7D review cons is missing an important issue

bionet

Senior Member
Messages
1,133
Reaction score
32
Location
DE
Without interchangeable focusing screens, the user has to rely on AF with fast lenses. Normal screens only represent DOF at about f/4.5. I'm using the Eg-S in the 5D2 and it's a must have for manual focusing.

Considering this can be a deal breaker for some people (it certainly is for me), it should have been listed in the "cons" list.
 
And I don't like the font used on the Canon logo! LOL
--
Bob

'I can look at a fine art photograph and sometimes I can hear music.' - Ansel Adams

Yes they should change that, but the most important con is that it don't says Nikon or Leica

--
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication

http://aleo-photo.org
 
And I don't like the font used on the Canon logo! LOL
Very funny. Not being able to manually focus is a big issue. If you like to use DSLRs like a point and shoot, good for you. Some people expect the OVF to work for more than just framing.
 
Yeah, and Cannon is too easy to misspell!

Bet I can manually focus a 7D (or a D3 or an a850) just fine without any other screen than the one it comes with. I was also told that it is impossible to manually focus a D200 without something called a 'katzdeli' or 'catsear' or something expensive. Fact is, I can do razor sharp macros without any portion of the feline anatomy.
 
Seriously, a proper focusing screen really does make a big difference. Critical manual focus with a fast lens wide open, like the 85/1.8, is quite an ordeal with the standard screen. The actual plane of focus is much narrower than what is shown through the viewfinder. Live View is a workaround, but that has its own set of issues.

If you enjoy using adapters then it's a point that you need to consider. I have a Zeiss Biotar 75/1.5 in Exacta mount that's much more usable since installing the EF-S matte screen in my 40D.

--
-Bryan
http://bcostin.typepad.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bcostin/
 
Without interchangeable focusing screens, the user has to rely on AF with fast lenses. Normal screens only represent DOF at about f/4.5.
On my D300, I can see a difference in the DOF displayed at f/2 compared
with f/4.5 when I use the DOF preview button. Do you not? I still
would prefer a split prism collar though.

Dpreview no longer plays hardball with reviews. They used to be much
better. There was a time when Phil would criticize a camera and then
things would be fixed in the next release. This no longer happens. Even
things which the 7D still does just as wrong as previous bodies are not
mentioned any more, but on the old bodies' reviews, they were.

Here's a list of handling issues on the 7D compared with the x00 bodies:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1039&message=33658077

I don't know why folks think they're in the same class; according to
their handling, they certainly aren't. Dpreview used to talk about this,
but now they don't.

Wonder why?

--tom
 
Without interchangeable focusing screens, the user has to rely on AF with fast lenses. Normal screens only represent DOF at about f/4.5.
On my D300, I can see a difference in the DOF displayed at f/2 compared
with f/4.5 when I use the DOF preview button. Do you not? I still
would prefer a split prism collar though.

Dpreview no longer plays hardball with reviews. They used to be much
better. There was a time when Phil would criticize a camera and then
things would be fixed in the next release. This no longer happens. Even
things which the 7D still does just as wrong as previous bodies are not
mentioned any more, but on the old bodies' reviews, they were.

Here's a list of handling issues on the 7D compared with the x00 bodies:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1039&message=33658077
There's some misinformation in your list, I posted a reply to the post.
 
Yeah, and Cannon is too easy to misspell!

Bet I can manually focus a 7D (or a D3 or an a850) just fine without any other screen than the one it comes with. I was also told that it is impossible to manually focus a D200 without something called a 'katzdeli' or 'catsear' or something expensive. Fact is, I can do razor sharp macros without any portion of the feline anatomy.
Les, bionet is describing an entirely different issue.

For macro, you're typically shooting at apertures where the stock screen works OK. The Nikon 60mm and 105mm are f2.8 at infinity, around f4.5 at 1:1, and even smaller on tubes or with TCs. My "baby", the 200mm f4 micro-Nikkor is f4 wide open, and f6.3 at 1:1 (if memory serves). And most of my macros don't involve those lenses being wide open.

The default focusing screen has about a 10 degree scatter, it "sees" a "cone" from the f5.6 part of a lens's exit pupil. (screens aren't very precises, it's a mix of f4, f5.6, f8, and smaller apertures). The AF sensors are the same 10 degrees, and so are the split image screens like a Nikon K3 or the Katz Eye and Haouda. Everything is 10 degrees. It's "friendly" for our slow "kit" zooms.

For the system cameras like F3, F4, F5, Nikon used to make a large number of specialty screens, ground glass screens with 20 degree scatter for fast lenses, as well as split images with a 15 degree spread. Ground glass with 5 degree scatter for slow lenses and telescopes, with or without a 7 degree "slow lens" prism.

Canon still does, right up to the 50D you could get the EF-S screen, with a 20 degree scatter. It's dimmer when you use slow lenses, but when you use fast lenses you can really see the image snap into focus, because it shows you about f2 DOF instead of 4-5.6.

Unfortunately, with fast lenses shot wide open (or nearly so) you need that extra snap. Not only is the DOF so shallow it demands accuracy, but there's a problem caused by spherical aberration that causes the optimal plane of focus to be different on a lens at f4 or 5.6 than it is at f2 or 1.4.

So, unless you've got one of those cool Zeiss f2.0 macro lenses and you're in the habit of shooting it wide open, you're not experiencing the same problems that the OP is.

One way camera makers get around this is by adding extra AF sensors with 20 degree spreads to work with f2.8 or faster lenses. But that only helps AF.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
One way camera makers get around this is by adding extra AF sensors with 20 degree spreads to work with f2.8 or faster lenses. But that only helps AF.
No, they can be used for MF confirmation as well. Of course if you don't trust the AF to begin with you are hardly likely to trust the same sensor used in this mode.

--
Erik
 
Here's a list of handling issues on the 7D compared with the x00 bodies:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1039&message=33658077
There's some misinformation in your list, I posted a reply to the post.
There's some abbreviated information. Canon's flawed implementation of how manual exposure interacts with Auto ISO make it fairly unsable. The rest you'll have to argue with 7D PDF manual about. Feel free to post cuts-and-pastes if you think those are wrong. Be specific. The staggering balance is accurage. And I didn't even give it the full treatment. It's not just a matter of: Canon simply screwed up with a lot of stuff; there's just no way to make purse out of sow's ear.

--tom
 
Here's a list of handling issues on the 7D compared with the x00 bodies:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1039&message=33658077
There's some misinformation in your list, I posted a reply to the post.
There's some abbreviated information. Canon's flawed implementation of how manual exposure interacts with Auto ISO make it fairly unsable. The rest you'll have to argue with 7D PDF manual about. Feel free to post cuts-and-pastes if you think those are wrong. Be specific. The staggering balance is accurage. And I didn't even give it the full treatment. It's not just a matter of: Canon simply screwed up with a lot of stuff; there's just no way to make purse out of sow's ear.

--tom
Sure, whatever you say Mr. Nikon fanboy. I love my 7D regardless.

Mark
 
Sure, whatever you say Mr. Nikon fanboy. I love my 7D regardless.
I wouldn't want you not to like it. But since you can't provide any
factual refutation based on citations from the 7d PDF manual, you
are obviously just blowing smoke with nothing to say.

My article wasn't for your sort.

--tom
 
One way camera makers get around this is by adding extra AF sensors with 20 degree spreads to work with f2.8 or faster lenses. But that only helps AF.
No, they can be used for MF confirmation as well. Of course if you don't trust the AF to begin with you are hardly likely to trust the same sensor used in this mode.

--
Erik
Overall, this is a very nice feature on the D700 (and I assume on those lovely D3ish bodies, too) --- the guiding arrows are great, and it often works well if you put the active sensor on a good contrasty edge for focusing. But ... it's not just a matter of trust, sometimes the sensor just can't confirm focus (and sometimes I am using a MF lens, and might trust AF if it were available for that lens). Sometimes both arrows just blink in confusion, although focus is very close to correct. Maybe it's related to the scattering angle cited by Joseph. I reckon I'll be getting a split-prism screen installed in my D700 to help ... because I do sometimes use the Zeiss 100mm at f/2. Fortunately, the D700 permits this.
--
Chris in Red Stick
 
OMG! If you don't like the 7D, don't buy one. I would if I were a Canon shooter, but no one is making you do it. If you are correct, and the review is missing important points, then lots of Canon folks will take theirs back to the dealer, and Canon will have to fix it or have the engineers commit seppuku.
 
I agree with the point regarding the need for screens with ability to "snap" focus (details as described by Joe W. above). That swap out is ususally the first thing that I do when I get a new canon body, and it has been a rather big deal for me in terms of benefit.

I'm, just wondering if perhaps this screen is removable (in the usual or similar fashion), but that Canon simply hasn't offered, or hasn't yet offered a replacement alternative screen. If that's the case than we need to wait only a short while for the aftermarket alternatives such as the Katz eye to come out with their alternative screens and we are back in buisiness.
 
Without interchangeable focusing screens, the user has to rely on AF with fast lenses. Normal screens only represent DOF at about f/4.5. I'm using the Eg-S in the 5D2 and it's a must have for manual focusing.

Considering this can be a deal breaker for some people (it certainly is for me), it should have been listed in the "cons" list.
You have a point, but the VF is very large.

A similar situation applies to most Nikons I think.

Roberto
 
I seem recall reading that the screens are "officially not replaceable" due to the proximity of the new LCD screen for focus/etc to the focusing screen.

D.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top