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 15 Sep 2014 (Monday) 11:20
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

-= 7D2 owners unite! Discuss and post photos!

 
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
3,733 posts
Likes: 737
Joined Jan 2010
     
Nov 04, 2014 09:38 |  #931

Keyan wrote in post #17249404 (external link)
Wowza. Here is where I think the logic fails a bit - if you are putting significantly fewer pixels in a area, this level of crop is simply going to have a lot less data to work with if it came off of a 5D3 - sometimes you need pixels for prints, or certain DPI numbers for publishers, and an APS-C keeps that density higher for longer when cropping in.

The *only* final-IQ benefit to bigger pixels in FLLP (focal-length-limited photography) is when they have less noise per unit of surface area, IOW, a weaker noise spectrum where frequency is measured in mm or microns. This was the case before the 7D2 for Canon DSLRs: recent FF cams vs recent APS-C cameras. I used my 7D for FLLP up to about ISO 200 or 2500, and from there and higher, I preferred the 6D for noise, even though I gave up resolution. With the 7D2, however, there is a 1 stop reduction in high-ISO read noise over the 7D, so the gap is smaller, per unit of sensor area, between the 7D2 and the 3 newest Canon FFs.

Noise aside, talking about optics and resolution, the higher density always gives more detail for FLLP, with the same AA filter strength measured in pixels (with a very sharp lens a higher pixel density with a very weak AA filter could possibly give more aliasing and low-frequency beating).

Higher pixel density (more pixels on subject) allows greater flexibility in geometrical adjustments like resizing, rotating, persective, CA, and lens corrections, etc, without creating artifacts - a completely artifact-free and processing-resistant capture would actually look quite soft at 100% pixel view on a 100 - 200 PPI monitor




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
stsva
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,360 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 285
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
     
Nov 04, 2014 09:40 |  #932

[QUOTE=dinny66;1725145​8]

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #17251418 (external link)
Yeah. This one, I think the shutter speed is probably fast enough... focus is on, but looks like its front focused ALOT or something? I was tracking them for a bit before this. Could be that the shutter was too slow... or focus case was too slow to update

What focus point/group were you using? If it was expanded around the central point then it may have focused on the nearest object. Just watched a video about it. The link is in another thread on here.
I don't think it's the camera or lens per second but a an af setting.

I

There used to be a lot of discussion about the original 7D's AF, and some people were running into exactly the problem you've described here, that with auto-AF selection the camera would focus on the nearest thing with high contrast. That will not occur with a manually-selected single AF point with expansion, however; it's just a problem in zone or all AF auto-selected. Also, a lot of AF issues could be traced to the fact that the AF sensors cover a larger area than expected based on the size of the AF square in the viewfinder, and may focus on something other than whatever the viewfinder focus square was on when the shot was taken. Based on the distance between the focus square in the posted sample and what appears to actually be in focus, however, I don't think that's the probable cause of Kickflipkid687's issue.


Some Canon stuff and a little bit of Yongnuo.
http://www.pbase.com/s​tsva/profile (external link)
Member of the GIYF
Club and
HAMSTTR
٩ Breeders Club https://photography-on-the.net …=744235&highlig​ht=hamsttr Join today!
Image Editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Keyan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,319 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 78
Joined Mar 2011
     
Nov 04, 2014 09:43 |  #933

[QUOTE=dinny66;1725145​8]

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #17251418 (external link)
Yeah. This one, I think the shutter speed is probably fast enough... focus is on, but looks like its front focused ALOT or something? I was tracking them for a bit before this. Could be that the shutter was too slow... or focus case was too slow to update

What focus point/group were you using? If it was expanded around the central point then it may have focused on the nearest object. Just watched a video about it. The link is in another thread on here.
I don't think it's the camera or lens per second but a an af setting.

I

He used DPP to put the focus box on - if you are using expansion and it was also using an expansion spot both would be highlighted, so it looks like it was using the one AF point here and just missed in front by quite a bit. I would suspect the lens needs some MFA.


Cameras: 7D2, S100
Lenses: 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM, 18-135 STM, 24-70 f/4L IS USM, 50 f/1.4 USM,70-300L IS USM
Other Stuff: 430 EX II, Luma Labs Loop 3, CamRanger

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Keyan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,319 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 78
Joined Mar 2011
     
Nov 04, 2014 09:46 |  #934

John Sheehy wrote in post #17251485 (external link)
The *only* final-IQ benefit to bigger pixels in FLLP (focal-length-limited photography) is when they have less noise per unit of surface area, IOW, a weaker noise spectrum where frequency is measured in mm or microns. This was the case before the 7D2 for Canon DSLRs: recent FF cams vs recent APS-C cameras. I used my 7D for FLLP up to about ISO 200 or 2500, and from there and higher, I preferred the 6D for noise, even though I gave up resolution. With the 7D2, however, there is a 1 stop reduction in high-ISO read noise over the 7D, so the gap is smaller, per unit of sensor area, between the 7D2 and the 3 newest Canon FFs.

