Why does 7D II seem COMPARATIVELY soft with certain lenses?

[chrysoberyl]

Marsu42 and East Wind Photography: Thanks! I have been leery of going crop after full frame. Once I got my 6D, my 60D was shelved. After a year, I compared them again and there was still no going back to 60D.

 

[AlanF]

Weixing
I think you'll be happy with that swap. The Tamron is very good on FF, but on crop it isn't nearly as good - see DxO's analysis. The 100-400 II doesn't seem to deteriorate as much on crop because it is basically sharper - I am waiting for the DxO review of the lens to see what they find.

 

[Jack Douglas]

chrysoberyl, I've just added a 1D IV as an action body to go with my 6D. Do you think I'll be in the same boat as you with the 60D? Haven't shot with it yet but it's unrealistic, I think, to expect the IQ of the 6D. This was a very tough choice relative to my initial plan of getting the 7D II.

Jack

 

[Rockets95]

Hi,
Here is my experience: when use my 7D2 with my Tamron 150-600mm, my keeper rate is not high and AF seem not consistent. When use my 7D2 with my EF 400mm F5.6L, my keeper rate is way higher and AF is fast and consistent. So my conclusion is that my Tamron 150-600mm had some issue with my 7D2.

By the way, my Tamron 150-600mm had a live view AF issue with my 7D2 (no such issue when I use with 60D and 6D), but not sure does this issue affect the normal AF operation, but will going to do a 1 to 1 exchange tomorrow... after that I'll sell the Tamron and join the EF 100-400mm II club...

weixing,
That's one of the reasons I've shied away from non-Canon lenses, since they would have to be reverse engineered. I know that some Sigma lenses can be updated after the fact with a docking station. Maybe Tamron has a firmware update that would take care of the problem.

 

[chrysoberyl]

@ Jack Douglas:

chrysoberyl, I've just added a 1D IV as an action body to go with my 6D. Do you think I'll be in the same boat as you with the 60D? Haven't shot with it yet but it's unrealistic, I think, to expect the IQ of the 6D. This was a very tough choice relative to my initial plan of getting the 7D II.

Well, Jack, there is an option I had not considered - a used 1D IV. I've never shot a 1D IV, so I cannot advise. But the price is not much higher than the 5D III.

I think I will take out the 60D again and more carefully see whether how it performs with regard to BIF.

 

[East Wind Photography]

I do use other lenses. Here is a great tit taken on the 7DII + 300/2.8 II + 2xTC. A guy next to me had the same lens combo on the 7D, and it would not focus. Mine was fast and good.

Yes but this is a static shot where one shot AF would be sufficient. Try some bird in flight shots and see how many in focus shots you get in the sequence.

 

[Marsu42]

Well, Jack, there is an option I had not considered - a used 1D IV. I've never shot a 1D IV, so I cannot advise. But the price is not much higher than the 5D III.

If it's about sports or tracking with the 1.3x crop factor - there are still "aps-h" fainbois around for a reason . A 1d camera is said top notch usability, customization and much more durable shutter than the 5d3. It's my personal "dream" camera if I win the lottery. If you use search (hint, hint ) there are some threads on this.

I think I will take out the 60D again and more carefully see whether how it performs with regard to BIF.

I find the problem with my 60d is that the af points are too few and too far apart, so it doesn't actually "track" and hand over the subject between af points. It's just like the 6d basically a 1-pt af servo camera, though the 6d has 1 and the 60d has 9 cross points.

If you want to improve the 60d's tracking capability, use Magic Lantern and the "af patterns" which enable you to select for example the center 5 points, the 3 on the right side and so on rather just "one or all".

Here is a great tit taken on the 7DII + 300/2.8 II + 2xTC.

Hmmwellyes, maybe great for crop and certainly all nice and such. But such a shot makes you realize why there's a market for ff cameras. There are blown highlights on the head's feathers, the background gradient lacks, well, gradient and the shot isn't especially sharp - though you tried to compensate by cranking up the sharpening of the postprocessing software

Essentially, this is no good for 100% crop, but if it isn't there's little point in using a 20mp sensor in the first place. As this is a "sitting duck" the shot might have been better with a 6d full frame, even though the 7d2 is certainly "good enough" as 20mp is way over top for most purposes anyway and downsizing is common.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Marsu42, I think I've probably read most of the threads and it was still hard to make the decision, that is until the price was right. That really helped but still this keeps going around in my head. What is so challenging is user versus camera and personal biases. You'd like to trust a given person's judgment/ability but you never know for sure, although certain folk are very experienced, unbiased and trustworthy so .......

Jack

 

[takesome1]

Marsu42, I think I've probably read most of the threads and it was still hard to make the decision, that is until the price was right. That really helped but still this keeps going around in my head. What is so challenging is user versus camera and personal biases. You'd like to trust a given person's judgment/ability but you never know for sure, although certain folk are very experienced, unbiased and trustworthy so .......

Jack

Jack,

I have both the 1D IV and the 7D II.
Go back to your cropping thread for birds. That is what it comes down to.

With the 7D II when it hits you will have a super sharp image that you can crop tighter with greater detail. It adds a bit to that ability. It will give you a bit more sharpness to work with than the 1D IV.

With the 1D IV you will have a body with an AF system that hardly misses. Your little flying bird, it will be easier to get this pic with the 1D IV. If you miss the shot with the 7D II, how much resolution does the 7D II have? It has none.

I took the 7D II out this weekend, I had one situation presented itself with a running bird that I wish I had the 1D IV.
The 7D II missed and it would have been the shot of the day. But for the rest of the day the 7D II did just fine.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Thanks takesome1, as you've already probably gathered I tend to fuss and fume tooo much. I'll have the 1D IV in a few days and it'll have to do and I'm pretty confident it will do. :-[

Jack

 

[AlanF]

Here is a great tit taken on the 7DII + 300/2.8 II + 2xTC.

Hmmwellyes, maybe great for crop and certainly all nice and such. But such a shot makes you realize why there's a market for ff cameras. There are blown highlights on the head's feathers, the background gradient lacks, well, gradient and the shot isn't especially sharp - though you tried to compensate by cranking up the sharpening of the postprocessing software

Essentially, this is no good for 100% crop, but if it isn't there's little point in using a 20mp sensor in the first place. As this is a "sitting duck" the shot might have been better with a 6d full frame, even though the 7d2 is certainly "good enough" as 20mp is way over top for most purposes anyway and downsizing is common.

I just posted this shot to show that the focussing is generally spot on and the image is reasonably sharp. If the highlights are blown to you, here it is again with the highlights dimmed and zero sharpening (it had only 0.5 pixels 100% USM last time). Show us some of your shots.

 

[candc]

here are a couple more the nuthatch is with the tamron the chickadee is the 600ii + 1.4xiii, it was just one of some test shots that all looked good to me.

 

[East Wind Photography]

Thanks takesome1, as you've already probably gathered I tend to fuss and fume tooo much. I'll have the 1D IV in a few days and it'll have to do and I'm pretty confident it will do. :-[

Jack

You will enjoy the 1DIV and never look back. Once you see what it can do, all of this discussion on the 7DII will appear as silliness.

 

[Jack Douglas]

East Wind Photography, you know how to calm the nerves of an easily stressed perfectionist. Correction, I seldom do anything near perfect so I guess the only part that's correct is the hyperactivity!

I can and do laugh a lot, though, usually at myself. CR is a pretty safe place.

Alan, I see a challenge with birds that have near black heads and I'm not sure what else you could do, seems good to me, after all it's 300 X2.

Jack

 

[Marsu42]

Show us some of your shots.

I was issuing some comments on a shot you posted yourself to make an unspecified point about the 7d2, and I replied - no intention of taking a swing at you at all, why would I. It's about discussing what such a (crop) camera can do or not, not about persons. That's why I never go for the "I double-dare you to post your shots" technique.

As for the second shot, and please do note that this is my personal and subjective opinion: For a reason I cannot pinpoint the feathers are very soft, surprisingly the stump looks a bit sharper - I'd say backfoucs? Now I understand why it showed these sharpening artifacts, there's not a lot to sharpen ... compare with candc's samples.

 

[tron]

Marsu42, I think I've probably read most of the threads and it was still hard to make the decision, that is until the price was right. That really helped but still this keeps going around in my head. What is so challenging is user versus camera and personal biases. You'd like to trust a given person's judgment/ability but you never know for sure, although certain folk are very experienced, unbiased and trustworthy so .......

Jack

Jack,

I have both the 1D IV and the 7D II.
Go back to your cropping thread for birds. That is what it comes down to.

With the 7D II when it hits you will have a super sharp image that you can crop tighter with greater detail. It adds a bit to that ability. It will give you a bit more sharpness to work with than the 1D IV.

With the 1D IV you will have a body with an AF system that hardly misses. Your little flying bird, it will be easier to get this pic with the 1D IV. If you miss the shot with the 7D II, how much resolution does the 7D II have? It has none.

I took the 7D II out this weekend, I had one situation presented itself with a running bird that I wish I had the 1D IV.
The 7D II missed and it would have been the shot of the day. But for the rest of the day the 7D II did just fine.

This is really useful information. Do you have an opinion of 5D3 in comparison with 7DII and 1DIV for birds in flight? That would be very interesting for me to know.

 

[MichaelHodges]

Here is a great tit taken on the 7DII + 300/2.8 II + 2xTC.

Hmmwellyes, maybe great for crop and certainly all nice and such. But such a shot makes you realize why there's a market for ff cameras. There are blown highlights on the head's feathers, the background gradient lacks, well, gradient and the shot isn't especially sharp - though you tried to compensate by cranking up the sharpening of the postprocessing software

Essentially, this is no good for 100% crop, but if it isn't there's little point in using a 20mp sensor in the first place. As this is a "sitting duck" the shot might have been better with a 6d full frame, even though the 7d2 is certainly "good enough" as 20mp is way over top for most purposes anyway and downsizing is common.

I just posted this shot to show that the focussing is generally spot on and the image is reasonably sharp. If the highlights are blown to you, here it is again with the highlights dimmed and zero sharpening (it had only 0.5 pixels 100% USM last time). Show us some of your shots.

This looks a touch out of focus. It even has (I hate to say this) the dreaded "soft focus" look the 7D was famous for. It's an almost-but-not-quite twilight zone thing going on.

 

[AlanF]

It is not a "touch out of focus", it is a touch soft.

It is soft because it is totally unsharpened from RAW, and so there is softening from the AA filter. Also, the 300/2/8 + 2XTC was at f/5.6, where it is slightly soft on crop (f/8 sharpens it up). The depth of field at a distance of 5 m is only ± 1 cm, and the bird is 4-6 cm deep. That shot is as well focussed as you could get, and it wasn't a one-off.

(I don't usually use 600 mm on crop hand held, but normally stick to 400 mm).

 

[Hector1970]

A very interesting conversation for me because I have been pretty disappointed with the 7D Mark II.
I have very good eyesight and the view through the viewfinder and a 100-400 L II is really very good.
The camera looks as if it's locking on focus extremely well.
The photos however I am finding are disappointing.
I would say quality wise no better than my old 500D.
I had though APS-C sensors had come along way since the 500D but it doesn't seem so with my copy of the 7D Mark II.
It's a lack of resolved detail I'm finding most disappointing.
Maybe I'm spoiled by the 5D Mark III but I find the pixels seem to smudge into each other alot earlier than I am expecting. No better than a 500D sensor.
I understand it's a cropped sensor but I thought at 20+ MP it would resolve detail better.
Photos do look a bit soft compared to how they seemed through the viewfinder.

 

[YuengLinger]

A very interesting conversation for me because I have been pretty disappointed with the 7D Mark II.
I have very good eyesight and the view through the viewfinder and a 100-400 L II is really very good.
The camera looks as if it's locking on focus extremely well.
The photos however I am finding are disappointing.
I would say quality wise no better than my old 500D.
I had though APS-C sensors had come along way since the 500D but it doesn't seem so with my copy of the 7D Mark II.
It's a lack of resolved detail I'm finding most disappointing.
Maybe I'm spoiled by the 5D Mark III but I find the pixels seem to smudge into each other alot earlier than I am expecting. No better than a 500D sensor.
I understand it's a cropped sensor but I thought at 20+ MP it would resolve detail better.
Photos do look a bit soft compared to how they seemed through the viewfinder.

Could these issues be caused by an AA filter or something similar that was intended to smooth out noise at higher ISO's? Or maybe something in the in-camera processing of the image? I can't imagine the actual sensor tech has taken a step back...

(I know this question in various forms has already been asked in this thread, but I was hoping some our more engineering enlightened members might chime in. )