7d losing skin texture...quite disappointed.

Jannie wrote in post #12288924
AlanU Insee what you mean about the plasticy skin but what also looks weird is the ribbon on the right side looks over sharpened, is this from a jpeg that had picture styles set on something other than natural?

Hi Jannie,

ohhhh that green ribbon is tied on the my daughters drawers handle(have no idea why its there...she just wanted it there)

The photo was RAW then I only used the xrite passport preset (one I previously made for similar lighting) and converted to jpeg using LR3. LR3 has minor minimal tweeks but nothing like a picture style out of jpeg (sooc)

I used my 85L in that exact location and I underexposed the photo. It looks less plastic but dark shadow detail is smoothed too much for my liking. I changed the FEC so that i get the correct exposure ....BAM ...Plastic face. The underexposed image seems better and maybe I'll hit it hard with alot of "detail" slider found in the noise reduction section of lr3.

I am 99% certain the 7D is operating perfectly too. I am so use to the little effort of getting excellent detail and exposure from my 5dc and 5dmk2. I am still getting some difficulty getting exact results with my 1dmk3 in available light shooting. I've gotten some PM's telling me the exhibit the same soft details in available light with 1dmk3 and some say they get nothing like what I describe. My friends late sn 1dmk3 works exactly like mine. I wonder if for some odd reason 7D bodies have good/bad copies.

I don't see an issue. I also don't see many complaining wildly about the 1D3 metering being horrible.

Perhaps you be better off with Nikon.

HKGuns wrote in post #12289058
I don't see an issue. I also don't see many complaining wildly about the 1D3 metering being horrible.

Perhaps you be better off with Nikon.

Thank you for your words of wisdom. (i just edited my first reply)

As you can see I am concerned with my findings (which others experience aswell).

I see no point in the nikon comment. Care to share your great vast knowledge in this topic rather than being juvenile.

Your "findings" have no basis in fact and you've provided no evidence to illustrate they are founded in fact. Nor are they consistent with other peoples impressions of the camera.

To top it off, you're complaining about the metering of the 1D3 which has nothing to do with the 7D "issue" you've apparently discovered. Lots of people are 100% satisfied with their 1D3 metering.

When I read this thread I see someone who needs to find something to complain about.

There, now you have it in all its glory.

If you're attempting to demonstrate some alleged flaw with the 7D why not do your Raw conversion with DPP? At the very least it would eliminate on potential source of problems.

PixelMagic wrote in post #12291379
If you're attempting to demonstrate some alleged flaw with the 7D why not do your Raw conversion with DPP? At the very least it would eliminate on potential source of problems.

Or upload the CR2 to share with others, then we could try to see flaw in the raw itself.

HKGuns wrote in post #12291297
Your "findings" have no basis in fact and you've provided no evidence to illustrate they are founded in fact. Nor are they consistent with other peoples impressions of the camera.

To top it off, you're complaining about the metering of the 1D3 which has nothing to do with the 7D "issue" you've apparently discovered. Lots of people are 100% satisfied with their 1D3 metering.

When I read this thread I see someone who needs to find something to complain about.

There, now you have it in all its glory.

HongKong guns, thank you for all the glory.....

I do find many users of the 7D (teamspeed is the exception) have upgraded from a 20d, 30d, 40d etc. Seldom people go from a full frame to xxd as a main body. I'm assuming you have primary single body which is a 7D and I ruffled some feathers. Have you ever used a 1dsmk2,3 or 5d? 5dmk2. There is a substantial difference in dynamic range.

Analysing your website I see a percentage of slightly underexposed photos
(cheer leader and percentage of basketball players). Detail retention seems to be better slightly underexposed. Not sure if this is because of workflow, monitor calibration/using a non IPS panel for processing.

I will do alot more processing experimentation. My expectation was just much higher. I'll have to dig up my DPP and see if this makes a difference.

Actually my progression went as such:

350D->30D->40Dx4->50Dx2->1D3->50Dx2->7D+5D->7D+5D2x3+400D->1D4+5D2+400D->1D4+1D3+400D (where the xN is not at the same time, but rather I went through N copies), with a smattering of 20Ds, 30Ds, etc scattered throughout on as as-needed or as-desired basis.

Confused yet?

