7D Mark II - Focus Discussions

This is beautiful image as I see it and I don't think you could really improve on it. Same with some other postings. I can only relate my experience. Images shot with a 7DII on a tripod, mirror lockup and cable release with single shot AF. I tried several different lenses, including a 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8. They did not compare to the critical sharpness I got with my 5DIII. That is when I decided to purchase a second 5DIII as a back-up and return the 7DII. If you are happy with your 7II copy, by all means keep it and enjoy. Don't be unnecessarily influenced by other people's experiences.

Agree!

Once again, a beautiful image that appears quite sharp. I am sincerely happy that things worked out for you and sad that my experience was different.

Pondrader wrote in post #17350418
I don't think shooting wildlife anyone gets 80%?? Ive never had a camera that gave me 80% and I can tell you none of the very good shooters I shoot with get 80% Maybe thats a great question to put out there,....

I was referring to static objects. In any case, I was out with the kids to a local lake and took some pictures with the 5D (primarily ducks and Egrets); this is not real wildlife but the keeper rate was over 80%.

cerett wrote in post #17350470
This is beautiful image as I see it and I don't think you could really improve on it. Same with some other postings. I can only relate my experience. Images shot with a 7DII on a tripod, mirror lockup and cable release with single shot AF. I tried several different lenses, including a 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8. They did not compare to the critical sharpness I got with my 5DIII. That is when I decided to purchase a second 5DIII as a back-up and return the 7DII. If you are happy with your 7II copy, by all means keep it and enjoy. Don't be unnecessarily influenced by other people's experiences.

Wholeheartedly agree.

The 7D II is definitely capable of capturing sharp/in focus images.

I've gotten a handful, but often it's just that tiny bit off, that makes them soft/lacking the detail I'm after.
I've been taking way more shots that I did with my 60D, to hopefully get 1 sharp image.

I'm sending it into Canon on Jan 5th.

Edit: If I got a body that was focusing properly right away, or even with my second copy, I'd be totally satisfied. I really like the camera otherwise.

I must say the Mark II is a hard one to get to shoot, it is obviously not for everyone just as the 5DIII may not be the cats ass for me,...and thats ok. The more I shoot the 7DmarkII the more it becomes part of me and the more keepers I get. Im not going to try and tell anyone that its the end all and be all but neither is the 5DIII,.. just way to slow for my liking. you see the 7D would much better suit most of us that cant afford long glass. Although the 100-400mm II is going to change all that for the average guy like me. I'd love 500m but don't feel there's 5 or 6 grand worth of (better images ) in it as I just do this for fun and the pleasure of others company out in the bush hunting what ever is on the menu for that day.

I mean look at this shot,.. I could never have pulled this off like this with the 7D, the detail floor's me. I was never able to get the detail at a large distance with the 7D

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pRX5​43

As I posted elsewhere, just got a 100-400II and it blew me away!! Definitely a lens to have.

Gorgeous image - great composition.

I already have one of the grand kids on kijiji,...you don't have to convince me lol

Pondrader wrote in post #17350504
I mean look at this shot,.. I could never have pulled this off like this with the 7D, the detail floor's me. I was never able to get the detail at a large distance with the 7D

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pRX5​43 IMG_0947 by Jeff Manser, on Flickr

Jeff,
Another great image.
Can you please elaborate? What was so challenging on this image that you comment you would not have gotten the same IQ with the 7Dc? ( I assume you had the MK 1 dialed in as well as the MK II for critical focus with the same lens.)

Well my 7D was never great at detail over say 40/50/60 feet, it was a great frustration to me. The moose would have been muddy sort of, not motion blur but the fine detail was something I had to work super hard to get. Were the markII just jumped off my screen with detail at longer distances. I first noticed it shooting a white tail deer in my yard. I guess I should say as well, the mark II didn't start being consistent really until I hit a good 10,000 clicks I would say. But I how feel I can point and shoot and feel confident it will be equal to or better that my 7D. In focus and the detail will be better than I'm use to. Now I say this using the 70-300L lens

It still amazes me to see what I got from these two and the 7DmarkII. I had to learn to PP as well as shoot the MarkII

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/q6qS​kF

Pondrader wrote in post #17350418
I don't think shooting wildlife anyone gets 80%?? Ive never had a camera that gave me 80% and I can tell you none of the very good shooters I shoot with get 80% Maybe thats a great question to put out there,....

I recently got a burst of 14 shots with my 5D3, of a bird flying off with a fish. All 14 were wonderfully sharp. That doesn't happen all the time, but the 5D3 AF is very good, and a tough act for the 7D2 to follow.