check what metering mode the camera is in, is by looking at the top LCD.
Like other EOS bodies the metering mode is also displayed on the rear LCD. For example you can play back (display) the last image you took ">" button and then press the INFO button to display the metering mode. Also with no image displayed, you can hit the INFO button to display it (at least this is how it works on the 40D).
Perhaps Jorgen is a Nikon shooter who might be accustomed to the 'analog switch' based approach in Nikon UI for these types of settings. This is perhaps one of the biggest philosophical differences in Canon vs. Nikon's approach to UI. One resonates with one group of people the other with another group.
thedigitalbean wrote:
Perhaps Jorgen is a Nikon shooter who might be accustomed to the 'analog switch' based approach in Nikon UI for these types of settings. This is perhaps one of the biggest philosophical differences in Canon vs. Nikon's approach to UI. One resonates with one group of people the other with another group.
That's correct. On Nikons from D200 and up (and Pentax K7), the metering mode is also visible in the viewfinder. Since I need glasses to read the external LCDs but not when taking photos, it is an issue. It would have helped if there was a physical switch (something that both Nikon and Pentax have), but there's none.
Combined with the fixed spot metering area, this would actually interfere with the way I'm currently using my cameras, and it's one of my gripes with the D80, which works the same way as Canon.
WesN wrote:
Add me to the pre-order club as I’ve placed an order with Adorama.
I haven’t gone through all the posts on this thread but it looks like most folks are concerned with high ISO noise, but from what I can see it will suit my needs just fine.
What I'm interested most is its AF ability. I’ve never shot a 1 series body, only shooting xxD bodies, but the AF options look mighty nice. I think I’m gonna like - spot AF, AF point expansion, AF zone selection, and servo tracking sensitivity.
Hopefully I’m not too far down the pre-order list.
Jorgen Udvang wrote:
That's correct. On Nikons from D200 and up (and Pentax K7), the metering mode is also visible in the viewfinder. Since I need glasses to read the external LCDs but not when taking photos, it is an issue. It would have helped if there was a physical switch (something that both Nikon and Pentax have), but there's none.
Combined with the fixed spot metering area, this would actually interfere with the way I'm currently using my cameras, and it's one of my gripes with the D80, which works the same way as Canon.
Back to the thinking box....
You will be able to read the large back LCD screen ... it's not an issue.
UCSB wrote:
You will be able to read the large back LCD screen ... it's not an issue.
I will have to remove my eye from the viewfinder. Sometimes, that is an issue. I suppose it's just another way of doing things, but it surprises me endlessly why on earth they don't have that information in the viewfinder, at least when the metering mode button is activated. That would have solved the problem.
Not really, he wants something that is available on cameras of a similar class offered by competitors and something which is offered in the Canon 1-series bodies.
I don't think its worth freaking out (don't think Jorgen has done this) over but we should also recognize that it may be an issue for some folks.
Jorgen Udvang wrote:
I will have to remove my eye from the viewfinder. Sometimes, that is an issue. I suppose it's just another way of doing things, but it surprises me endlessly why on earth they don't have that information in the viewfinder, at least when the metering mode button is activated. That would have solved the problem.
If you don't want to remove your eye from the viewfinder, just put the modes you are switching between in as custom functions and rotate your mode dial between C1 ... C2.
thedigitalbean wrote:
I don't think its worth freaking out (don't think Jorgen has done this) over but we should also recognize that it may be an issue for some folks.
Indeed, but there's ALWAYS an issue for some folks.We all know it's impossible to please everybody and unfortunately, the minority always suffer, that's just the way it is. It's like how the shutter trigger button is always on the right hand side.
Unfortunately, some folks here seem content in blaming Canon for not making a body that doesn't suit their need when they should be thinking that perhaps it's just not designed for them.
I'm not talking about Jorgen by the way. I'm talking about those who complained that they wouldn't be able to use fast MF lenses on a pro AF body because of the new VF while at the same time admitted to not being interested in a 1.6x body.
this is an honest question: do you really move between metering modes so much that you might not be able to remember at any given time which one you're in?
I had the D200, and being able to see the metering mode in the VF always struck me as a typical Nikon "solution looking for a problem to fix" - I can honestly say that I never once felt the need to check the metering mode in the VF
While of course everyone's different,I can't really see that ability as something anyone would need: Certainly I always know which metering mode I've got my camera in.
