brainiac wrote:
...presumably because you made the basic error of comparing them at 100% on screen instead of comparing at equal magnification.
I use both cameras regularly, and while I think the 5D IQ is excellent, the 5D2 IQ is more excellent in every way.
I had the same thought reading lightshow's remark. I have both, and agree the 5DII IQ is superior. One aspect that's hard to show on screen is how the color processing is better on the newer digic's. From the 1DIII onward there have been a lot of subtle, meaningful improvements. It must frustrate Canon the most IQ discussion revolve around noise characteristics at 100% view.
With the 7D, Canon is certainly playing the numbers game with 18mp and 8 fps. But it doesn't mean that the 18mp files is worse than, say, a 15mp file.
dcmiller wrote:
It must frustrate Canon the most IQ discussion revolve around noise characteristics at 100% view.
With the 7D, Canon is certainly playing the numbers game with 18mp and 8 fps. But it doesn't mean that the 18mp files is worse than, say, a 15mp file.
Don't worry - DPReview and DXO will do a great job of showing everyone how the 7D's 18mp noise is worse than other cameras even though it won't be. I agree it must be frustrating for Canon, and I'm glad that they keep pushing the Mpixels in the right direction. We just have to pray that the DPReview/DXO delusions don't influence Canon to take its foot off the gas in DSLR the way it has with the G11.
timbop wrote:
I'm sorry for such harsh posts, my annoyance threshold just isn't what it used to be. It's just astonishing that the (I believe) vocal minority keep beating this horse to death (there's another thread on the screen topic), just for the sake of complaining. We all clamored for a non-1 series camera with better than the 9 point diamond AF, and what Canon delivered (admittedly on paper) is pretty amazing if it lives up to billing (RG notwithstanding). When you need a smaller AF point for small birds in trees, it's there. When you need a larger high precision AF point for really lowlight AF, it's there - all over the frame. Need expansion for tracking moving targets - you got it.
This camera was designed for high speed, high quality AF. I hope it lives up to it's potential, because if it does this is a landmark camera for Canon. The fact that it is an APS-C doesn't bother me, because I always intend to own more than 1 body. I also realize that there is now a very good chance that a FF camera with the same features might actually appear within the next year. I am also realistic enough to realize that if it does, it will NOT have a faster than 5fps frame rate.
I was right at the edge of putting all my canon gear up for sale and switching to nikon when the d700 came out, mainly because it didn't appear canon was very interested in keeping my business. The 5d2 has great image quality, but seemed very outclassed in every other respect. That appears to be changing now. From my perspective, the only thing that the d300s has that I would want is more tightly spaced AF points - but we'll see how tracking works in the 7d. I expect that the next FF camera from Canon will keep many of the 7d's enhancements...Show more →
skibum5 wrote:
and you have your massive boat anchors.... we don't have the light bodies.
face it a 1 series is a PITA if you are say running around all day on vacation, kinda bulky
and as for lift weights the problem is if i get in better shape then i simply take longer hikes/do more in a day and the heavier body still feels like a drag....
I don't mind carrying it around on vacation and I don't find it a PITA. But I sure don't need changeable screens or MF for vacation shots either.
gene A. wrote:
I would have happily paid $2500 for this body if it were full frame, but I have no interest in this camera with a cropped sensor. The sad fact is it will probably be 2 years before we see these features in a new version of the 5D.
+1
The way these cameras are depreciating and updating every year I'm buying glass. In the end I'm looking at the picture, and I just don't see $1700 for a cropper improving that.
Chevy has plenty of models.. how they doing now? Canon should have improved what they had and updated firmware, and look into making a model that is updatable. I think one day the SLR camera will be modular like computer systems today... it just makes sense.
The bottom line is that any camera that gets wet can die. Protect your camera from the elements. Canon is not warrantying any camera (1 series, 5 series, 7 series) as waterproof.
SkankPile wrote:
Chevy has plenty of models.. how they doing now?
... I think one day the SLR camera will be modular like computer systems today...
Car market isn't an olygopoly and PC is modular because there's no one company that develop and manufacture every single components in the PC. Intel doesn't make hard drive, nVidia doesn't make RAM, etc.
n0b0 wrote:
Car market isn't an olygopoly and PC is modular because there's no one company that develop and manufacture every single components in the PC. Intel doesn't make hard drive, nVidia doesn't make RAM, etc.
Actually, the car market is an oligopoly in my opinion.
n0b0 wrote:
Car market isn't an olygopoly and PC is modular because there's no one company that develop and manufacture every single components in the PC. Intel doesn't make hard drive, nVidia doesn't make RAM, etc.
But for a company like Leica, minolta, contax if they could offer you an SLR frame choice, sensor choice, AF package, and you can buy and upgrade it like you would buy a dell computer... yea that would work.
Then when a new FF sensor is available maybe you pay for the sensor and new processor..and instead of 8K you do that for 2K... I think that would sale like hotcakes. I'd happily pay $1500 now for a FF kit to drop into my old 20D.
timbop wrote:
I'm sorry for such harsh posts, my annoyance threshold just isn't what it used to be. It's just astonishing that the (I believe) vocal minority keep beating this horse to death (there's another thread on the screen topic), just for the sake of complaining. We all clamored for a non-1 series camera with better than the 9 point diamond AF, and what Canon delivered (admittedly on paper) is pretty amazing if it lives up to billing (RG notwithstanding). When you need a smaller AF point for small birds in trees, it's there. When you need a larger high precision AF point for really lowlight AF, it's there - all over the frame. Need expansion for tracking moving targets - you got it.
This camera was designed for high speed, high quality AF. I hope it lives up to it's potential, because if it does this is a landmark camera for Canon. The fact that it is an APS-C doesn't bother me, because I always intend to own more than 1 body. I also realize that there is now a very good chance that a FF camera with the same features might actually appear within the next year. I am also realistic enough to realize that if it does, it will NOT have a faster than 5fps frame rate.
I was right at the edge of putting all my canon gear up for sale and switching to nikon when the d700 came out, mainly because it didn't appear canon was very interested in keeping my business. The 5d2 has great image quality, but seemed very outclassed in every other respect. That appears to be changing now. From my perspective, the only thing that the d300s has that I would want is more tightly spaced AF points - but we'll see how tracking works in the 7d. I expect that the next FF camera from Canon will keep many of the 7d's enhancements...Show more →
Since I am also "right at the edge of putting all my canon gear up for sale and switching to Nikon...", I have to ask how the 7D kept you from putting all your Canon gear up for sale and buying a D700? Despite the fact that they're both FF cams, the D700 and 5d2 are vastly different cameras as are the D700 and 7D. 1.6 v. FF are entirely different.
Can you elaborate, or share the faith, or pass the bottle....
Nikon has no answer for the 5d2 (other than the $8k D3x) and Canon STILL has no answer for the D700.
I don't mind carrying it around on vacation and I don't find it a PITA. But I sure don't need changeable screens or MF for vacation shots either.
Cheers
Since I am not a youngster anymore, I find it easier to just use my P&S (RAW capable) camera on vacations and long walk arounds like races and fairs instead of lugging a case with a dSLR and three or four lenses. I find the freedom of this nice and it draws less attention when doing snaps and candids. I just look like any other tourist with his little P&S.
One of the advantages of having 18MP and lots of cross sensors throughout the frame, is that you can use the accurate AF (yeah, even at f/2) with a sensor near where the composition is right, and crop it the rest of the way in post.
Of course we would all pay $1700 for all the 7d's features WITH fullframe, but that is just fantasy in 2009. In 2015 maybe, but not today. I can't believe so many don't understand that.....
orangefirefish wrote:
Actually, the car market is an oligopoly in my opinion.
Oligopoly means only a few. Car market has more than just a few manufacturers. BMW, Merc, Volvo, Fiat, Toyota, Honda, Mitsubishi, Ford, etc. And this is not counting the subsidiaries.
SkankPile wrote:
But for a company like Leica, minolta, contax if they could offer you an SLR frame choice, sensor choice, AF package, and you can buy and upgrade it like you would buy a dell computer... yea that would work.
Then when a new FF sensor is available maybe you pay for the sensor and new processor..and instead of 8K you do that for 2K... I think that would sale like hotcakes. I'd happily pay $1500 now for a FF kit to drop into my old 20D.
With PC, one issue that people face with modular design is compatibility. That's why there's some sort of cooperation between those companies.
It's fine if one company makes all the parts like the RED camera but if you're asking different companies to make different parts, you'll face that same compatibility issues. Do you think those companies you mention are willing to cooperate and share their techs with each other to ensure compatibility? Somehow I doubt it.
Even though this thread is on the 7D there have been some excellent discussion here on a range of topics.
I feel that an important issue that Paul raised about MF capability was with fast lenses. Canon has a few 1.4 and 1.2 lenses. Focusing the 1.2 lenses accurately is a tall order with AF. Switching to MF is no picnic either.
I was happily strumming away with my 5D until I got "the alt lens bug" and I now own a few non Canon lenses. After converting the Rokkor 58/1.2 to the Canon mount I discovered how inaccurate my 5D actually was. Setting up a tape measure and photographing the 2' mark reveled some serious back focussing. In the end I ordered the Ee screen for the 5D. This helped with focusing but what I saw through the viewfinder is not what I saw in the files. I then had to track down the part numbers and order a full set of screen shims from Canon. Canon calls them "washers." Trial and error led me to picking the correct thickness from the pack of 18 washers that I received from Canon. But I can now focus my 58/1.2 Rokkor and 50/1.4 Super Takumar accurately. I also get better focus with my EF 100/2.
Shooting really great fast glass near wide open is a different style of shooting. I don't do it all the time, but the look can only be achieved with fast glass. Part of the process is using the human brain to decide what small element in the viewfinder will have focus. Think about out achieving razor thin focus on one barb on a barb wire fence on a country road. Messing around with AF points is not always the easy solution like it is in shooting a soccer match. MF is the answer. I think a lot of folks who have zero regard for MF have never tried using a 1.2 lens.
PhotoMaximum wrote:
This helped with focusing but what I saw through the viewfinder is not what I saw in the files. I then had to track down the part numbers and order a full set of screen shims from Canon. Canon calls them "washers." Trial and error led me to picking the correct thickness from the pack of 18 washers that I received from Canon. But I can now focus my 58/1.2 Rokkor and 50/1.4 Super Takumar accurately.
Wow, I admit I didn't know you could even do that.
When I found that one of my 5D bodies did not focus my fast lenses accurately with the 'S' screen installed, I considered it a defect and sent it to Canon to be fixed (they did).
I imagine these shims are what Canon service uses to retrofit this, but it seems odd to me they would make these user-orderable parts.
