If Canon wants to kill off Nikon/Sony/Pentax drop APS-C and Go APS-H

[Meh]

The 7D at 3200 looks the same as the 1D4 at 6400. Online samples show this (i.e. Imaging Resource) and direct numeric measurements of both JPEG and RAW confirm it (DPReview). The 7D is actually slightly better at 3200 than the 1D4 at 6400, so if the 7D is unacceptable at 3200 then the 1D4 is unacceptable at 6400.

Have you even used a 1D4? Don't talk in your dreams, 7D has the highest noise in all APS-C cameras, ever. Any sensor will beat that piece of crap 7D sensor.

It shows bad noise in ISO 100! Who are you kidding, take a landscape shot with tripod and ISO 100, and it can be full of noise! Oh my Jebus! 7D fans are either ignorant, or in denial that is for sure.

If you only read camera specs instead of actually using them, you should also know that while 7D does ISO 12800, 1D4 does 102400. Does it mean that 1D4 is 3 stops better than 7D? Maybe!

Following posts discuss 7D ISO 100 noise issues, if you love your 7D, don't look

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=896611

http://www.flickr.com/groups/canon_eos_7d/discuss/72157626132771753/

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/879150

Gotta love it. Someone disagrees with you and you bring out the classic response of "you must not actually be using your gear" blah blah blah which is essentially similar to the other classic "you need to learn how to use your gear" or "it works fine for me and I'm great so you must be a hack".

 

[unfocused]

The 7D at 3200 looks the same as the 1D4 at 6400...

...Any sensor will beat that piece of crap...

Gotta love it. Someone disagrees with you and you bring out the classic response of "you must not actually be using your gear" blah blah blah which is essentially similar to the other classic "you need to learn how to use your gear" or "it works fine for me and I'm great so you must be a hack".

You forgot: "If you had any taste or talent at all you would clearly see that your camera is a piece of crap. While I am so talented and discerning that I can't be satisfied with anything less than the ..."

 

[jrista]

The 7D at 3200 looks the same as the 1D4 at 6400. Online samples show this (i.e. Imaging Resource) and direct numeric measurements of both JPEG and RAW confirm it (DPReview). The 7D is actually slightly better at 3200 than the 1D4 at 6400, so if the 7D is unacceptable at 3200 then the 1D4 is unacceptable at 6400.

Have you even used a 1D4? Don't talk in your dreams, 7D has the highest noise in all APS-C cameras, ever. Any sensor will beat that piece of crap 7D sensor.

It shows bad noise in ISO 100! Who are you kidding, take a landscape shot with tripod and ISO 100, and it can be full of noise! Oh my Jebus! 7D fans are either ignorant, or in denial that is for sure.

If you only read camera specs instead of actually using them, you should also know that while 7D does ISO 12800, 1D4 does 102400. Does it mean that 1D4 is 3 stops better than 7D? Maybe!

Following posts discuss 7D ISO 100 noise issues, if you love your 7D, don't look

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=896611

http://www.flickr.com/groups/canon_eos_7d/discuss/72157626132771753/

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/879150

Noise at ISO 100 and Noise at ISO 3200 are very different things. Canon's APS-C sensors suffer from high electronic noise at low ISO, where as Nikon and Sony sensors control electronic noise better there. Once you are beyond ISO 400, however, the physical nature of light begins to dominate, and noise characteristics normalize. There is actually not much that can really be done about high ISO noise, particularly from ISO 1600 and on. Larger pixel wells and higher quantum efficiency allow you to gather more photons, which improves SNR...but once your up to 3200 and 6400, its a matter of time and light volume...there is VERY LITTLE difference between any camera at these levels (from an electronic, hardware standpoint). The key thing that matters is photon conversion rates...how many of the photons reaching the sensor are actually converted into charge in each photodiode. The 7D has a 41% Q.E. while the 1D IV has a 44% Q.E...that gives an edge to the 1D IV, but the differences at high ISO are not going to be very large...possibly noticeable, but not large.

Additionally, ISO 12800 in the 7D is an "artificial" ISO, digitally amplified. ISO's above 12800 on the 1D IV are also "artificial" and digitally amplified...so they are not really higher ISO settings. They amplify noise, both color and lumi, along with everything else, and you have some serious IQ degradation at those settings. Your far better off under-exposing at the maximum native ISO setting and correcting in post where you have full control over that digital amplification.

Before you go around calling people ignorant, make sure you aren't ignorant yourself.

