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

[YuengLinger]

In a thread here http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=24210.15

and in the test-chart sample images available at the-digital-picture, certain lenses seem less sharp, soft in comparison, when mounted on a 7DII and compared with a 1D Mk III. In particular, the new 100-400mm II.

On the other hand, Arthur Morris claims that talk of the 7DII being relatively soft is due to user error.

Test charts aren't flying around...

 

[Sabaki]

I firmly believe the engineering on the 7Dii, whether software or hardware, is flawed.

I've had three copies of this camera now and can tell you with great confidence, this camera does not perform to the standards Canon's promotional material suggested.

There's problems locking onto subjects, there's problems with softness, there's problems with AF performance...and before anybody takes my head for saying that, those were the words used by Canon SA when explaining issues with my first two bodies.

Softness was a BIG issue with the second body and according to Canon, they could not reconcile the issue and instead gave me a third body. Which is also not perfect.

Let's hope that when new firmware is released, it will solve of these issues.

 

[Marsu42]

and in the test-chart sample images available at the-digital-picture, certain lenses seem less sharp, soft in comparison, when mounted on a 7DII and compared with a 1D Mk III. In particular, the new 100-400mm II.

This is the usual 20mp crop vs. 20mp ff problem isn't it? It applies to the 7d2-upscaled 5ds, too. By cropping away only the center of the lens, you get a performance hit esp. when pixel peeping wide open - I can see it on my 100L which otherwise is very sharp. Just because you pay $2000 for a crop camera doesn't change the fact that it's a crop camera.

There's problems locking onto subjects, there's problems with softness, there's problems with AF performance...and before anybody takes my head for saying that, those were the words used by Canon SA when explaining issues with my first two bodies.

Af might be an issue, I don't know lacking a 7d2. But: lens "softness" sounds rather stange to me other than the crop/ff difference explained above. That's because the af is *somewhere*, so it has to be "as sharp as it gets" *somewhere* unless there's camera/IS shake.

 

[YuengLinger]

There's nothing handicapping the 7DII in the tests, Marsu42. My 60D is sharper than what is shown, and you can see that for yourself if you choose the 60D as the body in several comparisons.

The 7DII is not being cropped in any strange way. It is a straight test of sharpness, of how the lens is resolving a test chart, and the 7DII with the ef 100-400mm II, a theoretical "dream team," is having some kind of trouble in this instance.

Arthur Morris deals with some pretty experienced enthusiasts, yet he dismisses their claims as user error. Are you saying that Brian at the-digital-picture set up his tests incorrectly?

The whole crop vs ff issue doesn't come into play here.

 

[Rahul]

Hi YuengLinger,

Seems like a stupid question but have you checked your lenses for AFMA? Also, which are the lenses which appear to be soft to you?

I picked up my 7D2 on yesterday specifically for action / birding but haven't shot anything much because the weather has been terrible.

I'll be waiting for your response so that I'll know what to look out for and share the results.

 

[East Wind Photography]

There's nothing handicapping the 7DII in the tests, Marsu42. My 60D is sharper than what is shown, and you can see that for yourself if you choose the 60D as the body in several comparisons.

The 7DII is not being cropped in any strange way. It is a straight test of sharpness, of how the lens is resolving a test chart, and the 7DII with the ef 100-400mm II, a theoretical "dream team," is having some kind of trouble in this instance.

Arthur Morris deals with some pretty experienced enthusiasts, yet he dismisses their claims as user error. Are you saying that Brian at the-digital-picture set up his tests incorrectly?

The whole crop vs ff issue doesn't come into play here.

I concur with all of your statements. I believe there are multiple issues that are not related. After a lot of testing I'm also finding that AFMA does not seem very consistent. That meaning one day afma 0 is good but several days later with the same lens afma 6 is better. Same lens on my 5d3 is perfect. One would then suggest that there is a physical issue with the AF sensor moving...possibly...but could also be a firmware issue where afma is not always honored. No one but canon can make that determination.

 

[Orangutan]

There's nothing handicapping the 7DII in the tests, Marsu42. My 60D is sharper than what is shown, and you can see that for yourself if you choose the 60D as the body in several comparisons.

The 7DII is not being cropped in any strange way. It is a straight test of sharpness, of how the lens is resolving a test chart, and the 7DII with the ef 100-400mm II, a theoretical "dream team," is having some kind of trouble in this instance.

Arthur Morris deals with some pretty experienced enthusiasts, yet he dismisses their claims as user error. Are you saying that Brian at the-digital-picture set up his tests incorrectly?

