aladyforty wrote in post #18771726
Ok so here is my take on it for the very brief time I looked at it. I was comparing it to my full frame 5D3 because I dont believe in comparing with the 7D2 being a crop sensor and I cant see it replacing my crop sensor for what I do, it may do for others but not me.
The idea that a FF sensor is automatically at another higher level than an APS-C sensor is based on the assumption that if a larger sensor has the highest potential (which it does, AOTBE), that the higher potential is always there in every use, pervades photographic culture, but it is only conditionally true. The main condition is that you are willing to have shallower DOF, with a bigger lens, and without that, the FF sensor does not "gather more light", unless you are shooting in Av mode at base ISO in ample light, where no matter what DOF you have, you can give the full larger sensor a full ISO 100 exposure over a larger sensor area.
When deep DOF is actually needed, and dictating the f-numbers, then FF superiority disappears, and results can actually be worse for the FF, depending on the models. The 7D2 is better than the R, noisewise, when the 7D2 is at ISO 1600 and the R at 4000, and the 7D2 at 1600 (same image DOF, FOV, diffraction, and shutter speed) is much better than the 5D3 at ISO 4000, too. Of course, in equivalence, the R always has more pixel resolution than the 7D2 and 60D.
I noticed a long time ago that I was as happy or happier with the noise on my 7D2 with the 17-55/2.8 as I was with the 6D and the 24-105/4L. It got to the point where I rarely took the 6D out except when I wanted the FF for the potential wide FOV with my 12-24 Sigma and the full image circle of my fisheye lens. The fact is, the character of read noise in the 7D2 is one of the finest and most random in any current camera, something not reflected in noise charts. The R, of course, would fail to be any more impressive, either, noise-wise with a 24-105/L, but at least the R would have oodles of new shooting-time tools that the aging 6D doesn't have and 50% more pixels.
anyway, shot at ISO 200 800 and 6400, it was a quick go with someone elses camera card and settings so may be different if Id had more time. This is my unbiased opinion and i understand others will probably see things differently
comparing to 5D3 image quality only slightly better, sharpness similar although the R seemed to pick up more detail in fabric, better noise control at higher ISO but not by a lot, mostly noticeable in shadowed areas
That sounds about what I see in equal-exposure comparison images. An R improvement over the 5D3, but not huge, except in the shadows of very low ISOs.
I never got a chance to check frames per second but 5D3 does about 6 I think so I guess similar.
Colours on R, the skin tones seemed warmer, not sure if its a thing or not but appeared that way to me
did not like the lack of joy stick or the swipe thing on the back top
R is a fair bit lighter but thats not an issue either way for me
auto focus seems really good, although the eye detect thing seems to go out when I moved further away a bit. Video was great, no complaints there.
EVF on R is bright, really good, much better than my old Fuji X100
reasons I would get it, video, EVF , typical nice canon files, newer technology.
reasons I would not get it, 5D3 still an awesome sharp camera produces amazing images and I dont use it for what I photograph the most (nature wildlife) wondering if canon will bring out a mirror-less 7D3 (can only live in hope)
who do I think should get it. anyone who wants nice images, shoots a bit of video, is upgrading from a crop but wants an all rounder and does not already have a full frame camera...those who really want a good EVF over an optical viewfinder, those who need silent shooting.
That sounds like a very balanced and nuanced assessment; refreshing on a forum that tends toward monolithic hyperbole.
The R is tempting, for many of it's special features, but I will wait for an R that has more resolution than the 5Ds, and high-ISO noise at least a little better than the 5D4. I could easily see myself going R-like for full-frame, and staying with APS-C DSLRs until there is some revolution in electronic shutters that does not cause sheering and jello in the EVF, and with less lag.
Just keep in mind that the comparator does not normalize image size, so you are looking at 100% pixel views, which will favor larger pixels. A bit more work, but you could do a screen grab and then crop out each camera and upsample so that both have the same image size or object size. It would be nice to have a tool on your computer that allows multiple "magnifying glasses", so you can upsample both to the same subject scale.