Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review

[kirispupis]

I happen to be friends with Ron and have worked with him for some time. While I do not always agree with his reviews, he's pretty straight up. One thing is he has always stated what he thought about products - even when it wound up pissing off his sponsors. Keep in mind that the majority of big review sites out there have to temper their disappointments in order to not suffer financially.

In terms of his review on the 7D2, I happen to agree with it. \

so you recommend that someone who is not using the 7D MK II for wildlife or sports buy a D4s? A D4s won't do sports or wildlife? What is he on??

From his review I gather that he is recommending the 1D4 over the 7D2. As a primary camera this makes sense. Personally this is one area where I do not agree. I find a 5D3 + 7D2 to be a better combination.

In terms of the D4s I know he loves this camera because he found the AF to be superior to the 1Dx in his review. That being said he is a Canon shooter. This is one area where I do not entirely agree with him. Personally for wildlife I cannot justify the price difference of the 1Dx over the 5D3.

 

[kirispupis]

Checked his portfolio... he is not even a sports, wildlife, or, especially, bird photographer!!!

Yet, he speaks with massive authority on all things. Likely, we should go to him for dating advice as well, and also information about how and when to plant our crops.

I quote Russian Proverb: Ocean is knee deep to him.

Who is this person? Someone we should quickly forget, as there is nothing memorable about him.

You are correct that he does not photograph wildlife, but he does photograph sports. He has photographed Formula 1 for some time and has had his photos of it published. He also photographed the winter Olympics in Vancouver.

Although Ron has reduced time on his blog so I suspect this is no longer true, at one time his blog was among the top ten photography sites in traffic. His photos have been published in numerous magazines and he often gives workshops. While even he will admit that there are many photographers out there more talented than he is, he certainly has more credibility than you.

 

[tiger82]

The people who should review cameras should be those whose needs fit the camera. If the reviewer does what I want to do, then there is credibility there. I'm not interested in making images Martinsen has posted on his portfolio blog so what he has to say means nothing to me. The 7D2 is not for him. I have the 5D3/1D4/7D2 combination and I use them according to my needs. Each has their advantages and disadvantages and not one will do everything exceptionally. Find something that suits your needs and produces the images you want and who cares what others say. You are the best judge of the equipment. Rather than reading a myriad of reviews, rent the camera for a few days and decide.

 

[Tinky]

I just happened to see the movie "all the president's men" yesterday with the old-school newsroom, oh my, those were the days :-o

Yep. First class movie. Here in the UK we've had something of a less noble tradition, the cleansing is still going on, as more dirty deeds are uncovered.

You know I actually watched the film the other week (for the xxxth time!) and just realised that there are a fair number of shots done on tilt lenses (especially in the newsroom, foreground focus, middle ground out of focus, far end in focus)

My fiancee says she can't enjoy any tv of film anymore without me dissecting scenes or technique...

 

[papa-razzi]

I have the 5D3/1D4/7D2 combination and I use them according to my needs. Each has their advantages and disadvantages and not one will do everything exceptionally. Find something that suits your needs and produces the images you want and who cares what others say. You are the best judge of the equipment. Rather than reading a myriad of reviews, rent the camera for a few days and decide.

Tiger - I'd love to hear your comparison of 1D4 vs 7D2. I'm still considering one of these to replace my 7D.

 

[tiger82]

For one thing, the 1D4 is more suitable for indoor sports where I could use the 10fps and shoot wider with a 70-200. I don't pay as much attention to IQ as I do to my ability to capture properly framed moments and money shots. I would typically shoot a 1D4/70-200 and a 7D2/24-70 for those. For theater work, a 5D3/24-70f4 and 7D2/24-70f2.8 suits me well.

 

[Loswr]

You are correct that he does not photograph wildlife, but he does photograph sports. He has photographed Formula 1 for some time and has had his photos of it published.

I wish the birds I photograph flew in an oval, around and around and around in a predictable pattern. FWIW, I've shot F1 and stock racing with a very high keeper rate...with manual focus, a memory card that holds 36 images, and a frame rate that was as fast as my thumb could push the advance lever between each shot.

 

[tiger82]

You can tie the bird and make it fly around in circles

 

[Northbird]

You are correct that he does not photograph wildlife, but he does photograph sports. He has photographed Formula 1 for some time and has had his photos of it published.

I wish the birds I photograph flew in an oval, around and around and around in a predictable pattern. FWIW, I've shot F1 and stock racing with a very high keeper rate...with manual focus, a memory card that holds 36 images, and a frame rate that was as fast as my thumb could push the advance lever between each shot.

Thanks for the laugh Neuro. " ..... a frame rate that was as fast as my thumb could push the advance lever between each shot"

BTW, I own the 7D and 7D II. The 7DII is a fine camera for it's intended purpose if you don't want the weight, size and cost of a 1DX.

