New Canon cameras on the horizon ?

[hilton]

It's got it's quirks - like flash+ISO - that frustrate the hell out of me but you adapt, improvise and then overcome.

I don't have a 7D so what is this particular quirk?

 

[undesign]

I'm pretty familiar with the manual. The problem is I have with it was due to my expectations - or maybe just wishful hopes - of the AF being as good as my 1DMk3 and as a result was disappointed. It's not a bad camera by any stretch of the imagination. It's got it's quirks - like flash+ISO - that frustrate the hell out of me but you adapt, improvise and then overcome.

Rest assured, I wasn't intimating that yours was a "manual" issue. What I gather, once you separate the weed from the chuff regarding complaints/criticism, is that there are some valid concerns about the AF performance in certain conditions. If that is indeed the case I would assume that Canon would address it in a MKII version.

 

[Dolby]

Really? So what features of the MkII impress you enough to commit to an unannounced camera?

I'd hope even better noise reduction

 

[hilton]

Dolby have you fiddled with the noise reduction options in the custom functions yet?

 

[Dolby]

Dolby have you fiddled with the noise reduction options in the custom functions yet?

When I got it ... but I haven't been in the menu for a while now :/

I'll fiddle tonight and see what I have it set to and play around. Don't get me wrong ; it's not bad ... and it may be the same as every other 1.6x camera around for all I know. I just haven't used other cameras and when I'm home, I need to post process ISO 3200 photos.

If I brighten the image, the dark colours have a fair amoun too.

It could all be relative though.

I should be doing one tomorrow night - so I'll fiddle before then.

 

[koffiejunkie]

In my experience noise is greatly exaggerated when you're viewing a photo on screen. What post processing apps do you use? Have you printed these noisy photos, and do they still appear as noisy on paper?

I concur. This differs from screen to screen too. On my Samsung, the red noise shows up very very clearly, where on the MBP's screen (arguably the better one of the two) it's much less obvious. On the rubbish Dell screens at work, I can hardly see any noise. Calibration doesn't seem to affect this at all. I'd love to get these images up on a calibrated IPS panel and see what it looks like there.

On another note, now that you've mentioned it, I've heard people complaining about the 7D's AF. Both pro's and amateurs. I'm sure it has a lot to do with RTFM and the more complicated system i.e. user error, but between the lines I gather there may be some issues?

I have a number of problems with mine. I don't know how much of its "normal" for the 7D's AF system, since mine has a genuine problem that Canon needs to fix, and the rest may or may not be related. The problem I have is consistency - it's all over the place. If often locks on to a subject, and focuses to a foot or so in front of the subject - more if the subject is further away. I found with the 70-200mm f/2.8 I was able to reliably reproduce this effect at about 2m focus distance. Unfortunately this lens was a rental and had to go back yesterday. Sniff... With my lenses I have not been been able to trigger the problem reliably, but it's always there to some degree. And the faster the lens is, the worse it is - my 50mm f/1.8 is just about unusable. It was never the finest example of AF accuracy but it wasn't nearly this terrible.

The other issue I have I suspect may be a secondary symptom - in low light, it really struggles to lock on. With my 50D and 40D before that, I never had any of this. When I had OOF images on those bodies, I could always blame my own incompetence. But with those bodies I had maybe 1 out 100 shots out of focus or mis-focused, where with the 7D about 1 out of 3 is slightly out, and I'd say 1 out of every 10 is so bad it's unusable even at small sizes.

It's got it's quirks - like flash+ISO - that frustrate the hell out of me but you adapt, improvise and then overcome.

I don't have a 7D so what is this particular quirk?

I'm curious too. How does this compare to the 400D and 1D?

 

[bwana]

I don't have a 7D so what is this particular quirk?

If you've got Auto ISO enabled the camera will only go as high as ISO400 unless you set it manually - why?

When I got it ... but I haven't been in the menu for a while now :/

I'll fiddle tonight and see what I have it set to and play around. Don't get me wrong ; it's not bad ... and it may be the same as every other 1.6x camera around for all I know. I just haven't used other cameras and when I'm home, I need to post process ISO 3200 photos.

