« on: November 21, 2014, 12:27:57 PM »
The 7D2 should have an advantage with the crop, but in several cases I am not seeing that. For example in the coyote shot from earlier I compared it with a similarly posed coyote taken in worse light with my 5D3 but same rough ISO (400) and found that the detail is roughly the same despite the smaller size of the coyote on the 5D3.
In terms of the underexposed images that is what the light was at the time. With my 5D3 normally I would have shot these at ISO 3200, but at the time I was trying to get a good comparison between them. The point of illustration was the noise and loss of detail - not the quality of the shots.
I looked in LR just now to see the average ISO for my shots and can see:
ISO 3200 and above - 20%
ISO 1600 to 2500 - 25%
ISO 800 to 1250 - 20%
This is of all my shots, so most of the shots at lower ISOs were tripod based landscapes while most of the shots at higher ISOs are of wildlife.
Hey kirispupis, Hope I didn't offend.
I get what you were trying to do. I'm not second guessing either your conclusion or choices about what's best for your work.
My concern is that other folks, who might benefit from a 7D2 for their work, might conclude that it's not possible to get good results with the camera. I'd respectfully disagree with that generalization.
You had to know that if you posted examples that some folks would focus on your methodology rather than the substance of your argument. It's just what they do. My ETR comment is based on my personal experience. I don't have any idea how that reflects on your work. Hope I didn't seem to imply that it did. Any way, good luck with the 5D3/200-400 combo. I don't think that gear is going to be holding you back -Brian
No offense taken. I do believe the 7D2 can be a great tool for those who live in places where the light is better such as Arizona or Florida. Here in the PNW that just isn't the case - especially this time of year.
My disappointment with the 7D2 was that I expected ISO 1600 to be about the same as the 5D3 at 3200, but from experimentation I found this not to be the case. I also was disappointed with the amount of noise I found even at lower ISOs.
The big decision factor was last night when I showed my wife the photos from both cameras and offered her the choice.
a) Keep this camera and sell my 6D. Do not purchase the 1DX when it comes out, but do upgrade my 5D3 to a 5D4.
b) Send this camera back and replace my 6D with a 1DX2 when it is released. Some time after the 5D4 release upgrade my 5D3.
Obviously choice b is considerably more expensive, but after looking at the results she came to the same conclusion I did and (with regret) gave tentative approval for choice b.