Reading mode: Light Dark

K-7 / 7D / 50D detail comparison

Go to last post
Kuivaamo said:
I'm tired of this "comparison" already. In-camera jpg's with default NR, deep 3D target with suspect focus consistency... Certainly you can't make any solid conclusions based on them. Go to the IR website, and open up these images (ISO 1600, K7 first then 7D):

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/K7/FULLRES/K7hSLI1600_NR_OFF.HTM

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E7D/FULLRES/E7DhSLI01600_NR_OFF.HTM

Not a RAW comparison, unfortunately, but at least the in-camera NR is minimised for both and the focus seems good. This should leave you in no doubt as to whether the 7D can resolve details at high ISO (look at the "Proportional Scale" wheel near the right edge in particular, as well as the orange fabric towards the left).

The 7D is smoother and it resolves more detail just about everywhere I care to look.
Click to expand...
I love it! *sarcasm* So you go point out two images where the Pentax K-7 clearly has different focus than the 7d and point out the 7d's superiority. Based on your own points your comparison is as invalid as this one by the original poster.

Eric
--
I never saw an ugly thing in my life: for let the form of an object
be what it may - light, shade, and perspective will always make it
beautiful. - John Constable (quote)

See my Blog at: http://viking79.blogspot.com/ (8/18/09)
Flickr Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28177041@N03/ (updated daily)
See my PPG Shots: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/erictastad (8/31/09)
 
In the Pentax shot you can see a halo along the left hand side of the metal rod holding the resolution target that isn't visible in the 7D crop - the Pentax has obviously been more heavily sharpened in camera.

All this "issue" proves is that - maybe - the Pentax has a slightly better jpeg engine.

Not really an issue for RAW users...
 
viking79 said:
Kuivaamo said:
I'm tired of this "comparison" already. In-camera jpg's with default NR, deep 3D target with suspect focus consistency... Certainly you can't make any solid conclusions based on them. Go to the IR website, and open up these images (ISO 1600, K7 first then 7D):

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/K7/FULLRES/K7hSLI1600_NR_OFF.HTM

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E7D/FULLRES/E7DhSLI01600_NR_OFF.HTM

Not a RAW comparison, unfortunately, but at least the in-camera NR is minimised for both and the focus seems good. This should leave you in no doubt as to whether the 7D can resolve details at high ISO (look at the "Proportional Scale" wheel near the right edge in particular, as well as the orange fabric towards the left).

The 7D is smoother and it resolves more detail just about everywhere I care to look.
Click to expand...
I love it! *sarcasm* So you go point out two images where the Pentax K-7 clearly has different focus than the 7d and point out the 7d's superiority. Based on your own points your comparison is as invalid as this one by the original poster.

Eric
Click to expand...
...what? I'm sure the plane of focus is somewhere in that K7 shot, the details do seem pretty crisp to me. And the scene is shallower than the mannequin one. And the 7D image has more detail everywhere , not just at one point. Moreover, I linked to entire images, I didn't pick and choose any particular spot where one camera happens to be more in focus than the other, unlike the guy who compiled the mannequin crops; and unlike that guy, I also chose "NR Off" images which should show the maximum amount of detail you're going to get out of in-camera jpg's.

I'm not pointing out the "superiority" of the 7D, just that in this comparison, the 7D has more detail. It is in direct contradiction to the comparison that has been making the rounds, so we need more controlled comparisons if we want to know which one has the edge in noise/detail. At the very least, it casts serious doubts over the validity of the turquoise denim comparison.

Let me go for the record here that I think both are excellent cameras, inasmuch as one can make that distinction based purely on online (p)reviews, specs and sample images. But I dislike dishonest comparisons.
 
You are right about the focus but at the same time I believe that I can see more noise on the surface of the button in the 1600 K7 shot than its counterpart 7D shot.
O5iris said:
Hi,

I'm sorry but just by looking at those crops it clearly seems that the K7 is the only one perfectly focused on that fabric, therefore you're conclusion is flawed. One has to believe the 50D/7D can do much much better than that.

Cheers!
Click to expand...
 
... and you'll realize how the samples you selected are far from real life.

BTW I have a 50D and I know it does a lot better than that.
These 50D samples, specially 100 ISO, are a joke

Regards

Jaime
 
Yup, I noticed that on the edge of the lips. Also there seems to be more contrast in the K7 image which also helps to give a sharper appearance.

