7D mark II

[sedwards]

i dont mind sending it in for service but i cant understand having just spent $2100 and then have to spend a couple of weeks without a camera. i dont know how canon service is but every other company i have dealt with in canada is horrible for wait times. i read on another forum that canon is working on a firmware upgrade that should help so i will wait a while and see if that helps. in the mean time i find 80% to be pretty good as its the best i have ever got from a camera .

[HDNitehawk]

If you had read the posts from the source of that rumor, you would discount its credibility. The same poster said he sent the camera to Canon and they have had it for five weeks. That they didn't even know how to work on it when it arrived. Instead of fixing it they told him there was a firmware update coming. The rumor didn't come from Canon to the public, but through a service tech that doesn't know how to fix a camera to a customer that hasn't had his camera in five weeks.
He is in Europe not North America.

You may be waiting for a while. There are many people who have had their bodies serviced and now perform as they should. Others are saying their body is performing flawlessly. To me that doesn't indicate firmware.

[sedwards]

well i have really been trying hard to figure out if its me or the camera and unfortunately , i think its me lol. i cant figure out what i was doing wrong before but now i am getting consistently sharp images . even at quite low shutter speeds with little light. my bird setup at home only has sun in the morning so to test i went out tonight even though its quite dim after supper. here is a dark eyed junco . not a great image but it shows how sharp it can be and at only 1/80 shutter speed.
out of around 50 shots some werent in focus but i could easily tell it was motion blur or me that didnt have the focus point in the right spot.
7dmarkII
400mm@f5.6
iso 800
1/80
+1 stop exposure compensation
0V8A2998-Edit by sedwards679, on Flickr

[jrw]

Nothing quite like the double edge of reassurance that the equipment is fine served alongside the realization that the issue is the operator. On the bright side you will be able to track your ongoing improvements in technique! It happens to everyone at some point with new equipment, especially long lenses. They are in a league of their own for revealing the errors of our ways.
Glad that you are getting things worked out.

[Busted Knuckles]

How much coffee

[Joel Eade]

I am becoming more familiar with the 7D MKII and processing it's images so today I gave a trial at higher ISO settings because it was cloudy and the back yard is now shaded by the trees. I set up in TV mode with +1/3 EC using a shutter speed of 1/500 sec and f/4.5 I set ISO to auto and for this image the camera chose ISO 5000.
To be sure there is noise but using DPP and Topaz DeNoise it is very manageable without extreme settings and the detail seemed to hold up pretty good. Any opinions or experiences on using high ISO with 7D MKII?

[sedwards]

i havent tried any higher than iso 1600 yet. i moved my bird feeder to a spot that has sun only in the morning so it will be a good place to try higher iso tomorrow after work. that jay looks very good for iso 5000 .

[Jayson]

(Asking a more generic question here) Why do I see this "I don't want to send it in" fear/paranoia so often? I recognize that sometimes the manufacturer will declare a unit OK when it actually isn't, but wouldn't you rather the peace of mind to know that the people who built it have checked it, and either declared it good (for the cost of shipping and perhaps a modest bench fee), fixed it under warranty (for the cost of shipping), or offered to fix issues not covered by warranty (out of warranty or out of scope, for a modest repair fee plus shipping)?

I know for me when I initially was looking at sending something in was I am going to be without a camera for 2 weeks and there was always something going on at that time. I could live with the ratio for the time I was looking. I did eventually send it in, but not until I knew that I had two weeks without the need for the photography. Mine was rebel some time ago and it was just needed MA. If it was another body that had a significant flaw and I had a backup camera, I think it would have been easier to send it in. Majority of time, if you call Canon first...they will provide you with a shipping label if your camera or lens is under warranty. At least that is what they use to do.

[sedwards]

well here are a few shots i took early this morning and later in the evening with gradually higher iso settings. i downloaded a free trial of topaz denoise but i only used the preset for light raw because i have no idea how to use it. it did clean up some of the noise better than i can in lightroom .
these were all shot with 7DII and 400f 5.6 lens at f5.6

1/500 iso 2000 + 1-1/3 exp compensation


0V8A3854-Edit by sedwards679, on Flickr

1/500 iso 2500 + 1 exp compensation

0V8A3868-Edit-3 by sedwards679, on Flickr

1/500 iso3200

0V8A3835-Edit2 by sedwards679, on Flickr

1/200 iso6400 +1 exp compensation

0V8A3931-Edit by sedwards679, on Flickr

there is still a good amount of noise in the last shot but the light level was quite low

[HDNitehawk]

To be sure there is noise but using DPP and Topaz DeNoise it is very manageable without extreme settings and the detail seemed to hold up pretty good. Any opinions or experiences on using high ISO with 7D MKII?

Joel,

What I have noticed is that at higher ISO's the 7D II has performed better than past versions. In certain situations that might be a benefit.

But I have also noticed that my acceptable limit for noise in a picture hasn't went up with this body. I imagine with your work you have a certain standard that you are looking for when you finish PP, looking at your work over the last few years I believe you have a high standard. I know with the standard I set for myself the ISO performance didn't really improve that much.

But then there is always the exception even with noise. I do not think this one would have held up with some of the other older bodies. I just like this one regardless if its not that great;

Only PP was done in LR, 1/60 / ISO 6400 / F4CQ2A0915 by hdnitehawk01, on Flickr