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

Keyan wrote in post #17249404
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

[QUOTE=dinny66;1725145​8]

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #17251418
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.

[QUOTE=dinny66;1725145​8]

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #17251418
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.

John Sheehy wrote in post #17251485
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.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17249416
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.

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.

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.

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #17251418
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.

exerda wrote in post #17249766
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.

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.

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #17251418
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?

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

Less discuss, more pics.

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

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!

no portraits ?
no landscapes ?
only birds