# CANON 7D realesed!!!



## rom4n301 (Sep 1, 2009)

Canon EOS 7D Digital SLR

OMG HOLY ****ING **** 18 mega pic.. 8fps...
only 1700?
WAT THE ****!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.. ima have to get htis


----------



## mrs.hutch (Sep 1, 2009)

ya and while you're buying one for yourself how about you pick me one up while you're out


----------



## rom4n301 (Sep 1, 2009)

lol.. nah.. that ok


----------



## Restomage (Sep 1, 2009)

Come on Nikon!!


----------



## Mark Saint (Sep 1, 2009)

ahhhhhh......... :meh:


----------



## rom4n301 (Sep 1, 2009)

nnnaaahhh.... canon is were its at.. nikon is overpriced/over rated.. personally i dont really like any of their stuff besides thier old film cams.. the all manual ones


----------



## photo28 (Sep 1, 2009)

Love the title :lmao: :thumbup:


----------



## Josh220 (Sep 1, 2009)

rom4n301 said:


> nnnaaahhh.... canon is were its at.. nikon is overpriced/over rated.. personally i dont really like any of their stuff besides thier old film cams.. the all manual ones



Easy there buddy. I know that hard on has you thinking unclearly.  The only area Canon surpasses Nikon is for architecture since they have more tilt-shift lenses available


----------



## JamesMason (Sep 1, 2009)

Gave me an instant flop


----------



## musicaleCA (Sep 1, 2009)

Josh220 said:


> rom4n301 said:
> 
> 
> > nnnaaahhh.... canon is were its at.. nikon is overpriced/over rated.. personally i dont really like any of their stuff besides thier old film cams.. the all manual ones
> ...



And they have lenses with red lines on them, and depending on which manufacturer's leading and what you ate for lunch that day, one pro-body or the other is going to have better signal-to-noise ratios at higher ISOs. Big whoop. Let this not turn into a Canon vs. Nikon thread.

Anyway, looking at those specs, I want. Kinda set on this as my next body now. Heck, the max flash sync speed is 1/250. The 5D MkII only syncs up to 1/200. Funky.


----------



## Overread (Sep 1, 2009)

I'm still on the fence about this one. The 50D didn't wow us with high ISO performance, infact its ISO performance was about the same as the 40Ds - now we have another increase in MP to 18 on teh same sensor size. I really REALLY hope that canon have pulled the stops out for noise control, without leading to softer end resulting images. If they have then its all good  If not then meh ...


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Sep 1, 2009)

rom4n301 said:


> Canon EOS 7D Digital SLR
> 
> OMG HOLY ****ING **** 18 mega pic.. 8fps...
> only 1700?
> WAT THE ****!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.. ima have to get htis



I shoot a D700 and i'm stoked for Canon shooters, finally something they can _REALLY _sink their teeth into..

But honestly, this is what the 50D SHOULD have been in the first place. It really shouldn't have taken Canon this long to get pro-level AF/weather sealing/wireless flash commander/8fps into a camera this cheap. Nikon first did it with the D200(sans the 8fps), then they settled it in the D300..

Now if Nikon just got better video and newer midrange primes, then we'd be set too. I envy Canon's video and some of their exotic fast midrange L primes. 


That's for damn sure..


----------



## WTF? (Sep 1, 2009)

they definitely should have just put those specs into the 50D, why did they put all that into a body of an entry lever dslr? come on, no top lcd? whats the go? 
i just dont understand where this camera is targeted, pro-end specs in what looks like a pretty low end body. if your getting a camera with manly specs you want a big rugged body to demonstrate the manliness of your purchase. and im only half joking.


----------



## FrankLamont (Sep 1, 2009)

Sample pictures now available on DPReview. Ultra high ISO is terrible.


----------



## max3k (Sep 1, 2009)

mmmm nice


----------



## itznfb (Sep 1, 2009)

WTF? said:


> they definitely should have just put those specs into the 50D, why did they put all that into a body of an entry lever dslr? come on, no top lcd? whats the go?
> i just dont understand where this camera is targeted, pro-end specs in what looks like a pretty low end body. if your getting a camera with manly specs you want a big rugged body to demonstrate the manliness of your purchase. and im only half joking.



There is a top LCD
http://a.img-dpreview.com/news/0909/Canon7d/13_eur.jpg

It's about time Canon enter the Prosumer market. Looks like a great rival for the D300s as long as it can hold its own with that ridiculous megapixel rating.


----------



## Overread (Sep 1, 2009)

itznfb said:


> There is a top LCD
> It's about time Canon enter the Prosumer market. Looks like a great rival for the D300s as long as it can hold its own with that ridiculous megapixel rating.



Ok I'm sold now - I want it! 
but only... only after I see its ISO and fine detail capture performance. I just hope that in the quest for more and more MP canon has not nerfed the fine details in a bid for higher ISOs -


----------



## Village Idiot (Sep 1, 2009)

Sw1tchFX said:


> rom4n301 said:
> 
> 
> > Canon EOS 7D Digital SLR
> ...


 
What? The 5D MKII is Canon's best value. This camera sucks donkey do-hicky. APS-C with 18MP? OK, let's all never shoot above ISO 400 like the first Nikon shooter did.


----------



## Overread (Sep 1, 2009)

Village Idiot said:


> What? The 5D MKII is Canon's best value. This camera sucks donkey do-hicky. APS-C with 18MP? OK, let's all never shoot above ISO 400 like the first Nikon shooter did.



I'll save the review on this till there is a lot more data out on the ISO capabilities. But I do expect a good usable ISO 800 without massive loss to fine details in noise reduction. If its usabiltiy caps at 400 its hardly doing much better than my 400D


----------



## inTempus (Sep 1, 2009)

The WFT-E5A sounds interesting to me!


----------



## inTempus (Sep 1, 2009)

I must own this.


----------



## Overread (Sep 1, 2009)

hehe I I were you I would wait for the 1DM4  The shiny addons to the 7D look good - its just the ISO performance which is in question for me - but the 1DM4 would blow it out of the water (at leastit should!)


----------



## Jaszek (Sep 1, 2009)

Now I can get the 40D for even cheaper


----------



## Big Mike (Sep 1, 2009)

I assume that it has the same micro focus adjustment that the 50D has...but I can't find it in the specs.  :scratch:


----------



## NateWagner (Sep 1, 2009)

yeah, I would assume it has that same micro adjustment but you're right I didn't see it anywhere on the preview at dpreview. 

From what I saw that 1600 and 3200 and perhaps even the 6400 looked perfectly usable as long as a bit of noiseware was done. I want my next body to be full frame, but this does look pretty good to me. 

Canon has had a wireless grip for the 40d,50d (and probably the 5d can't remember) for a while, but they tend to have a pretty high price (last I checked they were in the $900 range)


----------



## inTempus (Sep 1, 2009)

Overread said:


> hehe I I were you I would wait for the 1DM4  The shiny addons to the 7D look good - its just the ISO performance which is in question for me - but the 1DM4 would blow it out of the water (at leastit should!)


I... can't... wait.  

I might wait, I probably should.  You're right.  But man, this thing looks amazing to me for what I would want it for... to replace my sorely missed 50D.  The new features, for me ROCK.  I don't care about the ISO performance at 6400 and beyond... I have a 5DMk2 for that.  I want the 8fps, horizon level, 19 AF points, the improved 63 zone metering, and the wireless transmitter.  I would take this little guy everywhere with me.


----------



## Dao (Sep 1, 2009)

Big Mike said:


> I assume that it has the same micro focus adjustment that the 50D has...but I can't find it in the specs.  :scratch:




Here

Under ..

AF microadjust:
 +/- 20 steps
                   Adjust all lenses by same amount/individually adjust up to 20 lenses


----------



## Jaszek (Sep 1, 2009)

Why can't all Canon products be 1/5th the price there are now? lol


----------



## Big Mike (Sep 1, 2009)

I also haven't seen anything about the wireless flash control anywhere on the Canon site.  I would think that would be a big 'new' feature to brag about. (unless they didn't want to point out that Nikon been doing that for years and they are finally catching up).  I saw it mentioned (but not elaborated) at Dpreview but not at Canon.

I found thiat at Dpreview...