Noise aside, talking about optics and resolution, the higher density always gives more detail for FLLP, with the same AA filter strength measured in pixels (with a very sharp lens a higher pixel density with a very weak AA filter could possibly give more aliasing and low-frequency beating).

Higher pixel density (more pixels on subject) allows greater flexibility in geometrical adjustments like resizing, rotating, persective, CA, and lens corrections, etc, without creating artifacts - a completely artifact-free and processing-resistant capture would actually look quite soft at 100% pixel view on a 100 - 200 PPI monitor

I think it's time to move this debate out to a different thread, this thread is for owners to post their pics and discuss this camera and for others who have an interest in it to ask questions of the owners, not for a deep mathematical discussion about FF vs Crop vs Polaroid vs film vs... Just don't want this thread to turn into (yet another) long debate about things that should be in a dedicated thread. I actually think there is a 7D2 vs 5D3 thread already started.


Cameras: 7D2, S100
Lenses: 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM, 18-135 STM, 24-70 f/4L IS USM, 50 f/1.4 USM,70-300L IS USM
Other Stuff: 430 EX II, Luma Labs Loop 3, CamRanger

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
3,733 posts
Likes: 737
Joined Jan 2010
     
Nov 04, 2014 09:51 |  #935

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17249416 (external link)
I do that kind of 7D vs 5D3 cropping comparison in my mini reviews. The 5D3 cropped and resized is pretty close to the 7D, but when I use a 1.4x on the 5D3, it is a bit better. Since the 5D3 is a stop better in ISO and holds detail a bit better, you have more wiggle room with a cropped section and subsequent resize from that camera.

Using a TC does not fundamentally change normalized noise-on-subject, if the same physical aperture and shutter speed are used. There really is no major "light loss" when using a TC, as far as the subject is concerned, if you are shooting the same subject from the same distance with the same physical aperture and shutter speed; only the f-stop increases, which can create issues with AF and OVF brightness.

I would use my 6D with a TC and manually focus my 100-400 and 150-6000 for better high-ISO subject-level noise over my 7D, but when it is dark and you really need this, the viewfinder can be dark, and while I can get close to focus more often manually than I could with AF without the TC, the AF is more exacting when it does lock on, so the 6D + TC option has some serious drawbacks if the min f-stop is greater than f/5.6. Basically, high ISO read noise on your subject depends most directly on subject illumination (of course), and then the effective physical aperture size, and read noise per unit of sensor area; the other stuff just factors out. Of course, there are small losses to light and contrast with a TC which lowers SNR at the top end of the spectrum slightly, too, but the "1 stop" and "2 stop" factors of 1.4x and 2x TCs is not a subject light loss at all.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
draderusa
Senior Member
Avatar
317 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Dec 2012
Location: Missouri, US
     
Nov 04, 2014 09:58 as a reply to  @ Keyan's post |  #936

Well. Just got my 7D2 from the nice Fedex man yesterday. Boy what a change from my plastic body Rebel. This thing is solid. It is going to take me some time to get used to the different control layout and wade through the myriad menu options. Man you can configure virtually everything on this bad boy. From my brief session with it so far the AF system is amazing. The big bright viewfinder is super as well. I think I'm going to love this camera.


Dave
EOS 7D Mark II, EOS T4i -- EFS 18-135 STM, EFS 10-22 USM, EF 40 f2.8 STM, EF 50 f1.4, 600EX-RT (3), YN-E3-RT, AD-360, FT16 (2), YN560II, YN622C (4), YN622C-TX

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
Avatar
7,640 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1069
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Toledo, OH
     
Nov 04, 2014 10:00 |  #937

John's logic is right (post #928). I agree with him and understand the theory behind it too.

But even if I didn't, it tells a lot that being a fairly accomplished bird photographer (at least I want to believe I am :) ) I use my 70D a lot more often for birding than my 5D3 in FLLP. And not necessarily due to the slightly higher fps. FLLP (focal length limited photography) is a tricky field when comparing FF vs Crop, especially when the mp count is different.

Fact is that in non-FLLP situations the 5D3 produces a better, nicer image than my 70D. Less noise, sharper (not necessarily because of the difference in "quality" between the actual pixels, but due to lower magnification/lower pixel density, less "stress" on the lens to resolve fine detail.)

Like it's been mentioned before, the pixel density of the 5D3 applied to an APS-C sensor would result in an only 8.6mp crop sensor. That's roughly like the old 20D, 30D, and XT. It didn't take an insanely sharp lens to produce a sharp image on those bodies. 8mp was easy for most lenses to resolve fine detail even when viewed at 100%.
So sharpness at the pixel level is definitely better on the 5D3 due to it's lower pixel density and less magnification when viewed at 100% (as well as all the other environmental factors that may reduce IQ when the image is magnified, e.g. haze, heat, etc.)

