Pixel Perfect wrote:
In AI servo and if using AFPS, do you still need to acquire focus first with the centre AF point, or can it acquire focus with any point(s)?
Somewhere between the two - you can select the "starting" AF point.
ta78 wrote:
Camera World are throwing in a free 580 exII if you reserve now. Makes me want to order one ..
As the UK price is one of the few downsides to the announcement, I'll add to this.
Mifsuds are advertising £1699 pre order with a free grip thrown in.
I think that, and the above camera Wolrd offer are perhaps the best deals.
My thought is that this is a carbon copy of the 50D launch, pre orders were at £1300 , physical cameras were much, much cheaper.
common sense says the camera has been launched to compete with the D300s. Thats £1300 or thereabouts, I cannot see the 7D being much higher than that once the thing is actually in stock.
I think the £1000 pre order for the new macro is even more outragous personally, especially when they want £130 for the tripod ring on top.
Andrew Krend wrote:
Maybe this has been covered already (though I didn't see it) but for me, the huge striking difference (on the imaging-resource site) between the 7D and the 50D samples was the NR muddiness/smearing... it's significantly reduced (almost gone!) in the 7D shots. If you compare the fabric swatches (or whatever they are) on the upper left of the sample shots (even at low ISO), the 50D looks smeary by comparison. The patterns in the fabric are crisp and well defined in the 7D shots, and decidedly not so in the 50D shots.
It's so striking I thought that maybe they switched lenses or JPEG compression or something. Digging through exif it appears that everything that can be the same is the same. Did I miss something?
So what gives? Is it a change in NR / in-camera processing which is similar to (or at least emulating) the look from the 1 series? Am I seeing things? Is it too late for a post like this?
Andrew ...Show more →
No, you're not seeing things. This is in fact what caused me to reach a preliminary conclusion that the 7D is producing less noise off the sensor than the 50D, despite the fact that the residual noise is roughly equivalent in these in-camera JPEGs.
I believe what you are seeing is the result of weaker noise reduction in the 7D vs. the 50D at equivelent ISOs, which would result in sharper output and reduced smearing at all equivalent ISO speeds. The ISO 100 sample looks to have no luminance NR applied at all.
Of course, it is possible that Canon has somehow made Digic IV noise reduction substantially less destructive, but I rather doubt it. It was already pretty good, as in-camera noise reduction goes, and such a big jump in performance would come in a Digic V processor (if at all). I think the more likely explanation is that the 7D sensor is really a leap forward from that in the 50D (and 5D2).
cameron12x wrote:
Does anyone know the minimum throughput required for 1080p video at 30fps? Is a UDMA CF card required?
That video is about 5 MB/sec., so with a little headroom an Ultra II or similar is enough. For example, the cheapie Transcend 133-300x cards work in the 5D II.
I know that everyone is excited and interested about potential image quality, both at the pixel level and in the final post-processed print result (me too), but what about real workflow and usability in the field with the new feature set? Given the resolution levels and image quality that we've already achieved relative to our 35mm film roots, don't these attributes measure up equally in importance?
For example, for those landscape shooters here, what has happened to the once beloved DEP function in Canon's DSLR line-up? (I last used it on the A2 film body many years ago). This is not to be confused with the dumbed-down A-DEP function. Here is a reference thread. I used that function nearly all of the time to find the perfect hyperfocal distance. I really miss it for static landscape photography. I know that the 7D is positioned more for sports and action photography, but this feature is also missing from the FF 5D Mark II. Sigh.
cameron12x wrote:
Does anyone know the minimum throughput required for 1080p video at 30fps? Is a UDMA CF card required?
To work reliably it needs to be a better UDMA card. Sandisk extreme III 30mbs is a good choice. It's UDMA, the older Extreme III is not.
Canon warned against any card slower than this.
Specs on the card don't mean much.
For occasional video use I wouldn't worry about it.
From the manual, you can show the LEVEL in the viewfinder pressing the m-fn button; no mention of aspect ratios.
On aspect ratios it specifically does say: http://www.danielechiesa.com/photo/ratios.jpg
Hey
this is the coolest thing yet
Thanks for showing this
I had missed it out. I wonder if Nikon also offers the same useful pattern.
I had always wanted some Sq format guides.
tommyleong wrote:
From the manual, you can show the LEVEL in the viewfinder pressing the m-fn button; no mention of aspect ratios.
On aspect ratios it specifically does say: http://www.danielechiesa.com/photo/ratios.jpg
Hey
this is the coolest thing yet
Thanks for showing this
I had missed it out. I wonder if Nikon also offers the same useful pattern.
I had always wanted some Sq format guides.
Actually, I really don't see the point of the half-@ssed solution. It says nothing about seeing the aspect ratio indicated through the viewfinder, so only in live view can you see it during composition. All it does for you when using the viewfinder is append meta tags so DPP will auto crop to the ratio. Frankly, that really is pretty useless - cropping in post is pretty easy
keithreeder wrote: Jeff Ascough likes the 7D, it would seem...