The 5D2 is a stop better than the 7D (at least my copies) as evidenced by the back to back comparisons in my review. The 7D does indeed require a different level of post processing. I developed a complete action in CS3 comprised of many different steps, based on color channel, using Noiseware and CS3 filters, that later I would just click based on the ISO of the JPG I was processing. It saved me alot of grief later, but I spent a solid week or so developing the action.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #12292609
Actually my progression went as such:

350D->30D->40Dx4->50Dx2->1D3->50Dx2->7D+5D->7D+5D2x3+400D->1D4+5D2+400D->1D4+1D3+400D (where the xN is not at the same time, but rather I went through N copies), with a smattering of 20Ds, 30Ds, etc scattered throughout on as as-needed or as-desired basis.

Confused yet?

The 5D2 is a stop better than the 7D (at least my copies) as evidenced by the back to back comparisons in my review. The 7D does indeed require a different level of post processing. I developed a complete action in CS3 comprised of many different steps, based on color channel, using Noiseware and CS3 filters, that later I would just click based on the ISO of the JPG I was processing. It saved me alot of grief later, but I spent a solid week or so developing the action.

Your not a gear whore...your a gear freak

Teamspeed,

I looked at your photo gallery of highschool "bri". I looked at all of "bri's" photos and it had 7d written all over it and I was 99% certain they were 7d files. I downloaded some of the photos(looked at exif) and see that they are indeed 7d. Those photos are exactly what I was talking about. It has this smoothed out look.

No pixel peeping either. I think this is just the characterisics.

Lol, I like to try them all and test them out. I actually had the 1D3 the longest, but then we had to go out and purchase a big home, and our 20% down required liquidating "toys". I finally landed on the 7D and had it for over a year. The 5D2x3 was due to issues that Canon tried to fix with high ISO issues. The last one I had that I just sold to an FMer was the best of the bunch.

Which leads me to a good point, there are variances between these bodies. Out of 3 5D2, there was one that was clearly the best to me out of the bunch. My 1D4 seems to suffer a bit from the issues these subpar 5D2s suffered from at high ISOs, so I fully expect there are 1D4s out there that are better. My 7D was good from day one though, where others seem to have issues with theirs.

So I personally believe these differences lie in the quality of the silicon wafers that are used to cut out these sensors, I don't think all same-format sensors are created equal. Just my opinion though after having had similar bodies with supposedly the same firmware versions, but resulting IQ was just different from each other.

Just don't click on my equipment history, the bodies don't even come close to the lenses I have tried out. Lenses are where the real fun lies!

if it's one thing I learned, don't bash the 7D on a public forum. A lot of those rose-colored-glasses- wearing 7D fanatics will come with their pitch forks and start a flame war.

(But I am definitely with you on this one Alan - the 7D does lose skin texture and it's VERY disappointing - I will sell it off VERY soon) The 7D is highly responsive however, the image quality just doesn't cut it. I found my 40D to be HEAPS better (that's just my opinion. AH! Don't flame me! LOL).

Marloon wrote in post #12293840
if it's one thing I learned, don't bash the 7D on a public forum. A lot of those rose-colored-glasses- wearing 7D fanatics will come with their pitch forks and start a flame war.

(But I am definitely with you on this one Alan - the 7D does lose skin texture and it's VERY disappointing - I will sell it off VERY soon) The 7D is highly responsive however, the image quality just doesn't cut it. I found my 40D to be HEAPS better (that's just my opinion. AH! Don't flame me! LOL).

BTW, you're suppose to update us on the Fuji concerns/issues. Whatever happened to that update?

jwcdds wrote in post #12293856


BTW, you're suppose to update us on the Fuji concerns/issues. Whatever happened to that update?

Hey Julian! how are you?

Oh yeah! i forgot. Well the camera went to the Philippines with my girlfriend. It will come back on the 6th of May...

My 7D went to Canon Canada and they cleaned, lubricated it, and checked it for any imperfections. They reported it to be a PERFECT COPY of a 7D - Of course, I am still dissatisfied.

Marloon wrote in post #12293884
Hey Julian! how are you?

Oh yeah! i forgot. Well the camera went to the Philippines with my girlfriend. It will come back on the 6th of May...

My 7D went to Canon Canada and they cleaned, lubricated it, and checked it for any imperfections. They reported it to be a PERFECT COPY of a 7D - Of course, I am still dissatisfied.

I'm not surprised you remain dissatisfied w/ the 7D. It's not everyone's cup of tea. You have the 5D2, setting high standards few cameras can match, certainly not from an APS-C... oh wait, the X100 can by your reports.

I'm sure you'll find your 7D a happy home soon.