The key question is, can the better IQ of the 5D3 make up for the significant advantage of the crop camera (1.6x crop factor) in FLLP scenarios? If you compare a crop and FF that are roughly the same MP, using a good lens, and shoot from the same spot (FLLP), under descent conditions, in my experience the APS-C will almost always win. Having shot tens of thousands of bird photos with crop cameras (7D and 70D), and probably a few thousand with FF (6D, then 5d3), often alternating between the two during the same session, I always get to the conclusion that while the FF IQ is better at the pixel level, my subjects in frame are significantly smaller and the FF camera's advantage in pixel-level IQ will not be enough to make up for the crop's advantage in having more pixels on the target and providing a much larger subject size within the frame (ergo much less cropping necessary compared to the FF shot).

Of course if the crop and FF cameras are very different in mp count, e.g. compare an XT to a 5D3 (8mp vs 22mp), then the crop will clearly lose it's advantage, and the FF will win.

The interesting question is where is the line where a lower megapixel crop sensor will start to fall behind a (much) higher megapixel FF in FLLP? I don't think there is a definite answer to that, it also depends on a lot of things besides megapixel count.


SONY A7RIII | SONY A7III | SONY RX10 IV | SONY RX100 | 24-70 2.8 GM | 70-200 2.8 GM | 16-35 F/4 | PZ 18-105 F/4 | FE 85 1.8 | FE 28-70 | SIGMA 35 1.4 ART | SIGMA 150-600 C | ROKINON 14 2.8
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
19,066 posts
Gallery: 57 photos
Likes: 3379
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Nov 04, 2014 10:04 |  #938

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #17251418 (external link)
Yeah. This one, I think the shutter speed is probably fast enough... focus is on, but looks like its front focused ALOT or something? I was tracking them for a bit before this. Could be that the shutter was too slow... or focus case was too slow to update?


Something's definitely off there; I would suspect severe front-focusing, as well. I'd definitely spend some time with MFA on that sucker. I have a LensCal target on a tripod and will be headed up to the Photo Expo in Lynnwood on Saturday. If you want to try and meet up I can bring it along and let you borrow it for a while.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
3,733 posts
Likes: 737
Joined Jan 2010
     
Nov 04, 2014 10:11 |  #939

exerda wrote in post #17249766 (external link)
Without having gone back through the entire thread, has anyone made use of the improved AF to f8 and taken, say, a 500f4 or 600f4 with a 2x and tried it out? Results & AF performance?

I tried the 300/4L IS with the 2xIII and it focused, but obviously slower than without the TC, so those big whites should do much better, I'm sure, as they are sharper and have better AF mechanisms.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
I still have 8 digits left
Avatar
17,456 posts
Gallery: 125 photos
Likes: 12615
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Canada
     
Nov 04, 2014 10:20 |  #940

I have the 2xII which I'll try out. Both Canon and Sigma. I could crop so much with my 7D I just stopped using my 1.4. I might have to look into a 2xIII if the IQ is significantly better and I like the results with my 2x . I'll have to do some research.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
I still have 8 digits left
Avatar
17,456 posts
Gallery: 125 photos
Likes: 12615
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Canada
     
Nov 04, 2014 10:21 |  #941

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #17251418 (external link)
Yeah. This one, I think the shutter speed is probably fast enough... focus is on, but looks like its front focused ALOT or something? I was tracking them for a bit before this. Could be that the shutter was too slow... or focus case was too slow to update?

QUOTED IMAGE

Shutter speed is OK for that speed. If the lens forcing you to shoot at 7.1 @ 600?


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kesterc
Member
228 posts
Gallery: 107 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 607
Joined May 2013
     
Nov 04, 2014 10:24 |  #942

Less discuss, more pics.



flickr (external link)
Canon 7D Mk II | 6D | Canon 500 f/4L IS | 300 f/4L IS | 24-105 f/4L IS | 1.4x/2.0x III
600EX-RT | 430EX II | Gitzo 4542LS + Wimberley WH-200

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
I still have 8 digits left
Avatar
17,456 posts
Gallery: 125 photos
Likes: 12615
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Canada
     
Nov 04, 2014 10:26 |  #943

Thread says 7D2 owners unite! Discuss and post photos! ;)


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TustinMike
figment of our collective imaginations
Avatar
5,330 posts
Gallery: 475 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 5026
Joined Feb 2011
     
Nov 04, 2014 10:32 |  #944

Subscribed.


BTW (sorry if this has been discussed already)-any issues downloading the RAW files from the 7D II to either Photo Mechanic or LR (I'm still using LR 4 but I'm starting to get impatient waiting for LR6 so I could always upgrade if needed) ?

Thanks!


I'm mainly here for the snacks

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
moltengold
Goldmember
4,296 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jul 2011
     
Nov 04, 2014 10:35 |  #945

no portraits ?
no landscapes ?
only birds :)


| Canon EOS | and some canon lenses

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

10,259,301 views & 101,087 likes for this thread
-= 7D2 owners unite! Discuss and post photos!
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 rush1981
590 guests, 246 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.