 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

abqnmusa wrote:
Why would you return the camera. The problem is not a 7D issue given that DPP does not produce artifacts.

Adobe should have a non-beta Adobe Camera RAW update for the 7D before long.
Otherwise DPP gets the job done

actually DPP shows it too, just not as much and even on cams where it barely shows a mze it still leaves behind extra speckles and noise at low ISO, so DPP doesn't really handle it perfectly either

Nov 04, 2009 at 02:30 AM

skibum5
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.127 #13 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

jorkata wrote:
ejmartin wrote:
It looks like DPP is producing the artifacts, at a lower level, in skibum's example. As I have always said, the fix is to do local averaging of the RAW data, so the artifacts can be suppressed at the cost of resolution. This is likely also the reason why some have been disappointed by the noise at lower ISO; the noise is a residual artifact of the hardware issues that the RAW converter was unable to filter out.

Agree.

I don’t’ think, though, that the issue limited only to certain (defective) units.

Canon seems to have intentionally made one of the green channels on the color filter more transmissive - as a way to combat noise.
ISO/noise is improved but the side effect are these artifacts that we are seeing.

With DPP the maze effect is not visible.
I’m also sure that the final versions of ACR and LR won’t produce the maze effect either.

However, the green channel imbalance seems to be causing the black & white dots in 7D images (the ‘digital dandruff’, as RG describes it) that no other Canon DSLR has.

After some experimentation with 7D images, my impression is that the black & white dots limit the amount of post-processing that can be applied to 7D images.

Sharpening and enhanced contrast make the black & white dots quite visible and it’s these dots that give the overall ‘harsh’ look to 7D photos.

the ironic thing if that is the case, that they went to a more transmissive G1 or something, is that the artifacts make most converters, really all, introduce more noise than whatever modest gain a more transmissive G1 might give I'd think!

At best it seems to help maybe 15%, assuming that is even the factor that has boosted photon capture efficiency which is anything but certain, while the extra noise is much more than 15% so....

in fact if you look at very mazing prone patches you can notice that DPP definitely shows a maze-pattern itself, just weaker and somewhat broken up into dots by the tendency for DPP to get zipper effect

sometimes it almost looks like DPP tries to selectively smooth over areas of low detail with 7D raws, but i could very well be wrong about that

Nov 04, 2009 at 02:37 AM

UCSB
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.127 #14 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

abqnmusa wrote:
Why would you return the camera. The problem is not a 7D issue given that DPP does not produce artifacts.

I have a 5DII that produces superb images. For me, focusing on producing images with the 5DII might yield better results and be a better use of my time. It doesn't matter now, I can't return the camera. So I will cross my fingers and hope for the best when the ACR/LR support arrives and hope Phase One updates v5 of C1. I am a big supporter of Canon and have a lot of respect for the company and their products. I can wait the month or so for better support from the software suppliers.

Nov 04, 2009 at 03:38 AM

abqnmusa
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.127 #15 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

7D photography ....

2008 © abqnmusa

Exif information
Model	Canon EOS 7D
Date	2009:10:23 20:42:55
Original date	2009:10:23 20:42:55
Exposure time	1/800 sec
Focal length	400mm
Focal number	f/6.3
ISO speed	100 ISO
Exposure compensation	0.0

Exif information
Model	Canon EOS 7D
Date	2009:10:23 21:35:06
Original date	2009:10:23 21:35:06
Exposure time	1/1000 sec
Focal length	400mm
Focal number	f/6.3
ISO speed	320 ISO
Exposure compensation	+0.3

Exif information
Model	Canon EOS 7D
Date	2009:10:23 21:48:48
Original date	2009:10:23 21:48:48
Exposure time	1/1000 sec
Focal length	400mm
Focal number	f/6.3
ISO speed	250 ISO
Exposure compensation	+0.3

Nov 04, 2009 at 03:41 AM

abqnmusa
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.127 #16 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

7D photography ...