> The Canon EOS 7D is equipped with an Integrated Speedlite Transmitter.  For the first time in an EOS, photographers can control external Speedlites with no additional accessories - ideal for those looking to experiment with creative lighting set-ups.  The EOS 7D also features an extensively upgraded, built-in flash including manual control, and wider flash coverage to cover focal lengths as wide as 15mm.


----------



## Jaszek (Sep 1, 2009)

I would like to give a hand of applause for Canon for finally giving us something new


----------



## Village Idiot (Sep 1, 2009)

But 18MP? APS-C? WTF?!?!?


----------



## Josh220 (Sep 1, 2009)

Village Idiot said:


> But 18MP? APS-C? WTF?!?!?



99% of the people who buy it will never need the 18MP. People who are freaking out about 18MP are the ones who fall into the marketing ploys that more MP = better camera.


----------



## inTempus (Sep 1, 2009)

Village Idiot said:


> But 18MP? APS-C? WTF?!?!?


I was hoping for 21mp, but I'll settle for 18.  Isn't it great?  3 more megapixels than the 50D!!!  This thing rocks!  

[/sarcasm]


----------



## photo28 (Sep 1, 2009)

Won't have the money for this toy in a while.


----------



## rom4n301 (Sep 1, 2009)

Village Idiot said:


> But 18MP? APS-C? WTF?!?!?


yea.. its a shame.. wonder why they didnt just throw in that full frame censor while they were at it haha...


----------



## icassell (Sep 1, 2009)

Well, I guess this one is my next buy ... I sorta wish they had weather-resisted it, but oh well ...  I wonder what the street price will be (MSRP is $1699) and when we'll actually be able to get them.


----------



## SanDiegoPhotographer (Sep 1, 2009)

wow...its about time canon comes out with a camera like this...they should have made the 50D like this


----------



## icassell (Sep 1, 2009)

B&H kit price with 28-135mm IS is $1899.95 .... no price yet on body only ...


----------



## Overread (Sep 1, 2009)




----------



## icassell (Sep 1, 2009)

Canon launches 15-85mm and 18-135mm EF-S lenses: Digital Photography Review



Canon EF 100mm F2.8L USM Macro with Hybrid IS: Digital Photography Review

I wonder if the B&H site is an error ... I wonder if it will be boxed with the new 18-135 ...


----------



## Montana (Sep 1, 2009)

This may just be a nice replacement for my 40D.  I like the specs.  for those that are pissed its not full frame, you have other options.  Some people like the crop sensor. I happen to like both.  I find crop very useful for wildlife and sports, and for a cheaper body to throw under the seat of the pickup just in case.  I anxiously await further reviews....


----------



## itznfb (Sep 1, 2009)

icassell said:


> B&H kit price with 28-135mm IS is $1899.95 .... no price yet on body only ...



It's been on amazon since midnight for $1699.99

edit: They must have gotten yelled at. They just took the prices down.


----------



## camz (Sep 1, 2009)

Great thread! I've been wanting to up my 20D since it's going to be my daughter's soon.  I have to say I like this one the most out of all the XXD series since the 20D was released.


----------



## Village Idiot (Sep 1, 2009)

But 18MP APS-C....


----------



## icassell (Sep 1, 2009)

Village Idiot said:


> But 18MP APS-C....



Well, if you read the canon info and the dp review, canon has a new sensor design that they think allows this.  I'm going to give it a chance and see what how it really performs, rather than blowing it off.  I'm a child of the vacuum tube era -- who would have thought you could have a super computer on a tiny little chip?


----------



## Village Idiot (Sep 1, 2009)

18 mp....aps-c...


----------



## icassell (Sep 1, 2009)

Village Idiot said:


> 18 mp....aps-c...



Now, now ... there were many large-format users who poo-pooed (and those that still do) 35mm film (what many hold up as the 'gold standard' sensor size) when that came out ... and many pros showed how good it could be (and I have seen incredible images taken with smaller format than that).  Why is full-frame 35 such a technological limit in your eyes?


----------



## Big Mike (Sep 1, 2009)

> Well, I guess this one is my next buy ... I sorta wish they had weather-resisted it, but oh well



sounds like they did....


> Impressive Design
> Canon has listened to photographer feedback when designing the body, as well as the internal technologies.  A magnesium alloy body offers environmental protection &#8211; the tough, lightweight construction is designed to defend against moisture, and dust &#8211; equivalent to the legendary EOS&#8211;1N.


----------



## astrostu (Sep 1, 2009)

I'm not happy that it won't ship until the end of September ... that misses the wedding I'm doing in 3 weeks and my trip to Flagstaff in 4.  Grr.


----------



## Village Idiot (Sep 1, 2009)

icassell said:


> Village Idiot said:
> 
> 
> > 18 mp....aps-c...
> ...


 
It's not, it's the amount of pixels crammed into that area. Until I see proof that I can get usable, although noisy, 1600 ISO shots then I will remain skeptical. They did fit 21mp into a FF sensor with amazing results, but still the pixel density is no where near that of an 18mp 1.6x APS-C sensor.


----------



## rufus5150 (Sep 1, 2009)

> sounds like they did....



Mike, you are totally going overboard with this 'reading' thing. Scary, man. Very scary.


----------



## icassell (Sep 1, 2009)

Village Idiot said:


> icassell said:
> 
> 
> > Village Idiot said:
> ...




Or silver grains packed into a 35mm frame ...


----------



## blash (Sep 1, 2009)

Even if they improved the high ISO performance over the 50D, the 50D was 15 MP and bad at high ISOs. So instead of the 7D being terrible at high ISO's, it sounds like it's only going to be bad... but I'll reserve final judgement until I see some final pictures from a production copy.

Once you take that 18 MP out of the picture, for pure photography the D300 still seems to be a better camera - better AF performance and ergonomics. The horizon LCD sounds like a gimmick to me - if you have the time to pay attention to that, just use a $25 horizon bubble level hot-shoe adapter if you really don't trust yourself to get it straight in the first place. Any other time, it's generally not going to matter as much. And then it's an LCD - will be interesting to see how accurate they can show tilt when dealing with pixels and diagonal lines (i.e. jaggies).

I don't shoot video and I don't know many SLR photographers who do. Once you get past the hype you see a catch-up product and marketing selling points.


----------



## Big Mike (Sep 1, 2009)

> Even if they improved the high ISO performance over the 50D, the 50D was 15 MP and bad at high ISOs. So instead of the 7D being terrible at high ISO's, it sounds like it's only going to be bad... but I'll reserve final judgement until I see some final pictures from a production copy.


I've never heard a 40D or 50D owner say that the the ISO performance was bad.  It seems like the only ones who say that it's bad...are the ones who are pissed off because Canon isn't offering a full frame, fully weather sealed body with ISO 800,000 for under $700.  :roll:

I think the issue (if there even is an issue) is that when the 50D came out, Canon was already falling behind Nikon and they wanted a HUGE improvement in ISO performance.  They didn't get that....but what they did get was an increase in MP with the same (or similar) ISO performance.


----------



## rom4n301 (Sep 1, 2009)

icassell said:


> Village Idiot said:
> 
> 
> > 18 mp....aps-c...
> ...



uhm what i hate bout it is that if i get a 50mm lens its not really ganna be 50mm.. and if i get a 70-200 lens.. its not really ganna be 70-200


----------



## icassell (Sep 1, 2009)

rom4n301 said:


> icassell said:
> 
> 
> > Village Idiot said:
> ...



And that's a problem?  Buy your lenses for the image they give you, not by focal length.  It's not the numerical focal length that's important, it's the image. Ask any large-format user what a 50mm does for him, and he will give you a different answer still.


----------



## Village Idiot (Sep 1, 2009)

blash said:


> Even if they improved the high ISO performance over the 50D, the 50D was 15 MP and bad at high ISOs. So instead of the 7D being terrible at high ISO's, it sounds like it's only going to be bad... but I'll reserve final judgement until I see some final pictures from a production copy.
> 
> Once you take that 18 MP out of the picture, for pure photography the D300 still seems to be a better camera - better AF performance and ergonomics. The horizon LCD sounds like a gimmick to me - if you have the time to pay attention to that, just use a $25 horizon bubble level hot-shoe adapter if you really don't trust yourself to get it straight in the first place. Any other time, it's generally not going to matter as much. And then it's an LCD - will be interesting to see how accurate they can show tilt when dealing with pixels and diagonal lines (i.e. jaggies).
> 
> I don't shoot video and I don't know many SLR photographers who do. Once you get past the hype you see a catch-up product and marketing selling points.


