7D Questions to be answered

Thanks for the advance warning, Scott F.

Lat

I find it quite interesting all the forum trashing of this camera already. It seems to me more and more (perception of the masses) that if you can't take the camera out of the box, point it at the bird in flight and get clear sharp sequences, the camera sucks. There is not one technique for BIF that all people do, exactly the same. Talk about variability...I dare say differing techniques, skills, shooting conditions involved with BIF shots all play a part. To say it's just the camera is shortsighted at best. Just like the 1D3, some say it sucks, some say it's great. It all depends and on many different things.

Thanks for all the info everybody, especially Scott & Romy! Looks like yet another Canon cam to skip (for my purposes). Disappointing - I really wanted to be able to use this as my whale and critter cam. Maybe a 1d4 or 3d or even a used 5D2 to play with while I wait or maybe I'll have to finally go with another brand. On the upside, the longer I wait the bigger my camera cash war chest becomes.

Christian, one of the wonderful aspects of the photog community here is the level of collective expertise: it's one of a very few places on the web where I can trust folks' opinions on gear, etc.. If Romy (a beta tester and experienced Canon & bird guy) and Scott (an accomplished Canon photog) don't find the 7D up to the task then I'm 99% sure that I wouldn't. For those of us researching whether we think a new cam is a worthwhile purchase, relying on early reports from rock solid photogs seems quite reasonable. As for already "trashing"the camera, I think we can be sure that Romy and Scott have the knowledge & experience required to have thoroughly tested the 7D's usefullness in a relatively short time.

Cheers!

akclimber wrote:If Romy (a beta tester and experienced Canon & bird guy) and Scott (an accomplished Canon photog) don't find the 7D up to the task then I'm 99% sure that I wouldn't. For those of us researching whether we think a new cam is a worthwhile purchase, relying on early reports from rock solid photogs seems quite reasonable. As for already "trashing"the camera, I think we can be sure that Romy and Scott have the knowledge & experience required to have thoroughly tested the 7D's usefullness in a relatively short time.

Cheers!

So if Scott and Romy say it sucks, then it does ?
Just like the 1D3 Joe.... There are reputable photogs here that said it was a poor performer, yet there are others here equally talented in the skills arena and say it the best camera to date by Canon. Sure it's great to get an affirmation that it's a great camera from a forum review (helps with the buying decision). Had I paid attention to RG and other 1D3 bashers only, I would never of purchased a 1Ds3. That would of been bad for me, since I have made my best images to date with that camera. Everything must be taken with a grain of salt...there are way to many variables in play.

And some will just carry on and enjoy the camera whatever the doomsayers have to say! So how many people have decided not to buy it because of this thread?

I have only just starting to take my photography a bit more seriously and was eagerly awaiting the arrival of the 7D to replace my aging 20D for an upcoming trip to Antarctica and Patagonia this Christmas but based on some of the reports I have been reading on a number of websites I have decided to hold off until I have a better idea of whether it will do the job I want it to do.

My main concern is the BIF on BG issue. I want to get the new camera soon so that I can get used to its features but not sure whether I should go for the 7D or settle for the 5DII at the moment...

All advice gratefully recieved so new owners of the 7D please keep posting your comments!

c.w. moynihan wrote:I find it quite interesting all the forum trashing of this camera already. It seems to me more and more (perception of the masses) that if you can't take the camera out of the box, point it at the bird in flight and get clear sharp sequences, the camera sucks. There is not one technique for BIF that all people do, exactly the same. Talk about variability...I dare say differing techniques, skills, shooting conditions involved with BIF shots all play a part. To say it's just the camera is shortsighted at best. Just like the 1D3, some say it sucks, some say it's great. It all depends and on many different things.

Just for the record, I never said it "sucked", I just relayed my findings after a couple thousand images over a week. I am not saying don't buy it, it might be perfect for many people, but not for me. Those were my observations and I posted them, just like other people that posted about how great it is. I am fairly picky about what I like and accept, and if I see something as a problem or concern, then I will say it. That doesn't mean every one else has to agree with me, just my observations. I also have a G10, and I use it at 80 or 100 ISO, and if I have no other option, I may even use 200, but never higher, other people are quite happy above that.
For example, I expect if I put an AF spot on a slow moving bird, and am able to keep it there, the camera should be able to focus on it.
Here is an example of what I have mentioned before, it is one of a series(I cropped it to just the AF array) where ALL the images are backfocussed(focus plane is on the birds back), and I would call this a dead simple situation(single point , no expansion, etc). I have other examples that show a similar situation. May be mine was just a bad sample , I don't know.

Maybe this link will help some of you learn how to use the AF system of this camera properly:


http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller ... leTypeID=5

Scott Fairbairn wrote:

c.w. moynihan wrote:I find it quite interesting all the forum trashing of this camera already. It seems to me more and more (perception of the masses) that if you can't take the camera out of the box, point it at the bird in flight and get clear sharp sequences, the camera sucks. There is not one technique for BIF that all people do, exactly the same. Talk about variability...I dare say differing techniques, skills, shooting conditions involved with BIF shots all play a part. To say it's just the camera is shortsighted at best. Just like the 1D3, some say it sucks, some say it's great. It all depends and on many different things.

Just for the record, I never said it "sucked", I just relayed my findings after a couple thousand images over a week. I am not saying don't buy it, it might be perfect for many people, but not for me. Those were my observations and I posted them, just like other people that posted about how great it is. I am fairly picky about what I like and accept, and if I see something as a problem or concern, then I will say it. That doesn't mean every one else has to agree with me, just my observations. I also have a G10, and I use it at 80 or 100 ISO, and if I have no other option, I may even use 200, but never higher, other people are quite happy above that.
For example, I expect if I put an AF spot on a slow moving bird, and am able to keep it there, the camera should be able to focus on it.
Here is an example of what I have mentioned before, it is one of a series(I cropped it to just the AF array) where ALL the images are backfocussed(focus plane is on the birds back), and I would call this a dead simple situation(single point , no expansion, etc). I have other examples that show a similar situation. May be mine was just a bad sample , I don't know.

Scott,
perhaps your settings for AF, Cust Fcn III-6 could explain the issue you are experiencing ? To me, if single AF point with surround points engaged, one could imagine having focus problems problems in some circumstances, particlularly Busy bg's. Have you tried the camera with just single AF point with no expansion ?

I recently bought this camera, but cannot render an opinion as of yet. I will when I get a chance to put it to use. For me, BIF, I will always use just the single point, with no expansion....like I do with my 1Ds. We shall see. Sorry for my exaggeration suggesting you thought the camera sucked. I could of phrased it better. Cheers !

Thanks for the link Brian. Just curious, have you tried this camera ? Any initial thoughts, opinions ?

Scott Fairbairn wrote:The second was the look of the files. I don't know if it is a character of the sensor, or the high resolution on a cropped camera, but every bird I photographed looked completely "flat" on screen. When I looked at the images, I could very easily imagine that the subjects were just painted cardboard cutouts.
Maybe it was just my particular sample? Either way, it's gone.

Scott, I'm specially interested in this comment of yours. Can you please elaborate a little more on this feeling? Do you fill this is a result of the broader DOF( when compared to larger sensor cameras you are used to)? Pour color accuracy? Lack of contrast? Heavy AA filter?

Thanks

Christian , the example I posted was using single point only. I tried the spot focus setting as well for situations like a bird in branches and it seemed to work well.
The other times it gave less than satisfactory results were also using single point. When BG's were uniform it had no trouble.

Brian E. Small wrote:Maybe this link will help some of you learn how to use the AF system of this camera properly:


http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller ... leTypeID=5

Thanks for the link , but I'd read it before, IMO , the new AF system is pretty straight forward once you read it through.

Thanks for all the information Scott, Romy and others.
Have you had the oppotunity to compare the focus against a 1dmII (n) ?

c.w. moynihan wrote:

akclimber wrote:If Romy (a beta tester and experienced Canon & bird guy) and Scott (an accomplished Canon photog) don't find the 7D up to the task then I'm 99% sure that I wouldn't. For those of us researching whether we think a new cam is a worthwhile purchase, relying on early reports from rock solid photogs seems quite reasonable. As for already "trashing"the camera, I think we can be sure that Romy and Scott have the knowledge & experience required to have thoroughly tested the 7D's usefullness in a relatively short time.

Cheers!

So if Scott and Romy say it sucks, then it does ?
Just like the 1D3 Joe.... There are reputable photogs here that said it was a poor performer, yet there are others here equally talented in the skills arena and say it the best camera to date by Canon. Sure it's great to get an affirmation that it's a great camera from a forum review (helps with the buying decision). Had I paid attention to RG and other 1D3 bashers only, I would never of purchased a 1Ds3. That would of been bad for me, since I have made my best images to date with that camera. Everything must be taken with a grain of salt...there are way to many variables in play.

