I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens or possibly the explanations I give at the end of this post ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens (good for this kind of test), maybe I should also shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely on the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image (when a RAW converter costs $400, you hope you are getting some expertise in processing the images optimally).
One other possible explanation for Darwin\'s problems is that possibly DPP was not entirely ready when the 7D was released. There may be hope for DPP tuning and ACR/LR will probably be very good when we see it.
Here is what C1 produces with NO NR and NO sharpening (or anything else ... like a little contrast ... the output could be improved from here even with NO NR and sharpening). Obviously took a different approach than DPP.
Finally, at least with my 135L I think this is awesome sharpness!
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens or possibly the explanation I give at the end of this post ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens (good for this kind of test), maybe I should also shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely on the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image (when a RAW converter costs $400, you hope you are getting some expertise in processing the images optimally).
One other possible explanation for Darwin\'s problems is that possibly DPP was not entirely ready when the 7D was released. There may be hope for DPP tuning and ACR/LR will probably be very good when we see it.
Here is what C1 produces with NO NR and NO sharpening (or anything else ... like a little contrast ... the output could be improved from here even with NO NR and sharpening). Obviously took a different approach than DPP.
Finally, at least with my 135L I think this is awesome sharpness!
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens or possibly the explanation I give at the end of this post ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens (good for this kind of test), maybe I should also shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely on the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image (when a RAW converter costs $400, you hope you are getting some expertise in processing the images optimally).
Here is what C1 produces with NO NR and NO sharpening (or anything else ... like a little contrast ... the output could be improved from here even with NO NR and sharpening). Obviously took a different approach than DPP.
Finally, at least with my 135L I think this is awesome sharpness!
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens or possibly the explanation I give at the end of this post ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens (good for this kind of test), maybe I should also shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely on the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image (when a RAW converter costs $400, you hope you are getting some expertise in processing the images optimally).
Here is what C1 produces with NO NR and NO sharpening (or anything else ... like a little contrast). Obviously took a different approach than DPP.
Finally, at least with my 135L I think this is awesome sharpness!
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens or possibly the explanation I give at the end of this post ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens (good for this kind of test), maybe I should also shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely on the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image (when a RAW converter costs $400, you hope you are getting some expertise in processing the images optimally).
Here is what C1 produces with NO NR and NO sharpening. Obviously took a different approach than DPP.
Finally, at least with my 135L I think this is awesome sharpness!
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens or possibly the explanation I give at the end of this post ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens (good for this kind of test), maybe I should also shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely on the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image (when a RAW converter costs $400, you hope you are getting some expertise in processing the images optimally).
Here is what C1 produces with NO NR and NO sharpening.
Finally, at least with my 135L I think this is awesome sharpness!
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens or possibly the explanation I give at the end of this post ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens (good for this kind of test), maybe I should also shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely on the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image (when a RAW converter costs $400, you hope you are getting some expertise in processing the images optimally).
Here is what C1 produces with NO NR and NO sharpening.
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens or possibly the explanation I give at the end of this post ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens (good for this kind of test), maybe I should also shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely on the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image (when a RAW converter costs $400, you hope you are getting some expertise in processing the images optimally).
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens or possibly the explanation I give at the end of this post ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens (good for this kind of test), maybe I should also shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely on the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image (when a RAW converter costs $400, you hope you are getting some expertise in processing the images optimally).
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens or possible the explanation I give at the end of this post ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens (good for this kind of test), maybe I should also shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely on the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image (when a RAW converter costs $400, you hope you are getting some expertise in processing the images optimally).
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens or possible the explanation I give at the end of this post ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens (good for this kind of test), maybe I should also shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely on the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image.
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens or possible the explanation I give at the end of this post ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens (good for this kind of test), maybe I should also shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely of the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image.
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens or possible the explanation I give at the end of this post ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens, maybe I should shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely of the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image.
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens or the explanation I give at the end of this post ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens, maybe I should shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely of the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image.
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens, maybe I should shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely of the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk. For myself, I would be careful defeating the initial settings in C1 when I start processing an image.
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens, maybe I should shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
What does it mean? There has been a trend with camera manufacturers where they have begin to rely of the extensive processing power of today\'s computers to really complete the processing of their images. I first saw this when there was a huge delay in ARC/LR support for my Panasonic LX3. The delay was caused because Adobe had to implement optics corrections, CA corrections and who know what on the RAW file in the converter. Very nice results on LX3. Adobe has added a whole technical capability for processing RAW files and making adjustments. The 7D may be very dependent on the performance of the converter ... where people have optimized settings to pull the images together. Defeat all of those judgments and you may end up with junk.
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens, maybe I should shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
For those wondering what you would get if you followed the Darwin Wiggett (author of 7D review) approach to preparing your files. Here it is DPP processed no NR, no sharpening, everything else standard. 7D top, 5DII bottom.
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens, maybe I should shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Frame as shot, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
100% crops, 7D top, 5DII bottom.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens, maybe I should shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
Here is the full image frame with the contrast added to the 50 smartsharpen above.
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens, maybe I should shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Using curves to add a very small amount of contrast to the image (plus prior sharpening).
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check. One thing that was going through my mind was the 135L is a very high quality lens, maybe I should shoot a comparison with a lesser lens.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens ... whatever, he got pretty bad results.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens ... whatever, it was a big screw-up.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images. Top image set is the full frame, bottom set are 100% crops.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
I looked at the review, also. It seemed like his big issue was IQ, sharpness specifically. So being stuck here with the flu, I decide to take a quick look at sharpness myself. I don\'t know what his problem was ... if I had to guess, he didn\'t AF micro adjust his lens ... whatever, it was a big screw-up.
Top image in each set is 7D, bottom image is 5DII. Both shot with 135L (f/5.6 on 7D, f/8 on 5DII). Direct flash, high speed sync. HANDHELD. Framed in a similar manner, but not perfect (7D seems to have gotten the short end of the deal). EXIF in full images.
Here is how the images were processed. Processed in C1 PRO v5, standard setting for NR (and virtually everything else). Sharpening standard setting is .8, 180. I used .8, 230 on both images. Not a big deal (scale is 0 to 1000). Full frame images were downsized in Photoshop, same sharpening applied to both ... something like smartsharpen 50 (very mild).
I am not trying to do a review here ... just a reasonable, quick quality check.
Of course if you were processing these images, you would apply output sharpening in Photoshop. Here is a smartsharpen of 100 on the 7D file. Nothing special about the value of 100 just wanted to illustrate how the file might take a little sharpening in Photoshop.
Nov 12, 2009 at 01:32 AM
Previous versions of UCSB's message #7765183 « Canon EOS 7D Master thread »