 

[Bosman]

Here's a quick response in support of H format:

It could be a great sensor to bridge the price gap between C sensors and FF sensors. You would get superior image quality to the C sensor coupled with prosumer features and nail down a price point of $2-2.5K. Jumping from the 7D at $1500 to the 5DIII at $3500 then 1DX at $6800 leaves a few price point holes to potentially be plugged.

The additional reach of the 1.3 is welcome over FF, and the larger sensor takes (presumably) higher quality images then the C sensor.

I have owned a Rebel 450D, 7D and currently own a 5DII and a 1DIV. While the 1DIV is a higher priced camera and the latest with the H sensor in the line.... with technology advances and trickle down the next H camera might not need to be at that same price point and could fall into the $2k range. (It doesnt need all the pro features of the 1DIV to be a successful selling body)

I love my 1DIV with it's H-sensor... and I'm not the only one. There is a huge difference in image quality from the C sensors and the 1.3x crop factor over full frame is very noticeable especially when pairing with long glass.

I would definitely not agree with the OP about dropping APS-C. It's a huge market and has a huge following.

I hear ya, i would like to go on record that i wrote incorrectly, i did not mean to imply no more aps-c, it remains a good entry level format.

 

[wickidwombat]

Here's a quick response in support of H format:

It could be a great sensor to bridge the price gap between C sensors and FF sensors. You would get superior image quality to the C sensor coupled with prosumer features and nail down a price point of $2-2.5K. Jumping from the 7D at $1500 to the 5DIII at $3500 then 1DX at $6800 leaves a few price point holes to potentially be plugged.

The additional reach of the 1.3 is welcome over FF, and the larger sensor takes (presumably) higher quality images then the C sensor.

I have owned a Rebel 450D, 7D and currently own a 5DII and a 1DIV. While the 1DIV is a higher priced camera and the latest with the H sensor in the line.... with technology advances and trickle down the next H camera might not need to be at that same price point and could fall into the $2k range. (It doesnt need all the pro features of the 1DIV to be a successful selling body)

I love my 1DIV with it's H-sensor... and I'm not the only one. There is a huge difference in image quality from the C sensors and the 1.3x crop factor over full frame is very noticeable especially when pairing with long glass.

I would definitely not agree with the OP about dropping APS-C. It's a huge market and has a huge following.

I hear ya, i would like to go on record that i wrote incorrectly, i did not mean to imply no more aps-c, it remains a good entry level format.

Aps-c will be around for a while in the EF-M mount

 

[AprilForever]

APS-C 7D did exactly what it what supposed to do. Quit whining because you can't get a 1d MK IV for 1600.

 

[wickidwombat]

APS-C 7D did exactly what it what supposed to do. Quit whining because you can't get a 1d MK IV for 1600.

Its not the price for me I just want a 1d4 in a 5d mk3 body, not a fan of grips and don't need the bulk
$3500 for that and they will sell tons they won't even have to do any development althou they could probably udate the sensor to the latest gapless microlens tech. But if nothing comes out I'll pick up a 1d 4 as it is my 1d3 still handily kills the crappy aps-c noise monster even if it is only 10 mp

 

[canon816]

APS-C 7D did exactly what it what supposed to do. Quit whining because you can't get a 1d MK IV for 1600.

I'm not sure who you believe is whining. Although I do appreciate your invaluable contribution to this discussion...

 

[jrista]

APS-C 7D did exactly what it what supposed to do. Quit whining because you can't get a 1d MK IV for 1600.

Its not the price for me I just want a 1d4 in a 5d mk3 body, not a fan of grips and don't need the bulk
$3500 for that and they will sell tons they won't even have to do any development althou they could probably udate the sensor to the latest gapless microlens tech. But if nothing comes out I'll pick up a 1d 4 as it is my 1d3 still handily kills the crappy aps-c noise monster even if it is only 10 mp

Given the 80% resolution advantage of the 7D, downscaling it to 10mp size would eliminate the majority of that extra noise...and a dash of post-process NR would take care of the rest...if it even mattered at that point. Yes, the 1D III is an excellent camera, but the 7D is really only a problem from a noise standpoint at ISO 100 and 200, and 6400 (at low ISO you have a fair bit of FPN, and at 6400 color noise really does get bad...) At higher ISO's, the 7D actually has both a Q.E. advantage as well as an electronic noise floor advantage, which helps mitigate the differences between it and the 1D III.