 
First of all, the 40D and 50D were good at high ISO's. Nikon played catch up until they put out the D90.

How do you know the D300 has better AF performance and ergonomics? Have you held a 7D? Have you seen the AF working? The camera was just announced this week.

You know why the 5D MKII is so hard to find? All the videographers that are shooting video. SLR photographers may not, but there are sure a hell of a lot of video people that were super excited about the 5D MKII and use it. I think it's even getting some time in the spot light for being used in some up coming main stream movie or another.





rom4n301 said:


> icassell said:
> 
> 
> > Village Idiot said:
> ...


 
Yes they will be. They don't magically change to a different lens because of your sensor. FOV may be different, but the lenses are still the exact same lenses.


----------



## astrostu (Sep 1, 2009)

So, there's an application for the video that no one's seemed to catch onto:  Planetary astrophotography!!  Most of the *best* photos of planets are taken by people with _webcams_ (yes, that's right) because they can shoot a ~5-minute movie via a modified webcam and then have literally thousands of individual frames to use to average together for a great photo.  That was really the one downside when I got my first and so far only DSLR, upgrading from my P&S Canon PowerShot S30 -- the Rebel didn't have any video, but my S30 did!

For example, click here.  Yes, that was done with a webcam (and no , I can't post the image since it's not mine, darn TPF rules  ).

I realize that obviously this is not and will not be a mainstream application, but the addition of HD video to a DSLR body that I am 70% sure I'll be buying is a major plus for me.


----------



## gsgary (Sep 1, 2009)

No instant boner here even though i'm a Canon user, not on my shopping list


----------



## Overread (Sep 1, 2009)

Aside from the ISO side (which I am going to wait on till its in peoples hands and in use) this camera is exciting me far more than the 50D did - weathersealing, fast AF and FPS, a flash commander mode, a host of other things and a nice crop sensor video mode (with full manual controls and such). All things I mostly want! 

The ISO is the big one for me still though - its what I feel most lacking in my 400D, along with weathersealing aspects - the rest is a nice boon.

Gary, don't you use a 1D model camera anyway - I agree if your in the 1D line of things (and budget) then waiting for the 1DM4 is the best thing to do, but I think for many others this could very well be the upgrade camera for them. Certainly I feel that is a stronger midrange camera than the 50D was


----------



## gsgary (Sep 1, 2009)

Overread said:


> Aside from the ISO side (which I am going to wait on till its in peoples hands and in use) this camera is exciting me far more than the 50D did - weathersealing, fast AF and FPS, a flash commander mode, a host of other things and a nice crop sensor video mode (with full manual controls and such). All things I mostly want!
> 
> The ISO is the big one for me still though - its what I feel most lacking in my 400D, along with weathersealing aspects - the rest is a nice boon.
> 
> Gary, don't you use a 1D model camera anyway - I agree if your in the 1D line of things (and budget) then waiting for the 1DM4 is the best thing to do, but I think for many others this could very well be the upgrade camera for them. Certainly I feel that is a stronger midrange camera than the 50D was


 

I won't be waiting for a 1Dmk4, when it comes out i will get a cheap MK3 or a 1DS MK3 most top sports photographers actually use a 1DS


----------



## blash (Sep 1, 2009)

Village Idiot said:


> First of all, the 40D and 50D were good at high ISO's. Nikon played catch up until they put out the D90.
> 
> How do you know the D300 has better AF performance and ergonomics? Have you held a 7D? Have you seen the AF working? The camera was just announced this week.
> 
> You know why the 5D MKII is so hard to find? All the videographers that are shooting video. SLR photographers may not, but there are sure a hell of a lot of video people that were super excited about the 5D MKII and use it. I think it's even getting some time in the spot light for being used in some up coming main stream movie or another.



1) I refer to DPReview's 50D review: Canon EOS 50D Review: 31. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review

"in terms of per-pixel sharpness the 50D cannot quite keep up with the better 10 or 12 megapixel APS-C DSLRs in the market. At higher sensitivities the smaller photosites are clearly producing more noise (as shown from our RAW comparisons) and so Canon is having to apply more noise reduction to keep to acceptable noise levels, this of course means a loss of detail from ISO 1600 upwards."

And

"At a pixel density of 4.5 MP/cm² (40D: 3.1 MP/cm², 1Ds MkIII: 2.4 MP/cm²) the lens becomes the limiting factor. Even the sharpest primes at optimal apertures cannot (at least away from the center of the frame) satisfy the 15.1 megapixel sensors hunger for resolution."

And finally:

"In some areas such as dynamic range and high ISO performance it's actually worse and that simply makes you wonder if the EOS 50D could have been an (even) better camera if its sensor had a slightly more moderate resolution."

which makes me think, we're probably going to see the same concerns about the 7D now. In fact, after seeing the sample images that DPReview took, I have to be a bit concerned with even ISO 800 performance which shows significant loss of detail and noise. From Canon EOS 7D Preview Samples Gallery: Digital Photography Review

http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canoneos7d_preview/originals/img_2601.jpg
2) I'm referring more to the 51-point AF sensor on the D300 with that general "AF is better" statement.

3) I never said adding video to the 5DMkII or to cameras in general was a bad business decision. It's obviously making Nikon and Canon some money. However, it doesn't apply to *my* criteria as a customer nor to many other customers like me, and therefore I couldn't give two twats about whether video was or was not included so long as some other feature didn't suffer as a result.


----------



## Overread (Sep 1, 2009)

any chance you could change that image to a link? only its massssive and really slowing down the page (And I can't imagin how slow it is for dialup users)


----------



## icassell (Sep 1, 2009)

I'm sorta interested in the other end too ... it has (if I read it correctly) ISO 50 too.


----------



## Hobbes (Sep 1, 2009)

blash said:


> 1) I refer to DPReview's 50D review: Canon EOS 50D Review: 31. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review
> 
> "in terms of per-pixel sharpness the 50D cannot quite keep up with the better 10 or 12 megapixel APS-C DSLRs in the market. At higher sensitivities the smaller photosites are clearly producing more noise (as shown from our RAW comparisons) and so Canon is having to apply more noise reduction to keep to acceptable noise levels, this of course means a loss of detail from ISO 1600 upwards."
> 
> ...



That's exactly what I tried to say with my post in another related thread. I actually ordered the 50D a while ago but changed my mind after reading several reviews and learned that there would be a replacement soon and this is the replacement, an even higher resolution sensor -.- I knew something is wrong with the 50D when the salesperson at the camera store told me with lowered voice that 50D is inferior to my 40D in high ISO performance. I am waiting impatiently for reviews on the 7D and see the high ISO sample pictures with my own eyes but until then I will remain skeptic  

and I wonder how many people in this forum who is using dial up. I mean you have to live in the middle of nowhere like Siberia or northern Canada to not be able to use broadband connection.


----------



## Playdo (Sep 1, 2009)

No spot meter linked to focus point? This should have been a bare essential before adding any of the glitz. Why?


----------



## musicaleCA (Sep 1, 2009)

icassell said:


> I'm sorta interested in the other end too ... it has (if I read it correctly) ISO 50 too.



Eh? I only saw ISO 100.

As for high ISOs, geese you guys are being incredibly anal-retentive about this. Look at it from the PoV of someone who wants to upgrade. Compared to a lowly 450D, the 7D blows it out of the water with high ISO performance. On the 450D, ISO 400 is the top end of things being clean. At 800 you need serious noise-removal (pitiful Lightroom (!) can't handle it; you *need* something like Topaz DeNoise or Nik Define to make it close to usable, and then down-sample to cover-up the blurriness...and then sharpen and pray that it works...). ISO 1600 is so disgusting it's useless, and can't be recovered.

The 7D, on the other hand, after looking at the images on DPR, is stellar by comparison. ISO 12800 only looks as bad as ISO 800 on the 450D. That's pretty awesome from where I'm sitting, stuck in a world of ISO 400. The 7D would give me 4 more stops of clean, usable ISO speed, and an extra stop on top of that if I need clean-up. Um, yeah, 4-stops more? I can deal with that. Then maybe my recycle times on my 580 would be reasonable indoors and I wouldn't have to switch-out my batteries all the time.

It's all about perspective.

