OK, I'm going to be purchasing a new camera. I currently have a 1DMkII, and the low resolution bugs me.
I rarely take any pix that require full frame, but I've never had FF, as the 1DMkII is a 1.3 crop. I am wondering if the 7D's crop will bug me, or if the 5D Mk II's shortening of my lenses will irritate.
So, for someone making the jump from the 1DMkII, what's the primary consideration? It looks like the 7D is more like the 1DMkII than the 5DMkII. I don't have the money to get to the MkIII level.
musclepics wrote:
I'm seeing quite a bit of chroma noise in the above ISO3200 and ISO6400 samples, even at web size... about 1-2 stops behind what I get with the MkIII. I guess that's the cost of the higher MP and 1.6x crop. Still better than any other 1.5x or 1.6x crop cameras out there.
Pffft.... there are pages and pages of images that compared the 7D against recent cameras, if you had bothered to look... unless you have intentionally blinded yourself with your prejudices
So, for someone making the jump from the 1DMkII, what's the primary consideration? It looks like the 7D is more like the 1DMkII than the 5DMkII. I don't have the money to get to the MkIII level.
Advice, anyone?
The 7D will not be a huge change in terms of FOV. It will have a number of improvements that will make you happy compared to the 1Dmk2. I have a mk2 and I hate the tiny LCD and the endless button pushing. I understand the feel of the 7D is closer to 1 series without the bulk. Another plus IMO. The controls are much better and navigation is better.
For most of what you do the crop body would be an advantage for the reach. OTOH if you are shooting portraits FF really makes one happier.
At bottom, the ultimate image quality of the 7d may not equal the 5dII but at the print level your post processing skills will fall short well before the files of either camera do.
musclepics wrote:
I'm seeing quite a bit of chroma noise in the above ISO3200 and ISO6400 samples, even at web size... about 1-2 stops behind what I get with the MkIII. I guess that's the cost of the higher MP and 1.6x crop. Still better than any other 1.5x or 1.6x crop cameras out there.
Hmm...I'm seeing the chroma noise, but nothing more than I would see on my 1DMKIII. Certainly not 1-2 stops behind.
markd61 wrote:
The 7D will not be a huge change in terms of FOV. It will have a number of improvements that will make you happy compared to the 1Dmk2. I have a mk2 and I hate the tiny LCD and the endless button pushing. I understand the feel of the 7D is closer to 1 series without the bulk. Another plus IMO. The controls are much better and navigation is better.
For most of what you do the crop body would be an advantage for the reach. OTOH if you are shooting portraits FF really makes one happier.
At bottom, the ultimate image quality of the 7d may not equal the 5dII but at the print level your post processing skills will fall short well before the files of either camera do....Show more →
Is it possible, with wider angle lenses, to get close to the FOV of FF before the shortness of the lens caused a real drop in IQ? IOW, to get a similar FOV to 17mm on a 1.6 crop, you'd need 10mm. Using that on a crop sensor, is the IQ even close to the 17 on a FF?
That's my problem, really. I like doing portrait and landscape work, but don't do a lot of it. I obviously do more distance work, and enjoy that too (working at KSC, I rarely get close to the action). If I can do adequate portrait AND landscape/architecture work with the 7D, that seems like a no brainer.
Chroma noise is not easy to get rid of, Adobe makes a pigs ear of it introducing nasty colour blotching in the shadows/blacks which is why I've never used iso 3200 on my 5D until now, both iso 1600 and 3200 from the 5D mkII look blotchy in the shadows, etc. Try out C1 and see what real chroma noise reduction should look like (now I can use 3200 on my 5D!). I suspect that it is far from easy to get a decent chroma reduction with high iso and that many will see the usual blotching, blame it on the camera and not on the software. ACR/LR is lightyears ahead as a workflow tool compared to most and because of that most people use them. It does come with a price though, in areas where it's a bit rubbish, that's where people will judge the camera.
I find that Noise Ninja and Neat Image do a decent job with Chroma noise. I use LR for workflow, but PP with NR in CS4. I have tried C1 a few times and just cannot get used to it. No doubt a good product. Just not what works best for me unfortunately.
musclepics wrote:
I'm seeing quite a bit of chroma noise in the above ISO3200 and ISO6400 samples, even at web size... about 1-2 stops behind what I get with the MkIII. I guess that's the cost of the higher MP and 1.6x crop. Still better than any other 1.5x or 1.6x crop cameras out there.
Man you say that every so many pages. I know you use FlexNR for clean pictures on the MkIII. FlexNR is specifically tailored to the 1dMkiii. That's a little different from comparing 1d mkiii files in the same raw converter as the 7d. The guy already said he's working on FlexNR for other canon cameras. Mkiii pics out any run of the mill converter don't look that great... not like FlexNR. Compare Apples to apples, and red apples to red apples at that!
The pics I use look damn great @ ISO 3200 and 6400. Why do 1d mkii users feel so threatened?
apdieb wrote:
I find that Noise Ninja and Neat Image do a decent job with Chroma noise. I use LR for workflow, but PP with NR in CS4. I have tried C1 a few times and just cannot get used to it. No doubt a good product. Just not what works best for me unfortunately.
