Canon 7D review - Gulp

Ady Williams said:
I find reading too much to be unhelpful, best to go play with it and see for yourself.


Just my 2p.

:D
Click to expand...

I agree, after all, a review is just someone elses opinion.
I much prefer the hands on approach rather that just listen to someone elses point of view.
 
Classic examples of diffraction. Using a f/16 lens at 100% view on the 7D will produce such results. I also question the use of the 45mm TS/E lens for many of the tests. To get top results, the 7D needs top glass
 
-Rob- said:
Don't be confused, buy a D300s instead.
Click to expand...

Humm.. I own both a D3 and a D300S and have been playing with the 7D quite a bit.

D3 - light years ahead of the pair of them in terms of light sensitivity, ISO and AF.

D300S vs 7D - Noise sucks on the D300S even at 200 ISO. AF better on D300S, in fact its absolutely unreal.

However... the D300S noise is that sucky I would really recommend trying it out properly if you are deciding between the 7D and D300S. Disabling ADL makes a difference but still..

Me, I'd go for the 7D out of the two.
 
hashcake said:
I agree, after all, a review is just someone elses opinion.
I much prefer the hands on approach rather that just listen to someone elses point of view.
Click to expand...

But it's an opinion worth taking note of though, Darwin is one of the world's top landscape photographers (IMO), and has used and abused top end equipment for a lot of years, he knows what he's on about.

grumpybadger said:
Classic examples of diffraction. Using a f/16 lens at 100% view on the 7D will produce such results. I also question the use of the 45mm TS/E lens for many of the tests. To get top results, the 7D needs top glass
Click to expand...

Darwin has moved away from 'normal' L lenses to TS/E for a lot of his landscape photography, has he gets similar quality alongside his need for the tilt and shift facility, and as long as he is using the same lens across the tests, the tests are still valid, aren't they?
 
No. Not valid as the D300s test uses a 17-55 lens, so it is not like for like. I think his approach of using the same lens and adjusting position is not likely to be a realistic approach for many photographers who use different lenses on crop or FF cameras.

The 7D puts huge demands on the resolution of lenses in the centre. You are always, within reason, going to get a sharper image from a FF camera of comparable resolution to a crop. Taking that to a logical extreme, I am very surprised the review found the 7D worse than the G9.

I also wonder whether the same settings on DPP with different cameras actually give the same results. There's lots of jiggery pokery going on in the software that Canon sometimes hide. I know when I had my 1DII, images needed lots of sharpening to not look soft but sharpening is part of the developing process. I think a better comparison is the final processed image as that is what we are all striving to produce.

Anyway, they obviously don't like it in the review and that's fine. Their experience isn't the same as mine. I've been pretty happy with the 7D image quality so far (it's no 1Ds but that's not what I bought it for) when coupled to long primes (which tend to offer highest resolution)

I'm not as happy with the AF system but in a static environment, I think its the best crop camera yet from Canon.
 
How can you possibly trust a guy who writes about himself in the third person? - " Darwin likes - Darwin doesn't like" :D

Fair enough, he clearly doesn't like it, but his findings are well at odds with other reviewers and certainly with my experience of the camera, which just goes to show - read the reviews by all means, but then rely on your own judgement, especially when one review is so at odds with the others as this one is.
 
CT said:
How can you possibly trust a guy who writes about himself in the third person? - " Darwin likes - Darwin doesn't like" :D

Perhaps because it was a joint review, therefore the syntax is correct :)


Fair enough, he clearly doesn't like it, but his findings are well at odds with other reviewers and certainly with my experience of the camera, which just goes to show - read the reviews by all means, but then rely on your own judgement, especially when one review is so at odds with the others as this one is.
Click to expand...

Not so, here's what the-digital-picture.com had to say about the 7D's apparent lack of sharpness :

I have had a lot of questions about the sharpness of the 7D images appearing in the comparisons I posted prior to completing this review. In all cases, the 7D is slightly less-sharp than the 50D.


And Darwin made a point in the subsequent discussion that he tested the camera bodies in the real world conditions he would be using the camera, i.e. out of doors/landscapes, and not a bowl of fruit that is often used in camera tests.
 
buckas said:
cameralabs review out aswell

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_7D/

also with HD video review
Click to expand...
There you go - chalk and cheese between the two reviews. :shrug:

Interestingly, camera labs have picked up on the fact that you can't have the active AF spot permanently illuminated on the 7D which I like to do and find it really handy in low light when you can see the active AF point far more easily. It does flash briefly as you obtain focus, but I'd have preferred it permanently lit.
 
Les, I do think you are selectively quoting there as the digital picture review also states that there is more resolution in the 7D and that it takes sharpening better in PP and also that if you up-rez the 50D image to 7D resolution the 7D has the slight edge. That report is nothing like the images demonstrated by Darwin that show a fundamental lack of not just sharpness but image quality. Comes back to my point that by not processing you can't be sure you are comparing like with like.