As for resolution, again, big whoop. I see that as "Yay! I have more information to play with!" Perhaps this will translate into more accurate healing and cloning in some cases, perhaps not. But as for the lens not providing the necessary resolution to squeeze *every* last pixel of detail? Please, when was the last time *you* ever uploaded a full-resolution 15MP (let alone 18MP) image to the web? It's not done (at the very least we can agree it's not common practise). Down-sample, and things get sharper. Hooray! (And that the very least, with more pixels of information to work with, noise-removal software is more likely to have a better time of removing noise. So while ISO 1600 on the 450D's 12MP sensor might be impossible to recover, with 18MP to work with, ISO 12800 just might be cleanable. Maybe.)


----------



## usayit (Sep 1, 2009)

My opinion..... 

I too am skeptical of cramming even more sensor sites into a small area.  My guess is that the 5D Mark I slightly used is still a better buy than the 7D brand new.  That's were I'm headed.... 5D Mark I to accompany my 1D mark II.  Both compliment each other quite nicely.  

(the 5D Mark I will still have to wait as funds are dedicated to something else at the moment).


----------



## icassell (Sep 1, 2009)

musicaleCA said:


> icassell said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sorta interested in the other end too ... it has (if I read it correctly) ISO 50 too.
> ...



If you look in the "Camera Controls" section of the DP review under Top of Camera Controls, it says there is an L1 setting (ISO 50) and an H setting (ISO12800) which are both enabled with the C.Fn1-3 control.  I can't find this anywhere else in the article.


----------



## rom4n301 (Sep 1, 2009)

icassell said:


> rom4n301 said:
> 
> 
> > icassell said:
> ...



well... i was ganna buy the canon fisheye.. cuz i do quite a bit of skatephotography.. and itd be a cool lens in general.. but it pointless getting it cuz of the apc... unless i get the tokina fish.. but ide rather get canon..so.. for me the crop is quite a problem... nothin too majore tho.. just for fishes and super wides...


----------



## cfusionpm (Sep 1, 2009)

rom4n301 said:


> icassell said:
> 
> 
> > rom4n301 said:
> ...



I've got the canon 10-22 and I think it's fantastic. Build quality is very good for a non-L and I've been very pleased with the images I've been able to get. It's about as wide as I need for sure.


----------



## Big Mike (Sep 1, 2009)

Why is it that every time a new camera model comes out, there are the same tired old arguments & discussions? :gah:

Does and 8x10 image look good when printed out and held at arm's length?  If so, then the camera is probably good enough.


----------



## icassell (Sep 1, 2009)

Big Mike said:


> Why is it that every time a new camera model comes out, there are the same tired old arguments & discussions? :gah:
> 
> Does and 8x10 image look good when printed out and held at arm's length?  If so, then the camera is probably good enough.



And the funniest part is that no one has even seen one yet ...


----------



## inTempus (Sep 1, 2009)

Would a mod PLEASE delete that image that Blash won't delete?  It's killing this thread.


----------



## inTempus (Sep 1, 2009)

Big Mike said:


> Why is it that every time a new camera model comes out, there are the same tired old arguments & discussions? :gah:
> 
> Does and 8x10 image look good when printed out and held at arm's length?  If so, then the camera is probably good enough.


I know, it's kind of funny.

When the 50D came out people ranted and raved about how horrible it was.  Then people who actually bought them and used them posted their reviews... low and behold is was highly popular and loved by many (myself included).

Now the 7D is announced and it has an amazing feature set... and we have the same peanut gallery talking about how bad it sucks and how previous bodies did X better... and we haven't even seen it in our greedy little hands yet.

It's a vicious and never ending cycle. People just love being unhappy I guess.

Me?  I have great hope for this new body.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Sep 1, 2009)

usayit said:


> My opinion.....
> 
> I too am skeptical of cramming even more sensor sites into a small area.  My guess is that the 5D Mark I slightly used is still a better buy than the 7D brand new.  That's were I'm headed.... 5D Mark I to accompany my 1D mark II.  Both compliment each other quite nicely.
> 
> (the 5D Mark I will still have to wait as funds are dedicated to something else at the moment).



If you're shooting people in a controlled environment, i completly agree. But if it moves in lousy weather we all know which would be the better camera, even though it's got a smaller sensor.


----------



## musicaleCA (Sep 2, 2009)

icassell said:


> musicaleCA said:
> 
> 
> > icassell said:
> ...



Oh. Missed that. Heh. Cool.


----------



## usayit (Sep 2, 2009)

Sw1tchFX said:


> usayit said:
> 
> 
> > My opinion.....
> ...



I wouldn't go as far is limiting it to portraits in a studio environment.  I doubt majority of the 5D users out there limit themselves to a controlled environment.  I've had low end cameras (even rebels) in light rain with no problem.  It is all about fulfilling needs.  For me, the extra mpixels are not all that important anymore and I see the full frame sensor with the 5D's proven performance more beneficial.  My 1D MII is weather sealed anyways and it still produces excellent results.

I personally don't think the Canon line of DSLRs are well thought out; kinda crowded and there is a bit of competition between their models.  I like it because it keeps the used market prices in check.


----------



## Sue Bruce (Sep 2, 2009)

Interesting reading!  I am enjoying this thread so much!

As of yesterday morning, I had set aside 75% of the cost of upgrading my 40d to the 5d Mk ii.  I even rented the 5d mkii to 'try before I buy' ... and got amazing results in a low-light sports environment (ie.  horse riding inside a poorly lit barn!!)  With the announcement of the 7d, I have enough money to buy it when it eventually hits retail ... but should I?  That's the big question.  

I loved the ability of the 5d mk ii to 'freeze' the action and capture every tiny detail, even in poor light.  Full frame is less of an issue for me.  (Honestly, I'm still trying to work out exactly what it means to my work!!!)

So ... should buy the 7d ... or stick to my plan ?


----------



## Overread (Sep 2, 2009)

I fully expect the 5DM2 to have far superior high ISO usabilty over the 7D - and if your working with horses more I would think that having a wider field of view might be beneficial (since horses are big subjects).

One thing though is that for getting a proper understanding of the ISO performace of the 7D is that its best to wait for it to be in the hands of photographers first - wait till its in the shops for a month or so and then have a look at how people rate it.


----------



## usayit (Sep 2, 2009)

I agree with Overread....  I expect the same BUT the advanced AF (f/2.8 at center, 19 cross points) and the 8 fps of the 7D might be the advantage during low light sports.  I think you should wait and see...  save a little more in the mean time.  To me Canon is trying to position the 7D as the "sportier' version of the 5D with its faster FPS rate and more advanced AF system.  perhaps I am missing something... afterall dpreview is comparing it to the 50D instead.  

1D MIII (Higher FPS, advanced AF, 1.3x sensor, less expensive) is to the 1DS MIII (full frame, larger sensor) what the 7D (higher FPS, advanced AF, crop sensor, less expensive) is to the 5D MII (full frame, larger sensor).  ???


----------



## MrLogic (Sep 2, 2009)

tharmsen said:


> Big Mike said:
> 
> 
> > Why is it that every time a new camera model comes out, there are the same tired old arguments & discussions? :gah:
> ...



Maybe. But the sample images on DPreview.com are not very convincing, IMO. Would be interested in a high ISO comparison between the D90 & 7D... I would gladly make the switch to Canon if the 7D was better in that regard. But I'm not holding my breath.

IQ is atrocious at ISO 1600:

http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canoneos7d_preview/originals/img_2566.jpg

And pretty bad at ISO 800. IMO, of course.


----------



## Village Idiot (Sep 2, 2009)

blash said:


> Village Idiot said:
> 
> 
> > First of all, the 40D and 50D were good at high ISO's. Nikon played catch up until they put out the D90.
> ...


 
People are still getting good high ISO shots out of a 50D. Because it's not as good as a D90, doesn't mean it's bad.

So do you know if the 7D has faster AF and better tracking? You're making assumptions.



			
				blach said:
			
		

> I don't shoot video and I don't know many SLR photographers who do. Once you get past the hype you see a catch-up product and marketing selling points


 
You sure make it sound like a bad business decision with a statement like that.


----------



## inTempus (Sep 2, 2009)

MrLogic said:


> IQ is atrocious at ISO 1600:
> 
> http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canoneos7d_preview/originals/img_2566.jpg
> 
> And pretty bad at ISO 800. IMO, of course.


Ahh, the same people that claimed the 50D sucked so bad... then when actual users got theirs and did independent tests between the 40D and 50D like this one they discovered the 50D was actually quite good. In this review the owner put the 50D above the 40D in performance.  The 50D gave us 50% more pixels with little loss of ISO performance.  For the birders out there, this was something they welcomed with open arms as it gave them the ability to crop even more and maintain a high IQ.

Here's a non-DPReview image in a very challenging venue taken by a 7D at ISO 1600:  http://ftp.robgalbraith.com/public_files/Canon_EOS_7D_ISO1600_Reggae.jpg

Here's ISO 3200 in the same demanding circumstances:  http://ftp.robgalbraith.com/public_files/Canon_EOS_7D_ISO3200_Reggae.jpg

I'm pretty impressed.


----------



## musicaleCA (Sep 2, 2009)

MrLogic said:


> tharmsen said:
> 
> 
> > Big Mike said:
> ...



That to you is bad? In comparison to what? A 5D MkII? Seriously now, give credit where credit is due. 

Tharm: Heh. Look at the image at a reasonable distance and resolution, and it looks fine. Nothing a little noise reduction couldn't spruce up.


----------



## robb01 (Sep 2, 2009)

My friend is getting it, can't wait to play around with it


----------



## ocular (Sep 2, 2009)

Why do I keep reading dp review's review of the 7d ?? There hasn't been a review yet Canon EOS 7D Hands-on Preview: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review is a PREVIEW...


----------



## MrLogic (Sep 2, 2009)

musicaleCA said:


> That to you is bad? In comparison to what? A 5D MkII? Seriously now, give credit where credit is due.



In comparison with a D700.  My bad. But I own a D90 also, so I was kind of hoping that the new 7D would do better than the 40D/50D AND Nikon's crop factor dSLRs. We'll have to see about that, I guess. But... I'm not a brand loyalist. I may just replace my D90 with a 50D or 7D before I invest in a 600mm f/4 prime. 





inTempus said:


> Ahh, the same people that claimed the 50D sucked so bad... then when actual users got theirs and did independent tests between the 40D and 50D like this one they discovered the 50D was actually quite good. In this review the owner put the 50D above the 40D in performance.  The 50D gave us 50% more pixels with little loss of ISO performance.  For the birders out there, this was something they welcomed with open arms as it gave them the ability to crop even more and maintain a high IQ.
> 
> Here's a non-DPReview image in a very challenging venue taken by a 7D at ISO 1600:  http://ftp.robgalbraith.com/public_files/Canon_EOS_7D_ISO1600_Reggae.jpg
> 
> ...



Thanks. 

Yes... DPReview went way overboard with their 50D review.


----------



## Antithesis (Sep 2, 2009)

I don't really understand the 18MP thing, but it still sounds like a nice camera. Adjustable video framerate is a nice feature too. A lot of people complained about the 5D2 not having that. Still has large shoes to fill, the D300 is one heck of a camera.


----------



## cfusionpm (Sep 2, 2009)

For less than the price of a 70-200 2.8L IS, I could pick up this as my second body, replacing the Rebel..... mmmmmm tempting!


----------



## CxThree (Sep 2, 2009)

I'll be glad to post images as soon as it's in stock anywhere I can order it.  I need a 2nd body anyway and I wa thinking of buying the 5DMKII.  However, I am getting the 7D and moving my 40D to my backup body.  Honestly, I am a bit worried about buying a 5DMKII right now.  The 7D introduces some features plenty of people might want to see on the 5DMKII.  Can some of it be done with firmware?  Will we see a 5DMKIII?  Who knows?  Not me.  

I just want to go with the newer body and experience some of the new offering.

Also, the links above of high ISO shots do not look bad to me at all.  Comparing the 7D shots on that site to the 5DMKII shots on that site is an interesting look.  I thin the 7D is doing pretty good.  I would like to wait for more reviews, but that's just not me.


----------



## Montana (Sep 2, 2009)

Can what be done with firmware?  The more advanced autofocus?  Additional AF points?  Nope.  The 5DII will still produce better images, but the 7D will be a rockin cropper!


----------



## CxThree (Sep 2, 2009)

I'll probably wind up with both, but I will start with the 7D.


----------



## MrLogic (Sep 3, 2009)

CxThree said:


> Also, the links above of high ISO shots do not look bad to me at all.  Comparing the 7D shots on that site to the 5DMKII shots on that site is an interesting look.  I thin the 7D is doing pretty good.



Compare them to the sample images of the 50D as well, if you care enough:

Canon EOS 50D Review Samples Gallery: Digital Photography Review

It may not mean a whole lot, but it doesn't *look* like the 7D's IQ OR high ISO performance is any better:


50D at ISO 800:

http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canoneos50d_samples/originals/img_3884.jpg



7D at ISO 800:

http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canoneos7d_preview/originals/img_2601.jpg


Canon EOS 7D Preview Samples Gallery: Digital Photography Review


----------



## blash (Sep 3, 2009)

inTempus said:


> Would a mod PLEASE delete that image that Blash won't delete?  It's killing this thread.



So wait, I only visit the thread once per day and that means that I won't delete the image link? Really? Some of us have lives off the Internet you know...

Image changed to link by semi-popular request. Seriously though, this is a photo forum. You should be expecting to see large images on this site. A large image is needed in that situation to show the presence of noise etc.


----------



## blash (Sep 3, 2009)

inTempus said:


> MrLogic said:
> 
> 
> > IQ is atrocious at ISO 1600:
> ...



Those images are worse than what DPReview posted. The noise is visible even at the zoomed-out default thumbnail size. Considering the price you're paying, clean images at 800 ISO and small noise at 1600 ISO is not a tall order IMO - otherwise just go back to film where modern film emulsions can do 400 ISO with little grain. I'm just sorry people are still caught up in the megapixel race when a 10 or 12 MP sensor is more than enough for the vast majority of prosumers that this is marketed to and would be able to provide very clean images with today's sensor technology.


----------



## MrLogic (Sep 3, 2009)

blash said:


> The noise is visible even at the zoomed-out default thumbnail size. Considering the price you're paying, clean images at 800 ISO and small noise at 1600 ISO is not a tall order IMO - otherwise just go back to film where modern film emulsions can do 400 ISO with little grain. I'm just sorry people are still caught up in the megapixel race when a 10 or 12 MP sensor is more than enough for the vast majority of prosumers that this is marketed to and would be able to provide very clean images with today's sensor technology.



Clean images at ISO 800?! If only. I don't think that's what you're paying for. It is an APS-C sensor, after all.

The Nikon D90 handles noise better at higher ISO levels, IMO, but it still doesn't convince... at all.

Nikon D90 at ISO 800:

http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/nikond90_samples/originals/dsc_0319.jpg


Meh. IQ quickly falls apart after ISO 640 or so.


----------



## blash (Sep 3, 2009)

MrLogic said:


> blash said:
> 
> 
> > The noise is visible even at the zoomed-out default thumbnail size. Considering the price you're paying, clean images at 800 ISO and small noise at 1600 ISO is not a tall order IMO - otherwise just go back to film where modern film emulsions can do 400 ISO with little grain. I'm just sorry people are still caught up in the megapixel race when a 10 or 12 MP sensor is more than enough for the vast majority of prosumers that this is marketed to and would be able to provide very clean images with today's sensor technology.
> ...



Exactly - that's a pretty clean image. Some noise is visible yes but individual strands of hair are not wiped out nor is the texture of her sweater. The D90 is also a much cheaper body than the 7D.

It's all about the design decision - why, oh why, did Canon put 18 MP in a APS-C sensor when they knew it could not deliver in the high ISO's? 18 MP is not medium-format size.


----------



## robb01 (Sep 3, 2009)

CxThree said:


> I'll probably wind up with both, but I will start with the 7D.



thats my plan :thumbup:


----------



## inTempus (Sep 3, 2009)

How about these shot in the last couple of days?

ModelMayhem.com - 7d

Check out the discussion.  The images were shot between ISO 800 and 3200.  The images are "good for print with no objectionable noise" according to the guy who took them.  Stephen Eastwood (Google him) is a very well known photographer and pulls no punches.

Direct links to the images:  
http://stepheneastwood.com/Canon/amy_7t/
http://stepheneastwood.com/Canon/iso_comp_7/


----------



## Big Mike (Sep 3, 2009)

Noise in an image, or being able to get a shot clean enough to use, is all about exposure and processing.  

