Reading mode: Light Dark

7D review says autofocus way better than 5D II

Go to last post
E

Eug

Senior Member
Messages
2,779
Reaction score
26
Location
Toronto, CA
YA7DR - Yet another 7D review.

This one makes some interesting comments about the autofocus.

http://www.apertureprofessional.com/showthread.php?t=31689

"The focus tracking was especially powerful. While standing in Times Square we were able to track onto quickly-diving pigeons instantly and have the system lock focus as the subject moved across the frame without any panning needed."

"We shot the 7D with both the company's new lenses and our stable of test pro lenses and all focused quickly and reliably, much more so than the 5D Mark II."

Images here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/35555043@N05/sets/72157622077759223/

--
Everything Apple - http://everythingapple.blogspot.com/
 
This guy wouldn't know a "great image" if it stood up in his soup - they're awful .

I can't take his opinion of the 7D's AF seriously when there isn't a remotely sharp image in the entire gallery...
 
And from your other posts, you hate video and will "jump ship" instead of buy a camera with video! :D
 
I didn't think they were awful, even if I wouldn't necessarily want to frame any of them and put them on my wall.

Plus did you actually download all the large size images to assess for critical focus? I certainly didn't, cuz that would take far too long.
Keith Reeder said:
This guy wouldn't know a "great image" if it stood up in his soup - they're awful .

I can't take his opinion of the 7D's AF seriously when there isn't a remotely sharp image in the entire gallery...
Click to expand...
--
Everything Apple - http://everythingapple.blogspot.com/
 
really not impressed with the sample pictures... most of them are extremely soft... and for several picsl exposure is average at best.. -- in the assumption that these guys are professional photographers, I'm not sure what conclusions to draw from this set. Probably the same old one: need to wait until the production model is out and gets tested by reliable hands.
 
warning that this was long ago totally discredited, the guy missed AF by at least 10' on half his photos and none look perfect.

no clue what he is doing

now hopefully the 7D DOES AF as well as he claims, but that remains to be seen.
Eug said:
YA7DR - Yet another 7D review.

This one makes some interesting comments about the autofocus.

http://www.apertureprofessional.com/showthread.php?t=31689

"The focus tracking was especially powerful. While standing in Times Square we were able to track onto quickly-diving pigeons instantly and have the system lock focus as the subject moved across the frame without any panning needed."

"We shot the 7D with both the company's new lenses and our stable of test pro lenses and all focused quickly and reliably, much more so than the 5D Mark II."

Images here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/35555043@N05/sets/72157622077759223/

--
Everything Apple - http://everythingapple.blogspot.com/
Click to expand...
 
The only action shot was the one of the kid throwing the baseball. That shot was at 185mm f2.8 - not really a great test of AF tracking ability. The quote you posted spoke of birds - yet photos of the birds moving across the frame aren't in the gallery. So while I won't go so far as to say the photos in the flickr gallery are bad, they just don't show how good/bad the AF tracking might be.

Show me both bird moving from point to point and runner coming toward the camera - at least a 5 shot burst of each. For the runner I would prefer at least 300mm f2.8 with the runner filling over half the frame.
 
Eug said:
I didn't think they were awful, even if I wouldn't necessarily want to frame any of them and put them on my wall.

Plus did you actually download all the large size images to assess for critical focus? I certainly didn't, cuz that would take far too long.
Click to expand...
yeah, so listen to those who have

the focus is not a tad off here and there, the photos are totally, utterly blurred in many cases, I mean focus is literally 10-20' off in some cases!

and not just blurred for a pixel peeper, blurred to the point that anybody would reject them even for a 4x6"
 
John_A_G said:
The only action shot was the one of the kid throwing the baseball. That shot was at 185mm f2.8 - not really a great test of AF tracking ability. The quote you posted spoke of birds - yet photos of the birds moving across the frame aren't in the gallery. So while I won't go so far as to say the photos in the flickr gallery are bad, they just don't show how good/bad the AF tracking might be.

Show me both bird moving from point to point and runner coming toward the camera - at least a 5 shot burst of each. For the runner I would prefer at least 300mm f2.8 with the runner filling over half the frame.
Click to expand...
lots of photos are too blurred to even use as 4x6" prints

guy had no idea what he was doing
 
Could be true. I only looked at a few shots, and they were in OK focus. However, the problem was that they were mainly portraits.
bronxbombers said:
Eug said:
I didn't think they were awful, even if I wouldn't necessarily want to frame any of them and put them on my wall.

Plus did you actually download all the large size images to assess for critical focus? I certainly didn't, cuz that would take far too long.
Click to expand...
yeah, so listen to those who have

the focus is not a tad off here and there, the photos are totally, utterly blurred in many cases, I mean focus is literally 10-20' off in some cases!

and not just blurred for a pixel peeper, blurred to the point that anybody would reject them even for a 4x6"
Click to expand...
--
Everything Apple - http://everythingapple.blogspot.com/
 
There were 2 photos with birds in them. One flying across the screen (in the first half of the group) and one with a bird flying upwards (bird not even close to being in focus.

There are actually some photos in focus and they are not bad. The girl with the black rounded hat, a lot of the building ones.
--
Michael Kaplan
http://www.pbase.com/mkaplan
See my profile for equipment list
 
Giuliano Colivicchi said:
Your way of use critic is horrible!
Click to expand...
Directed at me, Giuliano?

When someone posts stuff like that (to be clear, this Flickr gallery has come up before, the "blog post" has appeared on more than one site, and the photos in the gallery have been discussed at length on other forums) and then suggests they're "great", the photographer invites comment and criticism.

And - by any objective measure - those are not great images: especially, they do more to suggest that the 7D's AF is terrible (which I do not believe for a moment) than that it's the next big thing...
 
Keith Reeder said:
Keith Reeder wrote:

Indeed - reviewed, scrutinised, carefully considered, and found woefully wanting...

I make no apologies, Eug, for knowing a sharp image from a soft, OOF one.
Click to expand...
I agree with you Keith. The reviewer's examples are not the best. I would wait for an advanced amateur or a pro to review this one.

Cheers,
--
Sabesh
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sabesh/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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