The whole crop vs ff issue doesn't come into play here.

The first question I ask in these cases is whether there are people out there who are getting the expected results from this camera. If the answer is yes, then we know (fairly conclusively) that it's not a design/engineering problem. At that point there are two main possibilities: quality control (i.e. manufacturing variability) and user error.

Go hit the web again; this time, look for satisfied pros/advanced enthusiasts who don't have a business relationship with Canon. If they're happy, you need to look beyond design flaws.

 

[takesome1]

I think the error is not the 7D II but how you are interpreting the ISO chart.

First it is the 1Ds III, not the 1D III in the test.

The 1Ds III would put more pixels on the ISO chart and should have greater resolution.

Look carefully at the 60D image, it is smaller than the 7D II image. The 7D II file is larger, and the 60D image should have been upsized a bit. The 7D II is much better in the corners.

See this for how the charts work;
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Help/ISO-12233.aspx

AF issues would not show in the charts, they are shot in MF.

The 7D II will give you a resolution boost when used against FF cameras.
But the 7D II has a few problems, resolution and IQ are not one of them.

It will loose about 10% of its shots. A higher percentage than the 1D bodies.
It is not as precise, it has a wider range of float inside the DOF when hitting the subject than does other bodies I have. Some may think it is soft because of this, but if you have keepers that are crisp and sharp it is obviously an AF issue.
It has a harder time locking on small points, the spot point setting does not help much.
It seems like the individual focus point is larger than on other bodies. This may have something to do with crop vs FF and 65 AF points, but it is harder to pinpoint focus.

Some might think its soft because it doesn't have as much head room for sharpening as the old 7D had. It seems to do more sharpening in the body and you can see it in RAW as well. Personally I think this is a firmware change. I think this makes ISO and lab testing less effective, you are never comparing a sensor vs sensor, you are comparing a sensor with firmware vs sensor with firmware.

 

[takesome1]

After a lot of testing I'm also finding that AFMA does not seem very consistent. That meaning one day afma 0 is good but several days later with the same lens afma 6 is better. Same lens on my 5d3 is perfect. One would then suggest that there is a physical issue with the AF sensor moving...possibly...but could also be a firmware issue where afma is not always honored. No one but canon can make that determination.

I see the same thing.
Not as much as 0 to 6, mine is a bit tighter but it seems to do this.

But I continue to use it because of the resolution boost and I like that with small wildlife. When it hits the results are great.

 

[Sabaki]

There's nothing handicapping the 7DII in the tests, Marsu42. My 60D is sharper than what is shown, and you can see that for yourself if you choose the 60D as the body in several comparisons.

The 7DII is not being cropped in any strange way. It is a straight test of sharpness, of how the lens is resolving a test chart, and the 7DII with the ef 100-400mm II, a theoretical "dream team," is having some kind of trouble in this instance.

Arthur Morris deals with some pretty experienced enthusiasts, yet he dismisses their claims as user error. Are you saying that Brian at the-digital-picture set up his tests incorrectly?

The whole crop vs ff issue doesn't come into play here.

The first question I ask in these cases is whether there are people out there who are getting the expected results from this camera. If the answer is yes, then we know (fairly conclusively) that it's not a design/engineering problem. At that point there are two main possibilities: quality control (i.e. manufacturing variability) and user error.

Go hit the web again; this time, look for satisfied pros/advanced enthusiasts who don't have a business relationship with Canon. If they're happy, you need to look beyond design flaws.

Hi Orangutan

I consider your opinion reasonable and logical. I do however have enough evidence to support the performance issues of the 7Dii.

I take you back to Scott Kelby's hour long video where he highlights the superb performance of the 7Dii at two American football matches. Shots looked amazing, for both sharpness DNS noise performance.
There's other videos of Canon pros who intimate that although not identical, the 7Dii's performance is very near to that of the 1DX.

So we've all probably seen those and more videos.

Thing is, when I sit with owners of the 1DX, both professionals (international event sport photography) and serious birders, who cannot get decent performance from the 7Dii, I worry.

I am talking about seriously good photographers here.

Aside from AF and shsrpness issues, there's also this extremely weird 'work one day, next day not' phenomenon. Set your camera up, take good shots. Go to the exact same place with similar conditions and then the camera behaved very differently.

I can't grip that.

We also talk about the vast number of people who are not complaining and I can tell you something there too...most of the regular buyers do not know how to benchmark whether an image is sharp or not.

I'm a photographer/birder, meaning I strive for photographic excellence in my shots. There's also birder photographers, who are more keen on proof shots. It seems they're less worried about perfect photographs.

I'm hoping and praying that Canon fix this or I may end up selling my 7Dii.

Absolutely nothing worse than having a camera one does not trust implicitly.

 

[takesome1]

There's other videos of Canon pros who intimate that although not identical, the 7Dii's performance is very near to that of the 1DX.

Thus the issue for most of us, we were expecting these "Canon Pro's" not to lie to us.

The 7D II's performance is not 1D caliber.

But it is however the best AF system in a crop body. It is better than the old 7D. It is the best AF system in a body under $2,000.

Really what should we have expected for $1,799?

 

[YuengLinger]

Hi YuengLinger,

Seems like a stupid question but have you checked your lenses for AFMA? Also, which are the lenses which appear to be soft to you?

I picked up my 7D2 on yesterday specifically for action / birding but haven't shot anything much because the weather has been terrible.

I'll be waiting for your response so that I'll know what to look out for and share the results.

Hi, Rahul, I'm drawing my conclusions from reliable websites. I was considering buying the 7DII as a better way of powering a Great White's AF system than my 5DIII, which apparently lags quite a bit when extenders are used. I keep getting closer to buying a Great White, but still have some reservations, namely cost, weight, and how well they work with the 5DIII + extender.

Admittedly, I'm still confused, when doing the math, about the number of pixels and the quality of pixels as a trade off when shooting cropped vs FF on very long lenses. It seems like this is one of those endless debate issues.

THIS IS NOT AN AF ISSUE!!! It is about the basic resolving capability of the 7DII with various lenses, and one combo that seems surprisingly soft is with the brand new ef 100-400mm II.

PLEASE go look at the-digital-picture to see for yourself before chiming in. Either the tests are unreliable or they indicate a problem.

I think the silliest assertions made are those that say some cameras or lenses perform better in the real world than with test charts. If the photographer makes mistakes or intentionally introduces bias, sure, one camera is going to fair worse than its true performance, but a simple shot of a paper target, keeping the same field of view with the same lens should be a very good way of comparing A to B to C.

 

[Orangutan]

Hi Orangutan

I consider your opinion reasonable and logical. I do however have enough evidence to support the performance issues of the 7Dii.

I take you back to Scott Kelby's hour long video where he highlights the superb performance of the 7Dii at two American football matches. Shots looked amazing, for both sharpness DNS noise performance.
There's other videos of Canon pros who intimate that although not identical, the 7Dii's performance is very near to that of the 1DX.

So we've all probably seen those and more videos.

Thing is, when I sit with owners of the 1DX, both professionals (international event sport photography) and serious birders, who cannot get decent performance from the 7Dii, I worry.

I am talking about seriously good photographers here.

Aside from AF and shsrpness issues, there's also this extremely weird 'work one day, next day not' phenomenon. Set your camera up, take good shots. Go to the exact same place with similar conditions and then the camera behaved very differently.

I can't grip that.

We also talk about the vast number of people who are not complaining and I can tell you something there too...most of the regular buyers do not know how to benchmark whether an image is sharp or not.

I'm a photographer/birder, meaning I strive for photographic excellence in my shots. There's also birder photographers, who are more keen on proof shots. It seems they're less worried about perfect photographs.

I'm hoping and praying that Canon fix this or I may end up selling my 7Dii.

Absolutely nothing worse than having a camera one does not trust implicitly.

If your reports are accurate it could be a manufacturing problem, or possibly sensitive dependence on initial conditions (as we know, conditions are never exactly the same at a location between visits.) Maybe small differences in lighting have large impact on the AF system. Alternately, maybe the AF system is sensitive to temperature, and goes in or out of alignment in certain conditions. Unfortunately, we won't know the answers to these questions until the problems become reproducible.

Do you see the same problem in all AF modes? I.e., single-point vs zone? I hope you're able to isolate the problem before you give up on what is, reportedly, a very capable birding camera.

 

[takesome1]

but a simple shot of a paper target, keeping the same field of view with the same lens should be a very good way of comparing A to B to C.

It is the same FOV and the 7D II is shot 1.6x farther away than the 1Ds III. The 1Ds III has 21.1mp vs the 20.9mp of the 7D II. You loose from the MP and the additional distance. The 1Ds III should look better.

As for the 60D, it is not better than the 7D II IMO.

