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.
thw2 wrote:
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.
Its just my own observations. Just check the for sale forums, I think there are 3 on there right now. Plus a couple over at POTN. And that is what is available right now...plus they aren't selling as fast as they were when I sold mine. People are having to drop their price in order to unload these things.
The noise (or mazing) is terrible at low ISO's on a LOT of these cameras. While DPP does handle the files better than LR3 or CR Beta, the artifacts are still there. For me, thats not good since DPP is made to work with these cameras.
thw2 wrote:
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.
Are you absolutely sure that you don't having the mazing effect? What did you do to test for it? I was initially pretty sure that my camera was OK, but after some more careful looking and learning how to see it, I found that it does, just like I believe every other 7D that has been analyzed by Emil. As skibum5 has commented, there's no way at this point of knowing if this is designed in or not or whether it will be properly tamed in ACR or CR1. I really like the camera, but noise in skies at ISO 100 is not cool.
Well if the price difference between new and used is not a lot why buy used ?. With Microsoft cashback or ebay, it's way "cheaper" buying new.
MikeRichards wrote:
Its just my own observations. Just check the for sale forums, I think there are 3 on there right now. Plus a couple over at POTN. And that is what is available right now...plus they aren't selling as fast as they were when I sold mine. People are having to drop their price in order to unload these things.
The noise (or mazing) is terrible at low ISO's on a LOT of these cameras. While DPP does handle the files better than LR3 or CR Beta, the artifacts are still there. For me, thats not good since DPP is made to work with these cameras....Show more →
I just want to go on the record and say, I NEVER had these issues when I shot Nikon! Nikon comes out with a new camera every year, I have owned the D200, D300, D3 & D700 and I bought them all when they were almost new and NONE of them had issues that we are experiencing with Canon. 1D Mark III and its focusing issue, 5D and the mirror falling out 5D Mark II black dots and now the 7D.
Nikon has no issues ? C'mon.....Not sure why you are using Canon now ?...and on the same token people have never had problem with their Canon equipments.
MikeRichards wrote:
I just want to go on the record and say, I NEVER had these issues when I shot Nikon! Nikon comes out with a new camera every year, I have owned the D200, D300, D3 & D700 and I bought them all when they were almost new and NONE of them had issues that we are experiencing with Canon. 1D Mark III and its focusing issue, 5D and the mirror falling out 5D Mark II black dots and now the 7D.
Obviously you are just a fan-boy and don't know when to admit that Canon hasn't created a problem free camera in years! I shoot Canon because it is less expensive, they have a better selection of primes and I am one of the few that prefer the AF of Canon.
I don't recall a single issue with the D300, D3 or D700...not a single issue. And reports from the D3x and D3s show the same pattern. For Canon, lets go back to 2005 when they created the 5D & 30D. The 30D seems like a solid camera only had one new one malfunction and the mirror locked up in the first 80 frames. But that was just a fluke.
The 5D has had a major issue with the mirror falling out and not til they stopped making the 5D did Canon decide to do a free fix for owners.
Then they came out with the 1D/1Ds Mark III. Don't get me started on that camera. It took them three years to the get the AF right. Haven't heard much about the 40D or 50D except maybe the IQ or noise not being as good as previous models but I guess we can say that the 40D & 50D weren't really bad cameras. I mean, I have a 40D and no real complaints there.
5D Mark II - black dots and I believe there was something else too, just can't remember when I had mine.
7D...where do I begin!
For me, I have owned a ton of cameras, 10D, 20D, 30D, 40D, 1D Mark III, 5D, 5D Mark II and D100, D200, D300, D3, D700. I have had multiple copies of each except the D3/D700, which I only owned one of. I had one D300 that had some dead pixels, other than that, NEVER had an issue with Nikon. As for Canon. 10D metering went out, 30D mirror locked up, 5D Mark II would not recognize lens after using for 20 mins (display f0 in the top lcd) and a 1D Mark III that gave me an error on my first shoot with it (self cleaning sensor malfunction).
Its all personal experience, believe me, I am a huge fan of Canon but I also know when to say that something is really wrong with them lately.
Well great..if you think you are right call everybody a fanboy...I guess you are a Nikon fanboy...I think you need to go back to Nikon don't you think so ?
MikeRichards wrote:
Obviously you are just a fan-boy and don't know when to admit that Canon hasn't created a problem free camera in years! I shoot Canon because it is less expensive, they have a better selection of primes and I am one of the few that prefer the AF of Canon.
I don't recall a single issue with the D300, D3 or D700...not a single issue. And reports from the D3x and D3s show the same pattern. For Canon, lets go back to 2005 when they created the 5D & 30D. The 30D seems like a solid camera only had one new one malfunction and the mirror locked up in the first 80 frames. But that was just a fluke.
The 5D has had a major issue with the mirror falling out and not til they stopped making the 5D did Canon decide to do a free fix for owners.
Then they came out with the 1D/1Ds Mark III. Don't get me started on that camera. It took them three years to the get the AF right. Haven't heard much about the 40D or 50D except maybe the IQ or noise not being as good as previous models but I guess we can say that the 40D & 50D weren't really bad cameras. I mean, I have a 40D and no real complaints there.
5D Mark II - black dots and I believe there was something else too, just can't remember when I had mine.
7D...where do I begin!
For me, I have owned a ton of cameras, 10D, 20D, 30D, 40D, 1D Mark III, 5D, 5D Mark II and D100, D200, D300, D3, D700. I have had multiple copies of each except the D3/D700, which I only owned one of. I had one D300 that had some dead pixels, other than that, NEVER had an issue with Nikon. As for Canon. 10D metering went out, 30D mirror locked up, 5D Mark II would not recognize lens after using for 20 mins (display f0 in the top lcd) and a 1D Mark III that gave me an error on my first shoot with it (self cleaning sensor malfunction).
Its all personal experience, believe me, I am a huge fan of Canon but I also know when to say that something is really wrong with them lately....Show more →
This is not a fanboy review.
It is an interesting read that tests all aspects of layout and performance. They look at the camera in detail and are quite impressed by what Canon has accomplished with the 7D.
Next time if 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. Also check the air it has to be clean like a VLSI clean room level II.
abqnmusa wrote:
Seems rediculous to be examining pictures at 200% or 400%. All camera are going to have artifacts beyond 100% view.
I looked at the files at 200% to make it easy to see what was ruining the images at normal viewing magnifications. The images are junk at 100% view. These artifacts make the files unusable even at web magnification sizes. I do understand that DPP is producing artifact free images. Well ... after checking, I'm a couple of days past my return window for the camera ... I guess I will be coming along for the ride on this one. I'll be using DPP until ARC or C1 can process the files.
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.
