Review of 7D by Darwin Wiggett

Started Nov 11, 2009 | Discussions
Zeee Forum Pro • Posts: 18,791
Re: Shoot landscapes at f/7.1

jameslj wrote:

You can shoot landscapes at f/7.1. It's easy with a wide angle lens.

With a 17mm lens at f/7.1, hyperfocal distance is about 9 feet.
http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

I even shot this one at 25mm and f/4.5:

But, if a shot needed f/16, I would use f/16. It's all about tradeoffs. I don't think diffraction is that noticeable on the 7D at f/13 and below when sharpening a bit and viewing at normal sizes.

A nice capture by the way.

 Zeee's gear list:Zeee's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon Extender EF 1.4x III +5 more
Sylvain G Regular Member • Posts: 406
Re: Shoot landscapes at f/7.1

Thanks for the healthy demonstration. It doesn't seem to me to be so difficult...

It should also be stressed that Planet Earth shouldn't explode if you use F/8 or F/9 on a 18mp aps-c (as synthetic tests prove). But I do think indeed that testing it at f/16 and then bashing it for its soft results least than reasonable. It's surely not something we'll see camera makers warn against, but IMO an "advanced" photographer in this digital era cannot overlook what negative effects a high pixel density can be brought along with the advantages...

-- hide signature --

my 'review' of the Olympus PEN E-P1 - http://www.catbag.net/wp/?p=173

 Sylvain G's gear list:Sylvain G's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M5 II Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +4 more
Zeee Forum Pro • Posts: 18,791
Re: Review of 7D by Darwin Wiggett

I have a lot of respect for Darwin but based on the images that are being posted I don't trust this review.

 Zeee's gear list:Zeee's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon Extender EF 1.4x III +5 more
jameslj Regular Member • Posts: 125
Don't know what to make of his results

I really don't know what to make of his results. Maybe manual focusing in live view on the 7D isn't optimal (ie looks sharper than it actually is so you don't know focus is off a bit). I doubt that, though. It's just a guess.

I generally don't view at 100%. But when I look at my 7D images at the scale, I don't see much to be concerned about. High ISO shots look a bit noisy (to me). But I'm not a high ISO shooter. In general I find the 18MP resolution results in very smooth and more life like looking images than my 40D.

Anyway, here are some test samples. Same photo different crops and sharpening. Shot at ISO 100, f/11 with the Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro. I don't think the cropped images look particularly dull and mushy for 100% views shot at non-optimal aperture. The unsharpened images just look like they need some mild sharpening. In the uncropped images, the best focus is in the bottom right of the frame. All RAW conversions done by DPP.

Shot 1: 100% crop - no processing
Shot 2: 100% crop - RAW sharpening at 5 - RGB sharpening at 160.
Shot 3: 1400x933 downres - the size I like to view at - no processing
Shot 4: 1400x933 downres - RAW sharpening at 5 - RGB sharpening at 160.

Shot 1:

Shot 2:

Shot 3:

Shot 4:

Greg Pavlov Senior Member • Posts: 1,888
Re: Review of 7D by Darwin Wiggett

But a small fraction of the G9's and G11's.

alundeb wrote:
What?

What other camera is there with that pixel density? The 7D has 50% more pixels per area than the Xsi and D300, and more than double the pixel density of the 1ds3.

Using f/8 with 1.6 crop isn't a senosr specific problem.

Trading DOF against diffraction is a fundamental property of photography. There is no format that can provide less diffraction at a give DOF than another.

Greg Pavlov wrote:

alundeb wrote:

Raw converter (green channel differences not correctly handled), and aperture, sadly as usual with all reviews of 7D sharpness.

Come on, f8 to f16 on a 18 MP crop.

The 7D is not the only high-density sensor camera with photos in this review. And if the 7D is truly diffraction-limited by f8, that is a problem (I suspect, tho, that diffraction is not the issue here).

Tom Reynolds Contributing Member • Posts: 584
Re: Review of 7D by Darwin Wiggett

It looks to me like a focusing problem. Maybe the testers did not properly calibrate the camera to the lens they were using. Unless all shots were manual focus and then it would be problem with the screen.

Vibrio Veteran Member • Posts: 4,004
he should sharpen the images

we don't view unsharpened images on prints or screen and each camera has a different strength AA filter no doubt. the other problem is per pixel sharpnes, if he printed out A4 prints of those images he'd probably see hardly any difference.

elfroggio wrote:

Wiggett compares the 7d to Nikon d300s and the 1sdMk3.

http://darwinwiggett.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/the-canon-7d/

Does anybody cares to comment?

My view it's the raw converter. Canon really screwed up when they didn't arrange it Adobe. Nikon did get it though in the LR2.5 and ACR5.5 why not Canon?

Thanks

SergeSmArt I Regular Member • Posts: 284
Re: he should sharpen the images

Yes! this is the answer! As far as I see the images from 7D need more sharpering..
I did one test and here the result:
24-70L -

Original:

http://www.sergesphotography.com/old_site/pages/PhotoTech/Canon7D_18-135/IMG_0064_o.jpg

16-35 L II -

Original:

http://www.sergesphotography.com/old_site/pages/PhotoTech/Canon7D_18-135/IMG_0218_o.jpg

70-200/2.8 LIS -

Original:

http://www.sergesphotography.com/old_site/pages/PhotoTech/Canon7D_18-135/IMG_0239_o.jpg

Not as good as my 5D2, but seems OK for crop camera, even I would prefer if 7D have 12-14 MGPXL, than 18 ...

tivoboy Senior Member • Posts: 1,421
Re: he should sharpen the images

hair.

I find the best place to see the OOF or lack of sharp out of camera focusing is in the hair. In the example above the mans mustache and hair is blurred, and no amount of sharpening is going to increase the sharpness if the individual hairs are blurred. It needs to start out better.

I'm hoping a second copy is going to come out of the gates better for me at least.

The Davinator
The Davinator Forum Pro • Posts: 22,228
Re: Review of 7D by Darwin Wiggett

elfroggio wrote:

Wiggett compares the 7d to Nikon d300s and the 1sdMk3.

http://darwinwiggett.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/the-canon-7d/

Does anybody cares to comment?

Well, studio shots at f13 are a good way to test diffraction....not sensor limits. Comments on soft, muddy files....that aren't sharpened...confused me more. He shoots tha lndscapes at f16....thereby limiting the sensor rez due to diffraction....and then comments on soft muddy images. After that, I lost interest in the poorly executed comparison.

My view it's the raw converter. Canon really screwed up when they didn't arrange it Adobe. Nikon did get it though in the LR2.5 and ACR5.5 why not Canon?

Thanks

 The Davinator's gear list:The Davinator's gear list
Canon EOS D30 Canon EOS 10D Nikon D2X Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm X-T1 +17 more
DRoOpY1592 Regular Member • Posts: 391
Darwin Wiggett has a poor workflow. See this thread
David Franklin Senior Member • Posts: 1,147
alundeb is essentially correct

arandamdas,

I'm sorry, but despite whatever expertise you may have in some other field or fields (ph.d), alundeb is essentially correct in his various posts.

You might try understanding photo optics as a system in a state of stasis. When you change one input, other factors in the system change to yield an equal output. In otherwords, by whatever amount that decreasing (lower f/stop number) lens aperture decreases diffraction with an 1.6X APC size sensor, as compared to a larger 1.0X "full frame" sensor, it roughly equals the given depth of field increase at any given aperture in an equivalent focal length lens that the 1.6X sensor yields over the larger size sensor. Therefore, with a smaller (1.6 APC vs. "full frame") sensor, when you decrease your aperture in order to still yield the sharpest result your lens should be able to make use of while still avoiding diffraction, that reduced aperture will yield very similar depth of field results to a corresponding diffraction-limited but smaller aperture, with the equivqlent focal length lens, you would otherwise have used on a larger sensor with the same number of pixels.

Put much more succinctly, there is no such thing as a free lunch.

To try to somewhat nullify the issue of lens diffraction and depth of field when using the larger format view cameras of our over century-long heritage, our photo ancestors pioneered the lens focus technique known as the Scheinflug effect, achieving a type of optical system-cheating effect by tilting or swinging the lens plane relative to the sensor plane. This allows us to place the plane of focus in plane more congruent with what we want to see in better focus. This is at least one way you may somewhat upset the the optical system stasis of depth of field. If you buy a tilt/shift lens, you can take advantage of this effect with your DSLR right now.

Regards,
David
--
Keep learning; share knowledge; think seriously about outcomes; seek wisdom.

The Davinator
The Davinator Forum Pro • Posts: 22,228
Isn't it amazing?

DRoOpY1592 wrote:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/809801/136#7765183

Page 137 post 16.

Isn't it amazing what kind of difference one achieves when they actually know what they're doing? We see this often in sensor comparisons, film scanning comparisons, comparisons between various digital or film formats, etc, etc.

Luckily for us, this fellow was under the weather and completed a logical comparison.

 The Davinator's gear list:The Davinator's gear list
Canon EOS D30 Canon EOS 10D Nikon D2X Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm X-T1 +17 more
jm67 Contributing Member • Posts: 913
Re: Review of 7D by Darwin Wiggett

I might not stop laughing for a week. I don't know how I'm going to get any work done.

-- hide signature --

I am as ignorant as ever, and wiser than I've ever been.

PeaceFrog Forum Pro • Posts: 12,185
Re: Review of 7D by Darwin Wiggett

Actually I thought the point of the resolution test was to see what the maximum resolution possible was. It might not be something that you will see under most circumstances but at least it tells you what the maximum limit is…

Since there are so many different types of photography possible with any given camera it seems rather hopeless to get a “general resolution” figure that you seem to be seeking.

Greg

-- hide signature --
Daniel Clune
Daniel Clune Veteran Member • Posts: 3,453
have both 7D and Xsi

Just finished shooting my test chart with both cameras with a sigma 105 macro. Did F4, f8, and f13 in raw. Live view manual focus, mirror lockup, 2 sec self timer on tripod. Will post results later tonight. Since there the same cameras used in test i thought i would do my own test. Used DPP for raw process no sharpening and NR off.
--
http://www.pbase.com/dc9mm

 Daniel Clune's gear list:Daniel Clune's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 200-400mm f/4G ED-IF VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Epson Stylus Photo R1900
David_C Contributing Member • Posts: 931
Dear alundeb......

You have some interesting points, but I found it interresting that the reviewer tried 3 different 7D's.

So I look forward to your in-death review of the 7D, alundeb, to show us how to properly test a camera and write a review.

Dave

alundeb wrote:

Raw converter (green channel differences not correctly handled), and aperture, sadly as usual with all reviews of 7D sharpness.

Come on, f8 to f16 on a 18 MP crop.

Did they say f16? On a crop? The airy disc is two pixels wide.

If a reviewer doesn't know that you must use 1 1/3 stop wider aperture on a 1.6 crop sensor to get the SAME DOF AND DIFFRACTION, they are far off.

They don't have a clue what they're doing.

Our only hope for a correct measurement of 7D resolution is photozone, they use apertue f/4.

Erik Johansen
Erik Johansen Senior Member • Posts: 1,271
Re: have both 7D and Xsi

I've done the same today 7D with Sigma 70/2.8 Macro.
2.8-5.6-13 all ISO's up to 6400, compared to 40D though.

Result are fantastic; BUT even in DPP 7D is a lot more tricky to get right than 40D.

I can't register any diffraction-problems in f:13 with this lens......

I look forward to your results.
Erik
--
Canon since 1959 (and a Finepix F10 just in case)

 Erik Johansen's gear list:Erik Johansen's gear list
HDRsoft Photomatix Pro
arindamdas Forum Member • Posts: 64
Re: Review of 7D by Darwin Wiggett

Greg,

I wasn't looking for a general resolution figure. My whole point, which I ultimately wanted to get into before being sidetracked by some bone-headed comments (to me at least) is that, as you cram in more and more megapixels into a small format sensor, at some point, it is going to hurt you more by hastening the limit at which you start to see and feel the diffraction effects. Essentially, we will be left with a very narrow range of apertures where the camera would work best. That would probably lead to a horses-for-courses policy, use a MP crammed 1.6x crop camera for wildlife photography for instance, and a 12.3 MP FX camera for landscape photography (this is just an example folks).

If you view it from this angle, a cheap xsi doesn't seem to be a bad option after all for so-called amateurs .

PeaceFrog wrote:

Actually I thought the point of the resolution test was to see what the maximum resolution possible was. It might not be something that you will see under most circumstances but at least it tells you what the maximum limit is…

Since there are so many different types of photography possible with any given camera it seems rather hopeless to get a “general resolution” figure that you seem to be seeking.

Greg

Clint Dunn Senior Member • Posts: 1,551
Re: alundeb is essentially correct

David Franklin wrote:

arandamdas,

I'm sorry, but despite whatever expertise you may have in some other field or fields (ph.d), alundeb is essentially correct in his various posts.

Regards,
David

I think you guys missed Arandamdas's point....it was quite clear to me. He was not arguing the differences in diffraction, and DOF between a full frame and crop camera. He was stating that if a REBEL gives sharper images at the same smaller apertures as a 7D...then the Rebel would be better for him for landscapes. As you know the Rebel and the 7D are BOTH crop cameras...so what is your point???? Arandamdas is comparing apples to apples, you guys are comparing apples to oranges.

Clint
http://clintdunn.zenfolio.com

 Clint Dunn's gear list:Clint Dunn's gear list
Leica SL (Typ 601) Carl Zeiss C Sonnar T* 1,5/50 ZM Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 Super Wide Heliar Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 1,4/35 ZM Leica SL 24-90mm F2.8-4 +1 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads