Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
My 7D impressions
- Thread starter mrkgoo
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Great results, mrkgoo! I have the EF 100mm f/2.8 macro but that EF-S 60mm is really versatile for normal (non-macro) shots as well.
Unfortunately, my 7D is going back tomorrow. The keepers are amazing, and I loved the functionality and features of the 7D, but I just don't get the same number of tack sharp pictures that I do with my 50D. There was just something amiss with the focusing on mine. It was an early model (1.07 firmware), and maybe later firmware or hardware will fix the problem but I just couldn't live with the focusing problems for that much money.
Unfortunately, my 7D is going back tomorrow. The keepers are amazing, and I loved the functionality and features of the 7D, but I just don't get the same number of tack sharp pictures that I do with my 50D. There was just something amiss with the focusing on mine. It was an early model (1.07 firmware), and maybe later firmware or hardware will fix the problem but I just couldn't live with the focusing problems for that much money.
Great results, mrkgoo! I have the EF 100mm f/2.8 macro but that EF-S 60mm is really versatile for normal (non-macro) shots as well.
Unfortunately, my 7D is going back tomorrow. The keepers are amazing, and I loved the functionality and features of the 7D, but I just don't get the same number of tack sharp pictures that I do with my 50D. There was just something amiss with the focusing on mine. It was an early model (1.07 firmware), and maybe later firmware or hardware will fix the problem but I just couldn't live with the focusing problems for that much money.
It sounds as though you're sending it back without getting any replacement. If so, presumably there is some other issue influencing your decision to go back to the 50D.
I've noticed threads on a couple of forums regarding auto-focus woes that some 7D owners are having. I have to admit that I'm rather skeptical, partly because I'm not having any AF problems myself, and partly because the 7D has a very advanced and complex AF system and delivers much higher resolution than most upgraders are used to seeing. So I'm curious: what particular AF problem were you having, and how did you go about troubleshooting it?
Those macro shots are great! I just picked mine up the other day and have taken a few test shots just haven't had time to process them yet. Really like the focus so far and am loving the video part of it (I actually got it more for the video than stills, although really need to work on my manual focus quickness now ) I'll try and post some pic's here pretty soon and a more in depth review
Thanks again for all thr comments!
Interesting. You didn't get it checked out or get a replacement? The AF is so precise on mine - but then, I normally use single point AF. I HAVE noticed a few quirks using ALL points, but as I discovered, that's the nature of all point mode (I ad similar issues on my 40D when I went back and checked). I think with so many AF points active, it's really hard to get what you want if you are using narrow DOF.
I would only use all AF points when doing something like landscape. For macro, it pretty much has to be manual. Note, the AF system is pretty flexible - you can enable only groups of points, for example. Perhaps would be useful for an upgrader to have and 'old school' mode, where the only points that are active are the ones that fall in the same places as the XXD series.
Great results, mrkgoo! I have the EF 100mm f/2.8 macro but that EF-S 60mm is really versatile for normal (non-macro) shots as well.
Unfortunately, my 7D is going back tomorrow. The keepers are amazing, and I loved the functionality and features of the 7D, but I just don't get the same number of tack sharp pictures that I do with my 50D. There was just something amiss with the focusing on mine. It was an early model (1.07 firmware), and maybe later firmware or hardware will fix the problem but I just couldn't live with the focusing problems for that much money.
Interesting. You didn't get it checked out or get a replacement? The AF is so precise on mine - but then, I normally use single point AF. I HAVE noticed a few quirks using ALL points, but as I discovered, that's the nature of all point mode (I ad similar issues on my 40D when I went back and checked). I think with so many AF points active, it's really hard to get what you want if you are using narrow DOF.
I would only use all AF points when doing something like landscape. For macro, it pretty much has to be manual. Note, the AF system is pretty flexible - you can enable only groups of points, for example. Perhaps would be useful for an upgrader to have and 'old school' mode, where the only points that are active are the ones that fall in the same places as the XXD series.
Actually, the multi-point (expansion and zone) modes are really designed for tracking moving subjects. In those cases, like with a bird or a moving athlete, you generally have a subject that is against a rather homogeneous background as the camera sees it (either a sky or else a background that is at a considerable distance from the subject).
