Stumped wrote:
Robert no offence taken but I shot the 7D & 50D side by side
several days & the 7D did not cut it for me.
Nothing personal but in another thread you reported problems with your
7D in the light you had to work with- I see in your sports shots some of the problems I found- dark shadows & blown highlights – poor color- look at the skin tone in your shots- white shoes appear blown & some skin my show blinks?
This deal sucks because I really love the features –
My 5D, and my 40D do the exact same thing in the same lighting. It had absolutely NOTHING to do with the 7D.
The gym lighting is about the worst you can have, because it creates those situations, it's not exactly like there was a softbox sitting around that I could pop over the ceiling. I reported problems with the light and not the camera. I believe the camera to be fine, and an excellent deal for the money.
The 50D wasn't really a step up in my opinion from the 40D. The 40D is sharper, and in my opinion, the 50D didn't make good use of the extra pixels. Canon seems to have been able to cram more pixels into the small sensor and STILL come out ahead in the sharpness department. They made good use of the resolution.
Considering, and I stand by this, that there's really only 3 current dSLR's that are better (and this is a broad statement, as the 7D will do some things better than the three), but the three being the 1dsmk3, the 1dmk3 and the 5d2. Also price point is something to consider. It brings you 1d"like" af (not sure if it's as good as the 1d3. Some folks say yes, some say no. I don't have a 1d3, but maybe I will and I'll find out.
I really don't get all of the 7D hate. Tomorrow, I will do a few more test runs, this time, studio style shots. I also have a shoot this Friday for an MMA event, I'll put it to the test there, AND I have a portrait session Sunday. After I do the main shots with my 5D, I'll do a few with this, just to see.
digitalbug30d wrote:
heres a lil something..when one does a test shot
1.prefer outdoors sunny 16
2.use f8 on that 85mm 1.2L (use center A/F)
3.use 100-200 ISO outdoors no need to go higher (sunny 16 remember)
4.take a picture of something interesting(not a beercan,brickwall ect)
5.when posting post the RAW without PP
6 then Post the same shot with regular PP (sharpen/exposure/contrast)
7 100 percent crop if you must... one from #6 NOT #5
8
Comparing 100% crops from cameras that have different resolutions is not the way to do a comparison.
skibum5 wrote:
from what i hear the 1D3 is definitely better unless you need max reach
but the 7D does seem to be the best APS-C
We can agree on the APS-C, but maybe you have also seen the folks saying the 7D is better or equal to the 1d3 also?
I think honestly a lot of folks who are saying the 7D is worse, may be 1d3 owners who spent a ton and would be rather reluctant to admit so. I know I certainly would.
RobertLynn wrote:
Comparing 100% crops from cameras that have different resolutions is not the way to do a comparison.
it was meant as a primer for one body...since f8 is the sweet spot this should be the starting point...not set that 85L to f 1.2,1/20 sec hand held,under flourescent lights ect..
I agree with what you're saying. Some folks may start yapping about diffraction setting in at f/8 on such a crammed sensor. I don't know, I don't pay attention to that crap.
Forgive me for coming across as testy. Just everyone slamming Canon's latest offerings is a little disheartening. I read the crap and didn't even want to open my shipping container, I wanted to send it back. Then I just said screw it and shot it...wow am I glad I did.
People talk about the extra pixels making a sensor have more noise, but most people would say that the 1dmk3 has better noise than the 5Dmk1...but the 5Dmk1 has the least pixel density out of the croppers, 1d3, I think even 1dsmk3 and the like. They don't look at the other things that comprise a camera's IQ.
It just seems like people will look at a column of pros and cons in technology, or theory then they will post only part of it.
Just have to laugh at the negativity about the 7D; if it's crap how could one possibly describe the crop cameras that have gone before without being banned!
RobertLynn wrote:
We can agree on the APS-C, but maybe you have also seen the folks saying the 7D is better or equal to the 1d3 also?
I think honestly a lot of folks who are saying the 7D is worse, may be 1d3 owners who spent a ton and would be rather reluctant to admit so. I know I certainly would.