If you nail your exposure or better yet Expose Right, you can get very decent images at higher ISO levels...with cameras that pixel-peepers consider to be outdated or completely unusable.


----------



## MrLogic (Sep 3, 2009)

inTempus said:


> How about these shot in the last couple of days?
> 
> ModelMayhem.com - 7d
> 
> ...



My opinion: definitely better, but then again he's an all-out pro. I wouldn't be surprised if he could do that with a 50D, as well. (RE: Big Mike's post)


The first direct link: Amy. The only high-ISO images are the last two, both were shot at ISO 3200. (the other four are ISO 100). Good for ISO 3200, I guess, but I'm surprised that he considers them "good for print." But I'll take his word for it. 


Second direct link: ISO comparison 100-12800. Still a lot of detail loss at ISO 800 when compared to base ISO. Noise reduction seems a bit aggressive. 


As of yet, I'm not convinced that the 7D is any better than the 50D when it comes to high ISO shooting. But we'll find out soon enough.


----------



## icassell (Sep 3, 2009)

MrLogic said:


> . But we'll find out soon enough.



Nope, not soon enough.  I want mine now


----------



## Derrel (Sep 3, 2009)

After downloading several full-sized samples from the dPreview gallery, it's clear that the Canon 17-55 EF-S f/2.8 lens looks absolutely horrible when paired with the 7D's high-density,small-pixel sensor. The pixels are packed really tightly on a small sensor, which would translate to 46 Megapixels on a FF sensor. Clearly, the 17-55 EF-S f/2.8 is being out-resolved by the sensor,and the lens is simply not up to the task.

There's a certain "video-like" mix of poor acutance and slight chromatic aberration in the dPreview full-sized samples. The London shots of the buildings and downtown landscape taken at 17mm look dreadful when opened up on my 30 inch Cinema Display--the images look about like a 20D shot with a cheap 18-55 pre-IS Canon kit lens. It's hard to describe, but I see a sort of veiling distortion,almost as if the images were shot through thick plexiglass. Fine,fine detail is simply not being resolved, even at f/8 and ISO 100 and shutter speeds that ought to be sufficient, like 1/320.

The few dPreview full-sized samples shot with the 70-200 f/4 L lens look better, but it seems clear to me that there's a problem with the IQ with the 17-55,especially at the wider end of its range, but overall, that lens is not up adequate to maximize the highest-density APS-C sensor yet made. What is troubling is the shot of the metal deer head sculpture: look at that image and see there's an overall veiling that's puzzling.

The Stephen Eastwood studio samples are not that impressive at a per-pixel level. Shooting a human face,professionally made-up under studio flash, and covering an area less than one foot tall and one foot wide is not much of a test. Large areas of even-toned makeup, a bit of hair, some eyes. Not much of a challenge for ANY camera, since the area is so small. Even the 14 MP Kodak SLR-n looked GREAT of  model close-ups, but it had the infamous Italian Flag color banding and weird, very ODD problems with incredible color rendition problems on certain subjects, like yellow daisies, and brick wall masonry...but it looked killer on in-studio fashion headshots.

I have not seen the Robgalbraith shots much, but the one Reggae singer shot with the 85/1.2-L looks pretty good; I have a feeling that the 18MP pixel count will make a lot of lower-quality zooms like the 17-55 f/2.8 EF-S show every weakness they have. THis is not a direct fault of the 17-55 EF-S f/2.8, but it was designed when the highest MP sensor anon had in APS-C was what? 10 megapixels? Or was it back when they had 8.2 MP on APS-C? 18 on 1.6 equates to 46 on FF, so...it looks like lens quality will be paramount,if early samples are indicative of what the final camera will look like.

And the last point is important: remember how BAD, how very,very BAD Canon's original 5D official samples looked? They looked poor. Most all of the early 5D samples looked crummy--but the actual,production run 5D's images were and still are quite stellar. Maybe this is a similar situation, but I still am aware that this is the highest-MP count APS-C camera ever, and it will probably test most zoom lens designs,and it's possible I suppose that what I am seeing is *diffraction* problems at f/8. I would,in fact, think that tis high MP count will mean that stopping down past f/5.6, to even f/6.3, will COST YOU resolving ability, and so, the dPreview samples shot at f/8 would look less than optimal.


----------



## Big Mike (Sep 3, 2009)

Noise is usually more apparent in a digital image than in a print, especially when we are pixel peeping.  So when someone says 'good enough for print', it's easy to believe.



> but then again he's an all-out pro. I wouldn't be surprised if he could do that with a 50D, as well.


I know a high end wedding shooter.  Until he picked up a 40D, he had a 20D in his bag (along with 1 Series bodies).  He always said that he never hesitated to grab the 20D and certainly wasn't worried about noise levels.  
It's all about knowing your gear and knowing how to get the best out of it.



> As of yet, I'm not convinced that the 7D is any better than the 50D when it comes to high ISO shooting. But we'll find out soon enough.


The target market for the 7D is probably not 50D shooters.  It's probably 10D/20D/30D/40D shooters who now want to upgrade....or all the Rebel owners who want to step up (and there are more Rebel owners than all other EOS combined).
When you have a 2008 Honda Accord, you aren't likely to buy a 2009 Accord...so why be disappointed that it's not exponentially better?  But if you have a 1989 Civic, the 2009 Accord looks like the cat's meow.


----------



## inTempus (Sep 3, 2009)

MrLogic said:


> As of yet, I'm not convinced that the 7D is any better than the 50D when it comes to high ISO shooting. But we'll find out soon enough.


I don't think I would say it's better than the 50D either.  At best it's as good.  At worst it's slightly worse.

Believe me, I would MUCH rather have had another 15mp sensor with improvements to the photosites and microlenses that Canon is claiming for this latest sensor. I'm not at all excited about the 18mp sensor.  They should have stopped at 15 or even gone back to 12 and really increased ISO performance and dynamic range.

But, with that being said, as a package, this camera promises to be quite an improvement over all to the 50D.  I like it.

But, I don't like it enough to buy one.  I'll wait for the 1D4.  I just hope they don't go to 30mp on a 1.3x sensor with it.


----------



## astrostu (Sep 3, 2009)

Big Mike said:


> > As of yet, I'm not convinced that the 7D is any better than the 50D when it comes to high ISO shooting. But we'll find out soon enough.
> 
> 
> The target market for the 7D is probably not 50D shooters.  It's probably 10D/20D/30D/40D shooters who now want to upgrade....or all the Rebel owners who want to step up (and there are more Rebel owners than all other EOS combined).
> When you have a 2008 Honda Accord, you aren't likely to buy a 2009 Accord...so why be disappointed that it's not exponentially better?  But if you have a 1989 Civic, the 2009 Accord looks like the cat's meow.



Agreed.  I keep seeing all these complaints about "Oh, you can't shoot with it at ISO 3200 and get a useable 18 Mpx image!"  But then I remember that I rarely go above ISO 200, and I'm upgrading from a 4-year-old Rebel 350D.  I'm looking for a new camera now.  My options were a Rebel XSi, Rebel T1i, or 50D.  Now, included in that is the 7D.  Why buy last year's model when I can buy this year's for ~25% more when it has several more features that I will use?


----------



## MrLogic (Sep 4, 2009)

inTempus said:


> I don't think I would say it's better than the 50D either.  At best it's as good.  At worst it's slightly worse.




That's what I thought, but... take a look at this thread. The 7D more than outperforms the 50D & D300 at ISO 6400:

7D ISO Performance - Page 4 - Canon Digital Photography Forums


If this is true then... wow.


----------



## MrLogic (Sep 4, 2009)

^ All images in that thread are from the Imaging Resources Comparometer:

Imaging Resource "Comparometer"  Digital Camera Image Comparison Page


----------



## Dao (Sep 4, 2009)

Mr Hitler not happy about the Canon 7d...


----------



## inTempus (Sep 4, 2009)

MrLogic, THANKS!

Wow, the 7D beats the pants off the D300 and even gives the 5DMk2 a run for it's money!!!

Oh man, that's impressive.


----------



## MrLogic (Sep 4, 2009)

inTempus said:


> MrLogic, THANKS!
> 
> Wow, the 7D beats the pants off the D300 and even gives the 5DMk2 a run for it's money!!!
> 
> Oh man, that's impressive.



