bad review on the 7D

I wouldn't even call this review a bad review since it only focuses (no pun intended) on one particular field of photography, namely small aperture nature/landscape photography. This is what they do for a living so they did not bother to test the 7D at wide open apertures, tracking capabilities etc. For them it's not the right camera. I bet for them a nice full framer would be better. They don't really need the fast AF with zones, and good tracking etc. for landscape shots.
I have nothing against the reviewer but we should not generalize and paint a gloomy picture based on one area of usage. And I don't think they meant to do that anyway.

It's like as if an AARP club tested let's say a Lotus Exige, a Ferrari, heck even Hyundai Genesis Coupe and came up with the conclusion that they're not quiet, supple, refined, and overall not good cars for a nice cross country road trip with luggage etc. Would that make the these cars overall bad cars? Not really, it's just that it's not for them.

As for "cooking the books", it's always the end result that matters. 99% of the time there is some kind of resizing involved whatever the final purpose of a picture is, let it be print, web, etc. So I'm totally against the belief that "oh, it's not fair to compare images other than at 100%". And I am a pixel peeper... but if after printing I see a positive difference I don't care what the image looks at 100%.

Wait, what if this guys is right and the 7D is crap?

That means that Imaging-Resource, Digital-picture.com, and DPreview are all wrong to name a few

And the DPR forum members would have a field day with it.

And you've just saved me spending a bucketload of money

Hahaha no kiddin

OK, I feel I have to post it here too.

Here is another VERY controlled comparison done by Digital-picture.com.
They use the Canon 200mm 2.0L. I'm linking in the f16 comparison chart between the 7D and the XSi.
Even though the XSi image definitely looks a bit sharper, the 7D still outresolves the XSi.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=7

Interesting how the resolution advantage is measured, though it doesn't appear to be there. Downrezzing the 7D to match the XSi's resolution would show the difference a little better.

Right.
But even looking at those resolution scales (until your eyes bleed ) shows that moire appears on the XSi at lower res, and the 7D also keeps those lines clean at a bit higher res. This is really minor though at that aperture.

I'm not normally a pixel peeper, but after plunking down $1,700 I was curious to see how much "better" my 7D is than my 30D.
Totally uncontrolled tests, different situations, zooming in 400% on an outdoor shot with my new to me 400 5.6 on the 7D handheld at iso 1600 at 5.6. meh, they look alright.

I think your standards are too low. You should be zooming in to 1000% on an indoor shot at iso 12800.

gabebalazs wrote in post #9023677
OK, I feel I have to post it here too.

Here is another VERY controlled comparison done by Digital-picture.com.
They use the Canon 200mm 2.0L. I'm linking in the f16 comparison chart between the 7D and the XSi.
Even though the XSi image definitely looks a bit sharper, the 7D still outresolves the XSi.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=7

Looking at the other bodies from 50D and up the 7D is the worst of the bunch and the 1D's are simply amazing. I had no idea that with the same lens the body would have such a big difference. I like the 50D over the 7D. and this is about 1/2 the 7D's cost.

I had the 7D on pre order and got cold feet and cancelled it. I am so glad I did. While the 7D is the feature set body I want the IQ is not even up to the task of the 50D in BW test shots. I know in the real world the 7D can be a bit better but not enough for me to open up my wallet.

Canon sure sucks when it comes to cramming more MP's and hurting the IQ.
I want to upgrade my 50D feature set. I also want the 5DmkII's IQ. Sadly it looks like Canon will give me the 7D's features with a super megapixel new and improved CMOS chip in the 5DmkIII and there goes EVERYTHING Canon gave us in the IQ of the 5DmkII for the improved feature set of the 5DmkIII but with degraded IQ in this new body.

ARE YOU LISTENING CANON?

STOP MESSING UP OUR IMAGE QUALITY!!!

LEAVE THE CHIPS RESOLUTION ALONE!!!

JUST GIVE US THE FEATURES WE WANT!!!

I read the review and i was shocked..but I also question the lack of sharpening, because in my experience a touch of USM will take care of most diffraction...

But then again, at the end of the day, the 7D isn't the best tool for landscapes, the 5D is a far superior tool for that in the price range...

And the 7D is certainly not TERRIBLE at it either [I disagree with his results, the overall images look good, the problem is pixel peeping..] and the new ACR and the like could really help those images [Because i DO keep hearing the DPP = crap argument]

It shook me at first and made me start to doubt choosing a 7D, but truthfully, i rarely do landscapes [I do like architechture though...but it should NOT be a problem..I'll just adjust my PP habits if i have to]

AllenF wrote in post #9024698
Canon sure sucks when it comes to cramming more MP's and hurting the IQ.
I want to upgrade my 50D feature set. I also want the 5DmkII's IQ. Sadly it looks like Canon will give me the 7D's features with a super megapixel new and improved CMOS chip in the 5DmkIII and there goes EVERYTHING Canon gave us in the IQ of the 5DmkII for the improved feature set of the 5DmkIII but with degraded IQ in this new body.

Except you're wrong, the IQ of the 7D is a LOT better than the 50D from every test I've seen, it has less noise at high ISOs [What noise there is is better quality] and at lower ISOs the 18 megapixels give it a -slight- edge in resolution

AllenF wrote in post #9024698
Looking at the other bodies from 50D and up the 7D is the worst of the bunch and the 1D's are simply amazing. I had no idea that with the same lens the body would have such a big difference. I like the 50D over the 7D. and this is about 1/2 the 7D's cost.

I had the 7D on pre order and got cold feet and cancelled it. I am so glad I did. While the 7D is the feature set body I want the IQ is not even up to the task of the 50D in BW test shots. I know in the real world the 7D can be a bit better but not enough for me to open up my wallet.

Canon sure sucks when it comes to cramming more MP's and hurting the IQ.
I want to upgrade my 50D feature set. I also want the 5DmkII's IQ. Sadly it looks like Canon will give me the 7D's features with a super megapixel new and improved CMOS chip in the 5DmkIII and there goes EVERYTHING Canon gave us in the IQ of the 5DmkII for the improved feature set of the 5DmkIII but with degraded IQ in this new body.

ARE YOU LISTENING CANON?

STOP MESSING UP OUR IMAGE QUALITY!!!

LEAVE THE CHIPS RESOLUTION ALONE!!!

JUST GIVE US THE FEATURES WE WANT!!!

You should read the D300s review and look at the photo comparison section. I trust their controlled settings more than anywhere else.

The D300s had comparisons with the 7D, 50D, and Pentax K7.

IMO, the 7D clearly outresolves the 50D, especially at higher ISO.