AFAIC, if Scott and Romy aren't happy with it (they never said it sucked) and from samples, etc I've seen elsewhere on the net, that's good enough and I don't need to run out buy one and go thru the hassle of testing it myself then sending it back, etc. I'll stay tuned and see what transpires with the cam, other users and firmware, etc. Maybe I'll get lucky and find one here in Juneau to test myself, which would be ideal, but for now, based on Romy and Scott's findings as well as other info on the net I'm gonna hold of on a planned purchase.

By no means I am an expert in BIF but over the years I have owned canon's bodies such as 30D, 40D, 50D, 5DII, 1DMK2N, 1D3, 1DsIII and now 7D and I can say (after few thousand frames) that 7D is the best non-1D-series camera in tracking flying birds using single center AF point. 5DII is quite good too but only when I activated the hidden AF points but single center point did not work well.
Please see my gallery where I used EF400/5.6L+7D. Not very challenging BG but it holds very well even after I completely missed the AF point on the bird(see some examples at the end).
http://ruhikant.smugmug.com/Birds/7D-Du ... 9962_D4949

I'm thankful that I don't need to use single center point only to track BIF....I'd be in trouble

Scott Fairbairn wrote:I am fairly picky about what I like and accept, and if I see something as a problem or concern, then I will say it. That doesn't mean every one else has to agree with me, just my observations. I also have a G10, and I use it at 80 or 100 ISO, and if I have no other option, I may even use 200, but never higher, other people are quite happy above that.
For example, I expect if I put an AF spot on a slow moving bird, and am able to keep it there, the camera should be able to focus on it.

Hi Scott,

I have been reading this thread for a while now. No disrespect to you but I browsed your website and noticed few images "soft" as well with your previous body. Do you have a problem with that body too? Here are some links just to mention few.

http://www.scottfairbairnphoto.com/Scot ... cet.html#0

http://www.scottfairbairnphoto.com/Scot ... ern.html#0

http://www.scottfairbairnphoto.com/Scot ... ery.html#1

I have to agree with several folks here, technique and knowledge are critical. I remember when a lot of folks talked badly about the 40D and I've been doing OK with it.

As always, respectfully.

Maxis wrote:

Scott Fairbairn wrote:I am fairly picky about what I like and accept, and if I see something as a problem or concern, then I will say it. That doesn't mean every one else has to agree with me, just my observations. I also have a G10, and I use it at 80 or 100 ISO, and if I have no other option, I may even use 200, but never higher, other people are quite happy above that.
For example, I expect if I put an AF spot on a slow moving bird, and am able to keep it there, the camera should be able to focus on it.

Hi Scott,

I have been reading this thread for a while now. No disrespect to you but I browsed your website and noticed few images "soft" as well with your previous body. Do you have a problem with that body too? Here are some links just to mention few.

http://www.scottfairbairnphoto.com/Scot ... cet.html#0

http://www.scottfairbairnphoto.com/Scot ... ern.html#0

http://www.scottfairbairnphoto.com/Scot ... ery.html#1

I have to agree with several folks here, technique and knowledge are critical. I remember when a lot of folks talked badly about the 40D and I've been doing OK with it.

As always, respectfully.

Hey, thanks for the respectful disrespect, and taking the time to look on my site for small jpgs that could be sharpened better, if I have some time to spare, I'll do the same. I don't know about you, but I judge focus and image quality at greater than 640x640. Only one is actually digital, so it must be just the film choice I used or the scanner(wrong brand I guess).
The psychology of photo gear is quite fascinating. If someone says anything negative , then they don't know what they are doing, haven't read the manual,it's a pre-production sample, or it's sample variation. If it's good, then their standards are lower,a case of the emperor's new clothes, or it's proof that it's the best camera ever.
Why do some people act like it's personal insult when someone says they weren't satisfied with a camera or lens? Do we throw out all our older images once a "newer" , "better' camera comes out on the horizon?
For example, the topic of wide angle zooms often comes up for Canon, some people really dislike the 17-40f4 due to distortion, but despite this, I quite liked the lens and accepted that property.
BTW, I agree with you on the 40D, I thought that was a very good camera, although not the best at tough BIF's(sorry, just IMO).

Maxis wrote:
I have to agree with several folks here, technique and knowledge are critical. I remember when a lot of folks talked badly about the 40D and I've been doing OK with it.

As always, respectfully.

Hi Maxis,

Those are good points. The fact that some of us want to skip it doesn't mean it's a bad camera. I suggest that you buy a 7D, and wish that it will live up to your expectation.

Romy

bias_hjorth wrote:Thanks for all the information Scott, Romy and others.
Have you had the oppotunity to compare the focus against a 1dmII (n) ?

IMO, the mark 2 is better in that department.