After using the camera for a couple outings, I like it quite well. The general setup is good, menus are fairly easy, adjustability is good. To me, the focus is about on par with my Mk2 in good light and almost as good in bad light. Definitely better than my 40D for sports use. It has a bit more shutter lag it seems like, not sure what the spec is on it compared to a 1 series, but feels a hair slower to fire. Nothing one can't get used to and I wouldn't call it a big issue. Seems quicker than either a 20D or 40D in that area. The high ISO isn't as good as I would have hoped for, but it's still an improvement and seems like the files clean up well with noise ninja.
I tried setting the tracking method (CFnIII-3) to setting 2, track priority. I wasn't happy with the results. I got a lot of shots of the stands in the BG in focus. Once it locks on something, it sticks with it. I'm sure my bad results were because I hit the button too soon and before I was on the right target. That may still be a usefull setting, but will take more practice to make it work for me consistently.
I'm one of those lowlifes who shoots JPG 98% of the time and am happy with how they come out. Perhaps a little more could be squeezed out of a RAW file, but I've never gotten the workflow down to the point it was worth the difference to me when I shoot 1000 or 5000 images I need to get posted ASAP. I can't hardly tell the difference between a large fine JPG and a large compressed. so extremely discriminating I am not.
Here's a few from MS volleyball and some from youth football the last few days. All are cropped and processed with NN for the high ISO shots. The gym was typical bad light and the football wasn't exactly a bright sunny day either. All were shot with standard picture style JPG. NR was on low for all. (I think, too many times through the menus the last few days.) Links are for the files as shot from the camera.
Gosh, wondering how Rob Galbraith is going to react. The sports shots posted here are fabulous.
Superficially, his article on the 7D sounds OK, but it's also filled with lots of negative connotations. I am willing to bet he's going to write another negative review eventually. What will the folks here think?
ExxWhy wrote:
After using the camera for a couple outings, I like it quite well. The general setup is good, menus are fairly easy, adjustability is good. To me, the focus is about on par with my Mk2 in good light and almost as good in bad light. Definitely better than my 40D for sports use. It has a bit more shutter lag it seems like, not sure what the spec is on it compared to a 1 series, but feels a hair slower to fire. Nothing one can't get used to and I wouldn't call it a big issue. Seems quicker than either a 20D or 40D in that area. ...Show more →
After a couple of days, I'm impressed with the 7D. IQ is better than I expected (as a former 50D owner). Did a head-to-head comparison today at all ISO's with my 5DII and although the 5DII IQ is better, the 7D images processed very nicely in PP. Great results after a little noise reduction at 1600 and 3200.
last saturday I got mine too. Very happy for the moment, I'm coming from the 1Dmk2N.
One thing I like, not mentioned (I think), is the new exposure system. I like it. I think it is very good.
Coming from 8MP 18MP are really impressive. A lot of detail!
ruhikant wrote:
Finally some shots..
All shots are with EF800 ISL Handheld. About 50% crop. I have to say that this camera beats 1DMK2N to get the initial focus acquisition specially when I set the lens's minimum focus limit at 6mm.It has been a struggle for me with 1DMK2N and EF800 combo (to get a quick response I have to set the focus limit at 20m: and many times it is too long).
These are easy shots with blue skies but very impressed with the tracking(way better than 5DII or 50D). I used center point with AF expansion.
WHOA
Love these pictures
800mm handheld ?
You a gym-guy....I must get me one of these 800mm lens. As well as sign up with the local gym while I am at that )
Jim Victory wrote:
My test involves going out and shooting the subjects I use the camera for and then processing the raw files. If the results meet my client's and my approval then that is all that matters.
I really don't understand the obsession with all the technical data and test as well as the eagerness to believe any of it. I can understand if your an engineer and you like to disect and test it under controlled conditions but this is a camera to take pictures not an atom smasher.
Try to take a shot, in the conditions you shoot in, process the file and see if you like it. If you print all of your shots in 100% crops then by all means endeavor to find a camera that meets that need. I'm more concern about the final product and that is a print of a photograph not a flow chart or 100% crop.
I must admit I feel quite inadequate as a photographer many times after coming on this forum and seeing the level of analysis of noise, DR etc that goes on. I know someone has to do it, but I don't really find it that interesting other than a general conclusion. I'm much more interested in what real world performance is like and if the camera will work in a wide range of conditions with a wide range of subjects to an acceptable level. So far no camera I've owned has come close to fulfilling that role other than the 1D II. Hopefully the 7D can be added to the list.
Try shooting a backlit bride and you'll see the need for more than +/-2 stops Yakim. Using spot metering which is not tied to a focus point is a pain in the neck whichever method you use.
Yakim Peled wrote:
Indeed I'm puzzled why there's no CF for that like in the 1 series.
To encourage folks to upgrade to 7D Mk2?
Honestly, with each AF point being covered by at least 1 independent metering zone, it's probably a piece of cake for Canon to implement spot metering tied to individual AF point. But, of course, they won't do it just yet...
40D: Shutter Lag (SL) = 59 ms, Viewfinder Blackout (VB) = 100 ms
1D2: SL = 40-55 ms, VB = 87 ms
7D: SL = 59 ms, VB = 100 ms
1D3: SL = 40-55 ms, VB = 80 ms
Thanks for those numbers. Makes me wonder if I actually can notice it or it's my imagination. Or it could be the shutter button, different feel, etc. 2 hundreths of a second doesn't seem like much difference to detect. I noticed it in VB serves, was consistenly late until I adjusted.
thw2 wrote:
7D: SL = 59 ms, VB = 100 ms
1D3: SL = 40-55 ms, VB = 80 ms
When running balls-to-the-wall, neither camera has much time with light on the AF sensor to figure out AI Servo tracking. What, about 20ms per click for the 1D3? No wonder some of the Nikons at highest FPS don't AF continuously.
It will be interesting to see if the next 1-series body(ies) really go at 12 or 14 fps, as per the rumors, and if they AI Servo at that rate, and if they do, how long the VF blackout is.
It further raises the question of how VF blackout is defined with regard to mirror-bounce; it would seem that the bouncing would need to be done for AF to work, but you might get away with a faster spec to advertise if you just need an image good enough for the photographer to see.
EDIT: I haven't read this yet, which discusses high FPS and mirror movement from Nikon.
Spot AF seems to me to be useful for One Shot, not AI Servo.
This AF system is new and different and will take many of us some time to figure out. I think if there is a systemic problem with the camera, the community will uncover it quickly; conversely, if there is user error (e.g., picking an AF mode inappropriate to the subject), this too will be thoroughly discussed and alternative "best practices" developed.
.
The sports shots posted here are fabulous.