-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Canon 7D
- Thread starter AshMills
- Start date
Tim the Grey
Veteran Member
And I assume you are always using a 10% crop? Otherwise, why the hell do you WANT that many pixels?
I have 5 here, and I don't feel shortchanged...
--
The world's best Vulcan, XH558, after 14 years on the ground, lives again.
http://www.tvoc.co.uk
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandfish_imagining/
I have 5 here, and I don't feel shortchanged...
--
The world's best Vulcan, XH558, after 14 years on the ground, lives again.
http://www.tvoc.co.uk
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandfish_imagining/
BG454
Veteran Member
I'm afraid I have no idea what that sentence means, like it's written in another language.
Could you please explain it to me?
--
about a FF chip, but with the chip they are using it can't match the Pentax K7. Take a look at the thread that I've linked to below for details.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=32904182
--
Have a good day.
Regards Allan
Malcolm Practice
Leading Member
Chris59
Forum Pro
First of all, sensors do NOT outresolve lenses and lenses do NOT outresolve sensors. Resolution is a combination of sensor AND lens (and software but we won't go there just to keep it simple).
Secondly what about diffraction? Diffraction is simply a theoretical and unavoidable limit to the resolution possible from a lens at a particular aperture. The better (more pixels) the sensor, the better it will resolve the theortetically diffraction limited image - period.
Chris59
Forum Pro
I had a (very) quick look at your profile and we seem to agree on a number of disparate points so I am making the effort to understand your post.And I assume you are always using a 10% crop? Otherwise, why the hell do you WANT that many pixels?
I have 5 here, and I don't feel shortchanged...
--
The world's best Vulcan, XH558, after 14 years on the ground, lives again.
http://www.tvoc.co.uk
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandfish_imagining/
The short answer is that more pixels means more resolution, more detail and sometimes, even more sharpness. Also, all things being equal, it doesn't make the entire image any noisier at the same ISO and DR is the same.
So I guess, my answer is why wouldn't I want all that?
John Sheehy
Forum Pro
Canon has never had any subsequent or upgrade camera gone to higher noise at high ISOs, at the image level. I would be surprised if the 7D wasn't as good or better than the 50D (or 20D) at high ISO noise.
--
John
John Sheehy
Forum Pro
Tell the reviewers to use the Tamron 90mm or Sigma 50/1.4 - they won't be seeing what you said until much high pixel counts.
--
John
Pierre Bellefeuille
Member
Based on the research I made on the Canon 7D, I thing that Canon has done a great job! This camera is a real winner.
I am surprised how well the noise is well controlled with so much pixels on a small captor. The color balance is gorgeous too!
For the moment, I am still using my 5D. But, I am very tempted to get the 7D too.
--
We always find when we search
I am surprised how well the noise is well controlled with so much pixels on a small captor. The color balance is gorgeous too!
For the moment, I am still using my 5D. But, I am very tempted to get the 7D too.
--
We always find when we search
Same for Pentax K-7... rather for $1299
The K-7 is weather, dust and cold resistant (to 14° F/ -10° C) + built-in shake reduction and can use older legacy lenses + the wonderful all metal Limited lenses for a start.
Much more manageable file sizes and yet can print to poster size or larger if needed.
See imaging-resource.com or trustedreviews.com for ready reviews.
or http://www.pentaximaging.com/slr/K-7/
for those on the fence this is a good extra-choice to consider
The K-7 is weather, dust and cold resistant (to 14° F/ -10° C) + built-in shake reduction and can use older legacy lenses + the wonderful all metal Limited lenses for a start.
Much more manageable file sizes and yet can print to poster size or larger if needed.
See imaging-resource.com or trustedreviews.com for ready reviews.
or http://www.pentaximaging.com/slr/K-7/
for those on the fence this is a good extra-choice to consider
AlanG
Senior Member
Gee what's with this? I figured you all would know what I meant. It is pretty simple. We covered a lot of tougher stuff than this in M&P at my first year at RIT.
But for those who don't... take the best lens from a given manufacturer... the one with the potential for the highest resolution at the aperture that gives this lens the potential for its best resolution, and match it to a sensor that turns this potential resolution into actual resolution. Maybe this system will only be at its best at the center of the frame when focused at 10 feet. But there is going to be one lens that at one aperture at a given distance at the center of the frame will be the best. By best aperture, obviously I am talking about an aperture that has minimal diffraction or it wouldn't be the "best" would it?. Maybe it is two or three stops down, you'd have to test for it.
At some point having more pixels (or any other improvements to the sensor, firmware, and software) with the best lens at the best aperture won't produce any additional resolution. I am guessing that point will be around 50 megapixels for 24x36 and the best current lenses, but it could be higher although there will be diminishing returns past 50. (You'd need 100 to get 50% more resolution potential.)
--
Alan Goldstein
http://www.goldsteinphoto.com
Galleries:
http://www.photoshelter.com/usr-show/U0000PjmCIXEp.NI
BG454
Veteran Member
So you have the first review camera?
