Canon 7D — Almost Review
(redirected from Biz.Canon-7d-almost-review)
Canon 7D: could have been a review
This is not a review for measurebators or pixel-peepers. It's my opinions, as of mid-november 2009, based on:
- My experience: 20+ years
- The age of the captain
- The direction of the wind…
For a detailed technical review see:
7D review from Digital-Picture.com
Why I bought the Canon 7D
I was looking for a camera in the 20 MegaPixels range. The cheapest camera in the 20 megapixels range is the Sony a850 at around $2500 Canadian. The most expensive camera is the Nikon D3x at $8000 Canadian. Then, there are the lenses. I will need lenses that can resolve the 20 Megapixels. Nikon only has a few lenses, more are coming such as the new Nikkor 70-200VR2. These lenses carry a very hefty price tag. By the way, it's not to beat on Nikon, Canon lenses are almost as expensive. My personal opinion is that Canon is a little bit better on the tele side while Nikon is better on the wide side. An item that made me look at Canon is the 70-200/4ISL has no equivalent in the Nikon line-up of lenses.
In business, one of the most important factors is: ROI The Return On Investment. Can I make a profit and how much?
- Nikon doesn't have any camera between 12 Megapixels an 24 Megapixels. Very few of Nikon's lenses are between very good and excellent at 24 megapixels.
- The best deal was the Sony a850 with the Zeiss lenses. The image quality is outstanding.
- Canon has a camera with 18 Megapixels and that's close enough for me.
Why I didn't buy the Sony a850
The a850 is the cheapest of all the full frame camera, the lenses are excellent. It's almost same price as the Canon 7D, but I'm not going to buy all the lenses and accessories that I need, just the basic kit and get the rest as rentals, again the ROI. No camera store, that I know of, rents Sonyes.
At 18 megapixels I can easily make 16x20 prints, even 20x30 canvas prints and sell XXL photos. It's not just the number of pixels or their size, but the quality of the pixels and how they are processed that is important. That's where Nikon with their 12 Megapixels has an advantage on the quality of the pixels, but to my eyes, Canon has a big edge on how they process the pixels so they can be equivalent or almost the equivalent to Nikon & Sony.
Ergonomics
The ergonomics1 are not great. Nikon and Pentax have much better ergonomics. Yes, I know that eventually, I'll get used to it but if the ergonomics are right there would be not need to get used to it with time. The camera is fairly large, one of the largest in the aps-c sensor size. Good heft especially for the teles.
I know that some of comments are redundant to people that are Canonites, because that's how it's always been with Canon.
Big problems with some Canon “idiotics”
- 5 very small buttons at the front by the “adjustment wheel” aka the main dial. They are for customization, white balance, af-drive, iso and to light-up the top LCD. The buttons are way too small to use them without looking at them. How many month will it take for the finger to learn the proper position and spacing?
- A simple rubber cover over the terminal cover for the microphone, hdmi, usb… How long will that last? Don't use it too often or it will rip. A locked door would have been proper.
- No lock on the memory card door. It just slides in and out. Hope for the best.
- Auto ISO: Can't limit the ISO range, it's either manual or automatic 100 to 3200 with no control on my part. Yes I know that it's on the 1d series, but the 7d is Canon's pro camera in the aps-c format.
- ISO: Can't set the ISO if I'm using the flash! It's only 400 and that's it. This seems to indicate that the native sensitivity of the sensor is 400.
- ISO: Can't set the ISO if I'm in B! It's only 400 and that's it.
- No quick button for bracketing. I use bracketing a lot, it must be done though the menus or through a custom setting.
- Lousy manual. Poor layout and no great explanations, but that's not only Canon, every other camera manufacturer is just as guilty. On the other hand, Canon has the Digital Learning Center with many explanations, tips…
- Do you remember the cartoon of the man being help by the ankles and the money falling out of his pockets. That's what it feels to be with Canon. $1500 Canadian2 for a 17-55mm/2.8 lens and no lens hood or lens case.