In fact, I have more difficulty remembering what each of the metering mode symbols means, than remembering which one I'm using!
In the review, he pretty much summed up my greatest fear about the 7D IQ. Quote:
What the pictures look like is perhaps easier to digest. So far, the photos we've taken with a beta 7D look a lot like they've come from a 50D, except with 2.9 million additional pixels of resolution. Canon appears to have done a masterful job of wringing out every ounce of quality from the 7D's little pixels (smaller than any Canon before), resulting in photos that are crisp, reasonably clean and eminently usable up to about ISO 1600.
If I sell my very low click 50D to pickup a 7D only to find that the images are the same or essentially similar, I am going to be really disappointed. Looking at his sample images, I can see how he came to his conclusions. I would just rather keep the 50D and put my money into something else.
He has some sample images with the new 15-85 lens.
UCSB wrote:
If I sell my very low click 50D to pickup a 7D only to find that the images are the same or essentially similar, I am going to be really disappointed. I would just rather keep the 50D and put my money into something else.
You make it sound like the only difference between the 7D and 50D is the extra 3MP.
You do know that you get pro AF, brighter VF, built-in wireless slave flash controller, etc. with the 7D right? If you don't need these features then yeah, by all means, keep your 50D. Noone's forcing you to buy the 7D.
n0b0 wrote:
You make it sound like the only difference between the 7D and 50D is the extra 3MP.
You do know that you get pro AF, brighter VF, built-in wireless slave flash controller, etc. with the 7D right? If you don't need these features then yeah, by all means, keep your 50D. Noone's forcing you to buy the 7D.
I own a 5DII and use it over the 50D because of the superior IQ. My 50D has been getting little use. I am very interested in the 7D features, especially AF features and responsiveness. This could be a nice compliment to my 5DII. But, if it produces images that I would call fragile (what RG calls harsh in his review) then I just don't know if I want to put the money into the camera. Until the 7D came along, I was considering just selling off my crop kit and using the money in my FF kit.
I'm a bit confused with RG's PP workflow for his samples. If he sharpened his samples in PS, why did he use DPP for noise reduction? I would've thought that Noise Ninja, Noiseware Pro and Nik Software's Dfine 2.0 would work much better than DPP's slider.
In the review, he pretty much summed up my greatest fear about the 7D IQ. Quote:
What the pictures look like is perhaps easier to digest. So far, the photos we've taken with a beta 7D look a lot like they've come from a 50D, except with 2.9 million additional pixels of resolution. Canon appears to have done a masterful job of wringing out every ounce of quality from the 7D's little pixels (smaller than any Canon before), resulting in photos that are crisp, reasonably clean and eminently usable up to about ISO 1600.
If I sell my very low click 50D to pickup a 7D only to find that the images are the same or essentially similar, I am going to be really disappointed. Looking at his sample images, I can see how he came to his conclusions. I would just rather keep the 50D and put my money into something else.
He has some sample images with the new 15-85 lens....Show more →
I don't know why RG uses the words he does.
"A lot like they've come from a 50D" can mean anything from worse to better, and no one knows which direction, and by how much.
Why not check comparisons rather than uncomparable test shots in arbitrary conditions?
One example, the presentation of samples from IR, by thedigitalbean on page 41 in this thread.
UCSB wrote:
I own a 5DII and use it over the 50D because of the superior IQ. My 50D has been getting little use. I am very interested in the 7D features, especially AF features and responsiveness. This could be a nice compliment to my 5DII. But, if it produces images that I would call fragile (what RG calls harsh in his review) then I just don't know if I want to put the money into the camera. Until the 7D came along, I was considering just selling off my crop kit and using the money in my FF kit.
There are pages of photos in this thread comparing 7D images with other cameras.
UCSB wrote:
If I sell my very low click 50D to pickup a 7D only to find that the images are the same or essentially similar, I am going to be really disappointed.
This point has been beaten to death though - RG's conversion/PP routine is appalling and his results utterly unrepresentative of what the 7D can do.
Even conversions in the latest unofficial and unfinished (for 7D) Lr release are an order of magnitude better looking than RG's efforts.
For context: I am really satisfied with the IQ and noise handling of my 40D (I'm one of those hold-outs that prefers it to he 50D - although I freely acknowledge that the 50D is fine too), and I'm having a 7D, because what I've seen has left me in no doubt whatsoever that the 7D will be a signifcant improvement over the 40D and 50D, good as they are.
