Someone has to do it ... Canon 7D review comments

yana36 said:

http://www.kareldonk.com/karel/2009/11/08/canon-eos-7d-review-noisier-than-40d/

Karel Donk says the same about 7D...
Noise, banding, AF problems.

Click to expand...

Seems like a clown to me, the RiceHigh of Canon perhaps? Why is he comparing a 10 megapixel camera to a 18 megapixel camera at 100%? Downsample the 7D picture to 10 megapixel and the comparison might be somewhat meaningful.

Might also want to wait with comparisons until the 7D support in ACR comes out of beta stage...

--
My Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36164047@N06/

Thomas Karlmann said:

I completely forgot about K-7's ability to work better than the others at cold. One K-7 reviewer promtly threw the K-7 into the freezer, then went on to take photos and wvaluate. (OK, I know you can't do that, but that's what he did -- just to proove functionality -- and it worked)
--
Thom--

Click to expand...

Well I have had quite anumber of cameras with me in some rather extreme temperatures (well below -40C) for extended periods of time on assignments and for hte fun of the trips.

I have yet to see one fail due to low temperature, sure LCDs can get a little sluggish in response, but the overall issue for me is batterylife in those conditions.

While it seems that pentax works towards low temperature operation in the specs and I personally find it to be excellent news to see them improve on that side of things, then I have not found it any better or worse in real world use.

As I have not touched the 7D and likely never will I cannot comment on the two specifically, but if the 7D operates on line with say a K100D in cold weather, then my guess is that you will need extended time well below -40C to see a significant difference.
--
Thomas

Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool
http://main.duplophotography.com/

Duplo said:

Thomas Karlmann said:

I completely forgot about K-7's ability to work better than the others at cold. One K-7 reviewer promtly threw the K-7 into the freezer, then went on to take photos and wvaluate. (OK, I know you can't do that, but that's what he did -- just to proove functionality -- and it worked)
--
Thom--

Click to expand...

Well I have had quite anumber of cameras with me in some rather extreme temperatures (well below -40C) for extended periods of time on assignments and for hte fun of the trips.

I have yet to see one fail due to low temperature, sure LCDs can get a little sluggish in response, but the overall issue for me is batterylife in those conditions.

While it seems that pentax works towards low temperature operation in the specs and I personally find it to be excellent news to see them improve on that side of things, then I have not found it any better or worse in real world use.

As I have not touched the 7D and likely never will I cannot comment on the two specifically, but if the 7D operates on line with say a K100D in cold weather, then my guess is that you will need extended time well below -40C to see a significant difference.
--
Thomas

Click to expand...

Does anyone know what Pentax is doing, if anything, to achieve the lower spec'd temperature for the K-7?
--
Thom--

godfrog said:

yana36 said:

http://www.kareldonk.com/karel/2009/11/08/canon-eos-7d-review-noisier-than-40d/

Karel Donk says the same about 7D...
Noise, banding, AF problems.

Click to expand...

Seems like a clown to me, the RiceHigh of Canon perhaps? Why is he comparing a 10 megapixel camera to a 18 megapixel camera at 100%? Downsample the 7D picture to 10 megapixel and the comparison might be somewhat meaningful.

Might also want to wait with comparisons until the 7D support in ACR comes out of beta stage...

--

Click to expand...

My suggestion is that you read a bit futher down the page. There are folks there with dozens of Canon bodies chucking the lot of them for lack of getting them repaired/fixed/replaced to their satisfaction. Of course, there are naysayers all over, but are all those posters wrong? I do not think the thrust of some of the later comments was over megapixels -- rather over AF and other issues.

AFAIC: I always prefer same-sized image parts even among different MP cameras. DPR tests differently.
--
Thom--

I think the K-7 should be compared with the 7D in the review, not because nor in spite of its price but because of its features.

However, when I started reading the 7D's review I did notice the lack of any mention to Pentax's K-7, and thought: "Well, DPReview just excluded it from any comparison. Oh, well." That is, despite the fact that the K-7 has comparable features (although at an other price level). And right from the start I had the feeling that the choice to not include the K-7 was biased.

One place where I really missed the K-7 was in the photo comparing body sizes of the 7D and the 50D (the K-7 review had a body size comparison photo), and the graphical comparison of viewfinder magnifications.

Yet rather to my surprise the K-7 was later included in several comparisons, and as others have already pointed out, had advantages of its own or similar features not mentioned or adequately emphasized.Not to mention the slightly smaller magnification mentioned as a comparative disadvantage.

(And, oh, my 3 year old K10D already had a pop-up flash with the ability to act as wireless controller.)

If nothing else, I'd just like to add my voice to all the others, because I think such bias or at least such poor reviewing does not go unnoticed.

All that is said, notwithstanding the merits and unique features the 7D indeed has. However a fair comparison would allow many to see that the K-7 is not only a valid competitor but can be a much better choice.

Cheers,

--
From DPReview posting suggestions

• Enter a subject - please enter a concise subject description, this will be the first thing a reader sees of your message, make it count. If you're following-up to a message we would encourage you to CHANGE the subject to reflect the content of your message.

Thomas Karlmann said:

godfrog said:

yana36 said:

http://www.kareldonk.com/karel/2009/11/08/canon-eos-7d-review-noisier-than-40d/

Karel Donk says the same about 7D...
Noise, banding, AF problems.

Click to expand...

Seems like a clown to me, the RiceHigh of Canon perhaps? Why is he comparing a 10 megapixel camera to a 18 megapixel camera at 100%? Downsample the 7D picture to 10 megapixel and the comparison might be somewhat meaningful.

Might also want to wait with comparisons until the 7D support in ACR comes out of beta stage...

--

Click to expand...

My suggestion is that you read a bit futher down the page. There are folks there with dozens of Canon bodies chucking the lot of them for lack of getting them repaired/fixed/replaced to their satisfaction. Of course, there are naysayers all over, but are all those posters wrong? I do not think the thrust of some of the later comments was over megapixels -- rather over AF and other issues.

AFAIC: I always prefer same-sized image parts even among different MP cameras. DPR tests differently.
--
Thom--

Click to expand...

Of course, on a per pixel basis, the 7D has more noise. That said, make a 16x24 print at 1600iso and the 40D will not only have more noise, but have less resolution. As I own both, and have compared, this isn’t just a blind opinion, but based upon actual prints.

Autofocus has been dead on and accurate for both stationary and fast moving targets. I photographed my daughters basket ball team play and had no misfires. For weddings, it has been superb in low light.

The real issue I believe, is less of one with camera focus and noise….but more of one with people not understanding exactly how big a file they’re looking at in a 100% crop. Images from cameras 18, 21 and 24mp….as well as high end back are particularly unforgiving to poor technique. In other words, they will show every flaw in the technique of the photographer as well as the lens.

I have found that most complaints on the 7D originate from people who have not used high pixel count cameras in the past….but instead have moved up from 10 and 12mp cameras that are far more forgiving in not exposing the bad techniques of the photographer testing the gear.

Amazingly, once the technique of the photographers improve, you’ll find that in the future, they’ll obtain much better results from the camera….as though it miraculously healed itself.

Wouldn't make a difference if I did, because you're clearly not getting what I'm trying to tell you.

Excellent comments. Well put.
--
Thom--

Open your eyes and have a look at photos from 7D.
ISO1600 is sometimes like from good camerphone.



As for me, IQ of 7D is the worst I've ever seen from Canon

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=33581903

I started a thread about a week ago and only couple of members had participated.

I was surprised to see an 18MP dslr 7D has smaller file sizes for almost all images for similar situation from K-7 on Imaging-resource. In order to get clean output 7D seems to be throwing out lots of details.

I downloaded pics from 7D and K-7 in full resolution and compared their crops and almost everywhere K-7 has more details than 7D and so is noise.

I was thinking if details are there with noise-I can sacrifice them to get clean looking image in PP, but what if I wanted more details even though noise is there? The camera output which throws away lot of details can regain it back during PP?
So simply K-7 gives more headroom to a photographer.

Atindra

Dave Luttmann said:

Thomas Karlmann said:

godfrog said:

yana36 said:

http://www.kareldonk.com/karel/2009/11/08/canon-eos-7d-review-noisier-than-40d/

Karel Donk says the same about 7D...
Noise, banding, AF problems.

Click to expand...

Seems like a clown to me, the RiceHigh of Canon perhaps? Why is he comparing a 10 megapixel camera to a 18 megapixel camera at 100%? Downsample the 7D picture to 10 megapixel and the comparison might be somewhat meaningful.

Might also want to wait with comparisons until the 7D support in ACR comes out of beta stage...

--

Click to expand...

My suggestion is that you read a bit futher down the page. There are folks there with dozens of Canon bodies chucking the lot of them for lack of getting them repaired/fixed/replaced to their satisfaction. Of course, there are naysayers all over, but are all those posters wrong? I do not think the thrust of some of the later comments was over megapixels -- rather over AF and other issues.

AFAIC: I always prefer same-sized image parts even among different MP cameras. DPR tests differently.
--
Thom--

Click to expand...

Of course, on a per pixel basis, the 7D has more noise. That said, make a 16x24 print at 1600iso and the 40D will not only have more noise, but have less resolution. As I own both, and have compared, this isn’t just a blind opinion, but based upon actual prints.

Autofocus has been dead on and accurate for both stationary and fast moving targets. I photographed my daughters basket ball team play and had no misfires. For weddings, it has been superb in low light.

The real issue I believe, is less of one with camera focus and noise….but more of one with people not understanding exactly how big a file they’re looking at in a 100% crop. Images from cameras 18, 21 and 24mp….as well as high end back are particularly unforgiving to poor technique. In other words, they will show every flaw in the technique of the photographer as well as the lens.

I have found that most complaints on the 7D originate from people who have not used high pixel count cameras in the past….but instead have moved up from 10 and 12mp cameras that are far more forgiving in not exposing the bad techniques of the photographer testing the gear.

Amazingly, once the technique of the photographers improve, you’ll find that in the future, they’ll obtain much better results from the camera….as though it miraculously healed itself.

Click to expand...

I have started to reread the article with your thoughts in mind. I need to appreciate that you have both cameras. However I also read the words "cable release" and "tripod" in the body of the article. This might tend to weigh against the idea of poor photographer technique.

Presuming that everyone is truthful, I have to conclude what few like to hear -- sample-to-sample variation. In other words some cameras of certain model work very well, while others do not. This may support the author's claim that perhaps QC is not preventing some 7Ds from reaching users who are having issues.

My apologies, as I have no first hand information.

--
Thom--

well, it is a 7D review

there is no reason for them to mention any feature present on a K7 but not present on a 7D.

if there is a feature present on both cameras, yes, it should be fairly compared.

slocant said:

Yet rather to my surprise the K-7 was later included in several comparisons, and as others have already pointed out, had advantages of its own or similar features not mentioned or adequately emphasized....

Click to expand...

iliask said:

Please be reasonable. 7D has dual engines to process 18mp, 14 bit files at 8fps and a dedicated processor for focusing. Why are you baffled that it costs more? As a matter of fact, it's a bargain compared to the $5k pro bodies.

Ilias

Click to expand...

Simple. I'm not baffled why it costs more. I'm baffled why the lower cost isn't highlighted green on the comparison table.

The advantages if 18mp, 14 bit files, 8 fps, and focusing are already listed as 7D advantages on the table, each item considered indpendently.

So maybe you should ask yourself why the price row should be treated any differently.

Tan68 said:

there is no reason for them to mention any feature present on a K7 but not present on a 7D.

if there is a feature present on both cameras, yes, it should be fairly compared.

slocant said:

Yet rather to my surprise the K-7 was later included in several comparisons, and as others have already pointed out, had advantages of its own or similar features not mentioned or adequately emphasized....