Really these types of tests should be Raw only as in camera processing is not a constant and changes with different shutter and ISO.
Keith Reeder said:
In the Pentax shot you can see a halo along the left hand side of the metal rod holding the resolution target that isn't visible in the 7D crop - the Pentax has obviously been more heavily sharpened in camera.

All this "issue" proves is that - maybe - the Pentax has a slightly better jpeg engine.

Not really an issue for RAW users...
Click to expand...
--

 
I totally agree..

Also all 50D tests were performed using firmware 1.02 rather than 1.07
Jaims said:
... and you'll realize how the samples you selected are far from real life.

BTW I have a 50D and I know it does a lot better than that.
These 50D samples, specially 100 ISO, are a joke

Regards

Jaime
Click to expand...
--

 
These images on IR should be used as guides,and not conclusive.Each camera process their Jpegs differently,so the result will vary,then there is the lens factors,and do not forget user errors in the various setups.

I shoot the Pentax K7 and its a great camera,the size makes it very unique.The Canon 7D from what i seen on paper and other wise,is a leap for the APS-C sensor,Canon has done a good job here,no doubt.

The results from all current crop sensor cameras,surpass what most of us print and view on screen,really a storm in a tea cup issue to say the least.Great IQ can be pulled from any of these cameras raw files,to the point where differences come down to lens ,and processing preferences.Go capture some wonderful images and be contented.

Cheers !
 
Greg Pavlov said:
You are right about the focus but at the same time I believe that I can see more noise on the surface of the button in the 1600 K7 shot than its counterpart 7D shot.
Click to expand...
i'm unclear why IR uses settings with the DOF too shallow to have everything in focus. Why not just shoot at a larger F-stop? This should also equalize the lenses used since they perform better at larger F-stops

or am i missing something here?
 
They are already down to 1/40: the scene isn't anywhere near as bright as some people here have claimed (or complained about...).
foot said:
Greg Pavlov said:
You are right about the focus but at the same time I believe that I can see more noise on the surface of the button in the 1600 K7 shot than its counterpart 7D shot.
Click to expand...
i'm unclear why IR uses settings with the DOF too shallow to have everything in focus. Why not just shoot at a larger F-stop? This should also equalize the lenses used since they perform better at larger F-stops

or am i missing something here?
Click to expand...
 
Don't they use a tripod, though? At least one would hope so.
Greg Pavlov said:
They are already down to 1/40: the scene isn't anywhere near as bright as some people here have claimed (or complained about...).
foot said:
Greg Pavlov said:
You are right about the focus but at the same time I believe that I can see more noise on the surface of the button in the 1600 K7 shot than its counterpart 7D shot.
Click to expand...
i'm unclear why IR uses settings with the DOF too shallow to have everything in focus. Why not just shoot at a larger F-stop? This should also equalize the lenses used since they perform better at larger F-stops

or am i missing something here?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
There is no denying it; based on IR comparometer, the K-7 images are indeed better. I had thrown in the D300 in the mix and it still came out ahead. Focus can't be off for ALL cameras except the K-7 so lets admit that it is indeed better in these samples.

How does the K-7 focus? If it's on par with a 40D, I think it makes a compelling case for itself based on the image quality.

--
I see dead pixels
 
I agree. Comparisons at 1/40 is completely meaningless. They should all be tested with the same third-party lens, put on a tripod, stopped down to f/8, and manually focused to the same point on the scene.

I stopped peeping at pixels ever since the 20D came out with a 8Mp sensor. What's the point? And what's with the fuss with trusting the comparison on IR when we think even DP tests sometimes have flaws?
 
Get a life people, first of all the tests must be made correct, at all NR settings and ISO's, second the focus must be exactly the same for all the tests to get a final verdict...

And 3'rd but not the last, both camera are very god, only the photographer behind it will make a dig difference!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Johnnew Archibald - SMGJohn
Can we actually judge a strict CFA vs a loose CFA by SMI scores?
Replies
11
Views
2K
Johnnew Archibald - SMGJohn
Johnnew Archibald - SMGJohn
Z
A WIDE-RANGING REVIEW OF TOPAZ LABS - WARNING LONG POST
2
Replies
28
Views
35K
Ernie Misner
Ernie Misner
M
Camera Comparison - something odd with Sony A7R IV test shots
2
Replies
38
Views
7K
foot
F
solarider
Pentax K-1 Field Test is up at IR
Replies
17
Views
18
solarider
solarider
Easy Rider
  • Question Question
X-T 1 VS X-T20 - is the IQ close?
Replies
16
Views
151
wallawalla
W

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top