IDK, I know somone who got a 1D3 and then also picked up a 7D and wanted to use both but doesn't think the IQ of the 7D holds up to the 1D3 (although was very tentatively impressed by 7D AF for sports, seemed to imply there is a chance it might work nearly as well as 1D2n, seemed to think 1D3, despite the talk, at least with the fixed bodies and latest firmware, did a little better than the 1D2n for sports).
I can't say myself as the 1D3 is one of the few Canon bodies I've never even touched a single time.
digitalbug30d wrote:
it was meant as a primer for one body...since f8 is the sweet spot this should be the starting point...not set that 85L to f 1.2,1/20 sec hand held,under flourescent lights ect..
many lenses are sharper anywhere near the center of the image at f/5.6 than f/8 actually
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Just have to laugh at the negativity about the 7D; if it's crap how could one possibly describe the crop cameras that have gone before without being banned!
The rampart negativity towards the 7D is mainly a reflection of the poster's unhappy life. I feel sorry for them as life must really suck. Ah dunno but it shouldn't be too hard to work around the 7D's "warts" and still make some great images. They miss the forest for the trees sort of thing. Unfortunately if you take them too seriously they can drag everybody down with them.
I had a 1D3 and switched to a 7D because I needed a smaller more practical camera that packed a punch and would net me extra $$$ during the sale of 1D3 to pay some bills. I must say I'm really liking the 7D a lot. I honestly don't miss the 1D3 that much, maybe its size I miss. But I think the 7D is a better ALL AROUND camera than the 1D3. I'd still like to get a 1D4 though only because I really need that better high ISO performance for the High School sports I shoot.
Hmm, I think I have the same random OOF shot issue that my XSi had, even shooting at the same target on a tripod. I refocus in on another object that I put in between the camera and the flat perpendicular high contrast target, and at least 20-25% of shots are out of focus with all lenses. The OOF shot isn't even close (single point spot or regular, doesn't matter) Yes, my 50D is deadly accurate. My XTi and 50D never missed, but my XSi and now 7D have the random OOF bug. It's going back.
I want to love this camera. I'd have babies with it if I could, but it's not cooperating.
I have the 7D and the 1D3 and access to the 5D1 when I want FF.. As for sports they both work great for me. For studio work I prefer the 1D3 over the 7D and 5D1.
I only used the 7D a couple of times in the studio. I used it on a Santa shoot the other day and it did well. I am just used to the 1D3 and I'm very happy with my images. I have a shoot of the marching band at a local high school at noon today and I'm debating on which camera to use. My 7D seems to be good, but after reading all the arguments that it is not so good. I may just send mine to canon to get it checked out. I take a lot of pictures because I have the contracts for 2 high schools and 1 middle school. They keep me busy. We did over 180 seniors in the last 5 months.
Gochugogi wrote:
Unfortunately if you take them too seriously they can drag everybody down with them.
Yep That is exactly true :
Tom Rouse wrote:
My 7D seems to be good, but after reading all the arguments that it is not so good. I may just send mine to canon to get it checked out.
Tommy
Tom Rouse wrote:
I have the 7D and the 1D3 and access to the 5D1 when I want FF.. As for sports they both work great for me. For studio work I prefer the 1D3 over the 7D and 5D1.
I only used the 7D a couple of times in the studio. I used it on a Santa shoot the other day and it did well. I am just used to the 1D3 and I'm very happy with my images. I have a shoot of the marching band at a local high school at noon today and I'm debating on which camera to use. My 7D seems to be good, but after reading all the arguments that it is not so good. I may just send mine to canon to get it checked out. I take a lot of pictures because I have the contracts for 2 high schools and 1 middle school. They keep me busy. We did over 180 seniors in the last 5 months.
Gochugogi wrote:
The rampart negativity towards the 7D is mainly a reflection of the poster's unhappy life. I feel sorry for them as life must really suck. Ah dunno but it shouldn't be too hard to work around the 7D's "warts" and still make some great images. They miss the forest for the trees sort of thing. Unfortunately if you take them too seriously they can drag everybody down with them.
