-= 70D owners unite! Post up pics and discuss!

Good deal at Adorama - buy the printer and sell the printer...

70D + 18-55 STM IS + Printer

$1184

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=8019

Did you order one?

Keyan wrote in post #16360410
Did you order one?

naw, I think I'll wait this time until I have something in my bank account

Immaculens wrote in post #16360535
naw, I think I'll wait this time until I have something in my bank account

Your Canadian is showing with a statement like that.
The 'American' way is to buy now, worry about how to pay for it later!

JVthePT wrote in post #16360583
Your Canadian is showing with a statement like that.
The 'American' way is to buy now, worry about how to pay for it later!

more in common than you think... I'm just saying that is what I'd prefer to do is have the money in the bank...

Red tailed Hawk at 700 mm, handheld.

gabebalazs wrote in post #16359590
thanks.
I use Adobe Camera Raw an Photoshop CS6. I have a very good work process, you can find tons of my images over at the Sigma 120-300 2.8 OS thread. I worked out a pretty good process for noise reduction too, that's why my high ISO shots look pretty clean too.

EDIT: also, you can check out my Nature Shots Portfolio, link is in my signature. Most of my nature shots came from my 7D, which has almost identical set-up and AF system, so it's operation is very close to the 70D.

Great set Gabe, how do you compare the IQ between 7D and 70D? I thought 70D images are sharper and more crisp..any thought?
Ruhikant

ruhikant wrote in post #16360703
Great set Gabe, how do you compare the IQ between 7D and 70D? I thought 70D images are sharper and more crisp..any thought?
Ruhikant

hi,

Well, too early to tell but I did actually do some controlled tests and found that in RAW sharpness is very close, except for the 2 megapixel advantage the 70D has.
So per-pixel sharpness is the same in my opinion (that's the perceived sharpness that you see when viewing photos at 100%), but the extra 2 megapixels do produce a little bit of extra detail. So to sum it up the 70D is a little bit better. That's in RAW

Jpegs are no contest. The 7D's 4-year old jpeg engine is clearly inferior to the 70D's both in terms of detail and noise handling. I really like the jpegs from this camera!

Noise is better in RAW too if by a little bit. The nature of the noise is better too, dark shadow noise is more "friendly" in the 70D It is easier to clean up, and again the 2 megapixel size difference also helps a little bit to mask the noise compared to the 7D (when you print or resize them to the same size).

AF is good too, so far I don't notice any negative difference compared to 7D's AF, actually, I think accuracy may even be better. Maybe placebo, who knows

And finally, while there are features that are missing compared to the 7D (2 AF modes, bigger buffer, 1 fps burst difference, joystick [not a big deal]), magnesium body [not a big deal either]), there are numerous features in the 70D that I really love and have already gotten used to in my 6D. These are for instance the AF microadjustment for both ends of a zoom lens; the adjustable minimum shutter speed in the ISO menus, obviously the much better video features, the viewfinder level that does NOT disappear when you half press the shutter, etc. I am willing to give up the missing features in favor of these added ones.

So I really like the camera, since I bought it I've "returned" to APS-C and use my 6D less Of course that's partly because it's new... I still grab my 6D first if I need to shoot events, people, or anything low light

gabebalazs wrote in post #16360870
hi,

Well, too early to tell but I did actually do some controlled tests and found that in RAW sharpness is very close, except for the 2 megapixel advantage the 70D has.
So per-pixel sharpness is the same in my opinion (that's the perceived sharpness that you see when viewing photos at 100%), but the extra 2 megapixels do produce a little bit of extra detail. So to sum it up the 70D is a little bit better. That's in RAW

Jpegs are no contest. The 7D's 4-year old jpeg engine is clearly inferior to the 70D's both in terms of detail and noise handling. I really like the jpegs from this camera!

Noise is better in RAW too if by a little bit. The nature of the noise is better too, dark shadow noise is more "friendly" in the 70D It is easier to clean up, and again the 2 megapixel size difference also helps a little bit to mask the noise compared to the 7D (when you print or resize them to the same size).

AF is good too, so far I don't notice any negative difference compared to 7D's AF, actually, I think accuracy may even be better. Maybe placebo, who knows

And finally, while there are features that are missing compared to the 7D (2 AF modes, bigger buffer, 1 fps burst difference, joystick [not a big deal]), magnesium body [not a big deal either]), there are numerous features in the 70D that I really love and have already gotten used to in my 6D. These are for instance the AF microadjustment for both ends of a zoom lens; the adjustable minimum shutter speed in the ISO menus, obviously the much better video features, the viewfinder level that does NOT disappear when you half press the shutter, etc. I am willing to give up the missing features in favor of these added ones.

So I really like the camera, since I bought it I've "returned" to APS-C and use my 6D less Of course that's partly because it's new... I still grab my 6D first if I need to shoot events, people, or anything low light

Thank you so much. There is long thread on this topic at FM, and 70D seems to resolve more than 2MP due to a less aggressive anti-aliasing filter.. http://www.fredmiranda​.com …75/0?keyword=70​D#11803184

ruhikant wrote in post #16360919
Thank you so much. There is long thread on this topic at FM, and 70D seems to resolve more than 2MP due to a less aggressive anti-aliasing filter.. http://www.fredmiranda​.com …75/0?keyword=70​D#11803184

thanks for the link. Reading it...

Armando Ferreira wrote in post #16360627

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …essorarmando/10​190481093/
Casarão - Barão de Mauá - Monteiro Lobato por ArmandoFerreira, no Flickr

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …essorarmando/10​190386985/
Casarão - Barão de Mauá - Monteiro Lobato por ArmandoFerreira, no Flickr

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …essorarmando/10​190279594/
Casarão - Barão de Mauá - Monteiro Lobato por ArmandoFerreira, no Flickr

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …essorarmando/10​190277894/
Casarão - Barão de Mauá - Monteiro Lobato por ArmandoFerreira, no Flickr

http://www.flickr.com …essorarmando/10​190275864/
Casarão - Barão de Mauá - Monteiro Lobato por ArmandoFerreira, no Flickr

http://www.flickr.com …essorarmando/10​190418106/
Casarão - Barão de Mauá - Monteiro Lobato por ArmandoFerreira, no Flickr

http://www.flickr.com …essorarmando/10​190471083/
Casarão - Barão de Mauá - Monteiro Lobato por ArmandoFerreira, no Flickr

Casarão - Barão de Mauá - Monteiro Lobato por ArmandoFerreira, no Flickr

I simply love your photos Armando )

For years I have shot in raw, saved in raw, and converted into JPGs only for uploading on the web. I did this with the XSi, T2i, 60D, and now 70D. But I read here that the 70D handles JPGs much better than previous generations of Canon cameras. Does anybody think that moving from raw to JPGs may be a good idea?

Lbsimon,

I was going to ask the very question earlier but since I don't own a 70D, I felt it would be an odd question for "me" to ask.

I too wonder if the new 70D .jpg engine, with a proper set up in-camera, could do better than I do in Lightroom/PS6, if the shot is exposed properly, etc.

Something to ponder. I know I end up playing around with WB sometimes and additional adjustments to RAW images are needed to get them to pop.... but could the 70D .jpg engine outdo my own efforts? Of course, I have no way to experiment but I'd be very interested to see the results from said experiments by 70D owners.