 

[Marsu42]

and just realised that there are a fair number of shots done on tilt lenses (especially in the newsroom, foreground focus, middle ground out of focus, far end in focus)

That's interesting, I never had the idea they'd use those! I'll check next time I see it ... and because a friend of mine is currently underway buying a used ts-e 24mm, I am looking forward to look at the thing myself and what it can do.

Good point to make in a "machinegun that bird!" 7d2 topic though, because mf with a ts-e on a large sensor is the exact opposite type of photography you'd need a 2nd body for as a crop owner.

Even Ken Rockwell was able to get a sharply focused photo of a moving subject with a 7D2.

His growing family will be delighted :->

 

[DominoDude]

Myself, before the post was removed:

Hmmm, so he's at Microsoft? *spits in all compass directions and drags a black cat under a ladder (all at high ISO, and with no NR applied, for good measures)*

It's ok to tell me through a PM or similar, when a post is removed. I fail to see why/how this would violate anything. Sure, it's not exactly adding facts, but my way of trying to give a short (witty) comment.

 

[candc]

i really like the 7dii for the af, buffer, and speed but it does make me a bit irritated to think about how canon could put the 6d sensor in the 7dii body, sell it for $1800...

Yeah, and I bet you're irritated that Chevy didn't put a Big Block V8 into the Camero instead of that piddly little 3.6L V6 and sell it for the price of a Cruze, too. Because that would be just so feasible... :

it is not like the analogy you are referring to which would be physically difficult and expensive to produce. the sensor in the 6d is not expensive and it would not be difficult to put it in a 7dii body.

to me its greed. i don't mind paying a fair price for a product but i don't like getting ripped off.

Sorry, but you're being rather naïve. A FF sensor is bigger...a lot bigger. That means a bigger mirror assembly. A bigger sensor means a bigger AF sensor, a bigger pentaprism, a bigger metering sensor, etc. Oh, you still want 10 fps? Ok, that's the 1D X's mirror assembly. Willing to have a somewhat lower frame rate, say...6 fps? That's the 5DIII. But you want it for $1800?

Me dear ol' dad, who hailed from the Emerald Isle (by way of Chicago) used to say, "Wish in one hand, sh!t in the other, and see which fills up fastest."

Oh, and by the way what you call greed, Canon would call trying to generate the maximum value for shareholders – and that's their legal obligation as a publicly traded corporation.

i am not a socialist and i believe in free enterprise but i don't agree with price gouging. i think the price of ff cameras has been artificially inflated for a long time. they are free to charge whatever they want as long as they are not involved in collusion and price fixing. afaik that would be illegal in the u.s.

 

[Don Haines]

I am sorry, but the reviewer lost all credibility when he started to complain about noise at iso 100 when zoomed in 100%. That is like looking with a magnifying glass at a picture the size of a 4x5meter wall. O MY GOD SO MUCH NOISE.

"This image looks nice at first until you zoom in at 100%, there is so much noise at iso 1600!!!"

http://photos.ronmartblog.com/img/s6/v141/p250641345.jpg


And then he continues to rant how bad this camera is for a sports photographer. Yeah right, i am pretty sure 99% of the sport photographers out there dont print larger than the size of a newspaper that you can hold with 2 hands easely and publish in websize format on websites like facebook. Heck, very few sport photographers actually earn money these days since the market has been completely destroyed anyway. What the hell is he talking about?

Fact is, at iso 3200 and higher all the images produced are still pretty useable for newspapers and facebook (LOL!)

3200? for facebook? you can probably run it up to 51200 and be good enough for facebook

 

[Loswr]

i am not a socialist and i believe in free enterprise but i don't agree with price gouging. i think the price of ff cameras has been artificially inflated for a long time. they are free to charge whatever they want as long as they are not involved in collusion and price fixing. afaik that would be illegal in the u.s.

If you have evidence that such activities are occurring, you should report it to the Federal Trade Commission (www.ftc.gov). But I'm guessing you just think they cost too much. That's certainly your prerogative (of course, writing that they are engaged in price fixing is libel), just as it's Canon's to set prices to maximize their profit.

 

[Khalai]

i am not a socialist and i believe in free enterprise but i don't agree with price gouging. i think the price of ff cameras has been artificially inflated for a long time. they are free to charge whatever they want as long as they are not involved in collusion and price fixing. afaik that would be illegal in the u.s.

Trust me, I'd love to have the FF prices as low as they can be. But do you honestly think that any manufacturer never tried to undercut the price to gain more market share? FF prices are falling over time and one day, they'll be as cheap as current entry bodies (fool's hope of mine), but I guess you are just upset about the pricing (as many others are). If there was a cartel deal between all FF manufacturers then either one of them would try to undercut the others to grab its market share or somebody would certailny whistleblew it a long time ago.

 

[candc]

i am not a socialist and i believe in free enterprise but i don't agree with price gouging. i think the price of ff cameras has been artificially inflated for a long time. they are free to charge whatever they want as long as they are not involved in collusion and price fixing. afaik that would be illegal in the u.s.