For all other types of images, especially anything with shallow depth of field, singe-point focus is the way to go. For most landscapes or macro, I use manual focus, unless for some reason I'm unable to use a tripod (and would then use single-point AF).
Yes, agreed. I'm just 1) lazy to choose anything to focus at narrow aperture on landscapes, and 2) just want to see all the points light up in the viewfinder. As a Canon user, it's crazy cool!
Generally, I normally use single point as I'm a focus-recompose kinda guy. Macros need manual work - but the AF lightup is useful to help.
"I really should invest in some better software to post process (which I basically do none of at the moment ). I'm going to wait for an Aperture 3.0 or something, and maybe when I get a larger hard drive, I can seriously give RAW a better go."
mrkgoo...
Have you installed Canon's software? Try it...DPP has the ability to do SOME, albeit limited (compared with Aper/PS and to a lesser extent, LightRoom). The good thing about Canon's DPP is the RAW processing, specifically programmed for the 7d and other Canon RAW files.
There are plenty of free programs to try as well....just do a search. Check out POTN and DPReview for ideas. Also, LR/PS and other Adobe products allow a 30 day trial which is well worth it to give it a run...I am now using DPP in conjunction with BOTH Aperture and LR/PS. My computer is completely confused Still trying to figure out what I like best....Apple has been rumored to be releasing Aperture X (3.0) in the next 30-60 days...possibly better multi-core support with Snow Leopard and Grand Central...to be seen. Obviously, a bit cheaper than the Adobe alternatives and possibly better performance, built specifically for Apple's hardware....
Just thought I'd point out some options....as your photography, straight out of the camera (if you're not BS'ing us) is stunning! Phenomenal macro shots. You've got the camera figured out....it's a whole new Creative Ball o' Wax with post processing. Check out Lynda.com for some inexpensive ($25/month unlimited classes) tutorials on all software!
Jer
mrkgoo...
Have you installed Canon's software? Try it...DPP has the ability to do SOME, albeit limited (compared with Aper/PS and to a lesser extent, LightRoom). The good thing about Canon's DPP is the RAW processing, specifically programmed for the 7d and other Canon RAW files.
There are plenty of free programs to try as well....just do a search. Check out POTN and DPReview for ideas. Also, LR/PS and other Adobe products allow a 30 day trial which is well worth it to give it a run...I am now using DPP in conjunction with BOTH Aperture and LR/PS. My computer is completely confused
Still trying to figure out what I like best....Apple has been rumored to be releasing Aperture X (3.0) in the next 30-60 days...possibly better multi-core support with Snow Leopard and Grand Central...to be seen. Obviously, a bit cheaper than the Adobe alternatives and possibly better performance, built specifically for Apple's hardware....Just thought I'd point out some options....as your photography, straight out of the camera (if you're not BS'ing us
) is stunning! Phenomenal macro shots. You've got the camera figured out....it's a whole new Creative Ball o' Wax with post processing. Check out Lynda.com for some inexpensive ($25/month unlimited classes) tutorials on all software!Jer
"I really should invest in some better software to post process (which I basically do none of at the moment ). I'm going to wait for an Aperture 3.0 or something, and maybe when I get a larger hard drive, I can seriously give RAW a better go."
mrkgoo...
Have you installed Canon's software? Try it...DPP has the ability to do SOME, albeit limited (compared with Aper/PS and to a lesser extent, LightRoom). The good thing about Canon's DPP is the RAW processing, specifically programmed for the 7d and other Canon RAW files.
There are plenty of free programs to try as well....just do a search. Check out POTN and DPReview for ideas. Also, LR/PS and other Adobe products allow a 30 day trial which is well worth it to give it a run...I am now using DPP in conjunction with BOTH Aperture and LR/PS. My computer is completely confused
Just thought I'd point out some options....as your photography, straight out of the camera (if you're not BS'ing us
Jer
I've tried Aperture in the past, and yes I have DPP. Played around with a bit, pretty powerful, but I miss some file management functions.
I use iPhoto at the moment, and since it works nicely with Aperture, that's probably where I want to head.
