maybe I am missing it somewhere but what is the crop factor going to be, on canon's site it says it is a 100% viewfinder but still works with both EF and EF-S lenses, any info would be much apprecitated
mscottlogan wrote:
maybe I am missing it somewhere but what is the crop factor going to be, on canon's site it says it is a 100% viewfinder but still works with both EF and EF-S lenses, any info would be much apprecitated
snooked123 wrote:
Question: Are all these shots jpegs from the camera? I remember people saying after the launch of 5dII "6400 ISO on 5d II is better than my 5d's ISO 400" and in the end it turned out that the difference was approximately one stop. So I am very interested in seeing RAW samples. Can anyone provide them?
He shot them RAW and converted them in DPP, however he converted them with DPP's noise reduction turned on.
Not to be picky, but who cares if he had NR ON or OFF? The results speak for themselves - there appears to be plenty of detail with low noise, and no banding. I am pretty sure I can live with that. If it was accomplished in-camera (or during raw import) without having to go through noiseninja or neatimage I am actually happier, as it saves me a step in post.
timbop wrote:
Not to be picky, but who cares if he had NR ON or OFF? The results speak for themselves - there appears to be plenty of detail with low noise, and no banding. I am pretty sure I can live with that. If it was accomplished in-camera (or during raw import) without having to go through noiseninja or neatimage I am actually happier, as it saves me a step in post.
It's all about the final image, isn't it?
On an absolute level where only the image from the camera is important yes, however the intent of many folks is to compare the output to existing cameras and to determine noise level on a relative level and so whether NR was on or off is crucial piece of information for them to make the comparison.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=750973
Thanks for posting the link- though those are nice shots- they are not indicative of the 7D's high ISO capability. Those were under professional lighting situations. What many people fail to realize is that the amount and quality of light, as well as correctness of exposure, contribute far more to high ISO quality than the choice of ISO itself. The 40D and 50D would look just as nice in a studio setting.
keithreeder wrote:
A mistake, I imagine (I hope!) - they'd be a lot better exposed "properly".
Promising, though.
Well, yeah--but a properly exposed image will show different noise levels/characteristics. Obviously in this case the photog used EC the way he/she did to get a decent shutter speed (1/60).
Yes, I do, a whole lot to translate, but the guy presents this as a practical review.
AF: He used "extended AF point", and is impressed by both how easy it is to make adjustments (better than any camera he has used), and how it performs. Precision and tracking speed in the situations he presents images from, was excellent.
He is also impressed by the IQ, and says it is comparable to 5DII / 1Ds3 below ISO 800. The sharpness straight out of camera is very good. This camera has changed his view of IQ in 1.6 crop cameras.
Anything else you want me to look for in the text?
You can also ask the guy in the blog comment, in english.
Heya...thanks....that's what I want to know..the AF
alundeb wrote:
Yes, I do, a whole lot to translate, but the guy presents this as a practical review.
AF: He used "extended AF point", and is impressed by both how easy it is to make adjustments (better than any camera he has used), and how it performs. Precision and tracking speed in the situations he presents images from, was excellent.
He is also impressed by the IQ, and says it is comparable to 5DII / 1Ds3 below ISO 800. The sharpness straight out of camera is very good. This camera has changed his view of IQ in 1.6 crop cameras.
Anything else you want me to look for in the text?
You can also ask the guy in the blog comment, in english. ...Show more →
I certainly wouldn't use those shots for any kind of determination. When your shooting a 1.6x cropped camera at ISO6400 you certainly don't want to underexpose the shots that bad.
Mind you, I still think they show something of the 7D's potential: further confirmation that pattern noise/banding is a thing of the past; and (chroma notwithstanding - easily fixed with proper conversion) the look of the noise is pretty agreeable...
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Maybe they have targeted the 1D AF peformance. That would be a huge step up from the 50D yet still leave it inferior to 1D III (when working properly)
I saw a link to a Norwegian photographer (birds/sports/people) who said that, after a short test for a day, it appeared to focus better than the 1D3 and get tricked by bird wingtip as with other cameras.
EDIT: yeah, i noticed this has already been posted here too after entering my msg.