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

When Canon was the only one that had video, I think that was pointed out in other reviews. Also, the lack of video is still pointed out in the Sony DSLR reviews. Why not level the playing field and mention the lack of the K-7's unique features in other reviews?

P.S.: Canon and Nikon for sure do not want to talk about in-body stabilization! One could go on: Oh, this camera does not have a button to set metered exposure in Manual mode? What, no configurable RAW button? How come there are so few exposure modes? Why is this camera so large and heavy? Why are there no pancake primes for this camera? Why does this vertical grip have a protrusion making it hard to strore in my camera bag? Etc, etc, etc. (pick your own features ... )
--
Thom--

Thomas Karlmann said:

yana36 said:

http://www.kareldonk.com/karel/2009/11/08/canon-eos-7d-review-noisier-than-40d/

Karel Donk says the same about 7D...
Noise, banding, AF problems.

Click to expand...

There is information in the above link that seems to go way beyond the scope of folks pouring over the DPR review topic of this thread -- I would urge potential buyers leaning in the direction of the 7D to read the above link, then decide for themselves! This information appears to come from many sources who are much more familiar with Canon systems than many. Are they all wrong?

Wholehearted thanks to yana36 for this link!
--
Thom--

Click to expand...

This person had never touched or seen a Canon 7D and this is being touted as a solid source? It'd be better to read the messages, below the blog, showing all the people that have owned multiple Canon DSLRs and state that the 7D is the best they've had. Who are you going to site, the person that's never even touched a 7D and doesn't own a Canon or the people that have owned multiple bodies?

That is horrible siting of resources. It's like siting a Pentax shooter's posting about what he thinks of the 7D, without ever touching or seeing it, and claiming it as fact.

wy2lam said:

Simple. I'm not baffled why it costs more. I'm baffled why the lower cost isn't highlighted green on the comparison table.

The advantages if 18mp, 14 bit files, 8 fps, and focusing are already listed as 7D advantages on the table, each item considered indpendently.

So maybe you should ask yourself why the price row should be treated any differently.

Click to expand...

If you're comparing similarly spec'ed cameras, then the cheapest should get the green but you can't assign a value to different feature sets.

For someone who needs full frame, the price difference from APS-C is irrellevant. The same applies for someone who needs 18mps or 8fps. How can DPR assign a value to that?

Ilias

KALEL33 said:

Thomas Karlmann said:

yana36 said:

http://www.kareldonk.com/karel/2009/11/08/canon-eos-7d-review-noisier-than-40d/

Karel Donk says the same about 7D...
Noise, banding, AF problems.

Click to expand...

There is information in the above link that seems to go way beyond the scope of folks pouring over the DPR review topic of this thread -- I would urge potential buyers leaning in the direction of the 7D to read the above link, then decide for themselves! This information appears to come from many sources who are much more familiar with Canon systems than many. Are they all wrong?

Wholehearted thanks to yana36 for this link!
--
Thom--

Click to expand...

This person had never touched or seen a Canon 7D and this is being touted as a solid source? It'd be better to read the messages, below the blog, showing all the people that have owned multiple Canon DSLRs and state that the 7D is the best they've had. Who are you going to site, the person that's never even touched a 7D and doesn't own a Canon or the people that have owned multiple bodies?

That is horrible siting of resources. It's like siting a Pentax shooter's posting about what he thinks of the 7D, without ever touching or seeing it, and claiming it as fact.

Click to expand...

Which site did you read??? I did not read 7d owners gushing with enthusiasm. I read of long time Canon owners with several bodies and suites of lenses that were chucking the entire lot because AF didn't work.

What is wrong with folks reporting on cameras w/o ownership of same? Testers do it all the time. I thought the internet was the opportunity to find out before you buy.

Admittedly, the source is a long one and there are many thoughts presented there. If all you read were owners in support of the 7D, then you owe it to yourself to re-read the link!
--
Thom--

Thomas Karlmann said:

Which site did you read??? I did not read 7d owners gushing with enthusiasm. I read of long time Canon owners with several bodies and suites of lenses that were chucking the entire lot because AF didn't work.