If you own the 5D III the only reason to buy the 7D II is frame rate and a bit of added resolution if you are focal length limited and find yourself cropping. Then the benefit is a very small boost in resolution.

 

[geonix]

Hi Orangutan

I consider your opinion reasonable and logical. I do however have enough evidence to support the performance issues of the 7Dii.

I take you back to Scott Kelby's hour long video where he highlights the superb performance of the 7Dii at two American football matches. Shots looked amazing, for both sharpness DNS noise performance.
There's other videos of Canon pros who intimate that although not identical, the 7Dii's performance is very near to that of the 1DX.

So we've all probably seen those and more videos.

Thing is, when I sit with owners of the 1DX, both professionals (international event sport photography) and serious birders, who cannot get decent performance from the 7Dii, I worry.

I am talking about seriously good photographers here.

Aside from AF and shsrpness issues, there's also this extremely weird 'work one day, next day not' phenomenon. Set your camera up, take good shots. Go to the exact same place with similar conditions and then the camera behaved very differently.

I can't grip that.

We also talk about the vast number of people who are not complaining and I can tell you something there too...most of the regular buyers do not know how to benchmark whether an image is sharp or not.

I'm a photographer/birder, meaning I strive for photographic excellence in my shots. There's also birder photographers, who are more keen on proof shots. It seems they're less worried about perfect photographs.

I'm hoping and praying that Canon fix this or I may end up selling my 7Dii.

Absolutely nothing worse than having a camera one does not trust implicitly.

Hello Sabaki

I have a 7D2 since December, and I took it out, mainly for bird and wildlife photography, for in total about 15 days. I used it on the Tamron 150-600, the Canon 300mm f4 L IS, the Canon 100mm f2.8 L IS Macro and the the Tamron 70-200 f2.8. In one-shot mode it performed very well with all these lenses, no sharpness issues at all. In AI Servo I had some problems with the Tamron 150-600, many shots were out of focus although I used only the centerpoint extended by 4 sourrounding points and the focuspoint was firmly locked onto a birds head. With the 300mm f4, the 70-200 f2.8 and the same AI Servo settings, the results were much better. And since I also used a 5DIII on the 150-600 and expericened the same amount of unsharp results, I guess the cause is most likely my technique or (hopefully not) the lens.
I will soon try the 7D2 on a Canon 100-400mm II which I can borrow for some days.

 

[Rockets95]

The first question I ask in these cases is whether there are people out there who are getting the expected results from this camera. If the answer is yes, then we know (fairly conclusively) that it's not a design/engineering problem.

From my limited use so far, I'm impressed with the AF system, high ISO performance and overall image quality in comparison to my old 7D. I shot an NHL hockey game (as a fan) and I would have never came close to the results I got with the new 7D2 vs. my old 7D. It's hard to quantify, but the camera feels better in every way by a wide margin.

 

[East Wind Photography]

There's other videos of Canon pros who intimate that although not identical, the 7Dii's performance is very near to that of the 1DX.

Thus the issue for most of us, we were expecting these "Canon Pro's" not to lie to us.

The 7D II's performance is not 1D caliber.

But it is however the best AF system in a crop body. It is better than the old 7D. It is the best AF system in a body under $2,000.

Really what should we have expected for $1,799?

I would have expected a camera with a better than 10% keeper rate in servo AF mode. This camera is fine for Harry homeowner taking shots of his kids playing in the yard. It is NOT a body I would trust on an expensive trip or assignment. Not in its current state.

The system for all practical purposes is useless if you can't get better than 5 or 10% keeper rate. My daughters t2i does better than that.

 

[Rahul]

Hi YuengLinger,

Seems like a stupid question but have you checked your lenses for AFMA? Also, which are the lenses which appear to be soft to you?

I picked up my 7D2 on yesterday specifically for action / birding but haven't shot anything much because the weather has been terrible.

I'll be waiting for your response so that I'll know what to look out for and share the results.

Hi, Rahul, I'm drawing my conclusions from reliable websites. I was considering buying the 7DII as a better way of powering a Great White's AF system than my 5DIII, which apparently lags quite a bit when extenders are used. I keep getting closer to buying a Great White, but still have some reservations, namely cost, weight, and how well they work with the 5DIII + extender.

Admittedly, I'm still confused, when doing the math, about the number of pixels and the quality of pixels as a trade off when shooting cropped vs FF on very long lenses. It seems like this is one of those endless debate issues.