I can live with C1 for a small subset of images (iso 3200) though I dislike a great deal about it (while loving the colour, tonality, film curve, detail and noise reduction). Thing is and I had a long play trying this out on friday, ACR/LR is applying significant noise reduction with all sliders at zero and that will mess up the results from 3rd party noise software. I tried the same file, processed in C1 from RAW, zero chroma blotching. From ACR with all noise set to zero, import into C1, apply chroma reduction, same blotching you get with the regular ACR/LR colour noise reduction. Unfortunately using other tests, the noise reduction software in PS uses the same engine as the one in ACR (though worse for colour noise). Bottom line, colour blotching from a ACR/LR file even if you try to turn off all 'interference'.
I know that C1 gives better detail and general luminance reduction, but I don't care much about that, not when the noise is pretty much insignificant in real world use. Colour blotching however looks awful, especially in peoples dark hair and that does bother me enough to have spent time on the tests. It's not pixel peeping when you can see it on small prints.
Point is again, there is no blotching out of the camera, period, just lots of chroma noise, it's the unique approach adobe uses to noise reduction that smears it into big unsightly colour blotches across shadows and dark areas at certain iso's on certain cameras which is the problem. I don't blame the camera for that.
canon pants wrote:
Why shoot in manual? One shot is just one stop brighter than the other because you changed the ISO. Should have cut the shutter speed in half in the second shot or used aperture mode... or maybe I don't understand what you're trying to show us.
Not sure if anyone has already posted the link to the LL first look (didn't feel like sifting through 60+ pages on this post), but although MR says that he doesn't want to comment on image quality since it is a beta model he was working with, the following comment would make me hesitate to be an early adopter:
Though Canon placed no restrictions on my ability to report on image quality, other than to indicate that any pictures shown are "Beta Sample Images" I am going to punt, and will not be describing in any detail the image quality that I have seen from the Canon 7D.
Frankly, the reason is that I am seeing things which I am not sure are a consequence of the camera's inherent characteristics or are specific to pre-production cameras or even this specific camera. This includes overall image softness and some digital artifacting. Nothing terrible mind you; just enough though that I am aware of it, and therefore don't want to make any undue assumptions.
The major camera technical review sites will have their in-depth analysis of full production cameras soon enough, and once you've been able to read a couple of them you'll be able to draw a pretty good conclusion about this for yourself....Show more →
Here's the link: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/7D-hands-on.shtml
I do wish Canon had put in the same features set and build quality in the 5DII!
khurram1 wrote:
Not sure if anyone has already posted the link to the LL first look (didn't feel like sifting through 60+ pages on this post), but although MR says that he doesn't want to comment on image quality since it is a beta model he was working with, the following comment would make me hesitate to be an early adopter:
I have no doubt that any such defects - should they happen to filter down to the production line (which I doubt heavily) are easily corrected in a firmware update. The review itself is an unmitigated disaster saying basically nothing beyond that MR doesn't like DPP and that he is hung up about MLU not having a dedicated button (which it indirectly has, as MLU is automatic when using live view with the added benefit of a preview what's happening with your subject) - where is his wining that the Nikon DSLR didn't get live view integrated with MLU (they always let the mirror drop and raise it again when taking a picture out of live view)?
Good Lord - so much angst over these "digital artifacts", and we don't even know what he means!
I think the fact that Canon was confident enough not to put any restrictions on what MR had to say about the 7D's IQ says an awful lot more about the camera than whatever people choose to infer from his (non) comment.
Wow I really like what he is stating about the Autofocus system of the 7D:
"The AI servo tracking worked extremely well. I used it for most of the day in 'single AF point + expansion' mode, but I did try it in zone AF, normal single point AF and the accurate AF single point thingy.
I'm not sure about zone AF. It was distracting watching the AF points handoff focus to one another within the selected zone, and to be honest I wasn't happy with the camera deciding to move the tracking AF point within the zone without asking me first .
The accurate AF thingy is just that - very accurate - but you need to be extremely precise with where you have your AF point when using it with AI servo. Move slightly off target, and you'll miss focus (that was my experience anyway). I'm not sure just how practical this will be for fast moving objects.
Single point AF worked fine, but I stuck with the expanded points for today.
I also played with the tracking sensitivity, and it is this mainly that I want to carry out some more trials on.
"
Very accurate, that is wonderful!! Cannot wait to get mine!!!
anorphirith wrote:
when is a full frame 7d going to be released ? this is all the 5D2 should have been... I feel bad spending 2900 on an, so soon obsolete piece of...
! Can't blame you for not reading all the posts but there has been a lot discussed on the comparison of the two cameras. You have to remember the evolution of newer models and the 5DmkIII will probably have some of the 7D features. The mkII is a year old camera now and a year is a lot of time in digital photography. The 5DmkII is still a winner in my eyes except for the outer AF points. The image quality of the mkII will be a notch better especially at high ISO, but how wide that notch will be is just becoming evident.
Many people have taken amazing shots with it....and you say it's a piece of what ?
anorphirith wrote:
when is a full frame 7d going to be released ? this is all the 5D2 should have been... I feel bad spending 2900 on an, so soon obsolete piece of...
! Can't blame you for not reading all the posts but there has been a lot discussed on the comparison of the two cameras. You have to remember the evolution of newer models and the 5DmkIII will probably have some of the 7D features. The mkII is a year old camera now and a year is a lot of time in digital photography. The 5DmkII is still a winner in my eyes except for the outer AF points. The image quality of the mkII will be a notch better especially at high ISO, but how wide that notch will be is just becoming evident.