Trust me, I'd love to have the FF prices as low as they can be. But do you honestly think that any manufacturer never tried to undercut the price to gain more market share? FF prices are falling over time and one day, they'll be as cheap as current entry bodies (fool's hope of mine), but I guess you are just upset about the pricing (as many others are). If there was a cartel deal between all FF manufacturers then either one of them would try to undercut the others to grab its market share or somebody would certailny whistleblew it a long time ago.

i have heard the argument about a ff camera costing more due to the sensor, mirror and other parts being bigger but that just doesn't seem rational when the 6d is as cheap as it is. i reckon ff sensors and parts cost a bit more but not enough to double the price. i would guess 20% more. take the 7dii 5diii comparison. they are the same size and the build is as good or better on the 7dii, it has gps and the dpaf sensor. it may well cost more to make a 7dii. i know about economy of scale but i can't see how the 5diii should cost twice as much.

 

[candc]

i am not a socialist and i believe in free enterprise but i don't agree with price gouging. i think the price of ff cameras has been artificially inflated for a long time. they are free to charge whatever they want as long as they are not involved in collusion and price fixing. afaik that would be illegal in the u.s.

If you have evidence that such activities are occurring, you should report it to the Federal Trade Commission (www.ftc.gov). But I'm guessing you just think they cost too much. That's certainly your prerogative (of course, writing that they are engaged in price fixing is libel), just as it's Canon's to set prices to maximize their profit.

that's it, i am calling the ftc, fda, cdc, and every government agency in the phonebook! canon is spreading a disease called g.a.s to sell you the cure and then they are jacking up the price on top of it!

 

[9VIII]

i am not a socialist and i believe in free enterprise but i don't agree with price gouging. i think the price of ff cameras has been artificially inflated for a long time. they are free to charge whatever they want as long as they are not involved in collusion and price fixing. afaik that would be illegal in the u.s.

Trust me, I'd love to have the FF prices as low as they can be. But do you honestly think that any manufacturer never tried to undercut the price to gain more market share? FF prices are falling over time and one day, they'll be as cheap as current entry bodies (fool's hope of mine), but I guess you are just upset about the pricing (as many others are). If there was a cartel deal between all FF manufacturers then either one of them would try to undercut the others to grab its market share or somebody would certailny whistleblew it a long time ago.

i have heard the argument about a ff camera costing more due to the sensor, mirror and other parts being bigger but that just doesn't seem rational when the 6d is as cheap as it is. i reckon ff sensors and parts cost a bit more but not enough to double the price. i would guess 20% more. take the 7dii 5diii comparison. they are the same size and the build is as good or better on the 7dii, it has gps and the dpaf sensor. it may well cost more to make a 7dii. i know about economy of scale but i can't see how the 5diii should cost twice as much.

Actually costs go up pretty dramatically as sensor size increases.
Every silicon platter is going to have defects on it, usually caused by dust in the air, and it costs the same to process the platter regardless of what you make out of it.
Just as an example, if every platter has an average of ten defects and you make 100 sensors out of it, you're probably going to lose 10% of your product. If you make ten sensors out of it you have the chance of getting nothing at all.
Basically that's the equation you face with sensors larger than Full Frame right now.
I remember reading that back when Canon was starting FF production they had to move their cleanliness standards to a whole new level.

 

[candc]

i am not a socialist and i believe in free enterprise but i don't agree with price gouging. i think the price of ff cameras has been artificially inflated for a long time. they are free to charge whatever they want as long as they are not involved in collusion and price fixing. afaik that would be illegal in the u.s.

Trust me, I'd love to have the FF prices as low as they can be. But do you honestly think that any manufacturer never tried to undercut the price to gain more market share? FF prices are falling over time and one day, they'll be as cheap as current entry bodies (fool's hope of mine), but I guess you are just upset about the pricing (as many others are). If there was a cartel deal between all FF manufacturers then either one of them would try to undercut the others to grab its market share or somebody would certailny whistleblew it a long time ago.

i have heard the argument about a ff camera costing more due to the sensor, mirror and other parts being bigger but that just doesn't seem rational when the 6d is as cheap as it is. i reckon ff sensors and parts cost a bit more but not enough to double the price. i would guess 20% more. take the 7dii 5diii comparison. they are the same size and the build is as good or better on the 7dii, it has gps and the dpaf sensor. it may well cost more to make a 7dii. i know about economy of scale but i can't see how the 5diii should cost twice as much.

Actually costs go up pretty dramatically as sensor size increases.
Every silicone platter is going to have defects on it, usually caused by dust in the air, and it costs the same to process the platter regardless of what you make out of it.
Just as an example, if every platter has an average of ten defects and you make 100 sensors out of it, you're probably going to lose 10% of your product. If you make ten sensors out of it you have the chance of getting nothing at all.
Basically that's the equation you face with sensors larger than Full Frame right now.
I remember reading that back when Canon was starting FF production they had to move their cleanliness standards to a whole new level.

ok, so how much does the sensor on the 6d cost compared to the one in the 7dii?

 

[tiger82]

Why sensors are not interchangeable: Physics of Optics and Data Processing.