Some of these aren't STRAIGHT out of camera. Probably third are cropped, and maybe a quarter of them I adjust the highs or lows on the histogram. I also punch up the contrast/saturation/sharpness in the built-in picture styles standard by one notch each. I'll occasionally bump these down to default - for example on overcast days or indoors, the extra saturation is actually not that pleasant. There isn't too much difference overall, just very slight 'punch' added to images with colour. I try to keep it in the camera as much as possible.
Thanks for the comments, I'll keep them in mind!
I use multipoint for landscapes, and control DOF with lens apertures from f/11-22, lens on AF. The points tell me exactly what areas in the frame the lens focuses on. With the camera set to track a subject, I use single point (usually the center one) since I don't want the lens to focus on the foreground or background. For macro or moon shots I focus manually. For a shot of a bird, moose, and such, I use one point with the lens on AF, and the camera set to track the subject.
With a 40D, those are probably your best options. The 7D has a whole different system and different options and more AF points that cover a larger portion of the frame. With landscapes, I find that using single-point AF (if not MF) enables me to target the hyperfocal distance most accurately.
Sorry, I must've missed this earlier.
I don't know what there is to be skeptical about.
I took both cameras and the 200mm f/2 I rent for sports to a football game Friday night. In side-by-side testing, my copy of the 7D just didn't get the sharp focus that I get with my 50D, even after spending Thursday night messing around with the MA on the 7D (which cost me an extra day's lens rental). AI servo mode with a manually selected focus point, one shot with a manually selected focus point, with and without zone expansion, whatever. The new "advanced" AF features would be great except that I got consistently better results from my supposedly "inferior" 50D.
I don't know why there's been such a coordinated effort to discredit anyone who's had AF issues with their 7D, including you in this post.
I had no qualms about sending my 7D back, since I didn't feel like I could trust it. I had no intention of letting my return period pass while Canon decided whether or not there was a problem they could fix. Maybe I'll buy another 7D in six months or so once they've got the bugs worked out, maybe not. I see Canon USA actually admitted to the 7D ghosting issue in burst mode, so maybe there is hope.
That answered my question, thanks. My apologies if I seemed to be "discrediting" you. My skepticism has nothing to do with you (I knew nothing about your situation until you just shared it). I read some threads on other forums that all boiled down to some very straightforward focusing mistakes. I would be really disappointed if I had to send my camera back, so you have my sympathy. However, six months is a long time. I guess you think what you experienced is some kind of design flaw, but mine (at least) focuses beautifully, so I think you should feel comfortable getting a replacement.
I have been using mine for a few weeks now and still need to look at the images in detail to get a full review done but so far there are a lot of points about this camera that I do really like. The improved focus system has been great, I used it at a wedding in a dark reception hall and was able to focus using any focus point where my 5d (or any other camera I have used) I would have to only use the center point and re-compose. That is a huge bonus for me to be able to get an accurate focus.
The resolution of the screen is great also and so far I am pretty happy with the noise levels (compared to my other backup a 30d, these files at 1600 are much better) Even compared to my 5d they are pretty good. Here is a shot at 3200 that was taken during the day with pretty good light but definitely a useable shot. I'll try and post some from a wedding at 3200 when those are processed.
This shot is cropped 100% and no adjustments made other than opening the RAW in lightroom and converting to JPG. There is noise but it's pretty tight and clean. At higher ISO's it does become pretty bad (mainly 12800).
I put up more shots from 400 ISO to 12800 ISO on my site if anyone wants to see them all (they are sized down for the web, so you can't see the full detail but can get a decent idea of image quality)
http://digitalphotobuzz.com/canon-7d-vs-5d-comparison
I haven't seen any AF issues that others have reported yet but will keep testing this out for and report anything back.
The resolution of the screen is great also and so far I am pretty happy with the noise levels (compared to my other backup a 30d, these files at 1600 are much better) Even compared to my 5d they are pretty good. Here is a shot at 3200 that was taken during the day with pretty good light but definitely a useable shot. I'll try and post some from a wedding at 3200 when those are processed.
This shot is cropped 100% and no adjustments made other than opening the RAW in lightroom and converting to JPG. There is noise but it's pretty tight and clean. At higher ISO's it does become pretty bad (mainly 12800).
