Canon EOS 7D Master thread

FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 3 … 147 148 149 … 176 177 end

Archive 2009 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

skibum5
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #1 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

jorkata wrote:
skibum5 wrote:
still don't have any suitable 50D/7D sets of images to compare but I did find the DPR D300s ISO 100 test scene RAW

Interesting results.
On my 24" monitor, I can hardly see any difference in detail at 100% crops.
At 200%, there's some difference in the fine prints.

Translated to print sizes, it seems that any differences between the 7D and D300 might be visible in 24×36 and larger prints but not in smaller ones (say 13x19).

Maybe it’s the quality of these megapixels that matters – perhaps it would have been a different story if they were of 5DII quality

.

Right now, though, it seems that putting 18mp on the 7D was about playing a numbers game rather than anything else.

perhaps it was a bit of a numbers game compard to having just put 15MP on it again liek the 50D (then again maybe having the few extra, even if they get slightly avgeraged to avoid mazing, makes a slightly better, more film-like product in the end? hard to say where the tradeoffs in file size and so on lie)

but i think it was surely worth it (the 18MP) over the 12.3MP of the D300s. When reach is the game you really need every little extra bit you can get. A 7D will definitely bring you more reach than a 5D2 and tons more than a 5D or D700 and more than a D300s. OTOH, is the D300s reach enough to be worth it over a 5D2? That start getting more debatable. I mean I'm sure it does still havemore reach but enough to be worth $1700 extra? not sure, at least with the 7D the answer is a lot more clear. For reach to be worth it, since the linear difference takes a LOT more MP to increase much you really need all you can get for it to be noticeably worth it. Anything less than the 15-18MP of the last two canon aps-c and i'm not sure the extra reach would be worth it.

for birds you can be really, REALLY reach limited, the other day i took some quick shots in the backyard and had to crop away 2/3 of the image even with 300+1.4x T just to get something that looked half-way reasonable. That difference starts coming into play even on HDTV screens and modest print sizes.

look at the moire on the last two comparisons with the D300s on the red stripes at the upper right and the checker-boxing at the bottom of the last one or on the first imge at the upper left you can see the full curl of the vine thingy on the 7D while on the D300s you don't see the final part of the curl of the vine at all

Nov 21, 2009 at 09:16 PM

alundeb
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #2 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

I have found the 7D to give the same "pixel sharpness" as my 500D, which is known to resolve essentially equally to the 50D. The 18MP vs 15 MP is not a "numbers game". The improvement is real.

At f8, the advantage of the 7D is muted because of diffraction. When will it ever be accepted that we cannot test the resolution of crop cameras at f8?

These are processed in C1v5, default sharpening. Note that I have not applied any extra sharpening of the 7D image to match the 500D image. Manual focus, unchanged between exposures. The test was repeated 3 times to ensure that the focus was always dead on.

I can't use ACR since I only have Elements 4.
Both 100% crops and equal magnification images are presented, for your convenience. 500D images resized with bicubic sharper.

2012 © alundeb

Nov 21, 2009 at 10:52 PM

mfurman
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #3 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

alundeb:
The 18MP vs 15 MP is not a "numbers game". The improvement is real.

Am I missing something here? I do not see any difference in sharpness between 18 and 15 Mpixel cameras. What is the improvement, you are talking about?

Nov 22, 2009 at 01:17 AM

skibum5
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #4 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

alundeb wrote:
I have found the 7D to give the same "pixel sharpness" as my 500D, which is known to resolve essentially equally to the 50D. The 18MP vs 15 MP is not a "numbers game". The improvement is real.

At f8, the advantage of the 7D is muted because of diffraction. When will it ever be accepted that we cannot test the resolution of crop cameras at f8?

ok, but if I use ACR 5.5 then it drawns lines as crisply as the others, but also makes horrible artifacts and if I use ACR 5.6 then it appears as if though it may very slightly soften the microcontrast, again this is one the same file....

could be wrong, but I think compensating for the G1/G2 knocks a trace off the crispness, but again the end result is certainly noticeably better than 12.3MP, likely, if not certainly, equal to at least 15MP if not more although probbaly not quite up to 17.9MP from a more standar design, but again since nothing else has more than 15MP and it produces a very smooth filmlike 15MP it's not like you are losing anything compared to any other APS-C camera (unless it does fall below the 50D, but it is hard to imagine it could be more than a meaningless trace worse at worst and it may well do better).

Nov 22, 2009 at 01:51 AM

abqnmusa
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.148 #5 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

The extra pixels of the 7D are very important when you crop the images. I can crop 2/3 of the frame and still have an excellent 6 MP imge. That is a big advantage when birding for example.

crop 2/3 of a 12 MP image and you only get 4 MP

Nov 22, 2009 at 01:51 AM

skibum5
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #6 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

alundeb wrote:
I have found the 7D to give the same "pixel sharpness" as my 500D, which is known to resolve essentially equally to the 50D. The 18MP vs 15 MP is not a "numbers game". The improvement is real.