Addendum/Correction
- The ISO setting of 400 under B and under the flash mode is only in the auto-mode of the ISO. It's possible to set the ISO manually during flash or B to whatever ISO you want.
- Many people have commented that having a simple rubber cover over the plug opening is not a problem for them nor having no latch on the CF card. It's a problem for me. The camera is supposed to be “weatherized” and it's one more thing to worry about.
Nice features
- Great viewfinder.
- 100% display, kind of. The 100% display applies if you don't wear glasses. I do.
- Great technology of the projection of display mark like framing, auto-focus areas…
- Very bright viewfinder for an aps-c camera.
- The Q button which gives a quick way of accessing the menus without going through the hundreds of menu items.
- Excellent high-iso, when you can use the high iso3. Is it better than Nikon's D300s? That's for the pixel-peepers to decide. I personally don't care or see why people should argue about it. Is it good enough for me? Definitely yes.
- 2 CPUs. It's a very fast
computer camera.
- Speed: 8 frames/sec in 14bit mode without the need for an external motor-drive.
Here's a photo: Camera down, hanging upside-down under my arm with an R-strap from Back Rapid. Lift the camera, almost look through the viewfinder and press the shutter. Only 1 shot, and the camera is again down under my arm, almost invisible: total time: 2 seconds. I like it. I love it.
Attach:street-woman-parking-meter.jpg Δ|Older woman, paying parking meter, Vancouver, BC, Canada
This photo is a jpeg, straight out of the camera, no processing, just shrinking it for web usage. Please note that the photo is not 100% sharp. I didn't have the 1/2 second to engage the IS drive.
Auto-Focus
Early on, on the various forums there were many people complaining about the accuracy of the auto-focus. It didn't work… Blah, blah… Since then Canon has come out with 2 firmware updates. I have the 1.10 version of the firmware. I don't have too many problems. It much more a user problem of learning the behaviour of the auto-focus, it's strength and weaknesses. For example my preferred setting for street photography and dog photography is the Zone AF, where the 19 points are divided in 5 areas. It's fast and gets it right the majority of the times.
The default 19-point Auto Selection AF setting prefers closer subjects, and averages the setting based on an f/5.6 depth-of-field when more than one point is confirmed.
— British Journal of Photography
My wish is for Canon to resurrect the technology from the Elan 7N and to select the focus point by tracking the eye. That would be awesome.
I have found the auto-focus to be very good in low light and lower contrast. It's fast, but I'm sure that there are people that will want to contradict me.
Take a look at Cartier-Bresson, Doisneau, Capa… their images are not 100% sharp. Their images have content, quality, poor grain, and just an OK focus. The optics were not sharp enough, and the focus was just guess work plus the depth of field. By The Way: DOF = Depth Of Field and not Depth of Focus. The depth of field in in front of the lens, the subject being photographed. The depth of focus is the focusing of the light on the sensor.
I have unlinked the auto-focus from the shutter button. I am re-training myself to use the focus with the AF-On/Start button:
The auto-focus seems to be working better. Why? I don't know, but even Canon claims that the auto-focus is more accurate and works better that way.
Video
None. I just did once a very quick trial. That's it. Any and all shortcomings of the terrible video where due to the incompetent operator, in this case me. I'm not qualified to judge.
Image quality
The image quality is done by many thing: The camera, the lens, the photographer, the raw processor4 and the display media: monitor or print. The camera is only one component of the image quality.
- Camera: Looks good, and with further firmware modifications, fixes and improvements this will become a great camera.
- Lenses: Very good, some are excellent.
- Raw converter: TBD5 when Adobe will support the 7D. Why didn't Canon arrange with Adobe? Nikon did arrange with Adobe for their D300s and D3s, why not Canon?
- Display: I have a very good commercial printer and a calibrated screen.
The verdict is still open! From the photos that I have done, the quality of OK! What only OK? for $4000 Canadian? My verdict will come when Adobe comes out with support for the Canon 7D. I don't like Canon's DPP6. It's terrible, a poor workflow, not that great raw conversion7. I'm not impressed. So right now, I'm shooting Raw+JPEG. I will reprocess the raw files later. For JPEGs, the quality is quite good but definitely not the same league as Olympus with their E3 or E30.