Dont like the message attack the messanger-
I dont hate the 7D- it is a tool- I prefer other tools-
7D samples
droopy1592 wrote:
My XTi and 50D never missed, but my XSi and now 7D have the random OOF bug. It's going back.
Both my XTi and XSi are deadly accurate. So was a 50D body I rented. Looks like the 50D is really the most reliable APS-C camera ever built by Canon. Too bad about its image quality.
The 7D is just one crazy toy I cannot fathom. It was at the service center for more than a month due to AF inconsistencies.. I made 5 visits there. Outcome? Much better than when I first got it. More consistent.
HOWEVER, it (a) back-focuses for objects near MFD (b) won't perform reliably in area AF mode unlike my XSi (c) some peripheral AF points still exhibit unstable AF.
In low light and action sequences I'll give it to the 7D for it's low light ability and new AF, but honestly I don't think the IQ is as good for what it is supposed to be. My 40D and even my 20D get consistently sharper "better" looking photos.
I hear people keep saying it's not fair to compare the IQ of an 8mp camera to an 18 mp camera, and that you'd have to downsample the 7D image to "fairly" compare. They keep saying that the 7D image will appear sharper after downsampling/downsizing or some such nonesense. So if the 18 mp isn't sharp at 18mp why make the camera? Especially if you have to reduce it's size to trick it into looking as good or close to as good as a smaller mp camera is producing.
Is canon in some sort of collusion with digital storage makers to get the consumer to have to buy more storage devices by having 25 meg raw files that are effectively no better than my, almost half the size files from the 40D?
I don't care about the science of pixels and sensor size and all the charts graphs etc that I see here trying to explain my camera to me. I do care about what my eye should be able to see; is the photo right? So far I'm not getting what I paid for.
If I get better results or even the same from a 40D and by better I mean the stuff that clients will pay me for. Then the 7D has not been worth it to me.
Maybe if I was a BIF photographer and making money that way I'd be thrilled as all hell at how nicely it can track a falcon on a cloudy day. But then again I've never actually met someone who makes money on BIF photography.
*rant not scientifically backed up but based on how I feel about this camera after, what 3 months or so since it came out.
Ruben: There's poor, fair, good, better, and best.
I have have had the 7D for a short time, so good is my grade at this time.
I do love the video which I didn't think I would use.
I rate my 1d3 as better at this time, as I have had it for almost 2 1/2 years.
Anyway thanks for showing concern for my lack of knowledge of my equipment.
Tommy
Will I send it in, I don't know at this time. It is more of, is there really a problem, which can be corrected and move it to a new rating of BEST!
saturos wrote:
...
I hear people keep saying it's not fair to compare the IQ of an 8mp camera to an 18 mp camera, and that you'd have to downsample the 7D image to "fairly" compare. They keep saying that the 7D image will appear sharper after downsampling/downsizing or some such nonesense. So if the 18 mp isn't sharp at 18mp why make the camera? Especially if you have to reduce it's size to trick it into looking as good or close to as good as a smaller mp camera is producing.
...
These claims are at the pixel level the sharpness is different.
The fact is that with 18MP you are able to capture detail that is not possible with 8MP. And you can crop, and... all the other pro's that folks have discussed in the past.
saturos wrote:
I hear people keep saying it's not fair to compare the IQ of an 8mp camera to an 18 mp camera, and that you'd have to downsample the 7D image to "fairly" compare. They keep saying that the 7D image will appear sharper after downsampling/downsizing or some such nonesense. So if the 18 mp isn't sharp at 18mp why make the camera? Especially if you have to reduce it's size to trick it into looking as good or close to as good as a smaller mp camera is producing.
your lenses may be a limiting factor, you cannot get 18mps resolution from an aps-c sensor (pixel density is roughly eqv 46 mps FF sensor) if your lens cannot provide such a resolution
also, you need higher shutter speed on higher density sensor as well (in comparison to your 40D), hope you know that too
That is exactly true :