Otherwise I don't see how you can make a statement like that when no reviews are available, and all you have to go by is the manufacturers publicity material. I'm sure it will be an excellent product, but until I see some meaningful reviews I'll reserve judgement.
--
John Sheehy
Forum Pro
50MP? Someday we will look back and laugh at that, like the declaration that maybe 5 or 6 computers would find use in the world.
You don't start getting truly redundant until it takes more than 12 pixels for a full cycle of modulation in the red and green channels with a Bayerized sensor. There is a long, long tail where people will argue over the practical usefulness, but this is the ideal. I could live with not going that far (that would be gigapixels), but I eagerly anticipate FF at least 100 to 200 MP in my lifetime.
I can clearly see with my sharpest lenses that the mild AA filter in my Canon 50D is the only thing preventing all-out aliasing. Even with 2x or 2.8x worth of TCs, they still are undersampled by the rules of proper sampling. This means that they should still be undersampled with 4 to 8 times as many pixels (60 to 90MP for APS-C).
41%.
--
John
Pierre Bellefeuille
Member
I have seen the Canon video demo.
I went through the Canon 7D DP Review. I downloaded the Hi-Res versions into Photoshop. These Hi-Res are JPG, I can imagine that RAW will be even better. As a graphic designer and professional photographer, I work with Photoshop since 15 years. I know exactly what to check with image quality.
I can tell you that this camera has a surprisingly low noise, considering these many pixels gathered of a small sensor. The color balance is very good too, I would say excellent.
Mainly into Photoshop, I push very far the curves or Shadow/Highlight, just to see where the noise is or any banding. This small test is pretty fast and good to evaluate the sensor. I know there is some very extensive tests done by others that are more elaborated like the ones made by : http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance.summary/index.html
Why I say it is a winner :
Canon has more surprise for us to come
--
We always find when we search
I went through the Canon 7D DP Review. I downloaded the Hi-Res versions into Photoshop. These Hi-Res are JPG, I can imagine that RAW will be even better. As a graphic designer and professional photographer, I work with Photoshop since 15 years. I know exactly what to check with image quality.
I can tell you that this camera has a surprisingly low noise, considering these many pixels gathered of a small sensor. The color balance is very good too, I would say excellent.
Mainly into Photoshop, I push very far the curves or Shadow/Highlight, just to see where the noise is or any banding. This small test is pretty fast and good to evaluate the sensor. I know there is some very extensive tests done by others that are more elaborated like the ones made by : http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance.summary/index.html
Why I say it is a winner :
- Weather seal
- 100% viewfinder
- 8 frames per second
- whole new focusing point approach
- etc.
Canon has more surprise for us to come
--
We always find when we search
Pierre Bellefeuille
Member
To MrBG :
Here is another link where you could have a better understanding about the new Canon 7D : http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E7D/E7DA.HTM
Yes, you can find already a lot of informations about this new Canon product.
--
We always find when we search
Here is another link where you could have a better understanding about the new Canon 7D : http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E7D/E7DA.HTM
Yes, you can find already a lot of informations about this new Canon product.
--
We always find when we search
Franka T.L.
Veteran Member
right now it made a duo together with the 5D Mk.II .. in away think of them as complementary models in the lineup. Just as 1D to 1Ds except they were really build for the utmost top end need ( which I assume the 1D-IV and 1Ds-IV would repeat )
--
--
- Franka -
BG454
Veteran Member
Yes, I saw that the day it was published. In the review they point out that this is "a prototype Canon 7D." I would therefore be wary of drawing any conclusions before a production camera is tested.
DPReview are professional enough to refrain from publishing detailed tests on pre-production units, because hardware/firmware/software may be revised on final release cameras.
To say "Based on the research I made on the Canon 7D, I thing that Canon has done a great job!" is based on incomplete evidence, and furthermore, is not actually based on your research, but on your opinion of others work.
As I said before, I have no doubt this is an excellent camera, but I still think it is too early to start drawing definitive conclusions.
"Based on our experience with the new camera's AF system so far, it's likely that focus on static subjects is going to be solid". Rob Galbraith
My K10D can do that very well for very much less $$$. ]; )
Too bad, despite a new AF it still is struggling
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-10042-10239-10240
My K10D can do that very well for very much less $$$. ];
Too bad, despite a new AF it still is struggling
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-10042-10239-10240
John Sheehy
Forum Pro
Wow! I didn't know that there were already RAWs from the 7D available. Looks like a winner, noise-wise. This is without a doubt, the camera with the lowest read noise per unit of area at high ISOs, of any APS-C; more than a stop better than the 50D, in my estimation. Read noise at ISO 3200 is about 29.6 ADU. Compare that to the 5D2's 20.4 ADU, with much bigger pixels. The 7D's read noise per unit of area, unless its ISO sensitivity is over-rated, may be slightly better than the 5D2. You know what this means for the next FF Canons ...
Read noise at the pixel level (5 ADU) is as good or better than the 1-series Canons (although there is a tad of vertical banding noise).
Where are the megapixel police? This is the highest-density APS-C DSLR, and it clearly has the lowest read noise per unit of area.
--
John
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum