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 … 148 149 150 … 176 177 end

Archive 2009 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

mfurman
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #1 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

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.

It cannot be 1.5 stop. I am talking about "print" measure of noise.

Nov 22, 2009 at 08:15 PM

Zenon Char
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #2 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

I don't want to repost these. I went to the local bird sanctuary today. Scroll down a bit to my images.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/836385/4#lastmessage

Nov 22, 2009 at 11:01 PM

Alek Komarnits
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #3 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

skibum5 wrote:
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

Roger that ... always fun to get down low ... but pretty hard to do with Polar Bears since due to safety reasons, you have to be above their reach! ;-)

Nov 22, 2009 at 11:21 PM

michael49
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.149 #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?

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.

The effect of diffraction at f/8 appears quite small here, but by f/16 is is quite pronounced. Fortunately, I usually find that f/8 is enough DOF for most landscapes on 1.6X crop.

Nov 23, 2009 at 01:34 AM

garyvot
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.149 #5 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

skibum5 wrote:
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

You are quite right: I misread this somehow. I thought the claim was that the 7D was one stop better than the 40D...

However, I think what often triggers these impressions is the affect of the in-camera JPEG procesing (also replicated by DPP). As you know, the 40D output receives little or no chroma NR at high ISO, whereas the 7D output (as a Digic IV camera) gets lots. So the subjective impression may very well be of a 2-stop advantage, particularly after resampling or if you don't look carefully at fine detail.

Nov 23, 2009 at 06:11 AM

Amylr
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.149 #6 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

I just got my 7D yesterday and went out this morning on a cold & nasty rainy day here in Washington state to take some pictures.

Nov 23, 2009 at 06:23 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.149 #7 · 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.

It's possible. I didn't do any controlled tests. I just took a few high ISO shots and looked at them. For my "defense" I'll say that I know my 40D well. I love it till ISO 800 but ISO 1600 is borderline IMHO. I loved the pictures I took with the 7D until ISO 3200 while ISO 6400 looked borderline. It's a general impression, nothing more.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Nov 23, 2009 at 07:16 AM

durandal2
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #8 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

well, with noise reduction and good post process, I can get better pictures than my old 30D but with the full 30D size. In my own point of view, the 7D is a lot better in term of everything (even the noise can be kept because it's fine grained and so much more detail were retained)

Nov 23, 2009 at 12:13 PM

brainiac
Offline
Dedicated FM
Account Locked

p.149 #9 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

mfurman wrote:
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?

1) I think the difference between 500D and 7D is surprisingly noticeable.
2) Despite the fact that diffraction is less of a limit at f4, there is no guarantee that the lens is not choking the performance of the 7D in these tests.
3) the 7D is an 18 Mpixel camera in exactly the same way that the 5D2 is a 21 Mpixel camera AS LONG AS NOISE, CAMERA SHAKE, LENS PERFORMANCE ARE NOT LIMITING detail at a scale between the absolute resolutions of the two cameras.
4) we will see lenses limiting performance on the 7D more often than on the 5D2.
5) DPReview's test of the 7D's detail can be ignored because it is pretty clear that DPR did not ensure that the lens was adequate to exhaust 7D performance.
6) if you want to use the full 18 Mpixels of the 7D, you need plenty of light, superb lenses, and wide apertures.
5) if you only need as much detail as a 40D then keep using your existing lenses happily and stop grumbling about sharp pixels.

Nov 23, 2009 at 04:25 PM

cameron12x
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.149 #10 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

brainiac wrote:
if you want to use the full 18 Mpixels of the 7D, you need plenty of light, superb lenses, and wide apertures.

+1

I couldn't agree more...

Nov 23, 2009 at 04:42 PM

droopy1592
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #11 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

cameron12x wrote:
brainiac wrote:
if you want to use the full 18 Mpixels of the 7D, you need plenty of light, superb lenses, and wide apertures.

+1

I couldn't agree more...

+2

Nov 23, 2009 at 06:06 PM

skibum5
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #12 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

garyvot wrote:
skibum5 wrote:
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

You are quite right: I misread this somehow. I thought the claim was that the 7D was one stop better than the 40D...

However, I think what often triggers these impressions is the affect of the in-camera JPEG procesing (also replicated by DPP). As you know, the 40D output receives little or no chroma NR at high ISO, whereas the 7D output (as a Digic IV camera) gets lots. So the subjective impression may very well be of a 2-stop advantage, particularly after resampling or if you don't look carefully at fine detail.

well comparing in-cam jpgs is an entirely different beast and isn't what you use to compare sensors (Actually doesn't the 40D get chroma NR if you set the special CR NR switch? I think it slows it down a lot though)

for RAW i don't believe it can be even be quite as much as 1 stop better, although i'm sure it is better than the 20D-50D (although i haven't tested SNR at all)

Edited on Nov 23, 2009 at 07:11 PM · View previous versions

Nov 23, 2009 at 07:02 PM

skibum5
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #13 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

brainiac wrote:
mfurman wrote:
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?

1) I think the difference between 500D and 7D is surprisingly noticeable.
2) Despite the fact that diffraction is less of a limit at f4, there is no guarantee that the lens is not choking the performance of the 7D in these tests.
3) the 7D is an 18 Mpixel camera in exactly the same way that the 5D2 is a 21 Mpixel camera AS LONG AS NOISE, CAMERA SHAKE, LENS PERFORMANCE ARE NOT LIMITING detail at a scale between the absolute resolutions of the two cameras.
4) we will see lenses limiting performance on the 7D more often than on the 5D2.
5) DPReview's test of the 7D's detail can be ignored because it is pretty clear that DPR did not ensure that the lens was adequate to exhaust 7D performance.
6) if you want to use the full 18 Mpixels of the 7D, you need plenty of light, superb lenses, and wide apertures.
5) if you only need as much detail as a 40D then keep using your existing lenses happily and stop grumbling about sharp pixels.

2 perhaps
3 not entirely sure about that, i think it would be possible for a different design to get a tiny bit more, but it's probably not a big deal
4 yes, certainly anywhere near the center
5 not sure about that, with acr 5.5 it seemed pretty crisp, thin contrasty single pixel lines in evidence; with acr 5.6 they were a touch less crisp (but artifacting went away) but even so it still does get more detail than anything (APS-C) else
6 probably

Nov 23, 2009 at 07:10 PM

anthonygh
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #14 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

So many pages of mumbo jumble on here....I have just printed off an A3+ print from a 40D image and it is superb by any standard.....but then i get the same standard from 35mm film...must be me as I obviously use inferior kit.

Mind you...I spend my time taking photos not pixel peeping etc etc etc..and etc!

Nov 24, 2009 at 12:55 AM

ejmartin
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #15 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

anthonygh wrote:
So many pages of mumbo jumble on here....I have just printed off an A3+ print from a 40D image and it is superb by any standard.....but then i get the same standard from 35mm film...must be me as I obviously use inferior kit.

Mind you...I spend my time taking photos not pixel peeping etc etc etc..and etc!

Wish I had a penny for every post like this...

Nov 24, 2009 at 06:01 AM

tuschinski
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #16 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

I have a few questions about the IQ.

All the comparisons I've seen between the 7D and XXD/XXXD are positive, as long as the distance to the object is small/medium. Now I don't want to rehash everything what is said about Darwin's test, as I've seen enough evidence that what he says is at least partly hyperbole. But what he did show and what I have seen at work from others is that the 7D is having "trouble" with resolving details at longer range (trees in the background etc).

My questions:

1. Is Diffraction more pronounced at those distances?
2. Or is the AA filter more pronounced at those distances?
3. Finally, or is it just because it's often compared with 5D C/2? Is it comparable to a 40D?

If 3 is a positive it's a non issue imho, but It's a bit hard to find a clear answer.

Nov 24, 2009 at 06:18 AM

Fred Tedsen
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #17 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

tuschinski wrote:
I have a few questions about the IQ.

All the comparisons I've seen between the 7D and XXD/XXXD are positive, as long as the distance to the object is small/medium. Now I don't want to rehash everything what is said about Darwin's test, as I've seen enough evidence that what he says is at least partly hyperbole. But what he did show and what I have seen at work from others is that the 7D is having "trouble" with resolving details at longer range (trees in the background etc).

My questions:

1. Is Diffraction more pronounced at those distances?
2. Or is the AA filter more pronounced at those distances?
3. Finally, or is it just because it's often compared with 5D C/2? Is it comparable to a 40D?

If 3 is a positive it's a non issue imho, but It's a bit hard to find a clear answer.

I took a series of photos of the type you referred, trees at long distance, both with 100mm macro and 100-400, comparing to my 20D. The 7D had no trouble getting perfectly sharp images. The only kind of images that occasionally fool me, are close-ups at f16 to f22, where the 7D will look softer than the 20D at 100%, but when adjusted for equal magnification they are comparable.

Nov 24, 2009 at 06:38 AM

skibum5
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #18 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

tuschinski wrote:
I have a few questions about the IQ.