I don't really care about this. I'm relatively pleased with the camera but another quote from the review you quote is "While the 50D is slightly sharper than the 7D in these identically processed, very low sharpness setting ("1" in DPP) results, the 7D clearly shows more resolution - and can have additional sharpening applied as I'll demonstrate later in the review. Eighteen megapixel of quality image is a very strong 7D feature. "
 
grumpybadger said:
Les, I do think you are selectively quoting there as the digital picture review also states that there is more resolution in the 7D and that it takes sharpening better in PP and also that if you up-rez the 50D image to 7D resolution the 7D has the slight edge. That report is nothing like the images demonstrated by Darwin that show a fundamental lack of not just sharpness but image quality. Comes back to my point that by not processing you can't be sure you are comparing like with like.

I don't really care about this. I'm relatively pleased with the camera but another quote from the review you quote is "While the 50D is slightly sharper than the 7D in these identically processed, very low sharpness setting ("1" in DPP) results, the 7D clearly shows more resolution - and can have additional sharpening applied as I'll demonstrate later in the review. Eighteen megapixel of quality image is a very strong 7D feature. "
Click to expand...

That wasn't really my point, it was in response to CT's statement that Darwin's review was at odds with other reviewers, when I don't think it is.

Like you, as I'm unlikely to want or own a 7D, therefore it's an academic kind of argument for me, a bit like the perrenial nikon-v-canon debates.

Although I've never met Darwin, I do know him, and have a lot of respect for his views, and he has more experience skill and knowledge than most of us can only dream about.

I'm just trying to balance the argument a bit, as it seems it was becoming a 'trash darwin' kind of discussion.
 
Will try to post some images from my 7D with 17-55mm & 70-200mm when I get home tonight. These lenses seem plenty sharp on the 7D to me. I think Darwin simply chose a bad lens/body combo.
 
Certainly a lot to consider, my main concern with the 7D is the pixel packed sensor and noise, if it can match the D300 at iso 1600 (my last camera) then its worth it.
With so many pixels it will be great for cropping and the video is a bonus to me though not essential.

As I have had a break from photography, and no lenses, starting with a clean slate its down to preference.
As the 7D has come down in price it makes it very tempting, but the Nikon D700 is so tempting just for its noise performance, decisions,decisions
 
The trouble is with articles on a product is they all differ try this site as they allow you to compare cameras side by side and images
[URL="http://www.imaging-resource.com/
then go to compare sample images in margin

My own experience with this camera are all good ones the main companies who buy my work are more than happy with the quality. To me a good camera means pounds shillings and pence to put it bluntly so if it did'nt do it's job it would be gone. Both Nikon & Canon produce excellent cameras when you view raw images on a 24inch monitor the difference is amazing from all three of the cameras you mention so don't be put off any of them
Regards
Lost
 
Orville said:
Will try to post some images from my 7D with 17-55mm & 70-200mm when I get home tonight. These lenses seem plenty sharp on the 7D to me. I think Darwin simply chose a bad lens/body combo.
Click to expand...

...or he needs to microfocus that lens to suit the body as everything seems to be related to the focussing. Mind you he does say
"In early October we were lucky enough to test the soon-to-be released Canon EOS-7D"

So pre release model camera? Could that be the issue?
 
Alan F said:
Found this so funny. its me! http://sonyalpharumors.com/funny-photography-can-increase-anxiety/?917f8718
Click to expand...

Brilliant! :lol: "There's a dead pixel in here and I can't find it! It was on DPReview!"

I think the problem with Darwin's slightly surreal test is that he is comparing very high quality cameras and they are all good. There is no difference in normal use and his findings are so inconsistent. That can only be user error.

To separate the performance of this kind of camera you have to shoot them side by side in tightly controlled conditions with just one variable - the camera, using one specific setting at a time. Wandering about shooting random stuff with different lenses just leads to confusion.
 
i read as many reviews as i could find about my camera(D300). and bought it:thumbs:

although reading several reviews on thre 7d i think i would give it a miss and thats not just because i,m a nikon user :lol:
 
Personally, I think that half of these reviewers already have an idea of what they are going to write before they get to the review.

It seems to me, that the 50d, and 7d, do not come delivered, with the settings correct for taking the 'best' images in a 'point and shoot' type of way. It seems that there are some settings which most people on this forum make almost immediately after getting the camera (ALO, HTP etc.), and then they have to work at getting other settings correct for their style of shooting. (for example, I think Grumpybadger has made settings to the way that the focus tracks birds).

These 'journalists' are interested in getting their words in print, that is what they are getting money for. If they do not want to like the camera, they are not going to put the effort in to make sure that it focuses correctly. They will grab whatever lens they have to hand, and use that to take example test shots.

Yes, the 50d has noise if you view the images at 100% magnification, however, if you are /able/ to frame your shots correctly, and expose correctly, then there is little detriment to the extra 5mp over the 40d.
If you are getting the 7d, then there is a definite reason why you would chose this over the 5dII, they are intended for different audiences. There is a possible reason why you would chose it over the 1DIII (around £3k).
If you are going to use ISO 6400, there is a reason why you are going to use ISO 6400, probably you don't have a lot of choice.
There does appear to be softening in their photos. Perhaps they were using an old version of DPP, or an old firmware, or perhaps they had their aperture value so high it caused diffraction to be noticable.
But then again, I don't think the 7d was slated to be a landscape camera, which by their (Darwin's) admission, is what they are interested in.

Reading the Darwin review, I get the distinct impression that he did not write it, it was Samantha. Yes, I understand that it is in the third person, but the comments are somewhat lopsided.
 
Perhaps Darwin is waiting for it to evolve into a 1Dmk6 or perhaps become extinct through natural selection, or should that be deselection :lol:
 
I found the article in amateur photography a well balanced view on the 7d
Regards
Lost
 
I remember similar things were said about the 40D when it came out.
I got mine anyway and found it worked fine :D
Pete
 
I have a few 7D samples taken with my 17-55mm and 70-200mm F/4 IS below. Lighting was not ideal and I only had a few books to balance the camera on, but you get an idea. The only post processing was to convert from RAW to JPEG using DPP. Sharpness set to zero. JPEG files are big.

17-55mm F/2.8
17-55mm F/4
17-55mm F5.6
17-55mm F8
70-200mm F/4
70-200mm F/5.6
70-200mm F/8

Sample 100% crop
crop.jpg
 
It's got to the point with some of these negative reviews im wondering if i have the same camera as they are testing i have tried rubbing the 7d logo on camera and it does'nt come off, it looks the same as the camera in the pictures they post. I just does'nt seem to have the faults that they mention i havent bothered upgrading firmware either the photographs i have taken with it are selling if you are interested most work is printed to A1 and A2 AF is working fine and there is no ghosting on continous shooting. Im running it alongside a 1dmk2 and a 5d mk2 at the moment and i have compared it to some images taken with the 50d and to my eyes it is the 7d that edges it but i have come to a conclusion with my 7d why it's so good there's a Genie living inside of it.
I really think you need to try one it's a camera that takes a while to get use to but it delivers the results when you learn all of it's secrets if anyone reading this is going to the Donna Nook meet and they want to try a 7d just walk up and introduce yourself i will have a Canon 600mm F4 is lens im getting to close to 50 for my liking and i am about 5'10 and a bit over weight i will probably have 2 other shady characters in tow
Regards
Lost
 
lost said:
if anyone reading this is going to the Donna Nook meet and they want to try a 7d just walk up and introduce yourself i will have a Canon 600mm F4 is lens im getting to close to 50 for my liking and i am about 5'10 and a bit over weight i will probably have 2 other shady characters in tow
Regards
Lost
Click to expand...

Will you have your 'talk photography' neck strap on?
I think they should be mandatory after a certain period
 
coldpenguin said:
Will you have your 'talk photography' neck strap on?
I think they should be mandatory after a certain period
Click to expand...

They should be and i will probably have a badge on with help the 7d owner
 
I am put off be the more negative 7D reviews. I'm worried that getting the best out of this camera requires more processing time and better skills than I have. Also, lots of the images I've looked at so far on the net seem way over processed and yet people rave about them.

I'll probably get around to trying one out for myself but the thought of using DPP fills me with dread as I think it's a hateful piece of software.
 
I don't think that CT or CanonBob over-process their images.

Do you process your images at all, or do you shoot jpeg? For my photos, I generally put all of them onto my server as RAW, then it converts them to jpeg without any modifications. They are coming out a lot better than my previous camera in this way. Unfortunately some of them are being mis-converted with the colour profile, but I have a very new version of dcraw, it may not be working 100%
 
woof woof said:
I am put off be the more negative 7D reviews. I'm worried that getting the best out of this camera requires more processing time and better skills than I have. Also, lots of the images I've looked at so far on the net seem way over processed and yet people rave about them.

I'll probably get around to trying one out for myself but the thought of using DPP fills me with dread as I think it's a hateful piece of software.
Click to expand...

Just try to ignore some of the negative reviews, a lot have been by people that I have certainly never heard of. There are a lot of 7D owners on here very positive about the camera, and also some cracking reviews in print now by well respected uk magazines-try the December issue of Photo Plus for example!!:thumbs:
 
In the days before the internet, you just had the reviews in magazines on which to base your purchasing decisions, now there are a million experts waiting to advise you :lol:
 
artyman said:
In the days before the internet, you just had the reviews in magazines on which to base your purchasing decisions, now there are a million experts waiting to advise you :lol:
Click to expand...

You got that right
Regards
Lost
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top