jmimac351 wrote:
At least I learned to appreciate the review method imaging-resource uses. It was nice to be able to compare the same scene for different cameras because that became the question - how does this compare to the 50D? I think it's clearly superior to the 50D and if it does all the rest Canon claims then they've built quite a little hot rod.
Imaging Resource is weird...they present their camera to camera comparisons in SOOC JPG...why would you do that? It's just introducing NR into the equation.
It's ridiculous, you can instantly tell by the absence of chroma noise and the water colour like results (and chroma blotching in newer Canon cameras) that those files have been whacked with a NR silly stick
Dawei Ye wrote:
Imaging Resource is weird...they present their camera to camera comparisons in SOOC JPG...why would you do that? It's just introducing NR into the equation.
It's ridiculous, you can instantly tell by the absence of chroma noise and the water colour like results (and chroma blotching in newer Canon cameras) that those files have been whacked with a NR silly stick
It's a bit roundabout, but if you go to the reviews for each camera you can typically see the full suite of samples including with NR off. Yeah, would be nice if you could select those from the Comparometer.
Yohan Pamudji wrote:
It's a bit roundabout, but if you go to the reviews for each camera you can typically see the full suite of samples including with NR off. Yeah, would be nice if you could select those from the Comparometer.
On most cameras there is still noise reduction being applied to the JPEGs even with "high ISO" NR off. On some Canon cameras this is true even at ISO 100.
I think IR does their tests this way because most consumers shoot JPEG. They do make the RAW files for some images available to downloas, we just don't have a RAW converter for the 7D yet.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
So a guy gets busted for for spending too much time in a Canon forum and at sentencing the judge says: "I'd sentence you to life, but unfortunately you don't have one".
I just flew in from jersey, and boy are my arms tired.... I got a million of 'em I tell ya....
headroom wrote:
As far as I know Apple says
Above Core Duo 2 2.6 plays H.264 files smooth
My Laptop 2.4 Core Duo2 dos not give smooth Videoplayback
Workaround Quicktime Pro Export the files to DVCPRO 1024x576 60fps
My G5 2 GHz Dual can play with this tweak
I found an Apple page that says the 2 GHz G5 Dual can play full HD at 24 fps if it has the better video card with 128 MB of ram. I have a dead G5 with that card so I will swap it and try. Interestingly, the Apple page says the Intel based Mac requires at least 3 GHz dual core to play. Knew there was a reason I preferred Power PC.
Jeff Nolten wrote:
I found an Apple page that says the 2 GHz G5 Dual can play full HD at 24 fps if it has the better video card with 128 MB of ram. I have a dead G5 with that card so I will swap it and try. Interestingly, the Apple page says the Intel based Mac requires at least 3 GHz dual core to play. Knew there was a reason I preferred Power PC.
If you use a program that supports full h.264 HW accel video cards you don't need very much CPU power at all.
I've downloaded the Imaging Resource RAW files and have taken a look at them using a Beta version of Camera Raw. A few notes:
1. The criss-cross pattern noise you see when you push the shadows really hard on the 5D2, its gone. Awesome.
2. The ability to resolve detail even at higher ISOs is impressive, very happy to see this.
3. Per pixel noise at ISO 1600 is visibly and considerably lower with the 7D than with the 50D. When applying the default color noise reduction in ACR, much of the color noise goes away however the 7D has much less color splotches than the 50D. Definitely good news for those who weren't impressed with the noise performance of the 50D.
4. Things only get better for the 7D against the 50D at higher ISOs. At ISO 3200 you get banding and really ugly splotches in your shadows (when you apply color NR) on the 50D. The 7D has no banding and though some spotching starts to show its controlled.
5. How does it compare to a 5D2? Only compared the images briefly, but sadly the laws of physics still apply. The 5D2 has less noise at virtually all ISOs, however the difference isn't as huge as it was comparing the 5D2 to the 50D.
Based on my observations so far, I'm quite happy I pre-ordered and pumped to actually use the camera when it eventually starts shipping.
Now I really need to get back to working on the stuff I get paid to work on...
skibum5 wrote:
If you use a program that supports full h.264 HW accel video cards you don't need very much CPU power at all.
True. I'm researching my options. The Apple spec assumed QuickTime 7. I use an old slideshow software for PowerPC called iView (now owned and ruined by Microsoft) to display my images. It can handle video files through QT. My thought was to replace tediously constructed pano shots with short film clips panning over the same scene. Integrating stills and film clips with the same slide show software is the goal.
I currently use an old G4 laptop to play slideshows on the Sony Bravia. Looks like it will never have enough horsepower to display HD videos.
thedigitalbean wrote:
I've downloaded the Imaging Resource RAW files and have taken a look at them using a Beta version of Camera Raw. A few notes:
1. The criss-cross pattern noise you see when you push the shadows really hard on the 5D2, its gone. Awesome.
Yeah - awesome - all I need to do now is sell my two 5D's, buy two 7D's... no wait scrap that since my lenses are full-frame focal lengths... all I need to do now is wait until Canon releases a 5D successor with shadow noise handling like that in the excellent 500D and 7D. Seriously, it's great that Canon is addressing this problem, but it's a shame there isn't a competitive and affordable FULL-FRAME Canon body which doesn't suck at patterned shadow noise. (No, the classic 5D isn't competitive with A900 or D700.)
I too am impressed by the specs of the 7D, and will probably pick one up. But the thing that is so ridiculous is to see the reviews that are already posted on retailers' websites. I mean, how is it possible for these folks to be posting reviews of something they have never even seen, let alone touched? Granted that there are a few who have test models, but lets get real!
brainiac wrote:
Yeah - awesome - all I need to do now is sell my two 5D's, buy two 7D's... no wait scrap that since my lenses are full-frame focal lengths... all I need to do now is wait until Canon releases a 5D successor with shadow noise handling like that in the excellent 500D and 7D. Seriously, it's great that Canon is addressing this problem, but it's a shame there isn't a competitive and affordable FULL-FRAME Canon body which doesn't suck at patterned shadow noise. (No, the classic 5D isn't competitive with A900 or D700.)
Yup, definitely looking forward to a full frame version of the 7D. The new 1D4/1Ds4 should also be impressive image quality wise. I won't touch a 1D4 unless its FF, and I'm not spending $8k on a camera (yes I know I currently have a 1Ds3 but I got that 7 months ago for half that).
How do I do that? Is that via PS?