2008 © abqnmusa

Exif information
Model	Canon EOS 7D
Date	2009:10:23 21:53:21
Original date	2009:10:23 21:53:21
Exposure time	1/1000 sec
Focal length	400mm
Focal number	f/6.3
ISO speed	125 ISO
Exposure compensation	+0.3

Exif information
Model	Canon EOS 7D
Date	2009:10:28 21:14:38
Original date	2009:10:28 21:14:38
Exposure time	1/1000 sec
Focal length	400mm
Focal number	f/5.6
ISO speed	250 ISO
Exposure compensation	+0.3

Exif information
Model	Canon EOS 7D
Date	2009:10:28 22:14:27
Original date	2009:10:28 22:14:27
Exposure time	1/500 sec
Focal length	400mm
Focal number	f/10.0
ISO speed	320 ISO
Exposure compensation	0.0

Nov 04, 2009 at 03:42 AM

abqnmusa
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.127 #17 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

7D photography ...

2008 © abqnmusa

Exif information
Model	Canon EOS 7D
Date	2009:10:28 22:41:28
Original date	2009:10:28 22:41:28
Exposure time	1/1250 sec
Focal length	400mm
Focal number	f/5.6
ISO speed	125 ISO
Exposure compensation	0.0

Exif information
Model	Canon EOS 7D
Date	2009:10:28 23:04:34
Original date	2009:10:28 23:04:34
Exposure time	1/1250 sec
Focal length	400mm
Focal number	f/5.6
ISO speed	400 ISO
Exposure compensation	0.0

Exif information
Model	Canon EOS 7D
Date	2009:10:28 23:09:50
Original date	2009:10:28 23:09:50
Exposure time	1/3200 sec
Focal length	400mm
Focal number	f/8.0
ISO speed	320 ISO
Exposure compensation	0.0

Nov 04, 2009 at 03:43 AM

abqnmusa
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.127 #18 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

Exif information
Model	Canon EOS 7D
Date	2009:10:28 23:31:07
Original date	2009:10:28 23:31:07
Exposure time	1/1250 sec
Focal length	400mm
Focal number	f/6.3
ISO speed	640 ISO
Exposure compensation	+0.3

Nov 04, 2009 at 03:44 AM

RobDickinson
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.127 #19 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

Damn. Pictures. Way off topic.

Nov 04, 2009 at 04:57 AM

kjcramer
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.127 #20 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

The mazing has destroyed these images, completely unusable

Great shots, I gotta buy another 400 5.6

Nov 04, 2009 at 05:07 AM

ejmartin
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.127 #21 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

Yeah, more .5MP images from the 7D. What is this supposed to prove?

One thing for sure, downsizing by a factor of six gets rid of the artifacts

Nov 04, 2009 at 05:12 AM

kjcramer
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.127 #22 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

From the description it doesn't look like he is trying to "prove" anything. I hear you though, some nerve posting photographs in a photography forum.

Try decaf bro.

Nov 04, 2009 at 05:23 AM

dwweiche
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.127 #23 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

Can you please post a 100% crop of the sky. Better yet, 200%. That's what I really am excited to see

Nov 04, 2009 at 05:45 AM

ejmartin
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.127 #24 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

Oh, OK, an advanced DSLR can make tiny web images. Lots of them! I needed to know that. Crucial for many people considering an upgrade I'm sure.

Nov 04, 2009 at 05:58 AM

alundeb
Online
Image Upload: On

p.127 #25 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

Nice bird pics, abqnmusa.
They would be more interesting in the Nature and Wildlife forum, though.
As they are presented, they could have been taken with any crop camera from the 10D, through all the rebels. They are low ISO pictures in good light.
Here in the gear-talk forum, they tell more about the lens than the camera.
Still, I think it is OK that you posted them here.

What is not ok, is that you jump on people who post images that can show us the DIFFERENCE between cameras.

100% crops of sky matter in fine art printing in large formats.

200-400% crops are helpful to see the exact nature of the noise, and analyze what caused it and what can be done to improve it. Just beacuse you don't understand everything, please don't try to stop what is going on here, a cooperation between different photographers and engineers to help poeple get the most out of their camera.

For the record, the crop from a flower I posted previously, shows so little mazing to me, that I actually think my camera is acceptable.

Nov 04, 2009 at 07:37 AM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Image Upload 1 2 3 … 126 127 128 … 176 177 end