And here's a thought, btw:
The 5D had 'only' 12mp and yet it was universally liked.
But 12mp on 1.6x crop is not enoght - they just had to go 18mp .
You defintely don't know what your talking about or your looking at samples other than just about everyone else on this forum.
If you think the 7D has noise characteristics similiar to the 40D then you haven't looked at any credible samples. If you want a 12MP camera Nikon makes several of them in FF and crop. You sound like a Nikon troll, are you?
mfurman wrote:
Initial tests are showing that 7D is about the same S/N as 5D, not 40D. This is the point I have been trying to make.
And it won't matter, because somewhere in the next hour someone who hasn't read any part of this thread will post that RG's crappy 100% crops prove that the 10d had better high ISO performance.
I'm convinced the whole key to this body's success is the AF system, will it clearly outperform the current non 1 series bodies and get us closer to 1 series AF?
I'm satisfied Canon has a good sensor in it. I'm excited that this might be the first 1.6X body that I'll really like.
rd4tile wrote:
I'm convinced the whole key to this body's success is the AF system, will it clearly outperform the current non 1 series bodies and get us closer to 1 series AF?
I'm satisfied Canon has a good sensor in it. I'm excited that this might be the first 1.6X body that I'll really like.
I agree.
After downloading some IR RAW files and looking at them with the latest camera RAW I was quite impressed especially with the higher ISO shots...
I think the AF should be quite good also but I thought my 40D did a fairly good job in this aspect of the camera when compared with the mkIIn.
I think I'll be quite happy with the 7D.
jorkata wrote:
Initial samples are showing that the 7D has about the same ISO/noise as the 40D.
About the same but not better. That's the key.
I'm questioning your judgement if you think the 7D is running even with the 40D. There are clear differences evident in the samples presented in this thread and others.
all I care about the 7D:
1. clean ISO 100-6400(it should be able to do a 20x30@6400)
2. A/F closer in speed/accuracy of a 1 Series camera
but people want it to be a 1 series which it is not..but is a leap above the 50d which by all counts is a good thing,you know if there was to be a 3D it most likely
be a FF version of the 7D..if Canon is listening this would fill the gap.
fraga wrote:
Exactly.
Make the 3d more expensive than the 5dMII (obviously) and leave the bigger, bulkier bodie do the 1DMIV (with grip included) as well as way better weather sealing, dual cards, better batery, +2 or 3 fps, more and better AF points with AF up to f8, larger buffer, longer life shutter, and some other tweaks and features like spot metering on every focus point, interchangable focusing screen, etc.
Make the 3d for $3300 - $3600, and pleople (specially pros) will still go for a $4300-$4500 1DMIV.
mfurman wrote:
Can we get back to the topic: "Is IQ of 7D almost as good as 5D's?", please?
comparing DxO DR measurements to what I got from IR samples it seems like the DR is a bit better at the lowest ISO or two for the 7D and almost identical to the 7D at higher ISO if the 7D rates ISOs like the 50D (if it rates them like the 5D2 did then the 5D will still have a little bit better DR at higher ISO but not by a huge amount and the lower 7D banding would probably make the 7D at least as good effectively).
that said in terms of SNR at 18% it is hard to imagine the 7D doing as well it simply has such a hugely smaller light collecting area.
Yohan Pamudji wrote:
I think the 7D, far from completing the lineup, is actually the strongest indication that we will finally see an "affordable" full frame with better-than-xxD features, a.k.a. the 3D.
The 5DII is the affordable full frame.
At least here in the UK, where its currently costs less to buy a 5DII body only than pre order the Sony 850.
A 3D will, by definition of Canons heirarchical pricing policy, be more expensive than a 5D, not less, regardless of anything else.
IF Canon are to introduce a FF version f the 7D, it will be a minimum twelve months away (to allow the 7D to maximise its sales and give breathing room for 1D introductions) , AND it will be significantly more expensive than current FF offerings.
That could be done by either selling it at a higher price point than the 5D currently occupies, OR lowering the 5DII price (as naturally happens over time anyway)and introducing the new camera at the $3k pricepoint.
Its difficult to judge these things because the US prices and the UK (and the rest of Europe infact) seem considerably out of alignment currently, as highlighted by the above mentioned 5DII/Sony 850 situation.
rd4tile wrote:
I'm convinced the whole key to this body's success is the AF system, will it clearly outperform the current non 1 series bodies and get us closer to 1 series AF?
I'm satisfied Canon has a good sensor in it. I'm excited that this might be the first 1.6X body that I'll really like.
Ok, let's admit it... For many of us who have already pre-ordered the 7D, we're suffering from excessive wanderlust with just too much time on our hands. We want this camera. Now!
cameron12x wrote:
Ok, let's admit it... For many of us who have already pre-ordered the 7D, we're suffering from excessive wanderlust with just too much time on our hands. We want this camera. Now!
Hurry up already, Canon!
I freely admit to that. I can't wait to slap the 400 f5.6 on, go on my back deck and shoot away, that's my version of therapy!
At least here in the UK, where its currently costs less to buy a 5DII body only than pre order the Sony 850.
A 3D will, by definition of Canons heirarchical pricing policy, be more expensive than a 5D, not less, regardless of anything else.
IF Canon are to introduce a FF version f the 7D, it will be a minimum twelve months away (to allow the 7D to maximise its sales and give breathing room for 1D introductions) , AND it will be significantly more expensive than current FF offerings.
That could be done by either selling it at a higher price point than the 5D currently occupies, OR lowering the 5DII price (as naturally happens over time anyway)and introducing the new camera at the $3k pricepoint.
Its difficult to judge these things because the US prices and the UK (and the rest of Europe infact) seem considerably out of alignment currently, as highlighted by the above mentioned 5DII/Sony 850 situation. ...Show more →
I agree, it's always about price points. Nikon played Canon well with the gap between the 40D and the 5D. It was an obvious move by Nikon. Canon showed it's corporate sluggishness by letting Nikon fill that space with the D300. Now Canon has lost a lot of market share and will be responsive for awhile.
The 7D makes it less likely to see an inexpensive FF. I think this line will have two camera's, one full frame and one 1.6 crop. These will be similar throughput and AF abilities.
dcmiller wrote:
The 7D makes it less likely to see an inexpensive FF. I think this line will have two camera's, one full frame and one 1.6 crop. These will be similar throughput and AF abilities.
First we have to see what Canon has in store for the MkIV since the 1D series will have a lot of impact on what Canon is going to release as their premium but non-pro series of DSLRs. For example, there isn't gonna be a FF version of the 7D if the 1D4 is still 1.3 crop.
I don't see a 3D coming for a long time, if ever. I think we'll see 1-series Mark IV cameras as before, around 18 Mp APS-H, and 31Mp full frame (oh, and video).
A 3D, with 5-6 fps, reduced shutter/mirror lag, and the AF of the 7D would be nice, but I don't have my hopes set too high. If you shoot primarily sports or action with Canon cameras, you'll likely be doing it with sub-frame sensors for a while.
I say this because the only real improvements I wanted in the 5D2 were these things, and we got something different. So I'm guessing Canon's product planners are working in inverse correlation to my desires.
. 
. 