At f8, the advantage of the 7D is muted because of diffraction. When will it ever be accepted that we cannot test the resolution of crop cameras at f8?

These are processed in C1v5, default sharpening. Note that I have not applied any extra sharpening of the 7D image to match the 500D image. Manual focus, unchanged between exposures. The test was repeated 3 times to ensure that the focus was always dead on.

I can't use ACR since I only have Elements 4.
Both 100% crops and equal magnification images are presented, for your convenience. 500D images resized with bicubic sharper.

i thought c1v5 still had a few artifacts left over, so is it 100% fully correcting?

anyway it probably does still just barely beat the 15MP cameras, maybe it gives like 16.5MP?

anyway wherever it exactly falls between 15.1 and 17.9MP, it does seem to be able to pull in more detail, even after full mazing correction, than any other APS-C camera

and left as is it already looks more natural and smoother than the 12.3MP D300s and if you were to scale it down to D300s size then it looks both sharper and smoother and perhaps less noisy than the D300s

Nov 22, 2009 at 01:58 AM

Zenon Char
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #7 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

Alek Komarnits wrote:
RobDickinson wrote:
Well just ordered a 7D and 17-55.

A very, very, very good combination ... two pictures below at 17 and 55 from a recent polar bear trip. The constant F/2.8 is wonderful for low light in combination with the 7D's high ISO capabilities.

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Sounds like you had a great trip. Hope you liked our province, eh!.

I just showed my wife the shot of that puppy and she loved it. What a cutie. We're from Manitoba but we have never been up there yet. Seems like the closer you are to a destination the longer it takes you to get there. We do have a cottage in the Canadian Boreal forest and have witnessed spectacular northern light shows, especially in the winter. Driving up we have see Moose, Woodland Caribou, Lynx, Wolf, a lot of Black Bears and an assortment of common critters like fox and coyote.

Nov 22, 2009 at 03:13 AM

alundeb
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #8 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

mfurman wrote:
alundeb:
The 18MP vs 15 MP is not a "numbers game". The improvement is real.

Am I missing something here? I do not see any difference in sharpness between 18 and 15 Mpixel cameras. What is the improvement, you are talking about?

Remember, we are talking about 8% increase in linear resolution. That means, for each 12'th pixel in each direction, you get a new one. It is not much, but it is what it is. Since we are not allowed by the forum police

to post 200% crops, I have circled in some areas where the extra resolution is visible.

2012 © alundeb

Nov 22, 2009 at 09:13 AM

alundeb
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #9 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

skibum5 wrote:

i thought c1v5 still had a few artifacts left over, so is it 100% fully correcting?

anyway it probably does still just barely beat the 15MP cameras, maybe it gives like 16.5MP?

anyway wherever it exactly falls between 15.1 and 17.9MP, it does seem to be able to pull in more detail, even after full mazing correction, than any other APS-C camera

and left as is it already looks more natural and smoother than the 12.3MP D300s and if you were to scale it down to D300s size then it looks both sharper and smoother and perhaps less noisy than the D300s

I agree that it's not fully up to 17.99 MP by the "old standards", I would say somewhere around 16.5. Remember, the 50D and 500D were only measured to around 13.5 by photozone. There was quite some fuzz about it then, but people seem to have forgotten already, that the apparent pixel sharpness was altered already with the 50D.

With my copy of the 7D, I don't have problems with mazing in C1, and I don't see any smoothing compared to my 500D either.

If I recall correctly, you mentioned that you found ACR 5.6 was able to pull out at least as much detail as C1, so the results could only be better with ACR 5.6 compared to my compilation here?

Nov 22, 2009 at 09:25 AM

mfurman
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #10 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

alundeb:
I have circled in some areas where the extra resolution is visible.

You are right - the difference can be seen but it very minimal and I did not even notice it.
The question then remains (you did address it, to some extend in the previous post):
If 5D mkII is a 21 Mpixel camera, is EOS 7D a 18 Mpixel camera?

By the way what is the difference between "old" and "new" standards?

Nov 22, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Alek Komarnits
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #11 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

Zenon Char wrote:Sounds like you had a great trip. Hope you liked our province, eh!.

I just showed my wife the shot of that puppy and she loved it. What a cutie. We're from Manitoba but we have never been up there yet. Seems like the closer you are to a destination the longer it takes you to get there. We do have a cottage in the Canadian Boreal forest and have witnessed spectacular northern light shows, especially in the winter. Driving up we have see Moose, Woodland Caribou, Lynx, Wolf, a lot of Black Bears and an assortment of common critters like fox and coyote.