Yeah, but comparing ISO 6400 on D300 & D90... I'm not sure about the abysmal performance of the D300. I was under the impression that both cameras -- the D300 & D90 -- were pretty much equal in terms of IQ and high ISO performance.

But apparently not(?)

D300 on the left, D90 on the right. Both at ISO 6400:


----------



## jochystar (Sep 7, 2009)

I agree with you ! I myself started pixel pipping some time ago when i got introduce to dslr photography and seen picture quality of all tastes and colors, having own a powershot sx10is and looking at the capabilitites of this camera and taking the next level of photography to dslr's i seen the diference, my photos then sucks, now they started to look better and now i can wao people with my images. like 8 months after i got my rebel xsi I thought that my skills got limited by the machine so i had planned to have a 50D as main and the rebel as backup but after the raw reviews the eos 50d gotten i decided to write to canon to tell them they were going to loose me as canon loyal since nikon had better offerings in that particular market range. Now the EOS 7D has come and let me tell you, it has been worth every second of my wait, canon finnally got what we asked for, you see some of us amateurs pro wannna b's cannot afford an expensive L glass colletion, that i will leave for magazine editing and getty images photogs. but to lots of us crop sensor is the only way to go fast and long in the cheap and the 7D is the question to those answers, thanks canon .... I seen some lab pics taken at imaging resource website and am totally convinced that the eos 7d will live to is capabilitites and that canon made a big leap into new grounds with 18mp cmos, incredible ahh .... twin turbo machine gun, filled up with all the goddies that you can ask for for 1700 easy to get dollars ....so stop winning !


----------



## CxThree (Sep 7, 2009)

Im curious.  Did you actually use and enjoy your 50D or did you believe the reviews.  From what I am seeing, mosst reviews were wrong on the 50D.


----------



## itznfb (Sep 7, 2009)

MrLogic said:


> D300 on the left, D90 on the right. Both at ISO 6400:



If my D90 or D300s looked that bad (either pic) at 6400 I would have thrown them in a lake. Those look like shots that were intentionally made to look bad.


----------



## inTempus (Sep 7, 2009)

itznfb said:


> MrLogic said:
> 
> 
> > D300 on the left, D90 on the right. Both at ISO 6400:
> ...


LOL, no.  They weren't made to look intentionally bad.  I don't believe the Imaging Resource site has a bias towards any particular brand.  It's easy to claim that when the results don't jive with your view of your gear I suppose.  

Here's more info on their testing methodology and practices.

Imaging Resource Digital Camera Test Methods


----------



## MrLogic (Sep 8, 2009)

inTempus said:


> They weren't made to look intentionally bad.  I don't believe the Imaging Resource site has a bias towards any particular brand.  It's easy to claim that when the results don't jive with your view of your gear I suppose.
> 
> Here's more info on their testing methodology and practices.
> 
> Imaging Resource Digital Camera Test Methods



So, then, would you agree that the D3X SMOKES the 5D MK II at lower ISO levels? :mrgreen: (or any other dSLR for that matter)


The Imaging Resource Comparometer compares straight out-of-the-camera JPEGs, though, if I'm not mistaken. It's good to keep that in mind (if I'm right about that)


----------



## bp4life71 (Sep 8, 2009)

Big Mike said:


> I also haven't seen anything about the wireless flash control anywhere on the Canon site. I would think that would be a big 'new' feature to brag about. (unless they didn't want to point out that Nikon been doing that for years and they are finally catching up). I saw it mentioned (but not elaborated) at Dpreview but not at Canon.
> 
> I found thiat at Dpreview...
> 
> ...


 
Mike...this is a little off topic...but I was checking out your wedding photos....the 4th from last photo, where the bride and groom are dancing...how did you get that effect?  Is that from the camera, or was that photoshopped like that?  Let me know!


----------



## PhotoXopher (Sep 8, 2009)

Awesome, my D90 still holds more than it's own for value per dollar it seems 

AT 6400 ISO the D90 has more detail than the 7D & D300.


----------



## bp4life71 (Sep 8, 2009)

Overread said:


> any chance you could change that image to a link? only its massssive and really slowing down the page (And I can't imagin how slow it is for dialup users)


 
.....and I couldnt imagine anyone still using dial-up.


----------



## bp4life71 (Sep 8, 2009)

inTempus said:


> Would a mod PLEASE delete that image that Blash won't delete? It's killing this thread.


 
Huh....what picture?


----------



## schumionbike (Sep 8, 2009)

inTempus said:


> itznfb said:
> 
> 
> > MrLogic said:
> ...


 

maybe they're not bias, but those test results are pretty inconsistent what I have seen before from others though.  I mean, the 5D MarkII should have done a lot better than what their test show, at least from what I see from other tests and such.


----------



## inTempus (Sep 8, 2009)

schumionbike said:


> maybe they're not bias, but those test results are pretty inconsistent what I have seen before from others though.  I mean, the 5D MarkII should have done a lot better than what their test show, at least from what I see from other tests and such.


That's far more likely than them having an anti-Nikon bias.

When the 7D hits I do plan on buying one.  I need a second sports camera probably, and this seems like a good candidate.  If I do buy it, I will shoot my own tests with my buddies D300.  I'm sure others will do the same when the 7D actually hits the street.  Only time will tell.


----------



## cassio (Sep 10, 2009)

A video using the pre-production Canon 7D has been released here.


----------



## Overread (Sep 10, 2009)

Nice!
would have been nice for them to have uploaded a larger version so we could get all pixel peeping but from what it shows there it looks very good - both with the action, motion and lowlight
edit - if you use this link here yo uget a larger version
http://vimeo.com/6487566


----------



## usayit (Sep 10, 2009)

inTempus said:


> When the 7D hits I do plan on buying one.  I need a second sports camera probably, and this seems like a good candidate.



Interesting... 

I would have guessed that a 1DMII from the used market would be a better choice.  Maybe it is just me, but I prefer to have my backup camera to have the same operational layout (switches, buttons, menus) to be the same as a primary.  Saves that "mental" switch going between the two bodies.  Your 1DMIII is in the same bread as the 1DMII with similar AF performance, layout, etc.   10mp versus 8mp is negligible.


----------



## cassio (Sep 11, 2009)

Here's a link to a landscape photographer reviewing the Canon 7D based on actual usage.  Actual Usage Review of Canon 7D.


----------



## reng2009 (Sep 20, 2009)

Y'know, FF sensors are not going to stop at 24 mp. The 1Ds Mk IV will certainly have much higher mp than 21. If Canon can achieve, say, 36 mp, then surely they can achieve 18 mp in APS-C.

I believe Canon have reached that technological threshold. The time is ready for a 30+ mp FF camera. Just wait till next year...

The 7D is simply the first step toward that goal. 18 mp mean we can expect ~40 mp in the next FF model. That's my prediction.

The 7D should prove to be very good. Reviews will bear me out. That's my second prediction.


----------



## musicaleCA (Sep 20, 2009)

But we don't *need* that kind of resolution. And no lens can feed such hypothetical beasts.


----------



## beni_hung (Sep 20, 2009)

I just got done reading all the reviews on the 7D AND all 9 pages of this thread and I have almost decided that I will upgrade to the 7D. I have been using my 20D since it came out and after taking it to Iraq a few years ago it is just about worn out. (There is an annoying scratch on my sensor that I have to keep editing out post-picture from the Iraqi sand). I was thinking about a second hand 5DMII, but I think the 7D for all the different things that I take photos of.


----------



## RyanLilly (Sep 22, 2009)

I for one think that overall this the 7D will be an exceptional value. I have been shooting with 20D's for the past few years, and I commonly use ISO 1600, and make very good looking prints from those shots. So pixel peep all you want and yes the 18mp is overkill, but if I can get a full stop or two better ISO performance in terms, of noise and detail, then I'm sold. 

The way camera technology is moving is amazing, we now have available a mid-level camera that in many ways surpasses the ability of the flagship camera from just one generation ago, and at less than half the price.  I am also happy to see this higher end crop body, because I a good bit invested in EF-s type lenses.This is a wonderful time to be a photographer.


----------



## Gilley (Sep 25, 2009)

Hey all. This is it. The store I am buying it from just notified me of the shipping date. Next Wednesday September 30. How accurate. They said late September, early October.

Time to sell my little Xsi

Flickr: printwebaudio's Photostream


----------



## Ava (Sep 25, 2009)

rom4n301 said:


> only 1700?


