Anyone Got the 7D?

[Eksmaan]

Just picked up the first one in my local camera shop yesterday and it rocks!! Still learning the ins-and-outs of it(will be doing that for a while I hope), but I am loving it! Ayone else have some feedback?

[Sean Setters]

Darnit now, quit teasing me. I just bought another lens in order to do an upcoming wedding. I won't be able to get the 7D for quite some time.

[Maleko]

I only hear good things from reviews about the 7D, personally I won't get one, I'll save that lil bit more for a 5DMKII :)

[Oren]

Seriously Sean, why do you want it so much? It's not *that* attractive if you ask me - the weather sealing is not even a *real* weather sealing (shame on you Canon!!!).

[Maleko]

It's not *that* attractive if you ask me
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>



Have to agree on that, its nothing, AMAZING, if they put a 1.3x sensor on it, then it would be more attractive to me, but its just another 1.6 crop body with a few new bells and whistles.

[Sean Setters]

Seriously Sean, why do you want it so much? It's not *that* attractive if you ask me - the weather sealing is not even a *real* weather sealing (shame on you Canon!!!).
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





It has two things that I really want--movie mode and a pop-up flash commander. Both are very attractive features to me.

[Don Burkett]

I've had it since Monday, this weekend will be the first serious IQ test, but so far it is a very very worthy upgrade from my 40d.


Everyone of it's so called 'bells and whistles' has added value to my shooting experience. In relationship to it's intended class and price point I think it's flat out fantastic. In comparison to the 40d; focus is better, exposure is better, wireless flash works great for my purposes, viewfinder is a dream experience, camera control and flexibility is in another stratosphere, handles and balances better, usable ISO is wider and the list goes on.


The perfect camera doesn't exist at any price so there will be no shortage of people who will wish something was better or some feature was added and I'm certain pixel peepers will target noise at some level simply because it's a 1.6, but I'm a happy camper.

[Tony Printezis]

I've had it since Monday, this weekend will be the first serious IQ test, but so far it is a very very worthy upgrade from my 40d.


Don, thanks for sharing your experience with us. Could I ask for a favor? Any chance of posting some 100% crops of shots taken at narrow apertures (f/10 or narrower)? I'm really curious to see how much diffraction would affect the shots. The very low DLA is the only thing that's making me nervous about buying it.


Thank you,


Tony

[Mark Elberson]

I've had it since Monday, this weekend will be the first serious IQ test, but so far it is a very very worthy upgrade from my 40d.

Don, thanks for sharing your experience with us. Could I ask for a favor? Any chance of posting some 100% crops of shots taken at narrow apertures (f/10 or narrower)? I'm really curious to see how much diffraction would affect the shots. The very low DLA is the only thing that's making me nervous about buying it.


Thank you,


Tony



Check out this thread : Myth busted: smaller pixels have more noise, less dynamic range, worse diffraction, etc. ("/forums/t/1055.aspx?PageIndex=4)




Now my rough calculation of the 7D is that it&rsquo;s DLA is 6.9. Would I be like Bryan and regretted going much past f/8 with the 7D?





If you are happy with *some* improvement, then you will not regret it. Diffraction will never cause the 7D to have *worse* resolution. But in extreme circumstances (e.g. f/22+) it will only be the same, not better. At f/11, the returns will be diminished so that the 7D is only somewhat better. (If you use the special software below, you can get those returns back.) In order to enjoy the full benefit of the additional resolution, one must avoid going past the DLA.

[ShutterbugJohan]

It's not *that* attractive if you ask me
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>







Have to agree on that, its nothing, AMAZING, if they put a 1.3x sensor on it, then it would be more attractive to me, but its just another 1.6 crop body with a few new bells and whistles.





Not everyone likes APS-C SLRs, but they are great for macro and wildlife. I don't see why so many people think that FF sensors are the greatest, when they can buy a digital medium format camera--a "fuller full-frame". [;)]


For what I photograph, the 7D would be nothing less than AMAZING!

[Jon Ruyle]

The very low DLA is the only thing that's making me nervous about buying it.


