7D Sensor...

[kdw75]

I have the 7D and really like the camera. I only wish it did better in low light. I feel like this model should perform better in IQ and low light performance compared to the rebels. Now I realize you get the magnesium body, higher fps and better focusing system. But it has always seemed a little wrong that the 7D and maybe the 60D weren't more of a step up from the rebels. Maybe one or both should have gotten a slightly bigger sensor.

Does anyone else agree?

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The 7D came out in 2009, so its a bit old. You seem to be thinking it should have been better back then? At the time, it was the best sensor.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I disagree.

The 7D has the best APS-C sensor currently offered by Canon. The features that differentiate it from the lower models are build, AF, fps, etc.

If the 7D had a larger sensor - even slightly larger - the image circle of EF-S lenses would not cover it. So...bad idea.

 

[unfocused]

No, I don't agree.

The 7D had the best APS-C sensor available all to itself when it first came out. Canon, as it has always done, started handing the technology down to its less costly models. The only other option would be for Canon to hobble it's Rebels and 60D with an inferior sensor – which wouldn't make the 7D any better. Would hurt their profits and make it less likely that the 7DII would have an even better sensor.

I fully expect the 7DII when it comes out to have the top of the APS-C technology available. But, I also expect to see some of the technology migrate to the lower cost models over time. I don't see any other option and there are plenty of other advantages to the 7D that make it worth the money, other than just the sensor.

 

[kdw75]

No, I don't agree.

The 7D had the best APS-C sensor available all to itself when it first came out. Canon, as it has always done, started handing the technology down to its less costly models. The only other option would be for Canon to hobble it's Rebels and 60D with an inferior sensor – which wouldn't make the 7D any better. Would hurt their profits and make it less likely that the 7DII would have an even better sensor.

I fully expect the 7DII when it comes out to have the top of the APS-C technology available. But, I also expect to see some of the technology migrate to the lower cost models over time. I don't see any other option and there are plenty of other advantages to the 7D that make it worth the money, other than just the sensor.

I did not realize that the 7D had the best sensor to itself when released. I will admit that I don't really make that much use of the advanced auto focus features so I don't really appreciate them. When I look at my 7D specs next to a T3i though it just seems like there should be a bigger difference considering the cost. I really feel like the 60D mitigated the difference even more. I really feel like my 7D will have very little in the way of features compared to the 70D. With so many models that are so close together it seems like they need to release a new one every 18 month or release all of them at the same time so that a higher end older camera isn't surpassed by a newer lower end model.

I guess my feelings stem from the fact that image quality is much, much more important to me than the AF system.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I guess my feelings stem from the fact that image quality is much, much more important to me than the AF system.

What is image quality, and in what context? If you're shooting static subjects with the camera mounted on a tripod, that's one thing. But if you're shooting birds in flight, fast moving action, etc., that's something else. To me, an image from the exact same sensor, but one that's blurry because the AF wasn't adequate for the subject, or the shutter lag too long to catch the decisive moment, is not of the same 'quality'.

 

[kdw75]

I guess my feelings stem from the fact that image quality is much, much more important to me than the AF system.

What is image quality, and in what context? If you're shooting static subjects with the camera mounted on a tripod, that's one thing. But if you're shooting birds in flight, fast moving action, etc., that's something else. To me, an image from the exact same sensor, but one that's blurry because the AF wasn't adequate for the subject, or the shutter lag too long to catch the decisive moment, is not of the same 'quality'.

Very true. Ninety plus percent of the time I use the center spot focus point and then recompose. I rarely shoot anything that I have to track. I do about half of my shooting at night on a tripod.

 

[jrista]

I guess my feelings stem from the fact that image quality is much, much more important to me than the AF system.

And what if the AF system is the key factor that lets you GET the shot in the first place? How valuable is IQ if you can't lock on focus, track, and capture the subject your interested in? For that matter, how valuable is IQ if you can't fire off enough frames in fast enough succession to get your now focused (thanks to the AF) subject in a worthy, intriguing pose? IQ is an incredibly subjective thing...just having sharpness and low noise means nothing if the photo is uninteresting or out of focus.

Advanced AF systems and high frame rates (both things the 7D offers) are critical to many types of photography, and just as important (if not more important in some cases) as IQ.

I have the 7D and really like the camera. I only wish it did better in low light. I feel like this model should perform better in IQ and low light performance compared to the rebels. Now I realize you get the magnesium body, higher fps and better focusing system. But it has always seemed a little wrong that the 7D and maybe the 60D weren't more of a step up from the rebels. Maybe one or both should have gotten a slightly bigger sensor.

Does anyone else agree?

All things being equal, while the 7D noise at high ISO (1600 and above) can look rather crazy when pixel peeping, keep in mind the resolution of the sensor. Pixel-level noise at ISO 1600 and even 3200 doesn't mean all that much when you have such high image resolution. In my experience, the 7D's sensor performs quite admirably at high ISO settings, and the noise is quite easy to clean up. I've also found that its preferable to leave a little bit of noise in place when printing as it helps improve gradients, background bokeh a bit, etc.

The value of the 7D does not really lie with its sensor, though. Its a camera designed for action in fairly rugged situations. The true value of the 7D is the fact that it brings to the table one of the most advanced AF systems for APS-C, and a pretty high frame rate for its resolution. When you need to shoot moving subjects at high speed, the 7D will perform extremely well, and is only really surpassed by Canon's 1D line. The one benefit the 7D has over the 1D line now is its smaller sensor...which helps extend the reach of any given lens when compared to a similar APS-H or FF sensor (i.e. using a 600mm lens on the 7D would be like using a 960mm lens on the 1D X from a framing standpoint.)

Here are some shots of birds in flight, taken on an overcast day near sunset (fairly low light, low enough that I was REALLY pushing the image stabilization of my 100-400mm lens even at high ISO), with a Canon 7D. ISO ranges from 160 to 2000, and all of them are keepers (there definitely is noise in the ISO 1250 and 2000 shots, but when scaled to a reasonable web size or printed, its a non-factor...the shots still look great). If it wasn't for the 19-point AF system and 8fps, most of these shots wouldn't exist:

ISO 2000

ISO 1250

ISO 800

ISO 640

ISO 160

 

[neuroanatomist]

I'll just add one more BIF shot, this one in one of the more challenging situations for an AF system - the subject coming toward (or away from) the camera, rather than moving across the frame. The 7D's AF did fine here, too (tracked the red-winged blackbird from takeoff leaving the blurred tree in the background to landing, almost all of the shots in crisp focus), and the 8 fps caught the right moment in the burst.


EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM @ 400mm, 1/1600 s, f/6.3, ISO 1600

 

[kdw75]

I'll just add one more BIF shot, this one in one of the more challenging situations for an AF system - the subject coming toward (or away from) the camera, rather than moving across the frame. The 7D's AF did fine here, too (tracked the red-winged blackbird from takeoff leaving the blurred tree in the background to landing, almost all of the shots in crisp focus), and the 8 fps caught the right moment in the burst.


EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM @ 400mm, 1/1600 s, f/6.3, ISO 1600

That is a fantastic subject and shot.

 

[Marsu42]

Ninety plus percent of the time I use the center spot focus point and then recompose. I rarely shoot anything that I have to track. I do about half of my shooting at night on a tripod.

Well, you don't need af at all in this case ... what many people don't realize however, that with large apertures it does not work to use the central af point and then recompose because the focus changes from center to edge. I shoot macro objects often, and to get the focus right, I have to use the non-center af points, even if I have time and use a tripod. For landescapes this doesn't matter though.

... concerning the 7d, my 2 cents: This heavy body is made for outdoor journalism and tele shots (build-in tele converter due to 1.6 crop) and/or moving subjects (60d and lower servo af is a joke). Other than that, it is imho simply overpriced, so if you're on a budget a 60d+better lens is the way to go. And of course the main reason I wouldn't want a 7d even if I got it for free: magic lantern only runs on 60d and below (yet).

 

[koolman]

I disagree.

The 7D has the best APS-C sensor currently offered by Canon. The features that differentiate it from the lower models are build, AF, fps, etc.

If the 7D had a larger sensor - even slightly larger - the image circle of EF-S lenses would not cover it. So...bad idea.

neuroanatomist: I recently went out shooting for a week with my brother inlaw. He has a 7d and a 24-70. I have a 550d and Tamron 17-50. Over the week we exchanged cameras several times for hours at a time. I expected his 7d+24-70 to blow the 550d away. Well, I was in for a surprise. Overall, the 550d + Tammy where at least as good as the 7d. I would even dare that in some cases they where better. When shooting at night in low light on a tripod, the 7d took quite a few seconds to digest each shot - the 550d was much quicker?

