July 31, 2014, 03:08:55 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - MichaelHodges

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 16

Have you tried it on kids?  It couldn't keep up with mine... 

I have no problem with any critter moving towards me or away. I use center point AI servo. 

Like the 5DII before it, it does a decent job at tracking subjects moving across the frame, like the bighorns in your excellent image.  Where the 5DII and 6D fail are when a subject is moving toward or away from the camera (away is worse).   I just processed a burst sequence taken with my 1D X and 70-200/2.8L IS II of a gymnast running straight at me and vaulting from springboard onto the pad (which I was standing behind).  All 26 shots in the burst are in crisp focus (lighting was pretty poor, shots were at 1/800 s, f/3.2, ISO 12800).  The 7D would have gotten many of the shots in focus (but they'd have been unusable due to the ISO noise or the motion blur with a slower shutter speed. The noise from the 6D would have been acceptable, but after the first couple of frames, most of the shots would have been backfocused (and I'd have had far fewer shots, of course).

The 7D was the worst Canon DSLR I have owned. It was widely regarded as a "wildlife" lens, yet most big  wildlife is crepuscular in nature, a time when the 7D falls flat. I used my 7D and the 6D in that bighorn series, and the 7D failed. Many, many out of focus shots riddled with noise. Something about even light just played haywire with the copy I had when combined with telephotos.

I'm not surprised at the 1DX results. Awesome camera. 

While not the best photos, here are a couple examples of my 6D with a 300 prime and quick animals (much quicker than children). Very low sunset light, too. I've also attached the corresponding 100% crops.

I find the 6D to have better focus than any crop camera (and I've owned them all). If the 6D can nail bighorn rams unpredictably smashing heads, it can keep up with your kids and track race cars.

That was taken at 5 degrees, dawn. My 7D was completely useless in this scenario.

EOS Bodies / Re: Which is better for high ISO, 6D or 5D Mk III?
« on: July 09, 2014, 07:29:03 PM »
The difference between the 6D and 5DIII in long exposure high ISO is enormous.


EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 07, 2014, 10:06:29 PM »

The past IQ of the original 7D doesn't mean the 7D II will have the same problems. For Canon to succeed with the 7D line, the 7D II MUST have better IQ and overall performance than the 70D. It would just be a flop if it did not. If the 7D II does end up being a superior performer to the 70D...would you still adhere to the above statement? (Just curious...personally I find it odd when one single bad experience with one single product permanently taints a person's opinion of something...to me, every product generation is a chance for a new start, a chance for a company to reinvent itself, reinvigorate itself, or if necessary redeem itself (not that Canon needs redeeming, but they do need some reinvigoration in some areas.))

I battled a 7D for three years and it was never repaired properly. The customer service on top of it was the worst I've experienced.  On the first day of using the camera, it misfocused badly at telephoto. I should have just returned it, but instead I decided to let Canon do the right thing. Big mistake. I really wasted a ton of time on the issue.

I've never had a problem with a Canon body before that, or with the two bodies I bought after. I have no interest in pursuing a 7DII at all, because the 70D is stunning, and I already have a full frame to go with it.

The Mark IV and 7D, IMHO, focused poorly with certain telephotos, and shared  the AI Servo II algorithms and AF CF settings.

 Sure, the 7DII could use different algorithms, but I'm just staying away. Bad karma. I came pretty close to defecting over the 7D issue.

If you need an upgrade over the 7D, get the 70D.  Why?  Better sharpness at RAW (I'd say 30-45%), better color at RAW, much more reliable focus and almost as fast. I had both cameras side by side for a month. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 07, 2014, 05:07:56 PM »
I bought the 7D when it was first released and I had two impressions....One: I LOVED the ergonomics and control layout over the 5D2.  Two: I was majorly disappointed in the quality of the files out of the camera....just too mushy for my taste.

Agreed. Especially the bold part.  The 7D had the worst IQ of any Canon product I have used.  It was especially weak in crepuscular light, which is where most big-game wildlife shooting occurs.   
I'll be staying away from anything with the 7D name, no matter the amount of enticing gadgets. I found the 70D to be a far superior camera.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 70d center focus point -bug- problem
« on: June 25, 2014, 09:00:39 PM »
Got 70D from US Amazon. After shooting on the field I have noticed there are issues with AF.

I'm hearing this from many of my photog friends.  Thanks for the head's up.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 70d center focus point -bug- problem
« on: June 25, 2014, 08:59:56 PM »
Here are links about this:

Well, the first video is a useless joke.  Evidence?  I see none.  Zero information about the lens used, the camera settings, or the set up.  The most obvious answer to that "problem" is that the lens needs AFMA – sharper with live view than with phase AF is the easiest test to determine that.  I chuckled at the claim that "a good knowledge of photography" is necessary to detect the problem. That's what we call irony.  ::)

The second video says exactly what I just said – the focus was off with the 50/1.4 at f/1.4, and AFMA corrected the problem. Duh. He then goes on to suggest there is, in fact, a problem with some cameras – but he has no evidence for that, except "some people on the Internet say"…

Were these two videos the best 'evidence' you could come up with?  I think the only problems you're seeing are wetware errors – the person holding the camera is the issue.

Have you seen these videos? are they joke as well? Some newbies experimenting with the latest game changer from Canon? http://youtu.be/_9Qm4CEjz4U. If the language is a problem, this video may help uderstanding the issue better http://youtu.be/cA6JnzYSDJE

Thanks for posting.  I'll look for these potential issues next week when I rent a 70d for kicks.

This is bizarre.

So thankful for Lightroom.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D or EOS 7D, bodies compared
« on: June 13, 2014, 12:58:55 PM »
I wouldn't recommend either for wildlife as some 7D's have long-distance focus issues, too. It's no coincidence these two bodies use the same focus system.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7d2 IQ thoughts.
« on: June 12, 2014, 09:07:42 PM »
what I am saying is that if the 7D Mk2 is 16+ MP it will be of no use to me


...better noise control, maybe more dr????...

Better than in 6D? Wishful thinking I guess :)

The physics say it is not likely to be better than a FF for noise but there is alot of room for improvement when you look at the old 18mp sensor.    Even if they could get close to 1 stop of high ISO noise away from the 6d it would be a game changer!  I would actually use ISO 3200 on a crop!

If you need that kind of low light performance, just go full frame.

EOS Bodies / Re: Can Canon deliver a FF sensor that is class leading?
« on: June 03, 2014, 06:10:17 PM »
And if Canon can do that, can it finally deliver a FF sensor that is also class leading? By class leading, I'm referring to noise control and DR

Canon already has a class-leading sensor, it's in the 6d: nearly zero (esp. vertical) banding (better than 1dx @iso100) means almost the full theoretical dr is actually usable. It has good dr @base iso (boosted +1/3ev by ML and =15ev with dual_iso) and superior dynamic range at high iso: http://sensorgen.info/CanonEOS_6D.html

I can vouch for the 6D sensor.  Fantastic looking images.

I can only speak from experience...but despite the 7D's advanced focusing system, I find it to be the least accurate/most inconsistent of all the bodies I've used, and this even includes the tiny SL1. 

This has been precisely my experience as well.

My experience is 1 7D and 1 70D. My 7D had the same variability in AF as reported by lensrentals, and the AF with the 300mm f/2.8 II + 2xTCIII could be very, very slow, which is why I sold it. My 70D is as consistent as my 5DIII, which is superb, and focusses fast with the 300mm f/2.8 at 600mm.

Nice to hear concerning the 70D, but not surprised at all with the 7D.

is exactly what AFMA is designed to correct.  How many of those 400 petition signers know what AFMA is, and have properly calibrated their lenses?  I suspect the number of petitioin signers with a camera that's actually defective is much smaller than 400, as many of those people quite likely read about it on the Internet, and decided they have a problem unit despite not checking appropriately.   So, you have a few people in Germany with cameras that are actually defective…and it's the second best selling dSLR in the country according to Amazon.

In this scenario, you're presuming things you have no way to check upon unless you work for Canon, or have the skills of a great prophet.

One person could make the case this online noise means only a few duds exist, while another could claim the noise represents a much larger number, like statistical polling does.

Either way is presumptuous unless you have the actual raw data.  The only way for non-Canon employees to gauge product satisfaction is from their peers ,or, as you say below, a product recall. But as you and I both know, mega-corporations are not exactly models of self-regulation.

Sure, it's unfortunate that some people get defective products, but as I stated, defective units are unavoidable in any mass-produced item.  In the case of the 70D, the camera came out less than one year ago, meaning everyone who owns one still has warranty coverage provided by Canon.   

Unfortunately, that means nothing. My 7D had the dreaded focus issue. I shall not go into the details here.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 16