I'm holding off on getting the 200mm f/2 for the same reason [:)]

[Oren]

Well, 2 big advantages of full frame vs. APS-C sensors if you ask me are:


1. Better bokeh.


2. Bigger viewfinder [:D]

[Don Burkett]

Well, 2 big advantages of full frame vs. APS-C sensors if you ask me are:


1. Better bokeh.


2. Bigger viewfinder /emoticons/emotion-2.gif
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





Then with the introduction of the 7d half of your advantages are no longer issues. [:)]

[Don Burkett]

I've had it since Monday, this weekend will be the first serious IQ test, but so far it is a very very worthy upgrade from my 40d.

Don, thanks for sharing your experience with us. Could I ask for a favor? Any chance of posting some 100% crops of shots taken at narrow apertures (f/10 or narrower)? I'm really curious to see how much diffraction would affect the shots. The very low DLA is the only thing that's making me nervous about buying it.


Thank you,


Tony



Check out this thread : Myth busted: smaller pixels have more noise, less dynamic range, worse diffraction, etc. ("/forums/t/1055.aspx?PageIndex=4)




Now my rough calculation of the 7D is that it&rsquo;s DLA is 6.9. Would I be like Bryan and regretted going much past f/8 with the 7D?





If you are happy with *some* improvement, then you will not regret it. Diffraction will never cause the 7D to have *worse* resolution. But in extreme circumstances (e.g. f/22+) it will only be the same, not better. At f/11, the returns will be diminished so that the 7D is only somewhat better. (If you use the special software below, you can get those returns back.) In order to enjoy the full benefit of the additional resolution, one must avoid going past the DLA.

<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





I'm certain official reviews will start to hit the web pretty soon.


No offense, I don't mind sharing my opinions but I bought the camera to take photos, not psychoanalyze it.

[Sinh Nhut Nguyen]

Saw a guy shooting with a 7D yesterday, I was envious [:D]. But then my lens is bigger than his [:D]. Anyways, I can't wait to see both professional and user reviews of this camera.Three things that really attract me are: 1.6 crops great for what I shoot, 18 megapixels I can crop the heck out of it and assuming better autofocus than my 40D.

[clemmb]

I don't see why so many people think that FF sensors are the greatest, when they can buy a digital medium format camera--a "fuller full-frame". /emoticons/emotion-5.gif






I would love a medium format digital but I can not justify $15,000+.






For what I photograph, the 7D would be nothing less than AMAZING!
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>





All the canon DSLRs are AMAZING.

[ShutterbugJohan]

I don't see why so many people think that FF sensors are the greatest, when they can buy a digital medium format camera--a "fuller full-frame". /emoticons/emotion-5.gif





I would love a medium format digital but I can not justify $15,000+.





I was trying to make a point that different people need different size sensors; the FF 5D Mk II is not a "more serious" camera than the APS-C 7D; they are both serious cameras and are targeted at two totally different types of photographers.










For what I photograph, the 7D would be nothing less than AMAZING!
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





All the canon DSLRs are AMAZING.





I agree; they all have their niche and they fill their role well.

[Oren]

Hmmm Don... the viewfinder in the 7D is 100% coverage but it's not as large as, say, a 5D viewfinder. Am I missing something? It's a APS-C camera, and so the viewfinder's size should match it.

[Tony Printezis]

Stealthily :-), Bryan added comparative shots from the 50D, 7D, 5DmkII etc. to his 7D review page. I have to say, I am not impressed.


Tony

[Mark Elberson]

I'm certain official reviews will start to hit the web pretty soon.


No offense, I don't mind sharing my opinions but I bought the camera to take photos, not psychoanalyze it.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>



The point was that even though the 7D has a lower DLA than other 1.6 FOVCF sensors, it will still resolve more detail. I was hoping to set Tony's mind at ease. I'll leave the analysis to Daniel Browing for he does it better than most, but I have learned a ton from reading his posts and thought I would try to share the knowledge.


Enjoy your 7D. It seems to be an awesome body. If I didn't have a 50D (and a serious craving for a 5D) it would certainly make my wishlist :-)


By the way, I love your macro work so I am very excited to see some examples from your new camera!

[Don Burkett]

Hmmm Don... the viewfinder in the 7D is 100% coverage but it's not as large as, say, a 5D viewfinder. Am I missing something? It's a APS-C camera, and so the viewfinder's size should match it.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





According to Bob Atkins,


The EOS 7D has a 100% 1x optical viewfinder. The 50D has a 95% 0.95x viewfinder and the 5D MkII has a 98% 0.71x viewfinder.


Once you take the mulitplier into account

EOS 7D - 0.62

EOS 50D - 0.56

EOS 5D MkII - 0.7




According to Don Burkett


Based on the numbers it depends how you want to look at it. But I think the viewfinder is big, beautiful and impressive. Can't imagine it getting better.

[Don Burkett]

I'm certain official reviews will start to hit the web pretty soon.


No offense, I don't mind sharing my opinions but I bought the camera to take photos, not psychoanalyze it.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>







The point was that even though the 7D has a lower DLA than other 1.6 FOVCF sensors, it will still resolve more detail. I was hoping to set Tony's mind at ease. I'll leave the analysis to Daniel Browing for he does it better than most, but I have learned a ton from reading his posts and thought I would try to share the knowledge.


Enjoy your 7D. It seems to be an awesome body. If I didn't have a 50D (and a serious craving for a 5D) it would certainly make my wishlist :-)


By the way, I love your macro work so I am very excited to see some examples from your new camera!
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





Truly I hope no offense was taken. When my skills get so refined that I can out execute a camera's performance I'll probably develop a different mindset. In the meantime I limit my valuation of simple things: Does it have features that improve the quality of my experience, and is it's performance refined at a high enough level that I believe I'm getting value from the dollar spent. I normally wait for thorough reviews to help my decision and while I took this one on faith, so far am not disappointed. Thanks for the nice comments on my macros but also note, you'll rarely see max IQ in my shots, because I use filters on everything, including the macros lenses.

[Oren]

Don - no, I don't take it into account. I was talking on the physical size.

[DavidEccleston]

Stealthily :-), Bryan added comparative shots from the 50D, 7D, 5DmkII etc. to his 7D review page. I have to say, I am not impressed.


Tony






Really? I didn't think it was too bad. I tested by running across the top T1i line, which shows both a 5DmkII and 7D border, allowing some comparison across bodies. To my eye it looks like at ISO 100-1600, the 7D is roughly 1 stop noisier than the 5DmkII, and at 3200-12800, it's identical. Considering how much people complain about how much extra noise there will be because it's a crop sensor packing in so many pixels, I didn't think it was that bad. It's 1 stop more noise than Canon's best performing DSLR. It's also 1 stop cheaper in price for the body, and the 1.6x crop can make the long range telephoto lenses a stop or two cheaper in price too.

[Fast Glass]

Considering how much people complain about how much extra noise there will be because it's a crop sensor packing in so many pixels


Read Daniel Browning's Myth Busted thread.

[Don Burkett]

Don - no, I don't take it into account. I was talking on the physical size.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





Then, I truly think you would be very happy with the 7d viewfinder.

[DavidEccleston]

Considering how much people complain about how much extra noise there will be because it's a crop sensor packing in so many pixels


Read Daniel Browning's Myth Busted thread.






I have. It doesn't say you won't ever see more noise with more pixels/inch. His post says that if you take a high megapixel image and resize to a lower MP count, your image will be just as good, if not better than the camera that had the lower MP sensor to begin with. On the other hand, if you don't resize, but look at a 100% crop, you WILL see more noise.


You can take advantage of the extra resolution and crop more at low ISOs. At higher ISOs you'll want to resize to a lower megapixel count, losing the extra resolution, along with the noise.

[Fast Glass]

It's not about resizing, it's about smaller pixels having more noise than larger one, they don't. The larger SENSOR has better noise. Thats why 1.6 crop camerashave worst noisefor the same framing. If you were taking a picture of a bird, and you were staying at a fixed location, you won't have any benifit from a full-frame camera. But if you creapt up more and maintained your framing, you will benifit from the full-frame camera.Because the35mm sensoris gathering more light for the image size than the 1.6 camera, among other things.Think of pixel wells as little dividers, putting more or less dividers won't increase noise.

[Eksmaan]

Gotta agree with Don. I love this camera! It is so very simple to use, and FEELS nice in my hand. I am as green as they come in digital photography, and make people jealous when I tell them what's in my kit bag(I was saving for a Ducati 848 and decided I shouldn't buy it). I went with the T1I then sold it when I found out the 7D was coming out. My friend is saving for the 5d MK2. She's a professional photographer.