To be fair, he is a Canon Ambassador. Love his work and not at all saying this clouds his judgment, but since many were dismissing Rob Galbraith's credibility due to Nikon ads on his site, we might as well hand out the unfair beatings evenly on both sides of the Canon-v-Nikon fence.
timbop wrote:
Actually, I really don't see the point of the half-@ssed solution. It says nothing about seeing the aspect ratio indicated through the viewfinder, so only in live view can you see it during composition. All it does for you when using the viewfinder is append meta tags so DPP will auto crop to the ratio. Frankly, that really is pretty useless - cropping in post is pretty easy
Gotta save some stuff for the 1-series. Wouldn't be Canon otherwise
dcmiller wrote:
To work reliably it needs to be a better UDMA card. Sandisk extreme III 30mbs is a good choice. It's UDMA, the older Extreme III is not.
Canon warned against any card slower than this.
Specs on the card don't mean much.
For occasional video use I wouldn't worry about it.
Where is this warning, or is it new to the 7D over the 5D II?
Andrew Krend wrote:
... so, in my opinion, Canon has pretty much pulled off the same trick: increase the MP keep noise *about* the same.
Agree.
It seems as if Canon has an internal scale/standard for the ISO levels of their xxD cameras.
If technology advancements allow them to improve the ISO, they will never do it and instead will use the advancements towards adding more megapixels while keeping ISO the same.
Personally, I'd rather they leave the resolution be and improve the noise
+1.
Maybe this has been covered already (though I didn't see it) but for me, the huge striking difference (on the imaging-resource site) between the 7D and the 50D samples was the NR muddiness/smearing... it's significantly reduced (almost gone!) in the 7D shots.
I noticed the same thing too.
The 7D seems to have a weak AA filter, so detail at low ISOs is very crisp.
For high ISOs they must be using some new NR technique because as noise increases, detal stays pretty much the same - without the usual mushiness associated with NR.
timbop wrote:
Actually, I really don't see the point of the half-@ssed solution. It says nothing about seeing the aspect ratio indicated through the viewfinder, so only in live view can you see it during composition. All it does for you when using the viewfinder is append meta tags so DPP will auto crop to the ratio. Frankly, that really is pretty useless - cropping in post is pretty easy
jorkata wrote:
For high ISOs they must be using some new NR technique because as noise increases, detal stays pretty much the same - without the usual mushiness associated with NR.
Or it might just be that the new sensor manufacturing technology Canon is using in the 7D is actually doing what they say it will do.
jorkata wrote:
I noticed the same thing too.
The 7D seems to have a weak AA filter, so detail at low ISOs is very crisp.
For high ISOs they must be using some new NR technique because as noise increases, detal stays pretty much the same - without the usual mushiness associated with NR.
Thanks to jorkata, garyvot, keithreeder, and Daan B for the replies... In summary the theories about why the 7D appears to have much less NR muddiness then either the 50D or the 5dm2 are:
1) weaker AA filter
2) different JPEG NR processing
3) something about the sensor design
4) some combination of those
As Daan B points out, to really know about the quality of the new sensor (and any other physical aspect of the camera) we need to see some RAWs. I agree completely, but without those, comparing the out of camera JPEGs still shows us something about canon's approach to image quality.
Because the 1dm3 JPEGs have a similar quality in terms of NR mudiness, I'm wondering if anyone knows whether the AA filter in the 1dm3 is weaker then that of the 50D and 5dm2? I read that the anti-aliasing filter in the 7D was split into two panes of glass (or whatever it is), but this was part the revision to the anti-dust system, with no mention of a change in the optical quality. I'd call it a big win for the 7D if it means less smeary effects.
If canon did something different with the NR processing, I would hope that they'd push that change (assuming it's something fixed in firmware) out to the other digic 4 cameras. Even though it's "just jpegs" it would be a welcome improvement to my 50D.
yeah, there's (naturally! ) a lot of speculation about what's really going on, and not only do we need RAWs (there are quite a few on Imaging Review, incidentally) but also for our favourite RAW converters to catch up with the camera.
My gut still tells me that there's something in the "new sensor tech" explanation (although I've no doubt there's also something going on in firmware/software).
Given that we expect the 1D 4 to be released in time to make a big impact for the Olympics, it's likely that Canon will be debuting some of the technology that the 1D 4 will showcase, in the 7D.
Now then: a thought.
Of course we're all wondering whether the 7D really can live up to its suggested potential, but - given the RG/Mk III debacle - does anyone really believe that Canon won't have tested the 7D to death before feeling it was safe to give it to RG?
I just don't buy any suggestion that Canon won't have sweated blood to get the 7D as good its on-paper specs suggest: and (if we accept that Canon "had to" come up with a D300/s beater - I don't, but you hear that noise everywhere) they'll surely be pretty confident about being in a position to win that "competition" too.
Nothing else makes much sense to me.
As to AA filters: yes, the 7D's AA/anti dust arrangement is indeed a two part affair, but I have no idea if that's going to be good or bad for IQ..!
I have heard it suggested however, that the 1D Mk III has a less-strong AA filter than other bodies.
78 wrote: