Whoa, I don't log on to FM very often... but you guys are hardcore pixel peepers! I'm trying to figure out what is going on in this thread and having trouble...
Anyway, just for the record, I have been more than happy with the performance of my 7D. It's the best camera I have ever owned.
theSuede wrote:
Thank you Paul. I'll look at the raw's later tonight. And try to gather some other cameras as well... I already have the data, but not in a uniform presentation format.
I will be interested to hear what you say about my second body in terms of the way you characterized the other 7Ds you've looked at:
theSuede wrote:
I've tested 13 cameras so far - and TWO has been "good", eight has been "nah...." and three have been "OMG! that's BAD!"...
There have been a few possibly minor issues with the camera, and I have half-a-mind to just send this one back as well, but if it is good in IQ, then maybe I should keep it and send it in to Canon to fix other issues (which I will describe in my next post...)
(For the record, I have taken real pictures with the 7D, not just oof color charts, and they look very good; from what I can tell from looking at my photos, !)
1. Shutter release and "Set" button do not respond. Cycling power switch does not help; popping battery out and in appears to resolve problem.
2. Trying to configure 580exII on hotshoe, but camera does not recognize that flash is there and turned on. (And I think, but do not recall exactly, that at the same time, could not configure internal flash wireless control because there was a flash on the hotshoe...) I don't recall if cycling the on/off switch worked, or if I had to pop out the battery.
Both these things happened in the first 48 hours of having the camera.
Do you think these things are par for the course, or do they say to you to have the seller swap the camera? (again; first one is going back with a big, unmoving spot on the sensor.)
I found this most interesting regarding what Darwin found in terms of image softness (which is my biggest concern holding me back from buying right now)...
"The Canon EOS 7D shows a slight resolution increase over the 50D, but again, appears slightly less-sharp at the "1" sharpness setting. Even though the 50D image is slightly sharper, the 7D image is still better than the 50D uprezzed to 7D dimensions. Honestly, the resolution differences are not huge and in my opinion, not a good reason alone (there are many other good reasons) to upgrade from the 50D to the 7D for most...A sharpness setting of "2" helps the 7D a lot in this example. The 5D Mark II, on the other hand, is a clear winner in this comparison."
and, when comparing sample images....
"...The sharpness setting is "1" (very low) with the exception of the "S=" examples that indicate the sharpness setting used to process them. My perception is that, at a sharpness setting of "2", the 7D image is similarly sharp as the 50D image. And at a sharpness setting of "3", the 7D image is similarly sharp as the 5D Mark II image. I'm guessing that the 7D's anti-alias filter is a little stronger relative to the individual pixels on this sensor compared to the T1i or 50D. And that the 50D and T1i's anti-alias filter are a little stronger relative to their individual pixels compared to the 5D II and some other prior DSLR models."
ejmartin wrote:
How do the 7D's you've examined compare against other current Canons -- say the 50D, 5D2, and 1D3? It would be good to know whether and how the 7D is different from its siblings.
definitely different than the 50D and 5D2
they have more of the random sort of pattern banding but less of the repeated vertical banding and their G1/G2 have closer avg values for any measured patch (aside from patches where the green signal is getting low enough to be getting at least somewhat closer to the floor) and on the 7D one of the green channels always measures lower standard deviation than the other, at least with my two copies, didn't measure Paul's new copy at all yet (but his new copy in ACR 5.5 processing does show more signs of mazing than a similarly processed 50D or 5D2 file, even if quite a bit less than with the bad copies and within striking range of the 50D).
i'd have to check, but i think my copy was about 3x greater difference than the other models, but i have to check
I think that there are at least two or three groups of people in this thread and although there is a lot of exchange within those groups, people from one group completely ignore posts from another group.
One of the groups definitely constitutes of those who think that there is nothing better than EOS 7D and any analysis of problems with 7D is without the slightest merit
Censorship? Not sure what you are smoking. So we keep this thread open for 6 more months? Why did they ever close the 5D master thread then? Keep 'em all open!
If there are too many mixed threads stuffed into an unweildy master thread, then close it and let those folks start new threads to discuss whatever they like. Then those not interested need not read it.
^^ Jeff ... in the current versions (2.5, 3 beta) support for the 7D is junk; it is crazy to do evaluations with those products ... the 7D is not currently supported (with a production release) in those products. Adobe has been hinting that they will have a full production release for the 7D in December. You might want to try DPP or Capture One because those are production releases.
jcbradshaw wrote:
This was not terrifically controlled, but still the results are surprising. I shot the same target under the same conditions using four cameras. 10D, 20D, 40D and 7D. Shot raw. No adjustments. Converted to jpg from Lightroom.
If you ask me, the 7D is only better in the noise department than the 10D, which is horrible. I know the 7D is higher resolution, which increases noise, but I had heard they had more than compensated for that with new technology.
Any thoughts or input?
Thanks,
Jeff
Flawed testing methodology perhaps? If there's one thing that has been demonstrated in the many reviews and comparisons of the 7D it is that it has better high ISO noise characteristics than any of the cameras you are comparing it with.
Fred Tedsen wrote:
Flawed testing methodology perhaps? If there's one thing that has been demonstrated in the many reviews and comparisons of the 7D it is that it has better high ISO noise characteristics than any of the cameras you are comparing it with.
Custom function question, is this the correct thread or should I start a new one? ... Just picked up a 7D and going through the setup and there's a lot to learn. I spent some time with the camera and manual last night and can't figure out how to set the AF-On button to activate autofocus with automatic AF point selection and at the same time, the * button to activate autofocus with a manually selected point. All the while I want the shutter button to activate metering only.
I was doing some noise comparisons between my 20D and 7D. I converted some RAW files to TIFF using DPP, and I was surprised to find that when I imported the TIFFs into Lightroom, the noise characteristics of the TIFFs and RAWs was identical. In DPP the 7D images in particular appear much cleaner than in Lightroom. Puzzled by this, I then tried converting paulfeng's first 7D color chart. This image shows very clear mazing in Lightroom but not in DPP. But again, the TIFF processed from DPP when imported to Lightroom showed the identical mazing as the RAW. Does this say that the mazing in Lightroom is a function of how it displays images rather than how it processes RAW files?
!)