I'm not saying you could completely eliminate all of the 7D's noise just with downscaling...there is still that 20% gap, so you would need some NR...but on a normalized bases it is not as bad as your making it sound. If you don't need the resolution advantage of the 7D (which would seem to be the case if you are happily willing to use the 1D III over the 7D any day any time), no matter how you slice it...more noise or not, scaled down to 10mp its going to offer sharper, clearer detail without any explicit sharpening, and the resolution advantage will show through regardless of the noise:

 

[wickidwombat]

I really wanted to replace my mk3 with a 7d mainly for the following reasons
-smaller form
-same battery as 5d2
-still had a decent fps and AF
On paper it looked good

However when I compared the in real life I found that the reality was the 1dmk3 was still far superior in many ways and just decided to keep it the 18mp aps-c sensor has never really impressed me it was the aps-h and fullframe canon sensors that caused me to change from nikon.

Anyway that's my opinion I was disappointed because on paper the 7d looks a lot better I just felt it didn't live up to that

 

[briansquibb]

I really wanted to replace my mk3 with a 7d mainly for the following reasons
-smaller form
-same battery as 5d2
-still had a decent fps and AF
On paper it looked good

However when I compared the in real life I found that the reality was the 1dmk3 was still far superior in many ways and just decided to keep it the 18mp aps-c sensor has never really impressed me it was the aps-h and fullframe canon sensors that caused me to change from nikon.

Anyway that's my opinion I was disappointed because on paper the 7d looks a lot better I just felt it didn't live up to that

I have found the best a 7D can do is at iso400 in good light when it is almost as good (with a full frame image) as the 1D4

It is cropping and iso1600+ where it all starts to fall to pieces. The iso100/200 pictures dont appeal - especially when compared to the 1DS3.

 

[jrista]

I really wanted to replace my mk3 with a 7d mainly for the following reasons
-smaller form
-same battery as 5d2
-still had a decent fps and AF
On paper it looked good

However when I compared the in real life I found that the reality was the 1dmk3 was still far superior in many ways and just decided to keep it the 18mp aps-c sensor has never really impressed me it was the aps-h and fullframe canon sensors that caused me to change from nikon.

Anyway that's my opinion I was disappointed because on paper the 7d looks a lot better I just felt it didn't live up to that

I started to feel a little bit the same way after I had my 7D for a short while. The thing I've learned, as I've continued to use it, is that the 7D, with a far higher pixel density than most other cameras (particularly full frame cameras), is very succeptible to softening by optical aberrations (in other words, its a hell of a lot more demanding on lenses). Where a 5D II/1D III might be fine with a lens wide open, the same lens used on the 7D at the same aperture would appear somewhat soft...and one thing the 7D does NOT do well is control noise in areas of smoother detail (particularly bokeh, but softness from optical aberrations heightens the effect of noise in detail areas as well.)

I recently learned that stopping down just about all of my lenses just a bit results in far sharper photos, and noise in the areas where it matters...the key subject(s) and the detail within them, appears far less noisy. I will grant that the 7D seems to drop the ball a bit on lower-luminance smooth detail...particularly out of focus backgrounds...bokeh tends to exhibit noise fairly badly when other cameras do not at higher ISO. Not really sure why...perhaps the smaller pixel pitch and surface area heighten the effects of photon shot noise...either way, its an area where improved Q.E. and better SNR in a 7D II could really improve things.

 

[Canon-F1]

Any other competitor (for large sensors), except Sony ... which makes Full Frame, 1.5X APS-C, Micro 4/3rd, 1 inch (RX100), and several different Super35 and Super16 sensors for video. Guess who is the leader in sensor production ... Oh, and lets not forget the former Kodak digital sensor division (which is still active).

and that´s a part of sony that makes some money.
but not enough as it seems...

yep

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/12q1_sony.pdf

canon has to do nothing as it looks.

thought... the camera biz at sony is making a profit.

 

[DomHanzak]

How about a full frame 7D that is still EF-S compatible? When you stick an EF-S lens on it all pictures are cropped to 1.6x. And obviously it would shoot full frame when you use a EF lens, but maybe you could still have the option to shoot at 1.6x for the telephoto advantage?

Forgive me if something like this has already been suggested, I only scanned through the rest of the thread.

 

[swrightgfx]

How about a full frame 7D that is still EF-S compatible? When you stick an EF-S lens on it all pictures are cropped to 1.6x. And obviously it would shoot full frame when you use a EF lens, but maybe you could still have the option to shoot at 1.6x for the telephoto advantage?

Forgive me if something like this has already been suggested, I only scanned through the rest of the thread.

The mirror would collide with the rear element of the majority of EF-S lenses, particularly the wides. Third-party lenses tend to have much larger image circles and also greater clearance and can be retro-fitted.

 

[insanitybeard]

jrista, thanks for your insights into some of the science behind the sensor properties/issues!