All the comparisons I've seen between the 7D and XXD/XXXD are positive, as long as the distance to the object is small/medium. Now I don't want to rehash everything what is said about Darwin's test, as I've seen enough evidence that what he says is at least partly hyperbole. But what he did show and what I have seen at work from others is that the 7D is having "trouble" with resolving details at longer range (trees in the background etc).

My questions:

1. Is Diffraction more pronounced at those distances?
2. Or is the AA filter more pronounced at those distances?
3. Finally, or is it just because it's often compared with 5D C/2? Is it comparable to a 40D?

If 3 is a positive it's a non issue imho, but It's a bit hard to find a clear answer.

i don't see how any of that has to do with "at distance", in fact, with the higher density sensor, the 7D should be able to provide more detail than the others, in particular, when stuff IS far away.

of course atmospheric hazing can certainly come into the mix and that could prevent one from making full use of higher density at times

Nov 24, 2009 at 07:08 AM

skibum5
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #19 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

ejmartin wrote:
anthonygh wrote:
So many pages of mumbo jumble on here....I have just printed off an A3+ print from a 40D image and it is superb by any standard.....but then i get the same standard from 35mm film...must be me as I obviously use inferior kit.

Mind you...I spend my time taking photos not pixel peeping etc etc etc..and etc!

Wish I had a penny for every post like this...

i think you'd be shooting stereoscopic 1200mm's

(and have anthonygh as your paid porter)

Nov 24, 2009 at 07:09 AM

fredschulz
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #20 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

I was afforded the oppurtunity to shoot a High School Playoff game a couple of weeks ago at Aloha Stadium ( same stadium as the past NFL Pro Bowls).

The Game started at 4:30 and ended around 7:00 pm when it is dark out here in Hawaii this time of year.

The series of 79 shots are in order of time taken and it shows the 7D from an ISO setting of 400 through 2500 increasing as the sun set. (the last 5 are at 2500)

My 40D or 50D would have never performed this well at 800 or 1600 ISO

I just opened the gallery so please comment. I know some of the photos could have been cropped a little tighter as has been suggested for sports action shots. I just have a lot of parents that want a "photo of Johnny" in action so sometimes I crop to include an extra player or two which can be cropped out when purchasing a photo.

Here is the gallery:

http://gallery.hawaiianshots.com/aiea_fb_1106

As stated above please comment, I have thick skin and do want to get better.

Regards,

Nov 24, 2009 at 08:25 AM

weekh
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.149 #21 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

7D vs 50D for Sports

For those who have used both the 7D and 50D, is there a big difference between the 2 camera? What's your take on the AF performance and image quality (up to ISO 1600) from the 2 cameras?

I'm a 5D2 user and was recently given a 50D to cover a sporting event. I've not tried the 50D yet. I'm thinking if the 7D would be a significantly better camera for the task.

Nov 24, 2009 at 11:34 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.149 #22 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

anthonygh wrote:
Mind you...I spend my time taking photos not pixel peeping etc etc etc..and etc!

Oy Vey! Gevald!!! It's blasphemy. Satan, cast yourself from this thread.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Nov 24, 2009 at 11:51 AM

brainiac
Offline
Dedicated FM
Account Locked

p.149 #23 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

fredschulz wrote:
Here is the gallery:

http://gallery.hawaiianshots.com/aiea_fb_1106

As stated above please comment, I have thick skin and do want to get better.

Very nice shots. Love the portly fella in number 77. You show why the 7D certainly looks like the best crop format DSLR from any maker right now.

Nov 24, 2009 at 12:16 PM

abqnmusa
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.149 #24 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

anthonygh wrote:
Mind you...I spend my time taking photos not pixel peeping etc etc etc..and etc!

STOP taking photos.
This thread is only about pixels viewed at 200% or more magnification.
show us your pixels

Nov 24, 2009 at 03:56 PM

garyvot
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.149 #25 · Canon EOS 7D Master thread

weekh wrote:
7D vs 50D for Sports

For those who have used both the 7D and 50D, is there a big difference between the 2 camera? What's your take on the AF performance and image quality (up to ISO 1600) from the 2 cameras?

I'm a 5D2 user and was recently given a 50D to cover a sporting event. I've not tried the 50D yet. I'm thinking if the 7D would be a significantly better camera for the task.

I've shot youth soccer with both. If the 7D is otherwise focusing correctly, it is the better choice, as the center-point + assist points help keep the target in focus (much like the 5D2). The customizability of the AF algorithm is a bonus too. The center point AF tracking on the 50D is fine as far as it goes, but it is easier to lose track of an erratically moving subject.

Nov 24, 2009 at 04:24 PM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 148 149 150 … 176 177 end