I put up more shots from 400 ISO to 12800 ISO on my site if anyone wants to see them all (they are sized down for the web, so you can't see the full detail but can get a decent idea of image quality)
http://digitalphotobuzz.com/canon-7d-vs-5d-comparison
I haven't seen any AF issues that others have reported yet but will keep testing this out for and report anything back.
stagi: thanks for the impressions and example. Looks good!
Anyway, I'm still using mine. Getting into the groove now:
EF-17-40L, 17mm, f/8.0, 1/125s, iso100 (Panoramic stitch)
EF-85mm f/1.8, f/4.0, 1/160s, iso800
EF-17-40L, 17mm, f/8.0, 1/400s, iso400
EF-17-40L, 40mm, f/8.0, 1/60s, iso100
EF-17-40L, 17mm, f/8.0, 1/500s, iso400
EF-17-40L, 40mm, f/8.0, 1/800s, iso400
EF-S 60mm Macro, f/8.0, 1/800s, iso100
Anyway, I'm still using mine. Getting into the groove now:
EF-17-40L, 17mm, f/8.0, 1/125s, iso100 (Panoramic stitch)
EF-85mm f/1.8, f/4.0, 1/160s, iso800
EF-17-40L, 17mm, f/8.0, 1/400s, iso400
EF-17-40L, 40mm, f/8.0, 1/60s, iso100
EF-17-40L, 17mm, f/8.0, 1/500s, iso400
EF-17-40L, 40mm, f/8.0, 1/800s, iso400
EF-S 60mm Macro, f/8.0, 1/800s, iso100
EF-17-40L, 17mm, f/8.0, 1/125s, iso100 (Panoramic stitch)
I really like the range of color in this one
I understand what you are saying, but regardless of camera being used, landscape photography where you want everything in the foreground and background in focus, works best by controlling lens aperture. For the sharpest photos and as I mentioned above, lens apertures from f/16 and up (f/22, f/24, f/26...), with the camera mounted on tripod are the best. Some landscape photographers even lock the mirror in such instances.
I find my landscape panos have to be manual everything to get quality stitches. That means manual focus, ISO, aperture, and shutter speed, and a very deep depth of field -- even manual shutter release. If I use auto focus I have problems in post processing getting things to line up. Likewise, auto ISO means I'm going to have noticeably brighter and darker frames that need to be "feathered" in post.
Having tried both, I'd rather start to stitch together a seamless set of images and brighten underexposed areas myself vs. having each frame exposed correctly but have to cope with frame "integration issues".
My latest project is to build two identical panos with different exposures to try HDR-type techniques on them (not to create HDR images, just to help bring back underexposed shadows).
Then again, some of my panos require a day's hike in; it's not like I get a second chance if I didn't get something just right.
Having tried both, I'd rather start to stitch together a seamless set of images and brighten underexposed areas myself vs. having each frame exposed correctly but have to cope with frame "integration issues".
My latest project is to build two identical panos with different exposures to try HDR-type techniques on them (not to create HDR images, just to help bring back underexposed shadows).
Then again, some of my panos require a day's hike in; it's not like I get a second chance if I didn't get something just right.
I find my landscape panos have to be manual everything to get quality stitches. That means manual focus, ISO, aperture, and shutter speed, and a very deep depth of field -- even manual shutter release. If I use auto focus I have problems in post processing getting things to line up. Likewise, auto ISO means I'm going to have noticeably brighter and darker frames that need to be "feathered" in post.
Having tried both, I'd rather start to stitch together a seamless set of images and brighten underexposed areas myself vs. having each frame exposed correctly but have to cope with frame "integration issues".
My latest project is to build two identical panos with different exposures to try HDR-type techniques on them (not to create HDR images, just to help bring back underexposed shadows).
Then again, some of my panos require a day's hike in; it's not like I get a second chance if I didn't get something just right.
What software do you use to stitch? I've been using the opensource program Hugin. I think it's very competent (I don't know the first thing about stitching).
My latest effort:
Click on through to get to a large version (1900x3750):
All images: EF-S 60mm Macro, f/2.8, 1/125s, iso1600.
