Canon EOS 7D the Review… Nice Camera but Could have been a bit better (article)

Fyi. Article:
"Canon EOS 7D the Review… Nice Camera but Could have been a bit better"

Hmmm, it seems he couldn't get a proper Mg-Alloy one.

I'll bet it toasts really well though.

hollis_f wrote in post #9001406
Hmmm, it seems he couldn't get a proper Mg-Alloy one.


I'll bet it toasts really well though.

And 'advice' misspelled as well...and
'button' should be plural, 'buttons'....and
'place' should be 'placed'....

oh well....

Read Darwin's review instead.....
http://darwinwiggett.w​ordpress.com/2009/11/1​1/the-canon-7d/
Disappointed with the 7D

SL888 wrote in post #9001515
Read Darwin's review instead.....
http://darwinwiggett.w​ordpress.com/2009/11/1​1/the-canon-7d/
Disappointed with the 7D

Wow, that is dissapointing. And they tried 3 different 7D's!! You can argue that diffraction played a role here, but if so then the Xsi should show problems in these tests as well.

You folks might give the reviewer a break. His first language isn't English and a spell checker won't care whether he used bread or breed,

The Darwin Wiggett review said that he tried a soon to be released model,but 3 soon to be released cameras being that soft.What gives.Hopefully some of the users on here will respond to this review..All the best..GORDO

That review was pretty hard to read...I hope English isn't his first language.
Looking at what he expected from this camera, it's ridiculous.

So he wants noise-free 100% crops at 3200 ISO on a 1.6x crop camera? Hah!

advaitin wrote in post #9001800
You folks might give the reviewer a break. His first language isn't English and a spell checker won't care whether he used bread or breed,

lol, no kidding. I speak a little french and if I posted a review in french as well as the OP did in his own translation I'd hope not to receive any snobby posts about grammar and spelling.

Thanks for taking the time and sharing. It's always interesting to read these reviews. I think that because of the greater availability of FF, today's photographers standards are surpassing the quality that small sensors deliver. I think that if this were released before the 5Dii, a FF camera more affordable to the greater masses, it would have received better fanfare. My old rebel camera stunned and amaze me because I was upgrading from a nikon cooplix 990 (3.31 megapixels!). Well, those days are passed and if I'm a dark situation where flash is not permitted, nothing other than the 5Dii will do... period.

I'm sure the 5D mark iii will sport a similar or slightly better sensor than that in the 1Ds mark IV. Once we all get on board with night-vision-like sensors, these APS-C sensors are going to be seriously obsolete (at least to the pro/semi-pro).

Trainboy wrote in post #9001866
That review was pretty hard to read...I hope English isn't his first language.
Looking at what he expected from this camera, it's ridiculous.

So he wants noise-free 100% crops at 3200 ISO on a 1.6x crop camera? Hah!

Are you kidding me? I can't believe the noise performance of my 7D. But I don't 100% crop every single one of my pictures for cripes sake. If he needs performance like that, he needs to stick with a medium format camera ala Hassy HD3 and the like. But you can buy fourteen 7D's for that kind of money.

I've just read the AP test of the 7D. Without actually saying anything at all negative, the luke warm language and the 88% score it achieved show that they think Canons 7D school report should read "Could try harder".

In the same magazine I also read a Canon "Bigwig" saying that the stratospherical ISO offering on the new ID is not the limit. Canon are already able to push it further if users wish them to do so. They will also look into the Nikon idea of "screen grabbing" a jpeg from video if requested. Lastly (and no suerprise here). all the 1D stuff will trickle down to the lower levels.

I was a little underwhelmed by both of those reviews.

The negative one by Darwin said he processed the files with no sharpening or noise reduction. Sounds unrealistic.

I'm with Jethro on this one. A reviewer QQ'ing about 100% crops. Seriously.

Anyone who is shooting 18mp with an APS-C sensor and still needs to crop at 100% should be happy that that they even got an image of the subject to begin with.

I don't mind his grammatical errors since English isn't his native tongue, but c'mon, isn't the lens used suppose to be the EF-S 15-85? (I am unaware of any 15-80mm zoom lens.) So for someone who pays such attention to 100% cropping details and then to let the "15-80" slide in (and last I check, 15-80 in whatever language you speak is still 15-80 in English), that's pretty bad.

The photo of the 7D on the review page even has the 15-85mm in focus (and not the camera body). How does one mess that up and still critique images at 100% pixel peeping?

Yeh, it is one of the most common newbie mistakes and the higher the resolution of the camera involved, the greater the mistake. Unless the reviewer makes a lot of 36x48 inch prints his credibility is entirely blown.

Sorry , darwin lost me here: "We then brought the processed RAW files up in Photoshop CS4 and compared the files at 100%."

and then again here: "using a Canon 45mm TS-E lens at f13"

I guess it proves anyone can be a "reviewer".