Krosavcheg wrote:
There we go, I was wrong indeed. Well, remains to see it perform in action.
Aside from weight, I didn't really like Focus Points - outlined bold in brownish red with dots in the middle. Couldn't really see clearly which point was focusing when all points were active. Tried selecting individual focusing points, but same story there. Focusing system is truly different from 1D/5D series.
Saw a magazine doing a 7D exclusive today in a local book store. Photos look great. However, I was not really convinced by the action shots - there were some football photos looking somewhat fuzzy...would love to see some stories on RL AF performance.
Maybe predictive AF suffered from same syndrome as 1D MkIII??...Show more →
So, seems that you're going all out to convince yourself the 7D is NOT the camera for you.
What are going to say next? '7' is your unlucky number?
..hehe..
I have no clue..I wish I could borrow it and spend a day walking around, then process the caps and yoddle.. Sigh...I really love 5D MkII though, but 1DS MkIII feels so right in my hands...
And speaking of lucky numbers, 5 is the one for me..
As for the caps in the magazine...Japanese generally don't pixel peep - they seem more impressed with the subject, and therefore quite a lot of shots in the media are little missfocused ever now and again. Wouldn't necessarily mean that AF is out of order, would it?
5DII significantly better, but that is no surprise to me. I'm trying to decide if I'm going to sell my 50D and preorder the 7D ... or just sell off my entire crop kit and get a few nice lenses for my FF kit.
dpun wrote:
and now speculation that the AF is not up to snuff..
Not really - it's one throw-away comment and - lets be honest - we all want to know how the AF behaves.
That said, I'm pretty relaxed about prospects myself, not least because of comments at Naturfokus, like:
As a summary I would say that the new AF-system in the 7D is very impressing, and I will rate it as the best AF system I have tried (including 1D/1DS Mark III).
(Unfortunately, it looks like the site has fallen off the net!)
Krosavcheg wrote:
Maybe in a way me having negative expectations, hoping for 7D to be atleast APS-H camera...
I am also dissappointed by the sensor size and pixel density. And noise performance - checking Imaging-resource's RAW files with ACR or Lightroom gives the results that 450D and 30D are on the same level or better than 7D regarding noise at ISO 800 or higher, when the images are reduced to same size. I haven't tried with other RAW conversion programs though. The 450D, 30D and 40D have more natural looking noise vs 7D at ISO's of 800 and higher. Even though the 7D can give more detail, I still prefer 30D/40D RAW results slightly over the 7D at ISO 1600 when judging noise.
Everything else in the 7D looks good to me.
keithreeder wrote:
That said, I'm pretty relaxed about prospects myself, not least because of comments at Naturfokus, like:
(Unfortunately, it looks like the site has fallen off the net!)
Naturfocus opened for me, when I just checked it. And I also like what Ole JOrgen thinks about handling and AF.
arn_old wrote:
I am also dissappointed by the sensor size and pixel density. And noise performance - checking Imaging-resource's RAW files with ACR or Lightroom gives the results that 450D and 30D are on the same level or better than 7D regarding noise at ISO 800 or higher, when the images are reduced to same size. I haven't tried with other RAW conversion programs though. The 450D, 30D and 40D have more natural looking noise vs 7D at ISO's of 800 and higher. Even though the 7D can give more detail, I still prefer 30D/40D RAW results slightly over the 7D at ISO 1600 when judging noise. ...Show more →
I have the 450D and I can say that the 7D high ISO is better than it. ISO800 of the 7D is about the same as ISO400 from the 450D. Starting from ISO800, the 450D produce a lot of chroma noise.
Why wasn’t the new camera named 60D? Because the 7D is considered to be the start of a new series in the EOS line-up. It ranks higher than xxD models like the 50D, just as the 50D ranks higher than the 500D even though both have APS-C sensors with the same resolution.
n0b0 wrote:
I have the 450D and I can say that the 7D high ISO is better than it. ISO800 of the 7D is about the same as ISO400 from the 450D. Starting from ISO800, the 450D produce a lot of chroma noise.
Have you downloaded RAW files from similar (equal) setups and compared? To my eye, the 30D may be equal or a bit better than the 7D and 450D slighly worse in noise performance, but in any case, the difference is not huge. I think that is slightly disappointing, as I would like to see clear advantage for the 7D - after all, it's a brand new sensor. Of course, noise patterns are a matter of personal taste to some extent.
"As for the caps in the magazine...Japanese generally don't pixel peep - they seem more impressed with the subject, and therefore quite a lot of shots in the media are little missfocused ever now and again. Wouldn't necessarily mean that AF is out of order, would it?"
Scuse me for the frankness, but - you're talking out of your @ss. Not only this quote - everything you've said so far. But, hey, you're doing a good job of it
arn_old wrote:
Have you downloaded RAW files from similar (equal) setups and compared? To my eye, the 30D may be equal or a bit better than the 7D and 450D slighly worse in noise performance, but in any case, the difference is not huge. I think that is slightly disappointing, as I would like to see clear advantage for the 7D - after all, it's a brand new sensor. Of course, noise patterns are a matter of personal taste to some extent.
It's all relative I guess. Perhaps having only a Rebel body kinda makes my expectation much lower than some who have higher end bodies.
However, I do think that one cannot look at only a single aspect of the camera when comparing it to other bodies. The 7D is way more advance than the cameras you mentioned in many aspects which will be a greater help in taking better photos than just noise suppression alone.
garyvot wrote:
I wonder if it is really NR at play here, or whether ACR is instead toning down its internal sharpening algorithm for the high ISO files, in order not to amplify the noise footprint? I'm just speculating, because I haven't done the testing others have done, but from the comparison posted it seems like different sharpening might explain the results too?
In either case, it's useful information to be aware of.
With LR/ACR for high ISO, set the mask value high and the detail low(er) to reduce accentuating noise. The defaults are useless IMO.
arn_old wrote:
Have you downloaded RAW files from similar (equal) setups and compared? To my eye, the 30D may be equal or a bit better than the 7D and 450D slighly worse in noise performance, but in any case, the difference is not huge. I think that is slightly disappointing, as I would like to see clear advantage for the 7D - after all, it's a brand new sensor. Of course, noise patterns are a matter of personal taste to some extent.
Could you perhaps have fallen into the trap of comparing images at 100% from cameras with very different resolutions? If the 7D at 18Mp looks even close to an 8Mp camera at 100% (prior to NR), then that's a big win.
Another way to think about this: shoot the 7D in MRAW mode, then compare the files with the 30D. My guess is that 7D MRAW will show a clear noise advantage over the 30D, perhaps as much as a full stop, yet still offer higher resolution.
rd4tile wrote:
I read in it's specs that the 7D is using the same surface material as the 1D3 which I found to be the best of any of the Canon cameras I have owned.
Here we go! Then it's definitely me being biased before even touching it.. Only left to publically admit it..heheheh
But I still don't like the focusing points!! HAH!
..hehe..
Sigh...I really love 5D MkII though, but 1DS MkIII feels so right in my hands...