At the expense of looking like a freak and having every pore on my face in macro sharpness .. here's a photo, that I had my boss click, of my ugly mug .. I held my external flash to my right so the light would bounce from the wall and triggered it using the 7D (God, I love that feature) .. Click for original http://light.smugmug.com/Reviews/Cameras/Canon7D/IMG0049/723757195_tYst4-X2.jpg
p.8 #3 · Post your 7D shot (Who actually uses their 7D?)
Well .. I realized I was getting disappointed before for 2 reasons
- one of my lenses is focusing badly with the 7D at certain focal lengths
- shooting in RAW and then using DPP was not my forte .. I am not used to DPP at all - this is the first time I've ever used DPP, I believe and I was doing things wrong. I had to push the sharpness slider all the way to the right in DPP while processing every image or else the image would look soft. But shooting in JPEG seems to make things much better. So, the data is there to get sharp images from RAW because the camera is obviously doing it .. I just need to learn to "re-calibrate" my PP for the 7D.
So .. I think I'll be keeping the 7D after all. I hope to take it to Tulsa (Keystone Dam) and see if I can get some photos of the eagles and the pelicans there this weekend. Let's see how it does with the Sigma 500. Hopefully will surprise me.
p.8 #4 · Post your 7D shot (Who actually uses their 7D?)
All's well that ends well! I am glad that you are now happy the camera. The 7D requires good glass though. I don't know how good the Sigma is, but if you shoot with a Canon 500/4L or 600/4L your images will be astonishingly sharp! I will using my 7D and 100-400L for the first time this weekend with some reservations, but I am looking forward to it.
p.8 #5 · Post your 7D shot (Who actually uses their 7D?)
bobbytan wrote:
All's well that ends well! I am glad that you are now happy the camera. The 7D requires good glass though. I don't know how good the Sigma is, but if you shoot with a Canon 500/4L or 600/4L your images will be astonishingly sharp! I will using my 7D and 100-400L for the first time this weekend with some reservations, but I am looking forward to it.
You're right. When I use my 100 macro with it, photos come out scary sharp. The 17-55 is moderately sharp. My 70-200 needs more MA and needs a high shutter speed, or a tripod, etc. But, wonder how the Sigma will do. Will be interesting to see your 7D + 100-400 photos. Please do share em!
p.8 #7 · Post your 7D shot (Who actually uses their 7D?)
saaketham wrote:
Well .. I realized I was getting disappointed before for 2 reasons
- one of my lenses is focusing badly with the 7D at certain focal lengths
- shooting in RAW and then using DPP was not my forte .. I am not used to DPP at all - this is the first time I've ever used DPP, I believe and I was doing things wrong. I had to push the sharpness slider all the way to the right in DPP while processing every image or else the image would look soft. But shooting in JPEG seems to make things much better. So, the data is there to get sharp images from RAW because the camera is obviously doing it .. I just need to learn to "re-calibrate" my PP for the 7D.
So .. I think I'll be keeping the 7D after all. I hope to take it to Tulsa (Keystone Dam) and see if I can get some photos of the eagles and the pelicans there this weekend. Let's see how it does with the Sigma 500. Hopefully will surprise me. ...Show more →
Glad to here it is working out for you. The detail in that tire image is amazing.
p.8 #11 · Post your 7D shot (Who actually uses their 7D?)
saaketham wrote:
Well .. I realized I was getting disappointed before for 2 reasons
- one of my lenses is focusing badly with the 7D at certain focal lengths
I freaked out a bit when I first clicked into this thread after couple days of being away. I was like, if saaketham is seeing the same issues that I was seeing, I should have sent mine back too when I had the chance. I posted on another thread about me being stuck at home for a week, clicking away about 500 times trying to figure out why it looked so soft.
Anyway, the drama aside, so far on this body
a 70-200 f/4L needs about -8 to -12 MA
a 24-105 f/4L needs about +2 MA
a 28-135 is very soft until f/6.3, but accurate focus w/o MA
a 24 f/2.8 misfocuses 1 out of 3
a 50 f/1.8 misfocuses 1 out of 2
It was the Zenon Char's great suggestion to use Live View for focus testing that convinced me that the body is good, I should keep it and send it in to Canon along with some lenses. I will do that after thanksgiving. Will let you know how it goes.
p.8 #12 · Post your 7D shot (Who actually uses their 7D?)
Who says UV or clear filters effect IQ? I took these with a UV filter on the lens and through dirty glass at the zoo. There is some IQ loss due the glass but I bet not too many people would have guessed that if I had not told you.
p.8 #19 · Post your 7D shot (Who actually uses their 7D?)
Awesome shots everybody!
Since switching to Canon from Pentax this summer, I've been saying that I want to eventually go FF. Looking at what I've been able to do with my 40D + your pics has made me start to question if that really is necessary. I'm having a hard time imagining myself coughing up $2700 for a 5DMkII, even in 1.5-2 years when I'll most likely be ready for an upgrade. Of course, I imagine that it's successor will already be out and the 5DMkII will be a good bit cheaper. Of course, there's always the original 5D, but I've gotten to where I like the live view on my 40D so much that I think I'd miss it on any other camera I were to buy in the future.
p.8 #20 · Post your 7D shot (Who actually uses their 7D?)
Hello Heather
Now that we have seen the 7D's AF system, the 5D II is definitely not worth $2,700 .... but the 5D Mk III or 3D will certainly be worth $2,700 .... so wait for that! I am currently happy with my 5D II and 7D combo .... but I would dump both of them for a 5D III or 3D!
Bobby
heatherwb wrote:
Awesome shots everybody!
Since switching to Canon from Pentax this summer, I've been saying that I want to eventually go FF. Looking at what I've been able to do with my 40D + your pics has made me start to question if that really is necessary. I'm having a hard time imagining myself coughing up $2700 for a 5DMkII, even in 1.5-2 years when I'll most likely be ready for an upgrade. Of course, I imagine that it's successor will already be out and the 5DMkII will be a good bit cheaper. Of course, there's always the original 5D, but I've gotten to where I like the live view on my 40D so much that I think I'd miss it on any other camera I were to buy in the future.
here's a photo, that I had my boss click, of my ugly mug .. I held my external flash to my right so the light would bounce from the wall and triggered it using the 7D (God, I love that feature) .. 