Only???


----------



## musicaleCA (Sep 25, 2009)

Gilley said:


> Hey all. This is it. The store I am buying it from just notified me of the shipping date. Next Wednesday September 30. How accurate. They said late September, early October.
> 
> Time to sell my little Xsi
> 
> Flickr: printwebaudio's Photostream



Yup. Apparently there's some 7D preview event happening or something here, and I'll be able to pick mine up there right away (so the rumours go, anyway).



Ava said:


> rom4n301 said:
> 
> 
> > only 1700?
> ...



Compared to a 5D MkII, yes. Only.


----------



## MrLogic (Sep 25, 2009)

7D hands-on on *Luminous-Landscape.com*:

Canon 7D First Look Report


Scroll down to 'Image Quality':

_"Though Canon placed no restrictions on my ability to report on image quality,     other than to indicate that any pictures shown are "Beta Sample Images"  I     am going to punt, and will not be describing in any detail the image quality     that I have seen from the Canon 7D._

_Frankly, the reason is that I am seeing things which I am not sure are     a consequence of the camera's inherent characteristics or are specific to     pre-production cameras or even this specific camera. This includes overall     image softness and some digital artifacting. Nothing terrible mind you; just     enough though that I am aware of it, and therefore don't want to make any     undue assumptions. 
_

_The major camera technical review sites will have their in-depth analysis     of full production cameras soon enough, and once you've been able to read     a couple of them you'll be able to draw a pretty good conclusion about this     for yourself."_


So _this_ is the so-called "field review" that was announced 3 weeks ago? Bad form, LL. :thumbdown:


----------



## Sue Bruce (Sep 30, 2009)

I admit I have been lurking ... and pondering my decision between the 7D and 5d Mk II.  

I decided to go with the 5d (collected it 1 week ago).  

I decided to go this route because I had rented the 5d and really loved it.  I was extremely persuaded by the 7D specs ... but was thinking long term.  

The full sensor is hard to ignore and whilst the specs for the 7D sound extremely 'sexy' ... I had to evaluate function over 'sexiness'.  

I'm not suggesting I evaluated this battle correctly (and clearly the price is significantly higher for my choice), but a choice had to be made and I may consider upgrading my 2nd shooter (40d) for the 7D in a few months.

... Of course I am interested in comments from anyone in this same upgrade position (ie.  7D or 5D mk ii)

Sue


----------



## FrankLamont (Sep 30, 2009)

Personally, the back of the 7D is too bloated for my liking. Though it looks comfortable, for sure.


----------



## musicaleCA (Sep 30, 2009)

FriedChicken said:


> Personally, the back of the 7D is too bloated for my liking. Though it looks comfortable, for sure.



Bloated? How so?

I'll be posting some thoughts on the 7D this weekend, once I've gotten a good chance to really put the AF system through it's paces.


----------



## cassio (Oct 3, 2009)

Interesting..  Canon 7D's shutter sound were specifically engineered based on photographer feedback.


----------



## zland (Oct 6, 2009)

I got my 7D today & spent a few minutes playing with it. I used the default video mode & it was jerky. Basically it looks natural but about every 2 seconds it has a jerky motion for a split second. Tomorrow I am going to change it from the default setting & shot possibly at 60 fps etc & see if it varies.


----------



## zland (Oct 6, 2009)

zland said:


> I got my 7D today & spent a few minutes playing with it. I used the default video mode & it was jerky. Basically it looks natural but about every 2 seconds it has a jerky motion for a split second. Tomorrow I am going to change it from the default setting & shot possibly at 60 fps etc & see if it varies.



I want to revise what I said last night (above). I was excited to try my new camera out but after I slept on it I realized what may be the problem. I am using the extreme III flachcards from my 40D camera. When I wrote Canon Help a few weeks ago regarding flashcards I asked them if my extreme III cards would work well on the 7D & they replied they would work fine except for when I tried shooting at 8 fps or when doing video. I think what is happening is the 2 second jerking motion is being created because the flashcard cannot download data fast enough. 

I am getting the extreme IV 8GB card later this week, it is already in the mail via UPS. I will try it with that card & see if it fixes it.


----------



## icassell (Oct 6, 2009)

zland said:


> zland said:
> 
> 
> > I got my 7D today & spent a few minutes playing with it. I used the default video mode & it was jerky. Basically it looks natural but about every 2 seconds it has a jerky motion for a split second. Tomorrow I am going to change it from the default setting & shot possibly at 60 fps etc & see if it varies.
> ...




Grrrrr ... of course ... and I have bunches of batteries AND half a dozen Extreme III's for my 30D ... now I'm gonna have to get new cards AND new batteries ...


----------



## zland (Oct 6, 2009)

icassell said:


> zland said:
> 
> 
> > zland said:
> ...



Well wait until I try the extreme IV card to see if it is still jerky. I knew the sample videos on line of the 7D were jerky on the waves breaking thus all action video would be less then desireable. The problem I am talking about is simple video of my wife just standing & talking into the camera thus an entire degree more of it being jerky.

If the Extreme IV card does not fix it, the video portion is not acceptable IMO. My bet is it will....


----------



## icassell (Oct 9, 2009)

So why does the kit they are releasing in the USA include the 28-135 rather than the new 18-135 that is part of the kit options in Europe?


----------



## zland (Oct 9, 2009)

zland said:


> icassell said:
> 
> 
> > zland said:
> ...




FYI, the extreme IV card fixed it!


----------



## musicaleCA (Oct 9, 2009)

icassell said:


> So why does the kit they are releasing in the USA include the 28-135 rather than the new 18-135 that is part of the kit options in Europe?



Maybe because they figure the average American wants a lower price, not higher quality gear, as opposed to the average European (hell, much of European culture is about quality...like the food...oh gods the FOOD!).


----------



## KnightShot (Oct 10, 2009)

how come no one has commented on my post in this forum???


----------



## CxThree (Oct 10, 2009)

The one where you asked if anyone ordered from Amazon?  Maybe nobody ordered from there?  I ordered from Adorama on the 8th and got mine a week ago.  Plenty of places are still backordered.


----------



## Buckster (Oct 10, 2009)

KnightShot said:


> how come no one has commented on my post in this forum???


Sorry I didn't get back to you right away on this important message.

I didn't order one.  Not from Amazon or anyone else.

Hope that's helpful to you.  :thumbup:


----------



## zland (Oct 11, 2009)

FYI, I did some video shooting today, really my first real attempt. The downsides are you got to check focus before startying the video & because you are not looking thru the viewfinder, it makes it easier to not get it right. The LCD was bright enough to see it though even in bright sunlight shinning on the LCD. I did not see a real good way to keep in in focus while your subject is moving. 

The video came out pretty nice. I still find that if you have a fast car going from right to left accross the screen it is a bit jerky but I took video of guys playing basketball & of surfing & they came out pretty good. Regarding video quality, very sharp compared to any consumer cams I have personally seen.


----------



## cassio (Oct 11, 2009)

Some photographers have been attaching audio cables to the Canon 7D.


----------



## Hobbes (Oct 13, 2009)

high ISO performance compared to other Canon dslrs:
Canon EOS 7D Digital SLR Camera Review


----------



## cfusionpm (Oct 13, 2009)

An article I saw posted elsewhere regarding noise, pixel size, and megapixels:

Myth busted: smaller pixels have more noise, less dynamic range, worse diffraction, etc. - Photography Community


----------



## musicaleCA (Oct 13, 2009)

cfusionpm said:


> An article I saw posted elsewhere regarding noise, pixel size, and megapixels:
> 
> Myth busted: smaller pixels have more noise, less dynamic range, worse diffraction, etc. - Photography Community



Hell...now that's a useful read. If you distill that argument, it boils down to what I've been saying all along: "Be sensible people, for goodness sake."


----------



## battletone (Oct 13, 2009)

I don't get something in that article.....in the debating afterwards, someone mentions that 15million/billion/zillion photons falling on a sensor with larger pixels will get more light per pixel than a higher megapixel sensor because it is being split up among more pixels.....  Then they say to just down sample because will take care of everything and give the same s/n ratio.

Is that right and this the correct statement?


----------



## cassio (Oct 13, 2009)

There are reports of oveheating sensors when taking long videos and on high ISO.

I don't think it would mean much if you're just shooting pictures.


----------