THIS IS NOT AN AF ISSUE!!! It is about the basic resolving capability of the 7DII with various lenses, and one combo that seems surprisingly soft is with the brand new ef 100-400mm II.

PLEASE go look at the-digital-picture to see for yourself before chiming in. Either the tests are unreliable or they indicate a problem.

I think the silliest assertions made are those that say some cameras or lenses perform better in the real world than with test charts. If the photographer makes mistakes or intentionally introduces bias, sure, one camera is going to fair worse than its true performance, but a simple shot of a paper target, keeping the same field of view with the same lens should be a very good way of comparing A to B to C.

Hi YuengLinger,

Luckily I have the 100-400 and it was for precisely this lens that I purchased the 7D2 for it a cheaper birding option - reach + 10fps.

I plan to shoot this combo over the next few days and revert with the results.

That being said, I took some shots of kids earlier today with the 70-200 f/2.8 II and got good sharp images. I also tried with 50L and it too worked pretty well with the outer focus points. So far I am pleased with the AF.

 

[Rahul]

There's other videos of Canon pros who intimate that although not identical, the 7Dii's performance is very near to that of the 1DX.

Thus the issue for most of us, we were expecting these "Canon Pro's" not to lie to us.

The 7D II's performance is not 1D caliber.

But it is however the best AF system in a crop body. It is better than the old 7D. It is the best AF system in a body under $2,000.

Really what should we have expected for $1,799?

I would have expected a camera with a better than 10% keeper rate in servo AF mode. This camera is fine for Harry homeowner taking shots of his kids playing in the yard. It is NOT a body I would trust on an expensive trip or assignment. Not in its current state.

The system for all practical purposes is useless if you can't get better than 5 or 10% keeper rate. My daughters t2i does better than that.

Less than 10% keeper rate would be unacceptable surely. Maybe there is some problem with the camera.

I can't say for others but my 7D2 seems to be focusing fine so far - I would place it at par with the 5D3 based on the 100+ shots I took in the evening today.

 

[Sabaki]

Hi Orangutan

I consider your opinion reasonable and logical. I do however have enough evidence to support the performance issues of the 7Dii.

I take you back to Scott Kelby's hour long video where he highlights the superb performance of the 7Dii at two American football matches. Shots looked amazing, for both sharpness DNS noise performance.
There's other videos of Canon pros who intimate that although not identical, the 7Dii's performance is very near to that of the 1DX.

So we've all probably seen those and more videos.

Thing is, when I sit with owners of the 1DX, both professionals (international event sport photography) and serious birders, who cannot get decent performance from the 7Dii, I worry.

I am talking about seriously good photographers here.

Aside from AF and shsrpness issues, there's also this extremely weird 'work one day, next day not' phenomenon. Set your camera up, take good shots. Go to the exact same place with similar conditions and then the camera behaved very differently.

I can't grip that.

We also talk about the vast number of people who are not complaining and I can tell you something there too...most of the regular buyers do not know how to benchmark whether an image is sharp or not.

I'm a photographer/birder, meaning I strive for photographic excellence in my shots. There's also birder photographers, who are more keen on proof shots. It seems they're less worried about perfect photographs.

I'm hoping and praying that Canon fix this or I may end up selling my 7Dii.

Absolutely nothing worse than having a camera one does not trust implicitly.

Hello Sabaki

I have a 7D2 since December, and I took it out, mainly for bird and wildlife photography, for in total about 15 days. I used it on the Tamron 150-600, the Canon 300mm f4 L IS, the Canon 100mm f2.8 L IS Macro and the the Tamron 70-200 f2.8. In one-shot mode it performed very well with all these lenses, no sharpness issues at all. In AI Servo I had some problems with the Tamron 150-600, many shots were out of focus although I used only the centerpoint extended by 4 sourrounding points and the focuspoint was firmly locked onto a birds head. With the 300mm f4, the 70-200 f2.8 and the same AI Servo settings, the results were much better. And since I also used a 5DIII on the 150-600 and expericened the same amount of unsharp results, I guess the cause is most likely my technique or (hopefully not) the lens.
I will soon try the 7D2 on a Canon 100-400mm II which I can borrow for some days.

Hi geonix

The issues with the third body is in AI Servo mode.

Now, knowing that all those Cases work ONLY in AI Servo mode, my feeling is that the issue is either the physical SF points, software or perhaps a combination of the two.

I was expecting to have a hit rate of maybe 70% for birds in flight but my current ratio is maybe 30%.