Apologies if this is slightly off the original topic but I suppose it does relate to the advantages/disadvantages of APS-C and pixel density against the larger sensor formats.

Regarding comments made by jrista on the softness:

I started to feel a little bit the same way after I had my 7D for a short while. The thing I've learned, as I've continued to use it, is that the 7D, with a far higher pixel density than most other cameras (particularly full frame cameras), is very succeptible to softening by optical aberrations (in other words, its a hell of a lot more demanding on lenses). Where a 5D II/1D III might be fine with a lens wide open, the same lens used on the 7D at the same aperture would appear somewhat soft...and one thing the 7D does NOT do well is control noise in areas of smoother detail (particularly bokeh, but softness from optical aberrations heightens the effect of noise in detail areas as well.)

I recently learned that stopping down just about all of my lenses just a bit results in far sharper photos, and noise in the areas where it matters...the key subject(s) and the detail within them, appears far less noisy. I will grant that the 7D seems to drop the ball a bit on lower-luminance smooth detail...particularly out of focus backgrounds...bokeh tends to exhibit noise fairly badly when other cameras do not at higher ISO. Not really sure why...perhaps the smaller pixel pitch and surface area heighten the effects of photon shot noise...either way, its an area where improved Q.E. and better SNR in a 7D II could really improve things.

It is interesting to hear your thoughts regarding the affect of optical aberrations on the detail and noise in an image. I have a 7D and use it for landscapes quite a bit and have noticed, particularly with the EF-S 10-22 lens that it does struggle with resolving detail towards the corners. Now I realise that the high pixel density sensor of the 7D will likely show up any failings of the lens, and that with an UWA lens some corner softness is to be expected, and coupled with CA and possibly field curvature as well...... I usually shoot af F/8 but still struggle to get corner to corner sharpness... at high magnification anyway. Fine detail certainly seems to become 'smeared' towards the corners though not consistently, particularly at infinity focus. Maybe that is partly down to focusing and the distance of subjects from the camera, and maybe even my technique. I have also noticed some noise at low ISO in blue/dark sky areas.

None of which takes away from the fact that I think the 7 is a great camera, and certainly not worthy of the 'piece of crap sensor' comments dished out. If I could afford a 5D I would probably go for it but not everybody has that kind of money to blow on a hobby.

 

[insanitybeard]

I don't disagree that the 7D sensor could use some improvement and could the camera do with with an update?
Yes it probably could, but to be fair to it, the sensor technology is nigh on 3 years older compared to the 3200 sensor you mention.

 

[Bosman]

Lets be frank here, the 7d is a sports camera intended for that. The 5d is landscape and journalism. The d series are more all encompassing however the 1ds series was intended to render finer details while the 1d series does it all it was more intended for sports. I am not saying this is all they can do i am saying the combinations of sensor, build, Frames per second, iso range, detail rendering are all playing together to make up the optimum use for each camera. Every camera can manage all things but every camera handles optimally in what Canon intended them to be. In my opinion the 1dx falls short, while it is incredible it lacks resolution for those who do magazine shoots and such. Canon is going to send them to Nikon or to Phase one and Hasselblad and the likes. I realize many of those prob never use an SLR format but many SLR users want to just get another SLR body to use with their lenses for the high end shoots. Then again starting off in that vein using the Leica S system would accomplish that! The sensor is 60% larger than FF. Incredible system not for everyone even if it fit into most peoples budget, which it doesn't lol!

 

[jrista]

Any other competitor (for large sensors), except Sony ... which makes Full Frame, 1.5X APS-C, Micro 4/3rd, 1 inch (RX100), and several different Super35 and Super16 sensors for video. Guess who is the leader in sensor production ... Oh, and lets not forget the former Kodak digital sensor division (which is still active).

and that´s a part of sony that makes some money.
but not enough as it seems...

yep

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/12q1_sony.pdf

canon has to do nothing as it looks.

thought... the camera biz at sony is making a profit.

In all honesty, I would put a sad face after:

canon has to do nothing as it looks. :'(

Canon should HAVE to do SOMETHING...their sensor technology (both image and AF) is languishing and has become increasingly dated. There have been improvements, but minor evolutionary only. Canon needs a big hefty competitor to pressure them to get their ass in gear and design a better image sensor, and design an AF sensor that has solid f/8 performance.

 

[wickidwombat]

i was hoping the 650D would be an indicator of fixing these issues however from looking on the internet it would appear not much has been done, i havent used one and more than likely wont bother unless someone i know buys one and i can have a quick look

maybe canon can just buy sony and integrate the sensor tech