Click to expand...

I read that site. Read all the replies below the blog. There is nothing but happy 7D owners and no owners with gripes.

Thomas Karlmann said:

What is wrong with folks reporting on cameras w/o ownership of same? Testers do it all the time. I thought the internet was the opportunity to find out before you buy.

Click to expand...

So I guess that the RiceHigh is much better for Pentax than that person is for the 7D because he actually shoots Pentax. I'll remember to site him as a "great" source next time he reviews a camera.

Thomas Karlmann said:

Admittedly, the source is a long one and there are many thoughts presented there. If all you read were owners in support of the 7D, then you owe it to yourself to re-read the link!
--

Click to expand...

I reread it and they picked over some of the worst threads out of the Canon forum here. I could do that with the K7, K20, and K2000, and make them look horrible by posting a few bad stories. You had seen what you wanted to see, so you accepted the opinion of a person with WHO HAS NEVER TOUCHED OR SEEN THE CAMERA as gospel.

KALEL33 said:

Thomas Karlmann said:

Which site did you read??? I did not read 7d owners gushing with enthusiasm. I read of long time Canon owners with several bodies and suites of lenses that were chucking the entire lot because AF didn't work.

Click to expand...

I read that site. Read all the replies below the blog. There is nothing but happy 7D owners and no owners with gripes.

KALEL33 said:

What is wrong with folks reporting on cameras w/o ownership of same? Testers do it all the time. I thought the internet was the opportunity to find out before you buy.

Click to expand...

So I guess that the RiceHigh is much better for Pentax than that person is for the 7D because he actually shoots Pentax. I'll remember to site him as a "great" source next time he reviews a camera.

KALEL33 said:

Admittedly, the source is a long one and there are many thoughts presented there. If all you read were owners in support of the 7D, then you owe it to yourself to re-read the link!
--

Click to expand...

I reread it and they picked over some of the worst threads out of the Canon forum here. I could do that with the K7, K20, and K2000, and make them look horrible by posting a few bad stories. You had seen what you wanted to see, so you accepted the opinion of a person with WHO HAS NEVER TOUCHED OR SEEN THE CAMERA as gospel.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that's pretty common in internet forums.

KALEL33 said:

Thomas Karlmann said:

Which site did you read??? I did not read 7d owners gushing with enthusiasm. I read of long time Canon owners with several bodies and suites of lenses that were chucking the entire lot because AF didn't work.

Click to expand...

I read that site. Read all the replies below the blog. There is nothing but happy 7D owners and no owners with gripes.

KALEL33 said:

What is wrong with folks reporting on cameras w/o ownership of same? Testers do it all the time. I thought the internet was the opportunity to find out before you buy.

Click to expand...

So I guess that the RiceHigh is much better for Pentax than that person is for the 7D because he actually shoots Pentax. I'll remember to site him as a "great" source next time he reviews a camera.

KALEL33 said:

Admittedly, the source is a long one and there are many thoughts presented there. If all you read were owners in support of the 7D, then you owe it to yourself to re-read the link!
--

Click to expand...

I reread it and they picked over some of the worst threads out of the Canon forum here. I could do that with the K7, K20, and K2000, and make them look horrible by posting a few bad stories. You had seen what you wanted to see, so you accepted the opinion of a person with WHO HAS NEVER TOUCHED OR SEEN THE CAMERA as gospel.

Click to expand...

I re-read it too. If you do not like the fact that the guy has not does his own hands-on testing -- then you have a fair criticism -- for you and others who feel similarly. There are some valid points made by folks dissatisfied with their Canon gear -- but that is perhaps misleading, as mostly those are from other Canon models, not 7D.

I prefer testers who have used their own money to buy the camera, rather than given one for testing.

If the majority of 7D users are happy with performance in the areas discussed, it would be folly to refute that.

There are others who are dissatisfied, and I wish them well. I think it is ok to review a review, look at the data, and perhaps arrive at your own conclusion. "Don't shoot the messenger" comes to mind.

Gospel? No, but additional information, YES.

--
Thom--