Canon announces EOS 7D ***Official Discussion thread***

hollis_f said:
Rob's put that image through PS's Equalizer filter to better demonstrate the problem. It's not as obvious in the proper image
Click to expand...

yes this is the shot as taken iso 640 you carnt go by how the Equalizer filter looks for checking the ISO .
if this shot is moved on the computer screen you see the shadow more .
Rob.
shot.jpg
 
If you know it is there, you definitely can see it on that shot can't you. Strange. How close to the shot before was it? My shots are ISO 800, I wonder whether the sensor reacts differently at this ISO (being a 'stop'), or whether it is just an amplification mode, like the 640?
 
coldpenguin said:
If you know it is there, you definitely can see it on that shot can't you. Strange. How close to the shot before was it? My shots are ISO 800, I wonder whether the sensor reacts differently at this ISO (being a 'stop'), or whether it is just an amplification mode, like the 640?
Click to expand...

i was on 8fps so very close :)
Rob.
 
CT said:
The battery grip just arrived. Very nice I must say, with a good quality finish which matches the camera body. I got it from Park Cameras who have just dropped the price to £159.99, which seems to be the best UK price. If you know different don't tell me! ;)
Click to expand...

Got mine yesterday, got it from Park as well, best price I have seen and the only stock I have seen from the Mainstream dealers.
 
The fix for the ghosting issue will be to reduce the max fps slightly. Don't be surprised if within the next firmware upgrade we lose half an fps.
 
Orville said:
The fix for the ghosting issue will be to reduce the max fps slightly. Don't be surprised if within the next firmware upgrade we lose half an fps.
Click to expand...

Maybe, or maybe one of the pre-amps isn't being drained properly/in the right order. We shall have to wait and see. It is why I am interested in whether anyone can re-produce the effect with the 800 ISO images I posted above.
 
Orville said:
The fix for the ghosting issue will be to reduce the max fps slightly. Don't be surprised if within the next firmware upgrade we lose half an fps.
Click to expand...

Source?

I've read a post on PotN from somebody that seemed to know what he was talking about. He said that clearing the CMOS took just a few microseconds and that it was likely that the fix would be to extend that time by a couple of extra microseconds. If that is the case (and I see no reason why he may be mistaken) then it'll have a minimal effect on the fps - 7.9999 instead of 8.
 
GyRob said:
yes im getting it , it is only faint but to show it more iv put it in cs3 .the ghost is from the image before this one.
Rob.
opps.jpg
Click to expand...

eek! hope they get this sorted before I get one (i know it's not very noticeable, but still shouldn't be there)
 
hollis_f said:
Source?

I've read a post on PotN from somebody that seemed to know what he was talking about. He said that clearing the CMOS took just a few microseconds and that it was likely that the fix would be to extend that time by a couple of extra microseconds. If that is the case (and I see no reason why he may be mistaken) then it'll have a minimal effect on the fps - 7.9999 instead of 8.
Click to expand...
Just a hunch. It may be that Canon cannot adjust actuation timers by as little as 1/10000th sec and they may have to cut off tenths or more. Maybe they cannot change it at all.
 
Must be able to do it by as little at 1/8000th I would think.
Otherwise the camera wouldn't work.
 
Must look at this tonight when I get home, not experianced the issue myself as yet, put off to Scotland for 10 Days tomorrow so need to do this before just incase it decides to rear its head and spoild some of my shots.

Thanks for the link guys.
 
Anybody what's done the upgrade tried burst-mode to see if it's still up there at 8 fps?
 
ive done it ,and cant tell the difference in fps ,it goes that fast you would be hard pressed to notice a difference i think
 
wambam said:
ive done it ,and cant tell the difference in fps ,it goes that fast you would be hard pressed to notice a difference i think
Click to expand...

You should be able to see on the time stamps if all 8 were within 1 second or not.
 
Just done mine. Before the upgrade, burst pictures were 0.14s apart (tv/2500, f/8 iso 800 AI Servo)
Same config, picture is 11:47:17.13 next is 11:47:17:28

time distance 0.15s

therefore a slight difference, not sure it is one that I care too much about (and focusing/light is much worse for this test, so that could be a factor)
 
Yes, but not quite a real world test there. Not that the first test was scientific,

So with manual focus, 12:16:10.26 to 12:16:10.39, that is 0.13s, therefore 1.0.10 is faster than 1.0.7!!!
 
Thanks for the links to the firmware fix - just downloading. :thumbs:

All credit to Canon for getting the firmware out there so quickly, which surely indicates it couldn't have been a difficult fix?
 
coldpenguin said:
Yes, but not quite a real world test there. Not that the first test was scientific,

So with manual focus, 12:16:10.26 to 12:16:10.39, that is 0.13s, therefore 1.0.10 is faster than 1.0.7!!!
Click to expand...

That still isn't 8 FPS though, there must have been something slowing it (your test) down both before and after the update.
 
The time is only accurate to 0.01s. This result is >7.5 frames per second, which is probably enough for Marketing to call 8fps.
My shutter speed is 1/2500, maximum is 1/8000. I do have (currently) High ISO noise reduction turned on, but would have thought that would be applied after mechanics. Also, I am testing with the 100-400L (as this was what I had in the first set of shots, which were real-world), this is a relatively old lens, perhaps the aperture blades cannot move that fast?
 