At this stage in my experimenting with my new toys, I can see growing into this camera for a very long time. Don't see the absolute need or want for a full frame camera. When I do, maybe I'll get one. But man, the 7D seems to have more than what I need or want for that matter!





Whatever you have, enjoy it! Have fun!!

[Chuck Lee]

At this stage in my experimenting with my new toys, I can see growing into this camera for a very long time


You have until Oct 2, 2010........[:D] LOL That's what I said when I bought my first of seven DSLR'sfour years ago!!

[DavidEccleston]

Think of pixel wells as little dividers, putting more or less dividers won't increase noise.


From how I read the noise myth post, you will see increased noise, on a 100% crop, and not on a resize. I shall demonstrate my interpretation of that thread will little number buckets.


Lets say we have two sensors, the first 2x2 pixels, and the second 4 times the resolution, 4x4 pixels, in the same physical space. We've somehow convinced the photons to behave identically twice. The photons land such that each of the larger pixels, on the low res sensor, receive 8 units of light.


8 8
8 8


However, the light isn't really evenly distrubuted, and the smaller pixels, on the higher res sensor, show that. I've added some spacing to emphasis the where the original pixels were. Assume they're all nice and evenly spaced physically.


3 2 2 1
1 2 1 4

2 3 3 1
3 0 1 3


Each 2x2 block adds up to the same 8 photons that hit the same sensor area. While the total photon count is identical, to account for the lesser number of photons going to hit each pixel of the sensor, we need these values multiplied by 4 before being store in the JPEG.





12 08 08 04
04 08 04 16

08 12 12 04
12 00 04 12
<div>With such a small number of photons (low light, high ISO), the noise is quite apparent. A resize of the 4x4 image into a 2x2 image would smooth back to 8, effectively blending out the noise. The myth busting is essentially if you're against the 7D because 18MP will be noisier than the 10MP on your 40D, you're silly. You can resize to 10MP and it will look the same. In good light you won't see the noise, and you can take advantage of the extra resolution and crop, if you'd like.</div>



I could be wrong in how I'm interpreting the noise myth post. My interpretation still shows the noise being a mythical reason to avoid higher density sensors. It works out mathematically. It also shows that 100% there will be extra noise.

[Daniel Browning]

Good explanation, David. I would add that there are parts of this that are objective, and parts that are subjective. Your post was about the objective parts:

18mp will have more noise per pixel than 10mp
18mp downsized to 10mp will have the same noise per pixel as 10mp.



The subjective parts are about what the impact of "more noise per pixel" is:

For some people (e.g. me), having more noise per pixel still looks like the "same" noise, because the noise is at a level of detail smaller than the 10mp camera. This is subjective, though, because some people see the higher noise per pixel as worse than 10mp, even though it is at a much smaller level.
Downsampling from 18mp to 10mp is one way to deal with the noise, but it's far better to use software noise reduction, which can use the higher resolution to great advantage. But NR is a whole realm of subjectivity.



So it's possible that Fast Glass is just talking about one of the subjective things. For example, I think it's OK to say that 18mp does not have "more" noise than 10mp, even though it does have more noise per pixel, because the way I see it, the "noise per detail" is still the same (even *without* downsampling or NR). But I recognize that it's only my personal impression from viewing images, and others see it differently.


FWIW.

[Jon Ruyle]

The myth busting is essentially if you're against the 7D because 18MP will be noisier than the 10MP on your 40D, you're silly.


That's it in a nutshell. You've condensed a 50+ post thread into one line :)

[Oren]

Don, is the 7D viewfinder bigger (physically)? Of course it's a bit bigger since it's 100% coverage and 1x magnification, but is it much much bigger? It doesn't make sense to me since the sensor is still an APS-C sensor. Anyhow, I'd love to have a 7D of course, what I was saying is that it's not *that* appealing to me and doesn't worth the extra $700 - I'd put that toward a new lens and other gear.

[alex]

I just wanna jump in here and say that, while I am waiting for Bryan's review on this beasty, my initial thoughts and feelings are that if I had the money to burn, I would sell my XSi and get the 7D sooner than I could even finish typing this sente....


Do I have it in my hands yet? Alas, no. It was a dream.

