Feather detail with a beta 7D

Looks good Romy!.

gooble wrote in post #8647093
I didn't claim to have any. I think I have a good eye for it though. But since you ask you can look here: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/neoview

Here are some of my favorites there:

http://www.flickr.com/​photos/neoview/3367714​522/

http://www.flickr.com/​photos/neoview/3359273​666/

http://www.flickr.com/​photos/neoview/3367714​236/

http://www.flickr.com/​photos/neoview/3358435​547/

Are you claiming that image was an impressive image? IMO if you put that image up on Naturescapes you would get a fair amount of criticism for it. I know I've posted some of mine there and have been ripped apart.

Edit: I wasn't trying to sound rude, I just felt that if that image was attempting to show off the prowess of the 7D that it failed. I think that it can do very well though from what I've seen.

BTW not sure if your last comment was sarcastic or not.

The OP wasn't for aesthetic purposes..... it was to show feather detail that the new camera can capture if the optics is not the limiting factor. If the sharpening isn't enough for you, you can see the fullres linked and you can sharpen it to your taste. But the details are there.

Test shots are normally posted with zero or very little sharpening to allow others leeway in processing it according to one's individual workflow and taste. Here's a link to a similar bird taken with the beta 7D, this time bigger in the frame. You can try processing it using your workflow if you wish.

http://www.pbase.com …/image/11724432​3/original

Of course, I'm very sarcastic in my last comment. For somebody with such underwhelming bird photos, you sounded like you are God's gift to bird photography. If you're not impressed with the posted samples, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. OTOH, I reserve the right to defend myself when I feel insulted.

tekkie wrote in post #8647099
Romy for the AF can you compare it to a 40/50D or a 1D MKII / MKIII ?

currently I have a 40D & a 1D MKII I like the 40D but the AI Servo is to darn slow, the 1D MKII is super fast but with only 8MP and not the greatest noise control doing cropping can be a problem

I pre ordered the 7D but I am super stoked to hear about the AF system, especially for tracking BIF

I wasn't able to give the 7D's AF a good workout at BIFs because of non-stop rains in our islands during the field test. Hence, to be fair, I'm refraining from posting my conclusive opinion until I can try the new camera again in better weather.

liquidstone wrote in post #8647153
The OP wasn't for aesthetic purposes..... it was to show feather detail that the new camera can capture if the optics is not the limiting factor. If the sharpening isn't enough for you, you can see the fullres linked and you can sharpen it to your taste. But the details are there.

Test shots are normally posted with zero or very little sharpening to allow others leeway in processing it according to one's individual workflow and taste. Here's a link to a similar bird taken with the beta 7D, this time bigger in the frame. You can try processing it using your workflow if you wish.

http://www.pbase.com …/image/11724432​3/original

Of course, I'm very sarcastic in my last comment. For somebody with such underwhelming bird photos, you sounded like you are God's gift to bird photography. If you're not impressed with the posted samples, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. OTOH, I reserve the right to defend myself when I feel insulted.

You sure know how to win friends. By your attitude you must feel you are God's gift to bird photography.

Wow, my pictures are deemed "underwhelming" by the great Romy. I must be moving up in the world. If that's the best you can say then I don't think you looked at much of my work that was less than several years old, in other words stuff that is on flickr. And once again I made no claims about my own work, you made some assumptions.

Whatever, I don't need to argue with a prima donna.

gooble wrote in post #8647178
You sure know how to win friends. By your attitude you must feel you are God's gift to bird photography.

Wow, my pictures are deemed "underwhelming" by the great Romy. I must be moving up in the world. If that's the best you can say then I don't think you looked at much of my work that was less than several years old, in other words stuff that is on flickr. And once again I made no claims about my own work, you made some assumptions.

Whatever, I don't need to argue with a prima donna.

Ok, you said your piece. Can we get back to the topic of feather detail with the 7D?

liquidstone wrote in post #8647191
Ok, you said your piece. Can we get back to the topic of feather detail with the 7D?

It's peace.

gooble wrote in post #8647194
It's peace.