Also, remember, that the camera has effectively taken 2 shots, 0.13 seconds apart, not just 1.
The 4 shot burst that I took, first image was at 12:16:10.02, last one was 12:16:10.39
That is a total of 0.37s for 4 images. 8 images would be double that+0.13, giving 0.87s for 8 images. If I actually had something to take a photograph of, I might actually waste a whole 1s burst, but at the moment, at these settings, all I am getting is a black screen
 
coldpenguin said:
Also, remember, that the camera has effectively taken 2 shots, 0.13 seconds apart, not just 1.
The 4 shot burst that I took, first image was at 12:16:10.02, last one was 12:16:10.39
That is a total of 0.37s for 4 images. 8 images would be double that+0.13, giving 0.87s for 8 images. If I actually had something to take a photograph of, I might actually waste a whole 1s burst, but at the moment, at these settings, all I am getting is a black screen
Click to expand...

Yes, you are quite right, my mistake. The first image is taken at 0.0 not at 0.13 so in fact you are getting about 8.5 FPS there.... impressive!
 
I would welcome any opinions on whether I'd be likely to see a noticeable image quality improvement from the 7D compared to my 40D given the lenses I own:
  • Canon 17-55mm f/2.8
  • Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8
  • Canon 300mm f/4 IS
It's a significant investment and although I'm very tempted I'm wondering if I will see much benefit.

Thanks, Jeremy
 
jpatrick said:
I would welcome any opinions on whether I'd be likely to see a noticeable image quality improvement from the 7D compared to my 40D given the lenses I own:
  • Canon 17-55mm f/2.8
  • Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8
  • Canon 300mm f/4 IS
It's a significant investment and although I'm very tempted I'm wondering if I will see much benefit.

Thanks, Jeremy
Click to expand...

It depends what sort of subjects you mostly do Jeremy. You'd see an almost doubling of pixel density over your 40D, so an enormous potential to crop and retain detail.The 7D is really aimed squarely at sports/wildlife photographers, and looking at your lenses I'd guess your interests must lie in those directions somewhat. If that's the case, then you'd obviously see a major difference in your ability to crop images and retain detail. Looking at your lenses, they'd seem to up to the job with the 7D so I can't see them being any bar to you getting one.

There are lots of other significanct improvements, but the improved AF system and wirelss flash capability are probably the biggies, along with dual Digic 1V processors.

Bear in mind that the 7D ouputs huge image files, and your PC needs to be up to the job of dealing with them.
 
CT said:
It depends what sort of subjects you mostly do Jeremy. You'd see an almost doubling of pixel density over your 40D, so an enormous potential to crop and retain detail.The 7D is really aimed squarely at sports/wildlife photographers, and looking at your lenses I'd guess your interests must lie in those directions somewhat. If that's the case, then you'd obviously see a major difference in your ability to crop images and retain detail. Looking at your lenses, they'd seem to up to the job with the 7D so I can't see them being any bar to you getting one.

There are lots of other significanct improvements, but the improved AF system and wirelss flash capability are probably the biggies, along with dual Digic 1V processors.

Bear in mind that the 7D ouputs huge image files, and your PC needs to be up to the job of dealing with them.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the overall feel of the 7D compared to the 40D/50D and that awesome viewfinder! :thumbs:
 
That's true Jon - it does feel nice. I didn't mention the video btw, which might be a consideration for some :D
 
jpatrick said:
I would welcome any opinions on whether I'd be likely to see a noticeable image quality improvement from the 7D compared to my 40D given the lenses I own:
  • Canon 17-55mm f/2.8
  • Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8
  • Canon 300mm f/4 IS
It's a significant investment and although I'm very tempted I'm wondering if I will see much benefit.

Thanks, Jeremy
Click to expand...

I just did exactly that test, albeit in a simple and limited way - 40D and 7D side by side with 17-55 2.8 lens. I posted about it on this other thread http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=177809&page=3

In terms of IQ, the only thing I could really notice was improved noise (I only shot at ISO800). The sharpness benefit even on huge enlargements was not very evident at all. I'm disappointed and more than a little perplexed TBH. Maybe I should have done something differently :thinking: Comments very welocme.

CT said:
There are lots of other significanct improvements, but the improved AF system and wirelss flash capability are probably the biggies, along with dual Digic 1V processors.
Click to expand...

And for me, the much better LCD, viewfinder, faster framing, slightly revised layout with bigger buttons, weather-sealing, better build and lovely fast responsive feel, vignetting correction, custom focus micro-adjust - lots of smallish things that really add up vs 40D.

jontucker said:
Not to mention the overall feel of the 7D compared to the 40D/50D and that awesome viewfinder! :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Viewfinder is bigger and brighter, but not that much. It's still a crop camera. 5DII is still much better than 7D.
 
Thanks very much for the comments, I can see there's a usability and features improvement with the 7D but it seems that the IQ benefit may be relatively small even with decent glass.

I've thought carefully about a 5D MkII and what rules it out for me is the lack a crop factor for wildlife photography, as reasonably fast longer lenses would obviously involve serious expense and be impractical to take abroad on flights. I do have a 1.4x TC for emergencies but find that this impacts quite a bit on quality.

I think the biggest potential attraction for me of the 7D is the potential for greater cropping ability on wildlife shots, plus the 'new gadget' factor. I'm not too concerned about processing larger files as I use 64 bit Lightroom with 6GB of RAM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top