Addendum/Correction
- 19-Nov-2009: Today, Adobe has release Lightroom 2.6 Release Candidate. It does support the Canon 7D. It does look good, so much better than the beta support. It even supports the various standard camera profiles from the 7D with Natural, Portrait, Faithful…
- I have to say finally. Lightroom does a very good job or processing the files. I like them much better than the DPP processing of the raw files.
The best part of the camera is not in this review because it's the 70-200/f4IS L lens. The combo is fantastic. Fast, crisp and very well balanced. Better than anything I have ever used before. Too bad the lens has to be white, it sticks out like a sore thumb.
Nikon D300s
What about the competition, the Nikon d300s? The direct competition to the Canon 7d. Why should I bother? I'm on the Canon side. I've bought my “muchos dinors” glass. I'm starting to buy my accessories, flash… If you are on the Nikon side, good for you, be happy with your camera and go and take photos. The Nikon d300s is a great camera, enjoy it.
Conclusions
- Like I said, this is much more a first impressions than a technical review. I just a user, making photos. I don't measure pixels, but one of the first thing I did what to check the AF micro-adjustments with my lenses.
- It's a very fast camera, that will get better with age.
- The Canon 7d has been out for only 7 weeks, and there are already 3 upgrades to the firmware. I'm sure that Canon will continue to tweak and improve the 7d with further firmware upgrades.
1 Ergonomics is the science of designing to fit the end-user ↑
2 That's after tax. I could have purchased it a little bit cheaper on the Internet, but I wanted a local store so I could return and get local service, which is what I chose to pay extra for. ↑
3 No high ISO when using any flash or B setting for the shutter ↑
4 I always shoot raw ↑
5 To be determined ↑
6 Digital Photo Professional: software from Canon to process the raw photos from the 7D ↑
7 Right now it's better than Adobe's Lightroom ↑
(redirected from Biz.Canon-7d-almost-review)
Canon 7D: could have been a review
This is not a review for measurebators or pixel-peepers. It's my opinions, as of mid-november 2009, based on:
- My experience: 20+ years
- The age of the captain
- The direction of the wind…
For a detailed technical review see: 7D review from Digital-Picture.com
Why I bought the Canon 7D
I was looking for a camera in the 20 MegaPixels range. The cheapest camera in the 20 megapixels range is the Sony a850 at around $2500 Canadian. The most expensive camera is the Nikon D3x at $8000 Canadian. Then, there are the lenses. I will need lenses that can resolve the 20 Megapixels. Nikon only has a few lenses, more are coming such as the new Nikkor 70-200VR2. These lenses carry a very hefty price tag. By the way, it's not to beat on Nikon, Canon lenses are almost as expensive. My personal opinion is that Canon is a little bit better on the tele side while Nikon is better on the wide side. An item that made me look at Canon is the 70-200/4ISL has no equivalent in the Nikon line-up of lenses.
In business, one of the most important factors is: ROI The Return On Investment. Can I make a profit and how much?
- Nikon doesn't have any camera between 12 Megapixels an 24 Megapixels. Very few of Nikon's lenses are between very good and excellent at 24 megapixels.
- The best deal was the Sony a850 with the Zeiss lenses. The image quality is outstanding.
- Canon has a camera with 18 Megapixels and that's close enough for me.
Why I didn't buy the Sony a850
The a850 is the cheapest of all the full frame camera, the lenses are excellent. It's almost same price as the Canon 7D, but I'm not going to buy all the lenses and accessories that I need, just the basic kit and get the rest as rentals, again the ROI. No camera store, that I know of, rents Sonyes.
At 18 megapixels I can easily make 16x20 prints, even 20x30 canvas prints and sell XXL photos. It's not just the number of pixels or their size, but the quality of the pixels and how they are processed that is important. That's where Nikon with their 12 Megapixels has an advantage on the quality of the pixels, but to my eyes, Canon has a big edge on how they process the pixels so they can be equivalent or almost the equivalent to Nikon & Sony.