If I brighten the image, the dark colours have a fair amoun too.

It could all be relative though.

I should be doing one tomorrow night - so I'll fiddle before then.

Are you shooting RAW or JPGs?

You will get more noise if you don't expose it properly to begin with. With RAW you have more latitude when it comes to bringing out shadows.

 

[hilton]

If you've got Auto ISO enabled the camera will only go as high as ISO400 unless you set it manually - why?

I'm sure you've done this but there is an option to pre-set the limit for auto ISO. I have mine set to 3200 but I may bring that down to 1600.

 

[bwana]

I'm sure you've done this but there is an option to pre-set the limit for auto ISO. I have mine set to 3200 but I may bring that down to 1600.

Already done that - that's why it frustrating.

 

[hilton]

but this happens only when you pop the flash or are you using a speedlight?

 

[bwana]

but this happens only when you pop the flash or are you using a speedlight?

it happens with either.

 

[Dolby]

oh ... I see my NR was on disable *blush*

EDIT : Ok - I haven't read the manual fully ... is this noise reduction in the custom menu only on RAW - or JPG too?

 

[BigAl-sa]

oh ... I see my NR was on disable *blush*

EDIT : Ok - I haven't read the manual fully ... is this noise reduction in the custom menu only on RAW - or JPG too?

Shouldn't be on RAW, as RAW has no post-processing applied.

 

[bwana]

Shouldn't be on RAW, as RAW has no post-processing applied.

This.

 

[Dolby]

Ah - dumb question

Sorry

EDIT : Another dumb question ... but I'd like to get my head around it : http://blog.photoframd.com/2010/04/21/canon-7d-tips-in-camera-noise-reduction-settings/

I took a series of photos using the 7D and 17-55mm EF-S lens at 24mm. To be sure that I had sufficient digital noise, I used ISO6400. The camera was mounted on a tripod and the focus did not change throughout the series. Each image was shot as 18meg Raw file and processed in Canon’s DPP using the camera’s settings. All photos were taken with f/4.0 and 1/125 shutter with available light. The only variable was the Noise Reduction settings. I used the area indicated above in red for comparison as full-sized crops.

He shot in RAW?

 

[koffiejunkie]

He shot in RAW?

He developed in DPP. The camera settings that don't affect RAW, are still saved in the file, i.e. the scene mode, etc. DPP can read this (I assume it's encoded or encrypted in some fashion, because Lightroom and Aperture doesn't read it) and apply the same logic that the camera would have.

 

[Dolby]

He developed in DPP. The camera settings that don't affect RAW, are still saved in the file, i.e. the scene mode, etc. DPP can read this (I assume it's encoded or encrypted in some fashion, because Lightroom and Aperture doesn't read it) and apply the same logic that the camera would have.

*click*

Saved as tags ... I think I get it now.

Which is one reason RAW is so large? It saves - as for example - all the WB settings in the one file .... and hence you can select each afterwards?

 

[koffiejunkie]

Which is one reason RAW is so large? It saves - as for example - all the WB settings in the one file .... and hence you can select each afterwards?

Not really, that information is not likely to make up more than a few KB in the file. The reason it's so large is because, as the name suggest, it's the raw information coming out of the sensor that is saved to the file. It's not even an image yet. Your PP application then has to make sense of that information and make an image out of it. That is why different raw processors (DPP, Lightroom, Aperture, etc) give different results).

 

[MadMailMan]

I want either one of two (unannounced) Canon cameras. Either a 7DmkII which has a FF sensor with all the current 7D features. Or... A 5DmkIII which is the current 5DmkII but with the 7D focus system and FPS. Hmmm. Looks like they might be the same camera. Well, if somebody from Canon Japan ever reads this, this is what I want. Thanks in advance.

 

[Dolby]

I kind of agree - a 7DMKII with FF would be awesome and definately something I'd look at.

I don't think much of a 5DMKII right now purely because of the archaic AF, metering and FPS.