[Don Burkett]

I have put up some images of the 7D. Various ISO's, Crops, Lighting Challenges, etc.


I'm not trying to demonstrate any point, just sharing if you want to view them. [View:http://www.pbase.com/dbrasco/canon_7d]


http://www.pbase.com/dbrasco/image/117873111/large.jpg

[EdN]

Don


The images are great and the image quality looks really good too. How do you like the AF system? Have you had a chance to see how it tracks moving objects yet?

[Don Burkett]

Thanks, for the comments. The autofocus is superior to what I'm used to with the 40d. At the same time, I don't use autofocus all that often though I had no trouble tracking some sea gulls the other day. I am really pleased with the exposure handling.

[Fast Glass]

Can we see those see gull pictures? Im an all out bird nut and would love see some of your work. BTW all my wildelife shots thatwere takenin less than a month because my XTI broke. So my next body upgrade is probably going too be the 7D!

[Don Burkett]

I have put up a few more samples of the 7D if you're interested. Personally, I still like the camera. [View:http://www.pbase.com/dbrasco/canon_7d]

[Fast Glass]

I have put up a few more samples of the 7D if you're interested.





Very much so. Thanks! Looks great, I especially like the ones with the house in the background. Wait till I get a 7D and my Minolta 600mm, then were talking bird photography!

[muc1]

Hello all,


This is a day of firsts for me, it's my first post on this site and my first contact with anyone elseon these threads. Also I need infomation on my first Dlsr camera, this is a tad embarrassingreally admitting this but I'm having a difficult time loading images from my camera to my computer, this is a first as well. Up to now I've had three Canon P+S cameras and they have all been very easy to load images but for some reason I cannot find the true path for a transfer of my Images.


The reason I'm chatting and asking here is that I bought a 7d and someone possed the Question here 'doesanybody owna 7D?'I would like to ask one of the other owners if they could assist me, I've had this camera for a week and my memorycard is starting to fill.


If this is the wrongthread for this kind of Question please direct me to the right place.


Thanks, muc1

[Don Burkett]

You might need to explain your issue in more detail for us to help.


But, assuming your plugging your camera into a USB port and are using the EOS utility to transfer them to the computer, the default path is to a folder with the shot date in the format of 2009_10_09 and that folder is filed in your My Documents\My Pictures.


You can also use the windows search function under the Start button. Select 'All files and folders', enter *.CR2 as the file name. That will find all the RAW files from your 7d. If your shooting JPGs then just use *.jpg instead.

[richm]

So now I've had my 7d for a little over a week. I sold my 40d to get this camera, and so far so good.


I'll leave the scientific explanations to Bryan, as I'm anxiously waiting his full review.


But here are some unscientific observations so far (if anyone cares and in no particular order):

Higher ISO images appear to be better than with the 40d, but only slightly
I under-estimated some of the learning curve with the differences
between the 40d and 7d. I think it is just getting to used to the
subtle differences, particularly focus options, metering options, etc.
The controls are all exactly as expected, but every camera, or lens,
takes a little while to get used to what it can do.
The Quick Control Screen is a nice feature I didn't expect to like
The Micro AF Adjustment is fantastic, as my 70-200 2.8 IS consistently had a very slight front focus with my 40d and with the 7d. I already "adjusted" that away and it has made an amazing difference. It was very easy to determine the best setting (+5). This was a feature for which I had been tempted to move from the 40d to the 50d, and it was an important factor in my decision to buy the 7d.

The RAW/Jpeg feature will be handy. I'd had a few occasions where I wanted to switch from jpeg to raw, but didn't have the time or I'd miss the shot.
As expected 18mp allows for greater cropping, but I didn't realize how much of a difference that could make - more valuable than expected
I didn't expect the 100% viewfinder to make much of a difference, but find I appreciate seeing the edges when composing.

The camera feels noticeably more solid, yet only slightly heavier.



I haven't yet taken any video - that will give away that I purchased a new camera, and I'm hoping the "finance department" will miss it. If I start showing videos I'm all done ;-) That will have to wait a couple of weeks until she is off on a girls weekend. But I didn't really buy this camera for video, so.....


In order to get the camera, I ended up buying it with the 18-135 as a kit. The lens is for sale as it won't replace my 24-105, and next on my list is the 10-22 anyways.