Ergonomics
The ergonomics1 are not great. Nikon and Pentax have much better ergonomics. Yes, I know that eventually, I'll get used to it but if the ergonomics are right there would be not need to get used to it with time. The camera is fairly large, one of the largest in the aps-c sensor size. Good heft especially for the teles.
I know that some of comments are redundant to people that are Canonites, because that's how it's always been with Canon.
Big problems with some Canon “idiotics”
- 5 very small buttons at the front by the “adjustment wheel” aka the main dial. They are for customization, white balance, af-drive, iso and to light-up the top LCD. The buttons are way too small to use them without looking at them. How many month will it take for the finger to learn the proper position and spacing?
- A simple rubber cover over the terminal cover for the microphone, hdmi, usb… How long will that last? Don't use it too often or it will rip. A locked door would have been proper.
- No lock on the memory card door. It just slides in and out. Hope for the best.
- Auto ISO: Can't limit the ISO range, it's either manual or automatic 100 to 3200 with no control on my part. Yes I know that it's on the 1d series, but the 7d is Canon's pro camera in the aps-c format.
- ISO: Can't set the ISO if I'm using the flash! It's only 400 and that's it. This seems to indicate that the native sensitivity of the sensor is 400.
- ISO: Can't set the ISO if I'm in B! It's only 400 and that's it.
- No quick button for bracketing. I use bracketing a lot, it must be done though the menus or through a custom setting.
- Lousy manual. Poor layout and no great explanations, but that's not only Canon, every other camera manufacturer is just as guilty. On the other hand, Canon has the Digital Learning Center with many explanations, tips…
- Do you remember the cartoon of the man being help by the ankles and the money falling out of his pockets. That's what it feels to be with Canon. $1500 Canadian2 for a 17-55mm/2.8 lens and no lens hood or lens case.
Addendum/Correction
- The ISO setting of 400 under B and under the flash mode is only in the auto-mode of the ISO. It's possible to set the ISO manually during flash or B to whatever ISO you want.
- Many people have commented that having a simple rubber cover over the plug opening is not a problem for them nor having no latch on the CF card. It's a problem for me. The camera is supposed to be “weatherized” and it's one more thing to worry about.
Nice features
- Great viewfinder.
- 100% display, kind of. The 100% display applies if you don't wear glasses. I do.
- Great technology of the projection of display mark like framing, auto-focus areas…
- Very bright viewfinder for an aps-c camera.
- The Q button which gives a quick way of accessing the menus without going through the hundreds of menu items.
- Excellent high-iso, when you can use the high iso3. Is it better than Nikon's D300s? That's for the pixel-peepers to decide. I personally don't care or see why people should argue about it. Is it good enough for me? Definitely yes.
- 2 CPUs. It's a very fast
computercamera. - Speed: 8 frames/sec in 14bit mode without the need for an external motor-drive.
Here's a photo: Camera down, hanging upside-down under my arm with an R-strap from Back Rapid. Lift the camera, almost look through the viewfinder and press the shutter. Only 1 shot, and the camera is again down under my arm, almost invisible: total time: 2 seconds. I like it. I love it.
Attach:street-woman-parking-meter.jpg Δ|Older woman, paying parking meter, Vancouver, BC, Canada
This photo is a jpeg, straight out of the camera, no processing, just shrinking it for web usage. Please note that the photo is not 100% sharp. I didn't have the 1/2 second to engage the IS drive.
Auto-Focus
Early on, on the various forums there were many people complaining about the accuracy of the auto-focus. It didn't work… Blah, blah… Since then Canon has come out with 2 firmware updates. I have the 1.10 version of the firmware. I don't have too many problems. It much more a user problem of learning the behaviour of the auto-focus, it's strength and weaknesses. For example my preferred setting for street photography and dog photography is the Zone AF, where the 19 points are divided in 5 areas. It's fast and gets it right the majority of the times.