Sigh.....

"Say your piece"

http://idioms.thefreed​ictionary.com/say+piec​e

liquidstone wrote in post #8647191
Ok, you said your piece

gooble wrote in post #8647194
It's peace.

Whoops! Looks like English, as well as diplomacy, lessons are required.

I knew I shouldn't have made that post.

muusers wrote in post #8646850
every EOS cam would make awesome shots with a 400mm f2.8L... Color and contrast mainly depend on the lens, not the body.

I´m fairly unimpressed, the noise in the butter-soft bokeh really anoys me.

Couldn't agree more. That shot was taken with a top of the line - uber $7,000 lens. Any 'good' characteristics in the image above stem from the lens alone. I can't say I'm impressed at all. The bird's head is too soft (the eye in particular), and end of the branch appears in focus (back focus). Any avg. camera paired with that lens would have produced an image that would be just as good.

I'd be curious to see the same shot taken with the same lens on a 5DII and a 1DIII.... THAT would be an example of what a really good image SHOULD look like.

liquidstone wrote in post #8647159
I wasn't able to give the 7D's AF a good workout at BIFs because of non-stop rains in our islands during the field test. Hence, to be fair, I'm refraining from posting my conclusive opinion until I can try the new camera again in better weather.

thanks Romy.... thanks for nothing

aridan wrote in post #8647277
The bird's head is too soft (the eye in particular), and end of the branch appears in focus (back focus). Any avg. camera paired with that lens would have produced an image that would be just as good.

Did you at least see the fullres image before commenting that the "head is too soft"?

Here's the link again:

http://www.pbase.com …/image/11729485​9/original

Another shot with the bird bigger in the frame:

http://www.pbase.com …/image/11724432​3/original

Note that these were at 400 mm and f/2.8, and as such DOF is pretty thin when shooting close. The whole bird's body can't be sharp.

aridan wrote in post #8647277
Couldn't agree more. That shot was taken with a top of the line - uber $7,000 lens. Any 'good' characteristics in the image above stem from the lens alone. I can't say I'm impressed at all. The bird's head is too soft (the eye in particular), and end of the branch appears in focus (back focus). Any avg. camera paired with that lens would have produced an image that would be just as good.

I'd be curious to see the same shot taken with the same lens on a 5DII and a 1DIII.... THAT would be an example of what a really good image SHOULD look like.

??? How about we stay within the realm of APS-C bodies?

The 1DIII does not have nearly the resolution to produce this large of a crop with that kind of quality, I know from personal experience. We are not discussing the DOF of this lens and the 7D, but rather the croppability and detail for printability, this creates a wide range of uses from a single crop-body frame. I could not shoot at 400mm on my 1DIII, crop out less than 20% of that shot, and still end up with the resolution and detail to print larger prints.

This post appears to dispute that the crop sensor this large just won't hold onto detail enough to make the post-cropping work well.

liquidstone wrote in post #8647313
Did you at least see the fullres image before commenting that the "head is too soft"?

Here's the link again:

http://www.pbase.com …/image/11729485​9/original

Another shot with the bird bigger in the frame:

http://www.pbase.com …/image/11724432​3/original

Note that these were at 400 mm and f/2.8, and as such DOF is pretty thin when shooting close. The whole bird's body can't be sharp.

First, I must say: This has nothing to do with the OP, nor his shooting capabilities. Whatever flaws I find in the image, are equipment related. While I admit that the second link above, is pretty good looking, I still stand behind my statement that the original (1st link) is soft. My opinion. We can argue all day long, but according to my SUBJECTIVE view (no pun intended), the image is soft.

aridan wrote in post #8647350
First, I must say: This has nothing to do with the OP, nor his shooting capabilities. Whatever flaws I find in the image, are equipment related. While I admit that the second link above, is pretty good looking, I still stand behind my statement that the original (1st link) is soft. My opinion. We can argue all day long, but according to my SUBJECTIVE view (no pun intended), the image is soft.

Ok then, you're entitled to your own opinion and standards.