Rich

[Don Burkett]

I'm mostly a floral and macro guy so birds are out of my element. At the same time, there's been so much discussion regarding the autofocus on this camera I took a whack at it last evening. Here's a couple of examples for your consideration. I know these are not top quality, I just don't shoot birds enough to have the exposure, dof, shutter speed and focal point down pat, but the hit rate was high enough to keep me content. I'll leave it to the pure BIF photographers be the judge on hit rates and this camera's worthiness in that arena. BTW, these shots range from ISO 1600 to ISO 400. I'm sure you'll be able to tell from the noise levels which is which. Hope you enjoy.



http://www.pbase.com/dbrasco/image/118196135/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/dbrasco/image/118196138/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/dbrasco/image/118196136/original.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/dbrasco/image/118196133/large.jpg

[muc1]

Hello Don,


Nice photos, what kind of bird is that?


Thanks for the advise the other day sorry haven'treplied back earlier, still have troubles with the loading of images but is not the camera it's the computer, appears there's a bug roaming around in there somewhere.


I took the camera to another computer to load the first batch of pickies, No problems. I have to say I like what this thing can do if I can just hold the camera steady I'll be OK.


Will attach some of the results when I figure out how.


muc1

[muc1]

Hello,


Photos from my 7D,


100m 2.8 usm macro.





/resized-image.ashx/__size/800x550/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.11/Picture-006-copy.jpg





/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.11/Picture-024-copy.jpg





/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.11/Picture-045-copy.jpg





muc1

[Alan]

Nice photos, what kind of bird is that?








They are Canadian geese. We call them "sky rats" in my part of the country. [;)]

[Chuck Lee]

Photos from my 7D,


100m 2.8 usm macro.



Wow...I'd love to see 100% crops from these. According to these reductions the prints would look killer. Very Nice.


Love the big Iris..... Were does it grow? Gotta be southern hemisphere. Spring in New Zealand? Looks like flower shots of my mom's flower garden in the spring here in the US.

[Fouad]

Great shots, muc1.

[Chuck Lee]

They are Canadian geese


Sorry Alan,


They are "Canada Geese". I use todo odd jobson the sidewith afriend who works for the VA Game and Inland Fisheries. He was very "matter of fact" about the name. we have lot's of Canada Geese in Virginia. They love to poop on the golf course greens.....[:D]


Nice photos.... I can't tell which are ISO 1600.

[Alan]

Sorry Alan,


They are "Canada Geese".
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





Picky, picky, picky....


You're right, but they are still sky rats....

[Don Burkett]

Once they were a worthy bird. The government decided to protect them and now they are vile pests. The first shot was ISO 1600, second and fourth ISO 400, third ISO 800

[Chuck Lee]

now they are vile pests


Nice shots Don.


I'd rather they be running around the golf course than 13 inch barn rats!!


But your right, there are one too many. [;)]

[muc1]

Hello Don and the others,


Flying Rats eh! We don't see many of them around here, We have giant jumping rats.


Thanks for the nice C's on my pickies, Regretfully I don't have any bird shots with this camera as yet, with my other one yes, but thats a P+S and this is a DSLR site so I won't show them even though they came out Ok.


The Bearded Iris are in full bloom all over town at the moment, it's Spring here so there's no shortage of flowers and insects which is what I usually like to shoot seeingthey don't move around to much.


Some more from the same batch all taken with the 100m macro it's the only lens I have at the moment for the 7D which suits me fine.


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.11/Picture-036-copy.jpg


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.11/Picture-005-copy.jpg


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.11/IMG_5F00_0004-copy.jpg


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.11/Picture-017-copy.jpg





muc1.

[Chuck Lee]

it's Spring here


Ahhh... "The Land Down Under" I should've checked your Bio.


Beautiful "pickies" mate. Nice soft, subtle light on #1


You'll have to buy all primes. There's no zoom that will satisfy you now.

[Don Burkett]

Not all my close up photograghy is done with a macro lens. This was with the 70-200 f/4 and a 20mm extenstion tube. The particulars were ISO 400 f/10 2 sec, full frame. The shrooms are 2"tall and it reminded me of a family, with mom,dad and 2 kids. Hope you enjoy.