The default 19-point Auto Selection AF setting prefers closer subjects, and averages the setting based on an f/5.6 depth-of-field when more than one point is confirmed.
— British Journal of Photography
My wish is for Canon to resurrect the technology from the Elan 7N and to select the focus point by tracking the eye. That would be awesome.
I have found the auto-focus to be very good in low light and lower contrast. It's fast, but I'm sure that there are people that will want to contradict me.
Take a look at Cartier-Bresson, Doisneau, Capa… their images are not 100% sharp. Their images have content, quality, poor grain, and just an OK focus. The optics were not sharp enough, and the focus was just guess work plus the depth of field. By The Way: DOF = Depth Of Field and not Depth of Focus. The depth of field in in front of the lens, the subject being photographed. The depth of focus is the focusing of the light on the sensor.
I have unlinked the auto-focus from the shutter button. I am re-training myself to use the focus with the AF-On/Start button:
The auto-focus seems to be working better. Why? I don't know, but even Canon claims that the auto-focus is more accurate and works better that way.
Video
None. I just did once a very quick trial. That's it. Any and all shortcomings of the terrible video where due to the incompetent operator, in this case me. I'm not qualified to judge.
Image quality
The image quality is done by many thing: The camera, the lens, the photographer, the raw processor4 and the display media: monitor or print. The camera is only one component of the image quality.
- Camera: Looks good, and with further firmware modifications, fixes and improvements this will become a great camera.
- Lenses: Very good, some are excellent.
- Raw converter: TBD5 when Adobe will support the 7D. Why didn't Canon arrange with Adobe? Nikon did arrange with Adobe for their D300s and D3s, why not Canon?
- Display: I have a very good commercial printer and a calibrated screen.
The verdict is still open! From the photos that I have done, the quality of OK! What only OK? for $4000 Canadian? My verdict will come when Adobe comes out with support for the Canon 7D. I don't like Canon's DPP6. It's terrible, a poor workflow, not that great raw conversion7. I'm not impressed. So right now, I'm shooting Raw+JPEG. I will reprocess the raw files later. For JPEGs, the quality is quite good but definitely not the same league as Olympus with their E3 or E30.
Addendum/Correction
- 19-Nov-2009: Today, Adobe has release Lightroom 2.6 Release Candidate. It does support the Canon 7D. It does look good, so much better than the beta support. It even supports the various standard camera profiles from the 7D with Natural, Portrait, Faithful…
- I have to say finally. Lightroom does a very good job or processing the files. I like them much better than the DPP processing of the raw files.
The best part of the camera is not in this review because it's the 70-200/f4IS L lens. The combo is fantastic. Fast, crisp and very well balanced. Better than anything I have ever used before. Too bad the lens has to be white, it sticks out like a sore thumb.
Nikon D300s
What about the competition, the Nikon d300s? The direct competition to the Canon 7d. Why should I bother? I'm on the Canon side. I've bought my “muchos dinors” glass. I'm starting to buy my accessories, flash… If you are on the Nikon side, good for you, be happy with your camera and go and take photos. The Nikon d300s is a great camera, enjoy it.
Conclusions
- Like I said, this is much more a first impressions than a technical review. I just a user, making photos. I don't measure pixels, but one of the first thing I did what to check the AF micro-adjustments with my lenses.
- It's a very fast camera, that will get better with age.
- The Canon 7d has been out for only 7 weeks, and there are already 3 upgrades to the firmware. I'm sure that Canon will continue to tweak and improve the 7d with further firmware upgrades.
1 Ergonomics is the science of designing to fit the end-user ↑
2 That's after tax. I could have purchased it a little bit cheaper on the Internet, but I wanted a local store so I could return and get local service, which is what I chose to pay extra for. ↑
3 No high ISO when using any flash or B setting for the shutter ↑
4 I always shoot raw ↑
5 To be determined ↑
6 Digital Photo Professional: software from Canon to process the raw photos from the 7D ↑
7 Right now it's better than Adobe's Lightroom ↑
