I like how dpreview sees that the 7D is better than the D300s so what do they do? They qualify every pro 7D statement with "if you prefer the 7D or Nikon D300S in this respect is probably a matter of taste."
their ACR 5.6 beta conversion maybe looked ok, remains to be seen
so far i think the 7D has a harsh, ugly look at low ISO using DPP and a little bit with C1 5 and especially using ACR 5.5 beta, acr 5.6 seems to be the only real hope at this point
200% to make it easy to see that the noise is caused by a mazing affect, you can see the noise easily enough at 100% view. Why is it NOT considered silly when some review says it has like 20% better performance for so and so and yet demonstrations like below where it is producing worse noise than any major DSLR in over half a decade are suddenly silly? I mean maybe ACR 5.6 and some new DPP version will fix it, but if not....
try the same with a 20D and it looks smooth as silk
and again, if this is considered silly, then looking at any reviews talking about noise or DR or whatnot that doesn't have to do with general camera body functionality are silly and yet the people questioning posts like below have no trouble shouting the praises about reviews demonstrating great very high iso performance
jorkata wrote:
There's something about the 7D sensor.
Many reviewers are noticing the softness.
I think Roland Lim is correct when he says that the 7D is lacking micro-contrast.
The difference between the 7D and 5DII in his test is quite striking, btw.
A quote from respected pro beauty/fashion photographer Stephen Eastwood, as seen in his "first look at the 7D" article in this month's Digital SLR Photography magazine, comparing it to the 5D Mk II:
In terms of noise the 7D is truly amazing: there is barely any difference between the two cameras at the highest ISO - and the 5D Mk II is no slouch to be compared with...
In the rest of the piece it is clear that he doesn't just mean highest ISOs but high ISO in general.
Let's not argue but I disagree the 1D3 is better than the 1Ds3 at the pixel level and identical at the image level. The 5D2 is all but the same, but a teeny bit better at like ISO 3200 and above.
The 40D is better than the 7D at the pixel level, but similar at the image level
It's funny how the 1D and 5D owners don't like the 7D too much.
Feel threatened much?
The 7D is a superior camera to the 5DII in every way sans the bigger sensor and whatever else goes along with it.
I don't think 1D and 5D owners feel threatened...because nothing is stopping them from buying one. I think the frustration is more from the fact that it isn't well specified enough to meet the needs of those with 1 series/5D's ( primarily FF sensor issue)
Elisha82 wrote:
It's funny how the 1D and 5D owners don't like the 7D too much.
Feel threatened much?
The 7D is a superior camera to the 5DII in every way sans the bigger sensor and whatever else goes along with it.
Why should anyone feel threatened? Don't we all just take photos? Is there a race here somewhere that I missed out on?
Anyone who thinks the 7D's ISO performance is as good as the 5DII's is VERY much mistaken. I picked up a 7D a couple of weeks ago, and just returned it yesterday. The level of detail captured by the 7D simply cannot touch a 5DII, and its ISO performance at/above 1600, while VERY good for an APS-C, again can't touch the 5DII's.
That said, I loved the new control layout, and the AF system blows away the 5D II's. But I know, for my needs (i.e. portraits/wedding photography), there's no Canon body as good as the 5DII's in the "small body" form factor.
Dawei Ye wrote:
I don't think 1D and 5D owners feel threatened...because nothing is stopping them from buying one. I think the frustration is more from the fact that it isn't well specified enough to meet the needs of those with 1 series/5D's ( primarily FF sensor issue)
Canon never claimed it to be. It is a CROP camera so what is the point of comparing it with a FF or APS-H?
I won't say "VERY much mistaken" I would say "DUMB". The 5D II is of course is better than 7D for large print size. The AF comparison is like day and night. Overall 7D is a better camera for me until 3D (5D II with 7D features) shows up.
WilliamG wrote:
Anyone who thinks the 7D's ISO performance is as good as the 5DII's is VERY much mistaken. I picked up a 7D a couple of weeks ago, and just returned it yesterday. The level of detail captured by the 7D simply cannot touch a 5DII, and its ISO performance at/above 1600, while VERY good for an APS-C, again can't touch the 5DII's.
That said, I loved the new control layout, and the AF system blows away the 5D II's. But I know, for my needs (i.e. portraits/wedding photography), there's no Canon body as good as the 5DII's in the "small body" form factor....Show more →
I think it will work...the 5DX line is intended for affordable FF SLR than 3DX ( 5DX only has 9 or 13 AF points ). The 1D series will always have a faster processing/acquiring speed than other lines (just look at the price and weight ).
n0b0 wrote:
5D2 + 7D features = Less sales not only on 5D2 but also 7D and 1D4 = not gonna happen.
alundeb:
...so I won't call it a day until we get hard numbers from DxO
I am actually waiting for these numbers very anxiously. Do you have an idea if we have to wait long? It may silly to some but after all the confusion (completely contradicting opinions about EOS 7D, as far as IQ is concerned), I am going to make up my mind on the day I see DxO test results.
the 1D3 is better than the 1Ds3 at the pixel level and identical at the image level. The 5D2 is all but the same, but a teeny bit better at like ISO 3200 and above.
). The 1D series will always have a faster processing/acquiring speed than other lines (just look at the price and weight 