Yea, the puppy was too cute ... and believe it or not, the photo isn't staged. I.e. just happened to put my backpack down, was taking pictures of another puppy, turned around, and he'd "fiddling" with my backpack!

Canada is spectacular ... as you may have seen on my polar bear trip report, I was also fortunate enough to see the Northern lights.

Edited on Nov 22, 2009 at 03:17 PM · View previous versions

Nov 22, 2009 at 01:35 PM

Heechee
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #12 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

I just bought my 7D today. I wanted a quick test to verify my hypothesis that 7D's ISO 3200 is sufficiently better than 40D's ISO3200 to justify the purchase. I shot the same scene with 40D in ISO3200, and 7D in ISOs 3200/6400/12800. EF 70-200 f4 L IS handheld, fixed ISO, fixed aperture, auto otherwise, RAW. LR3 beta, enough color noise slider use to get rid of color noise. So all in all a very unscientific test. Short summary: 7D ISO 6400 matches 40D ISO 3200 when 40D is upscaled to 7D size.

The full-size images are here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/arihuttunen/sets/72157622853167362/detail/

Here's what they pretty much all look like:

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Nov 22, 2009 at 01:48 PM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.148 #13 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

Two days ago (Friday) I attended the Israeli 7D launch. I only got to play with it a little but what else can I say but "I'm flabbergasted"? It seems more responsive than my 40D, the viewfinder is visibly larger and when I got home and looked at the pictures I get the feeling that ISO 3200 is like my 40D's ISO 800. Yippee....

Oh, the 17/4 TS and 100/2.8 IS were also there but funnily, the best shot of the day was taken with my favorite current kit: 40D and 120/4 macro TS at full tilt. The old dog can still do well with its old tricks.....

I'm going to be broke next year

so any help will be appreciated.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Nov 22, 2009 at 02:52 PM

paulfeng
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #14 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

WARNING: If you have no interest in Potential Pixel-Peeping ("PPP"), please skip this post without succumbing to the temptation to post a condescending slap at those who do. I will post some "real pictures" from when I went to "just go out and take some photos!" later.

As advertised, I set up a somewhat-controlled test shot for my 50D and three 7Ds (only keeping one; the first is already on the way back). (The third 7D, by the way, when examining an OOF color chart in DPP like the first and second, showed artifacts somewhere in-between but closer to the second, better body).

I set up the test as described below. The ISO100 shots were illuminated at full manual power (1/1) from a 580exII bounced from an off camera position. The ISO1600 shots were at 1/16. You will notice that the 1/16 shots are a little brighter than the 1/1 shots. I haven't checked to see if the 1/1 was dim, or the 1/16 was bright. There are slight differences in framing, only because my tripod is not spectacular; it was not moved intentionally.

I have not looked at these very closely - only casually in DPP 3.7.2. I did find it interesting how much better the red(-ish) spools of thread looked from the 7Ds compared to the 50D. (Unfortunately, I didn't have blue thread spools in the shot.) Also, unless there's something hinky going on with "zero" noise reduction in DPP, the 7Ds outclass the 50D considerably at ISO1600.

I will be interested to hear any observations y'all expert pixel peepers have to say, and feel free to post any crops, etc, of the files. Here are the raw files:

ISO100
ISO1600

Here's what the scene looks like:

This image is copyrighted by the owner

(flickr link)

Does anyone know who the little statue is of?

paulfeng wrote:
I should be receiving my third 7D body tomorrow, as the first and second both have non-IQ related issues. I'm not sure I will have time this weekend, but I may be able to set up a somewhat controlled test shot of 50D vs 7D1, 7D2, and 7D3. My plan is to tripod mount my 100-400 @ 100mm f/8 (we aren't really worried about diffraction, are we?), focus multiple times using live mode AF in live-view (& pick the best) and light the scene with bounced flash, manual power.

I probably won't put a lot of effort into the subject scene; I may put some wine bottles and skeins of yarn on the fireplace mantle. Any suggestions here (easy things I might have around the house)?

skibum5 wrote:
ejmartin wrote:
These are ACR 5.5 vs 5.6 with the 7D? The second of each pair clearly has much less artifacting, though there is some still left, which is intrinsic to ACR's demosaic method.

I'd be interested to see ACR 5.6 with the 7D vs the 50D.

yeah 5.5 vs. 5.6 with the 7D using the DPR ISO100 test scene

yeah i would be interested in seeing the 50D DPR test RAW since the real question is whether it really does at least deliver 50D detail without artifacting i suspect it can but can't be sure

i didn't check for general noise, for all i know whatever they did still leaves extra noise, but at least it is of a nice form and its not THAT critical at low ISO if it is of a nicer looking form

i sold my 50D so i can't make a test scene mysef

Nov 22, 2009 at 03:39 PM

omarlyn
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.148 #15 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

paulfeng wrote:]
Does anyone know who the little statue is of?

