Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 07 Oct 2014 (Tuesday) 08:17
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Scott Kelby's take on 7D mark II after real world use

 
pknight
Goldmember
Avatar
2,693 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Likes: 128
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Flyover Country
     
Oct 09, 2014 05:18 |  #121

MedicineMan4040 wrote in post #17202885 (external link)
Now teach the noob (me)...didn't Kelby (or someone) say that sports pro shooters always use jpg?? Not that I would know any different but if the camera is fast enough/buffer fast enough/card fast enough wouldn't they use raw?

I suspect that the issue is turnaround time. Last evening I was at a college volleyball match, and the university had a series of 30 photos online within an hour of the end of the match. If the jpegs are good enough for their uses they probably don't want to mess with processing raw.

They are just as fast with away matches, so I'm sure that the small file size is an advantage when they are sending the files electronically.


Digital EOS 90D Canon: EF 50mm f/1.8 II, EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro, Life-Size Converter EF Tamron: SP 17-50mm f/2.8 DiII, 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 DiII VC HLD, SP 150-600 f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2, SP 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD, 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 DiII VC HLD Sigma: 30mm f/1.4 DC Art Rokinon: 8mm f/3.5 AS IF UMC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Paulstw
Senior Member
827 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2012
     
Oct 09, 2014 05:27 |  #122

In hour? crikey I wish I had that time. Some are expected to be up within 3 mins of the action happening. I always get mine up within 15-20 mins of the end of the game. If it's a sunny day then some at half time and then the rest at the end. Shooting in Jpg helps a lot and there's some recovery you can do in photoshop. Shooting in RAW for sports tends to be a waste of time from what I can gather.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MedicineMan4040
The Magic Johnson of Cameras
Avatar
21,724 posts
Gallery: 1956 photos
Best ofs: 7
Likes: 74791
Joined Jul 2013
     
Oct 09, 2014 05:31 |  #123

OK got it, thanks. Thinking of immediately uploading via wifi, eye-fi, smartphone to a publisher makes sense for the sports crowd. Speaking of, I've always wanted a smartphone that can 'read' an SD card.


flickr (external link)
Vid Collection: https://www.youtube.co​m/user/medicineman4040 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Paulstw
Senior Member
827 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2012
     
Oct 09, 2014 06:31 |  #124

MedicineMan4040 wrote in post #17203042 (external link)
OK got it, thanks. Thinking of immediately uploading via wifi, eye-fi, smartphone to a publisher makes sense for the sports crowd. Speaking of, I've always wanted a smartphone that can 'read' an SD card.

You can get a cable for the iPhone that takes SD cards and punts the images into your camera roll. I just create a wifi hotspot on my phone and connect the laptop to it and upload from there.

I guess the fundamental thing for me would be can the 7D2 perform just as well out in the field as a 1D Mark IV, and quicker than a 5D3. I suspect yes to the later, however, the jury's out on the former until people can test it, however, I also suspect that there won't be much testing, it'll all be 7D2 vs 1Dx videos.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
38,998 posts
Gallery: 115 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 7473
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Oct 09, 2014 06:36 |  #125

davesrose wrote in post #17202654 (external link)
Arguing with you is pointless. Adding "graphics over your photo" is the same thing as graphic illustration....it is creating details by painting over the original photo (and why you don't need a 100% 22MP photo as base):rolleyes:

Add him to your ignore list. First of all he has moved over to Nikon and only shoots with one Canon. He has zero interest in the 7D2, although he might say he does. There is no reason for him or his counterpart to be in the 7D2 threads, because they have no intent on buying one. If one has no intent or interest in a product, yet are VERY active in said threads, then I leave you to conclude why they are there. ;)

There is no doubt the cover photo was chosen because of the subject material, his isolation from other players and the uniform fans blurred background, and not from IQ. That shot could have come from any camera at all, and if it was a bit noisy, just remove the noise (if one is skilled enough, up to 1 stop of noise can be removed with very little impact to the detail), and it still would have been the cover photo. It was a well timed and well composed image on an interesting subject, and that is why it was chosen. It is also a very common photo, most sports articles have a photo of just one player isolated with a blurred background, so it met the defacto criteria for such a selection too. That really isn't even a sports photo, it is a portrait of a sports player. There is a big difference (marginal AF system needed, lower ISO, lower shutter = about any camera).

This thread has gotten alot more quiet with his posts removed, where we can concentrate on the 7D2 and its pros/cons over the previous bodies, and what kernels of truth we can glean from Kelby's overview of the 7D2.

Too bad Kelby isn't a wildlife shooter, you would have thought he could have snapped a bird or two while doing landscape shots in Maine. :)


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
38,998 posts
Gallery: 115 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 7473
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Oct 09, 2014 06:45 |  #126

Paulstw wrote in post #17203035 (external link)
In hour? crikey I wish I had that time. Some are expected to be up within 3 mins of the action happening. I always get mine up within 15-20 mins of the end of the game. If it's a sunny day then some at half time and then the rest at the end. Shooting in Jpg helps a lot and there's some recovery you can do in photoshop. Shooting in RAW for sports tends to be a waste of time from what I can gather.

I shoot both raw/jpg, but I have quite a bit of time to get them uploaded. If I didn't and had to shoot only JPG, the 7D would have never worked for me over the seasons. The JPG out of camera has been horrendous until Canon finally updated that a year or two ago.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2n10
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
17,085 posts
Gallery: 81 photos
Likes: 1194
Joined Sep 2012
Location: Sparks, Nevada, USA
     
Oct 09, 2014 06:55 |  #127

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17203093 (external link)
Add him to your ignore list. First of all he has moved over to Nikon and only shoots with one Canon. He has zero interest in the 7D2, although he might say he does. There is no reason for him or his counterpart to be in the 7D2 threads, because they have no intent on buying one. If one has no intent or interest in a product, yet are VERY active in said threads, then I leave you to conclude why they are there. ;)

There is no doubt the cover photo was chosen because of the subject material, his isolation from other players and the uniform fans blurred background, and not from IQ. That shot could have come from any camera at all, and if it was a bit noisy, just remove the noise (if one is skilled enough, up to 1 stop of noise can be removed with very little impact to the detail), and it still would have been the cover photo. It was a well timed and well composed image on an interesting subject, and that is why it was chosen. It is also a very common photo, most sports articles have a photo of just one player isolated with a blurred background, so it met the defacto criteria for such a selection too. That really isn't even a sports photo, it is a portrait of a sports player. There is a big difference (marginal AF system needed, lower ISO, lower shutter = about any camera).

This thread has gotten alot more quiet with his posts removed, where we can concentrate on the 7D2 and its pros/cons over the previous bodies, and what kernels of truth we can glean from Kelby's overview of the 7D2.

Too bad Kelby isn't a wildlife shooter, you would have thought he could have snapped a bird or two while doing landscape shots in Maine. :)

+1 to all, especially the ignore list. Just started mine in fact yesterday.:D


John
Equipment
My Portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
andrikos
Goldmember
Avatar
1,905 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
     
Oct 09, 2014 07:26 |  #128

Would it not be in Kelby's best interest to not oversell the picture abilities of the 7DII so he can sell his Photoshop services? ;)


Think new Canon lenses are overpriced? Lots (and lots) of data will set you free!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
4,388 posts
Likes: 829
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Oct 09, 2014 08:04 |  #129

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17203093 (external link)
Add him to your ignore list. First of all he has moved over to Nikon and only shoots with one Canon. He has zero interest in the 7D2, although he might say he does. There is no reason for him or his counterpart to be in the 7D2 threads, because they have no intent on buying one. If one has no intent or interest in a product, yet are VERY active in said threads, then I leave you to conclude why they are there. ;)

I can see why now you ignore and don't engage;) Your posts on the 7DmkII seem right on the money and I appreciate the time you have spent covering the sports angle. I think Canon has quite a hit with the 7DmkII: improved IQ and high end interface for a middle tier camera. Sports shooters who can't afford a 1DX setup, birders, or any folks looking for an excellent crop body all are interested in this camera. I'm more of a hobbiest with photography, but am intrigued with eventually getting one as a second body for weddings I shoot. Seems like it compliments a FF quite well for other genres besides sports. The SOOC wedding jpegs Kelby showed have me sold on it's IQ. Even though he's not a birder, I think his sports shots have some parallels with birding features. I notice that Tony Northrup seems to be a popular youtube photog that's into birding. Assume his review of the 7DmkII will be glowing when he gets his hands on it.

andrikos wrote in post #17203146 (external link)
Would it not be in Kelby's best interest to not oversell the picture abilities of the 7DII so he can sell his Photoshop services?

Even though he gave a disclaimer about it being pre-production and he could only take SOOC jpegs, I did notice he was able to plug his website quite a bit:) He says they'll have training videos of the 7DII as soon as it's out. Wonder, since he's also respected for Lightroom if Adobe will be giving him a beta ACR so he can be trying out the 7DII RAWs before the full rollout.


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
38,998 posts
Gallery: 115 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 7473
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Oct 09, 2014 08:27 |  #130

David Arbogast wrote in post #17202656 (external link)
Now we're talking (birding)! I think I would jump on a 7D II - ordering from a retailer with an excellent return policy - and give it a try. If not satisfied, I would return it. I love what I'm seeing in regards to the 7D IIs AF and fast-shooting prowess. How clean will the files be and will you get all the detail you want? That will be interesting to see. I'm guessing and hoping it will be good. :)

This is the 2nd day of of shooting by Arthur Morris, an avid bird shooter.

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com …c-selection-af-area-mode/ (external link)

There is a previous blog on the 7D2, but it seemed more to be his getting familiar with it.

As to the entire discussion points about all these 7D2s being pre-production models, it is again a marketing thing. Canon usually puts out conservative release dates just in case something comes in last minute. However, it appears that the 7D2 might be in the hands of owners a month early (10/30), if Best Buy is correct with their pre-order emails to customers. This means the 7D2 is in full production swing at this point, filling pallets, crates, etc for shipments worldwide. This same behavior has happened many times in the past with new releases, including the original 7D, I believe.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
McNeese72
Goldmember
Avatar
1,268 posts
Gallery: 974 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2323
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Sulphur, La
     
Oct 09, 2014 08:28 |  #131

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17203093 (external link)
Add him to your ignore list. First of all he has moved over to Nikon and only shoots with one Canon. He has zero interest in the 7D2, although he might say he does. There is no reason for him or his counterpart to be in the 7D2 threads, because they have no intent on buying one. If one has no intent or interest in a product, yet are VERY active in said threads, then I leave you to conclude why they are there. ;)

I've been mainly lurking on the 7D2 threads and I've noticed that a lot of people that aren't interested in getting a 7D2 like some of the people with 70D's, 5D3's, 1Dx's, Nikons, etc. seem to come to the threads to put the 7D2 down. It is like they think they have to defend their choice of cameras from some reason.

I shoot sports for a local university as a hobbyist mainly (made a few bucks but not much) with a 7Dc and a 7D2 would definitely be an improvement over what I have now. That is why I'm interested in it. I don't care if it is not that much better image wise than a 70D, not quite as good image wise as a 5D3, and definitely not as good as a 1Dx, or any Nikon or other brands. If I had the money, I'd be getting the 1Dx, a new 70-200 f2.8 II (I have version 1) and some big primes, but I don't have that money.

The 7D2 looks like it will work for me and be an improvement over my 7Dc even though it doesn't have a super-duper revolutionary new sensor. :)

My two cents.


2 Canon 1Dx's | Canon R6 | EF 70-200 F2.8 L IS II | Canon 300mm F2.8 I | EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM | Canon Extender EF 2x III | Canon Extender EF 1.4x III | Editing of photos is okay.

Doc's Shots (external link) USMMcNeese72 Flickr Page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
38,998 posts
Gallery: 115 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 7473
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Oct 09, 2014 08:32 |  #132

McNeese72 wrote in post #17203242 (external link)
I've been mainly lurking on the 7D2 threads and I've noticed that a lot of people that aren't interested in getting a 7D2 like some of the people with 70D's, 5D3's, 1Dx's, Nikons, etc. seem to come to the threads to put the 7D2 down. It is like they think they have to defend their choice of camera's from some reason.

I shoot sports for a local university as a hobbyist mainly (made a few bucks but not much) with a 7Dc and a 7D2 would definitely be an improvement over what I have now. That is why I'm interested in it. I don't care if it is not that much better image wise than a 70D, not quite as good image wise as a 5D3, and definitely not as good as a 1Dx, or any Nikon or other brands. If I had the money, I'd be getting the 1Dx, a new 70-200 f2.8 II (I have version 1) and some big primes, but I don't have that money.

The 7D2 looks like it will work for me and be an improvement over my 7Dc even though it doesn't have a super-duper revolutionary new sensor. :)

My two cents.

A very fair and even-handed view of the situation. Sometimes utmost perfect IQ just isn't the core element that sells a product. Everyone complained about the AF on the 5D and 5D2, but both had great IQ? The 5D3 came out and fixed the issue. Now that we have a camera with great AF that is within spitting distance of the 5D2, some cry about the IQ. There is always something to complain about. :D


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
McNeese72
Goldmember
Avatar
1,268 posts
Gallery: 974 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2323
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Sulphur, La
     
Oct 09, 2014 08:34 |  #133

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17203097 (external link)
I shoot both raw/jpg, but I have quite a bit of time to get them uploaded. If I didn't and had to shoot only JPG, the 7D would have never worked for me over the seasons. The JPG out of camera has been horrendous until Canon finally updated that a year or two ago.

I shoot both raw and jpg's. I use a laptop to transfer the jpg's to a flash drive to give to the SID of the local university right after games. I use the raw to further process the photos to my liking.

I'm looking forward to shooting both raw and jpg's with the 7D2 and putting the raws on the CF card and the jpg's on the SD card. Then I can give the SID the SD card to plug into his laptop to transfer the files instead of me having to get my laptop out to transfer the files to a flash drive. Will save me a step.


2 Canon 1Dx's | Canon R6 | EF 70-200 F2.8 L IS II | Canon 300mm F2.8 I | EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM | Canon Extender EF 2x III | Canon Extender EF 1.4x III | Editing of photos is okay.

Doc's Shots (external link) USMMcNeese72 Flickr Page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Paulstw
Senior Member
827 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2012
     
Oct 09, 2014 09:03 |  #134

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17203097 (external link)
I shoot both raw/jpg, but I have quite a bit of time to get them uploaded. If I didn't and had to shoot only JPG, the 7D would have never worked for me over the seasons. The JPG out of camera has been horrendous until Canon finally updated that a year or two ago.

Very interesting. I didn't have my 7D long enough to get a real feel for how it worked for me, I just look around me at the football and it's a sea of 1D's and D4's

Wex Photo have a used 1D4 on for £1700. That's a big change from two weeks ago when it was £2000.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Thomas ­ Campbell
Goldmember
Avatar
2,105 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Kingwood, TX
     
Oct 09, 2014 09:10 |  #135

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17203093 (external link)
Add him to your ignore list. First of all he has moved over to Nikon and only shoots with one Canon. He has zero interest in the 7D2, although he might say he does. There is no reason for him or his counterpart to be in the 7D2 threads, because they have no intent on buying one.

I like how you have no problem assuming what other people think or know or like or dislike. No, I probably won't but one, but not many people would downgrade from a 1DX or D4 to a 7D. That isn't the consumer base. But I do like to know and discuss what is happening in the industry. And it wasn't me that brought up Nikon. It was you.

But still funny that you bring up that I wouldn't downgrade my cameras to a 7D2 in a thread about Scott Kelby's review, when Kelby has 1DXs. He wouldn't downgrade his 1DX for this camera and is only shooting with it because Canon is paying him to do so. Pretty hypocritical of you.

That shot could have come from any camera at all, and if it was a bit noisy, just remove the noise (if one is skilled enough, up to 1 stop of noise can be removed with very little impact to the detail), and it still would have been the cover photo.

Simply not true. If it was shot with the 1D3, it would not have been usable because there wouldn't have been enough detail for the cover. Remember that the ESPN cover is quite large and even using the 5D3 file was a stretch. Since it was ISO 400 and exposed correctly, the noise wasn't really a factor for any modern camera (this was shot in 2012.)

It is also a very common photo, most sports articles have a photo of just one player isolated with a blurred background, so it met the defacto criteria for such a selection too.

Isolated player shots are common, but shots of football players in really nice light like that are not as common. Go and search for yourself. And remember that half his games are played under stadium lights. There are lots of isolation shots of JF out there, but not a lot with that composition and lighting. So that would make it not a very common photo.

That really isn't even a sports photo, it is a portrait of a sports player. There is a big difference (marginal AF system needed, lower ISO, lower shutter = about any camera).

Except it was taken in a game moments before a ball was snapped. If you only ever shot players before the ball was snapped I guess you could just throw a rebel out there. But it was also shot with a 400 2.8, which was vitally necessary to make the shot.


Houston Wedding Photographer (external link)
Houston Sports Photographer (external link)
Current Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

63,919 views & 0 likes for this thread
Scott Kelby's take on 7D mark II after real world use
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is jdvann
902 guests, 315 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.