cameron12x
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
skibum5 wrote:
EDIT: the ACR 5.6 sample on DPP shows some signs of hope, it appears to be perhaps freer than C1 5 or DPP of the mazing, haven't looked yet into how it might be doing this and if there are any penalties, their sample looked a bit less crisp than mine, but I think it might still be far more free even if it was sharpened more, have to run, so far this might be the only converter (including DPP) that seems to show any sign of getting around it, but have to check into it more to see if it really does or if there are penalities
Well, maybe some new versions of DPP will arrive and I do need to try the new LR 3 BETA so maybe this will still all go away....
I'm hopeful for certain reasons, but it seems like the 7D has, either by truly poor QC or seemingly bizarre design choice, a probelm with artifacting at lower ISO. Yes, even with DPP (although muted though compared to ACR 5.5/C1 5). You can see hints of mazing and especially dots along maze lines if not clear lines even with reasonable settings and if you bump to sharpness 10 contrast 4, not normal settings but just to prove that DPP has no magic to eliminate it, then you can easily see that DPP has the same maze-type structure.
And everyone can ignore it and whatever, but hey, I guess it is just me but I would rather we raise a stink about it then get stuck with this for all future bodies. I mean wouldn't you? Well I guess not. Although I would really, really hate to do it, if the 5D3 and so on all have this and the Nikons don't.... I would hate to go through buying leneses again and I like Canon UI better, etc. but....
You know I'm not bringing it up because I hate Canon but because I LIKE Canon and wouldn't want them to think this is the way to go for future releases.
It is a little bizarre to post up reviews and sing the praises of how awesome the IQ is compared to this or that and then yet ignore issues like mazing, either you don't care about a little noise or artifacting or this and that or you do, can't try to have it both ways.
Wouldn't everyone like to have all the 7D has PLUS the same smoothness of the old 10D-50D or a D300S along with better high ISO performance and more resolution Would that be terrible
I just fail to see how they could be gaining things that are more important than losing, if this was by design. I'd far and away have 5% less accurate colors or 10% more noise at ISO3200 or whatever, than 80% more artifacts at ISO100.
Everything else about the sensor and electronics seems to be fantastic though.
Next week I will go down to Canon and see what they say, but I'm now thinking I actually way underestimate how many 7Ds have it and wonder if any at all don't (although one person gave me readouts from rawanalyze that sounded promising, but i never got to look at the RAW myself).
I also need to look over the conversions they did with the new 5.6 in detail and try LR 3 beta, maybe there will be a miracle, but since it shows in DPP too, I really wonder....
...Show more →
+1. Don't give up offering your opinion. It's been proven and shown time-and-time again in other threads by very capable engineering people that there are potential underlying design and QA issues with this sensor. For many people, this doesn't matter, as they don't intend to make large prints.
It's obvious that most of this will never show up in small to medium-sized prints. But for larger prints and if you crop an image before printing, you'll certainly begin to see the data smearing and lost image resolution at that point. That's where the pixel-peeping will really matter. And as someone else has pointed out, these deficiencies may possibly limit how much can be done in post to improve images.
The high ISO performance is really good on this camera. However, low ISO performance is no better (and possibly worse) than a 20D up until about ISO 800. And 7D images have a certain "harshness" to them, which is a result of the underlying maze artifacting coming from the sensor at all ISO levels. I don't know if that can be fixed by a firmware update, or if it will remain a legacy of the 7D. I have yet to see a single 7D image (here or anywhere) that doesn't manifest some of this "harshness," including my own. I was incredibly disappointed when I first looked at images shot side-by-side with my 20D. I was expecting more, not less, from this sensor.
Much of this won't matter visually much with HD video, and I've had some fun shooting both 720p and 1080p at varying frame rates. The ability to combine video with still shooting allows for a lot of creativity.
I haven't had an opportunity to fully evaluate the AF capabilities yet, but as soon as I can start shooting indoor sports I will. And I'm looking forward to shooting motorsports and doing some birding next year. I suspect the 7D will be fine for both, once I've learned the optimum settings. I've already been impressed with the AF system for static subjects in low light (far improved over my 20D). And of course there are a lot of other nice touches with the camera (flash control, etc.). As for the overall camera evaluation, it's still a large step up from my 20D, and I'm keeping my 7D. But the afforementioned IQ issues will keep me from calling it great camera.
I believe a number of design compromises were made with this sensor (likely for marketing reasons: higher ISO and more megapixels = more buyers).
Buyer beware.
|
Full size ACR 5.6 (beta) conversions in the RAW performance section look nice ... this is great news for me. 