Al Franken?

Nov 22, 2009 at 04:15 PM

durandal2
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #16 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

i just want all you himitsubako

Nov 22, 2009 at 04:53 PM

mfurman
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #17 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

Yakim Peled:
3200 is like my 40D's ISO 800.

Impossible. 5D mkII is barely 1.5 stop better than 40D. You are overly enthusiastic, Yakim.

Nov 22, 2009 at 05:17 PM

garyvot
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.148 #18 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

mfurman wrote:
Yakim Peled:
3200 is like my 40D's ISO 800.

Impossible. 5D mkII is barely 1.5 stop better than 40D. You are overly enthusiastic, Yakim.

I don't think so. If you compare captures at a common resolution (instead of at 100%), the 7D handily beats the 40D and all previous APS-C bodies in terms of noise.

Nov 22, 2009 at 05:30 PM

paulfeng
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #19 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

omarlyn wrote:
paulfeng wrote:]
Does anyone know who the little statue is of?

Al Franken?

Well, that was fast.

Did you recognize the likeness, or did you already know about this "bobblehead"?
(actually much fancier than a standard bobblehead)

Nov 22, 2009 at 05:32 PM

omarlyn
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.148 #20 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

paulfeng wrote:
omarlyn wrote:
paulfeng wrote:]
Does anyone know who the little statue is of?

Al Franken?

Well, that was fast.

Did you recognize the likeness, or did you already know about this "bobblehead"?
(actually much fancier than a standard bobblehead)

Never seen the bobble-head before but that has to be one of the best doll likenesses that I've ever seen.

Omar

Edited on Nov 22, 2009 at 07:28 PM · View previous versions

Nov 22, 2009 at 06:02 PM

paulfeng
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #21 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

It was a Saint Paul Saints give away, perhaps only surpassed in greatness by their give away the year before commemorating National Tap Dance Day.

Nov 22, 2009 at 06:49 PM

skibum5
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #22 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

Alek Komarnits wrote:
Zenon Char wrote:Sounds like you had a great trip. Hope you liked our province, eh!.

I just showed my wife the shot of that puppy and she loved it. What a cutie. We're from Manitoba but we have never been up there yet. Seems like the closer you are to a destination the longer it takes you to get there. We do have a cottage in the Canadian Boreal forest and have witnessed spectacular northern light shows, especially in the winter. Driving up we have see Moose, Woodland Caribou, Lynx, Wolf, a lot of Black Bears and an assortment of common critters like fox and coyote.

Yea, the puppy was too cute ... and believe it or not, the photo isn't staged. I.e. just happened to put my backpack down, was taking pictures of another puppy, turned around, and he'd "fiddling" with my backpack!

Canada is spectacular ... as you may have seen on my polar bear trip report, I was also fortunate enough to see the Northern lights.

it is a good photo though, really down low perspective at puppy level and then the building way off in the distance behind

Nov 22, 2009 at 06:54 PM

skibum5
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #23 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

garyvot wrote:
mfurman wrote:
Yakim Peled:
3200 is like my 40D's ISO 800.

Impossible. 5D mkII is barely 1.5 stop better than 40D. You are overly enthusiastic, Yakim.

I don't think so. If you compare captures at a common resolution (instead of at 100%), the 7D handily beats the 40D and all previous APS-C bodies in terms of noise.

yeah it is better up there but then again it seems pretty clear that the 5D2 also handily beats the 7D and since the 5D2 was measured, at the RAW level, to have only around 1.6 stops better SNR at ISO3200 (normalized, not pixel level) how can the 7D have 1.5 stops better SNR than the 40D?

1.6 stops better than a 40D would mean astonishingly better photon capture which doesn't seem possible, i'm not sure everyone realizes how radical of an improvement 1.6 stops would entail

the lesser banding in the high iso shots might help make it seem better than the better it is

i'm sure it is better, but no way do i believe 1.5 stops better

i also noticed that some places like IR shot 1/3 stop longer exposure to get what seemed to be at best the same light as with a D300s, but that was judging with acr and who knows if that really knows the cutoffs properly sometimes it has not in the past

Nov 22, 2009 at 07:05 PM

skibum5
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #24 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

paulfeng wrote:
It was a Saint Paul Saints give away, perhaps only surpassed in greatness by their give away the year before commemorating National Tap Dance Day.

wow, haha, that was not what i was expecting

Nov 22, 2009 at 07:06 PM

paulfeng
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.148 #25 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

skibum, I'm hoping you are going to peep those files and tell me that the third body is not appreciably worse than the second. It appears so far that the third body is AF-ing fine, has a clean sensor, and has not presented any odd glitches (fingers-crossed), so it may actually be a keeper.

Nov 22, 2009 at 07:13 PM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 147 148 149 … 176 177 end