Larger version is here: [View:http://www.pbase.com/dbrasco/image/118191891/original]


http://www.pbase.com/dbrasco/image/118191891/large.jpg

[muc1]

Hello Don and Chuck,


Nice family photo Don, I have a fair idea what lenses I want for this camera just have to wait a while, had to smash the piggy to buy this camera and lens, the 50m f1.4 and 70-200m 2.8 is are hopefully next but not till early next year. There are so many bits and pieces to purchase along the way, flash, tripod, battery grip,never ending story.


Chuck, the soft lighting was an overcast sky, much different to the second Iris in full Aussie harsh morning sunlight. Thanks fo your kind comments and I agree with you on Lens, after looking at some of the work done here bythe other artists I already want a zoom...alas not for awhile, The macro will keep me occupied until then,it's a nice lens, I like the small stuff.


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.11/Picture-055-copy.jpg





/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.11/Picture-040-copy.jpg





/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.11/Picture-066-copy.jpg





marc.

[Don Burkett]

Marc, you're off to a great start with that macro lens. Nice Shots. Maybe one tip on the bee shots is to not lead into the photo with such a strong OOF area. It tends to grab and hold the eye. It's a matter of personal choice and I like the shots either way. But, if you want to try something different remember your DOF is 1/3 in front and 2/3 behind, so you can focus a little bit in front of the bee's eye and still keep it sharp. Another way is to change the angle of the shot and have the sensor more in line with or even parallel to the bee. Again, I like the shots, the detail and lighting is great, my nit is mostly a matter of personal preference.

[nrdavis]

Alright, you guys seem to be a wealth of knowledge on this topic, so at the risk of going off on a tangent, I have a question.


If I shoot 10MP Medium RAW images with my EOS 7D, is the camera only recording what hits (roughly) every other pixel, or is the camera taking an 18MP image and then using its computing power to downsize that image to a 10MP file?


I am curious if I would see improved OR worsened noise performance at say (10MP RAW and ISO3200) than at (18MP RAW and ISO3200 downsized to 10MP in photoshop post-processing). Or if the noise would be the same, it would save me a lot of time (and hard drive space in post-processing)


I primarily shoot weddings and I don't have a lot of need for 18MP images from most of the reception. Not a lot of wedding guests order 20"x30" prints of themselves dancing at a reception. So, if I could back the camera down to 10MP I could save a lot of card space.

[Daniel Browning]

If I shoot 10MP Medium RAW images with my EOS 7D, is the camera only recording what hits (roughly) every other pixel,or is the camera taking an 18MP image and then using its computing power to downsize that image to a 10MP file?


The latter. On previous cameras they did the full, normal demosaic process (using all pixels), then downsampled to the lower resolution (still using all pixels). I would guess they are doing the same on the 7D.



I am curious if I would see improved OR worsened noise performance at say (10MP RAW and ISO3200) than at (18MP RAW and ISO3200 downsized to 10MP in photoshop post-processing). Or if the noise would be the same, it would save me a lot of time (and hard drive space in post-processing)


With downsampling, the noise can never be better, but with the ideal downsampling filter, the noise will be the same. Many slightly imperfect filters, like all the ones Canon had before, increase the noise slightly. It also causes an increase in aliasing.


However, downsampling isn't the only option. It would be possible for Canon to use on-sensor binning (connecting multiple pixels together electronically), and that would theoretically reduce read noise (shadow noise). However, it may require additional transistors on the pixel, and they would have to solve some other difficult problems such as aliasing (much worse than aliasing from downsampling).


Most people find sRAW to be perfectly acceptable, I think you will too.

[vitomalpi]

I just got my 7D !!!! it's replacing my 40D but before i get rid of it i will shoot a few pics with both cameras to compare pictures for those who are wondering.... will try posting tonight...

[Keith B]

I just got my 7D and maybe now I'm disappointed in my 5DmkII.


The build quality is soooo much better. I noticed right out of the box. The battery door, the CF card door are spring loaded. The 5D feels very fragile. I was a little concerned about all the extra buttons going on but I get use to it. I probably won't be disappointed that the 5D doesn't have them. I like the idea of the 5D being simple I just wish the build quality was similar. I haven't played around enough to see how accurate the AF is but I can tell it is the fastest I've seen (I have no 1D experience).