Bottom line is (my impression) that placing aside all of the 7d's pro qualities as far as AF, body, etc. from a pure IQ point of view - I saw no large advantage - and even seem to feel a certain annoying softness in the images.

Strange ? Can you comment?

 

[Kernuak]

I disagree.

The 7D has the best APS-C sensor currently offered by Canon. The features that differentiate it from the lower models are build, AF, fps, etc.

If the 7D had a larger sensor - even slightly larger - the image circle of EF-S lenses would not cover it. So...bad idea.

neuroanatomist: I recently went out shooting for a week with my brother inlaw. He has a 7d and a 24-70. I have a 550d and Tamron 17-50. Over the week we exchanged cameras several times for hours at a time. I expected his 7d+24-70 to blow the 550d away. Well, I was in for a surprise. Overall, the 550d + Tammy where at least as good as the 7d. I would even dare that in some cases they where better. When shooting at night in low light on a tripod, the 7d took quite a few seconds to digest each shot - the 550d was much quicker?

Bottom line is (my impression) that placing aside all of the 7d's pro qualities as far as AF, body, etc. from a pure IQ point of view - I saw no large advantage - and even seem to feel a certain annoying softness in the images.

Strange ? Can you comment?

It's pretty much answered by what Neuro and jrista said. Thise condititions simply aren't the areas where the 7D excels and in those circumstances, the 5D would be better, provided the subjects weren't moving too much. The focus system on the 40D I used to have sometimes struggled with birds in flight and certainly more distant ones, where the 7D can nail the shot. The 550D would struggle even more than the 40D. Unless you are shooting the sort of subjects where you need the fast focusing abilities of the 7D, then it probably won't be worth spending the extra, but if you do, then it is invariably a case of getting the shot or not, relative image quality at that point becomes irrelevant.

 

[briansquibb]

Laws to buying a body

1. Buy the best AF that meets YOUR need - OOF images are not good
2. Buy the best sensor that meets YOUR need - poor IQ is not attractive
3. With the remainder ofyour bedget focus on top quality glass

Just remember that one person's heaven is another person's hell

For some, a 40D with a 55-250 is right on the mark

We have done to death the 5DII AF - for some it is excellent for others it is horrible - depends on the user's requirements

I sold my 7Ds because I disliked the IQ - but others think it is excellent

We are all right - because it is a case of indiviual judgement.

 

[lol]

When shooting at night in low light on a tripod, the 7d took quite a few seconds to digest each shot - the 550d was much quicker?

My main guess here is you had the long exposure noise reduction working at the time, where it was not on the 550D. Not sure what the Canon default is, probably Auto which only uses it over a certain exposure time, so differences in exposure could make it happen or not. Personally I always force it off.

 

[Kernuak]

The default for long exposure noise reduction is on. Likewise for high ISO noise reduction it is standard. I always switch both to off, so that I have more control and have the maximum frame rate possible. I've never checked to see if noise reduction also affects focus speed/accuracy, but low light focusing is one of the achilles heels of the 7D. One shot is also often more accurate than servo in low light. I have my 5D MkII set to one shot the majority of the time, while on the 7D I have it on AI Servo by default, so that probably increases the difference between the two in low light. The 5D MkII is far superior in terms of accuracy then, so it could be that the less sophisticated focus of the 550D is working to its advantage. Simple is sometimes best,

 

[KeithR]

Does anyone else agree?

Uuuummmm...

No.

 

[briansquibb]

The 7D came out in 2009, so its a bit old. You seem to be thinking it should have been better back then? At the time, it was the best sensor.

Best APS-C maybe ....

 

[KeithR]

Best APS-C maybe...

And it's better at the image level than quite a few FF sensors too - it's certainly better than the original 5D, and better than the 1Ds bodies, up to and including the Mk III.

 

[briansquibb]

Best APS-C maybe...

And it's better at the image level than quite a few FF sensors too - it's certainly better than the original 5D, and better than the 1Ds bodies, up to and including the Mk III.

I guess that will debatable them - have you compared a 7D image with a 5DII, 1D4 or a 1Ds3 image?