Hey Sam, don't be too hasty to give up on your 7D. I think in theory that Matt may be correct about the greater pixel density amplifying movement error, but in practice it's a moot point. The 7D is a fabulous camera for action because the AF is fast, accurate, and extremely flexible and can be fine-tuned for different purposes. However, all of that flexibility comes at a cost of complexity and it takes a bit of work to learn the ins and outs. I got my 7D because I ran up against a wall trying to photograph BIFs and the sport of falconry with my 40D (and 5DMKII for that matter). My first experiences were disappointing! But with practice I soon got the hang of it and now I think it's amazing. My keeper rate of in-focus shots when shooting fast action has increase dramatically.
I commend Matt on taking a thorough approach to understanding what all the options do. I would also recommend googling "7D settings for action", or for bifs, and see what others do. There are some pretty good tutorials out there for fine-tuning the AF for different scenarios. It's definitely not a P&S camera. Seemingly little things like focus tracking sensitivity can make a big difference in how the camera responds to different scenarios. And knowing how they work can explain seemingly random behavior that you may be seeing.
Here are two shots that I could never, ever do with any other body I've previously owned.
This guy looks like he's hovering, but is actually flying straight at me at probably 30 MPH. And that's against a busy background too! I am thrilled to be able to get shots like this now that I never could before.
Ditto with this shot from Bosque.
I've spent many, many hours shooting BIFs with the 20D and 40D, and I'm telling you the 7D performs infinitely better at action than those older bodies. Hang in there, you'll get it!
FWIW, I shoot a lot of sports, and alternate between a 1Dm4 and a 5Dm2, depending on the lighting. Although the 5Dm2 is not considered a great sports camera (to put it generously), I still find that my absolute best photos come from the 5D and not the 1D, at least from a technical perspective. I very rarely use burst mode, so the 10fps of the 1D is underutilised. Beyond that, the IQ is consistently better on the 5Dm2.
I have never used a 7D, so I can't speak to how well it works. I tend to push the ISO on the 5D so that I can keep the SS very high. This makes up for a multitude of sins w.r.t. camera motion and vibration, esp. with a 400mm lens. It is one of the main benefits of the 5Dm2 over the 1Dm4, IMHO.
huh?! this means that Canon must have changed this in the firmware. I am using the latest (1.2.3) and I -do- get the red flashing focus point and grid even with one focus point and with spot-focus.
cheers,
Nick.
That is correct. What I am saying is that, the illumination of the selected focus point is NOT a confirmation of focus itself, but just illumination for the sake of seeing where the AF point is, period. At least, as far as I know.
That is correct. What I am saying is that, the illumination of the selected focus point is NOT a confirmation of focus itself, but just illumination for the sake of seeing where the AF point is, period. At least, as far as I know.
No, that is not the behaviour on the 7D with 1.2.3 firmware. The red flashing AF point(s) only occurs when AF is reached, simultaneously with the green LED and the beep. Also, when multiple AF points are active, only the one(s) that reach AF flash red, the rest stays black.
I have never seen any red flashing focus point(s) at a time other than when AF is reached. I think Canon is standardizing behaviour like this across camera types, so wouldn't be surprised if they changed this with new firmware releases.
About 7D AF vs 5D2 AF: many hope that the 5D3 will have the same AF as the 7D and this is a pretty persistent rumour. True or not, it is an indication that the 7D AF system is often regarded superior to the 5D2 AF.
ciao!
Nick.
ciao!
Nick.
my equipment: Canon 5D2, 7D, full list here
my Smugmug site: here
I'm sitting here thinking about motion across the pixels, and how a higher megapixel sensor is "less forgiving."
It makes sense on a "per pixel" basis. A movement of say, 1/4" at the subject will correspond to a (much smaller) movement on the sensor. If you have more pixels per inch on the sensor, then it will move across more pixels. If you have fewer pixels per inch, then it will move over fewer pixels. But it will always move over the same linear dimension (inches) right? (assuming the same focal length, etc.) So, if you look at the pictures on the same scale, they should look just as sharp.
Another way to get at this: if you shoot the same scene with an 8Mpix 20D, and an 18 Mpixel 7D, then open the RAWs in Lightroom and zoom to 1:1, what do you see? I think you will see the 7D shot "zoomed in" farther, because 1:1 is going to put the same number of *pixels* (not inches) across the screen. If there is any movement, you'll see it more in the 7D shot than the 20D. But, if you set the 20D shot to 1:1, and the 7D to around 1.5:1, you should be able to get the same number of *inches* across the screen. In that view, it seems that the 7D would have to look sharper.
Does any of that make sense? Is it right?
The goal of my photography is is the effective, original communication of a feeling expressing truth, beauty, or love.
I am not questioning your experience, and I do understand your explanation, yet.....................based on this the 5D II should be better at capturing fast moving objects than ether the 7D or the 1D IV.
I was (am) looking at the 7D as a sports camera. If I need to shoot at higher ISO (7D ISO performance less than 5D II) to get a higher shutter speed than needed with a 5D II it seems like this would be defeating the purpose of getting the 7D.
I am at this time getting leery of the 7D as a viable camera for me.
The 7D has 232 pixels per mm. The 1D IV has 175 pixels per mm, and the 5D II has 156 pixels per mm.
Meaning that for any movement, subject or camera the subject would travel through more pixels on the 7D or 1D IV sensors than the 5D II sensor. This supports your claim of the 7D needing more care when shooting moving subjects.
One could conclude therefor that with more pixels per mm that more detail would be captured with the 7D or 1D IV than the 5D II, but as far as the 7D is concerned it doesn't match the detail captured with the 5D II.
I need Scotch...........and lots of it.
Sam
I don't think we have any disagreements, fortunately, just misunderstandings. :-)
The 7D is certainly going to be much more effective as a sports camera than the 5D mk2, though not the 1D mk3 of course. Pixel density, and the demand it puts on your hand-holding technique, is WAY less of a factor compared to sheer camera performance. Especially if you use a stabilized lens, that really levels the playing field almost entirely.
I definitely wasn't trying to argue that people ought to disregard crop sensors and only use full-frame sensors for action, I was just trying to point out that with the 7D you'll definitely have to use good technique to get the full 18 megapixels worth of resolution. (And also I wanted to point out that sometimes when people accuse the 7D sensor of being "softer" than the 5D mk2, it's because they're just not shooting as steadily as they ought to.)
But, when pushing the shutter speed envelope a whole LOT, and with an un-stabilized lens, yes you will find full-frame pixels to be a little more forgiving. And, likewise, you'll find a 12 megapixel full-frame camera to be more forgiving than a 21 or 24 megapixel full-frame sensor. Just like a wider angle lens is easier to shoot at slower shutter speeds than a telephoto lens. It's all about magnification...
The 5D mk2 and 7D aren't the greatest examples though, both cameras have pixel densities that are getting kinda high to begin with, and they aren't even the same resolution. Which is why I use the 12 megapixel Nikon comparison- Two sensors of a different format but with identical resolutions.
With respect to the 7D not being able to "match" the 5D's resolution: Too many factors to consider. But, if you compare two sensors of different formats yet the same resolution, at the same focal length of say 200mm, it should be easy to grasp the fact that the smaller sensor will indeed "out-resolve" the larger sensor.
Oppositely, pixel VS pixel, larger sensors will indeed be able capture detail in higher *quality*. So if you were to use "converted" focal lengths and equivalent resolutions, the full-frame sensor would of course capture a higher quality image.
Of course, the real world is not a lab, and as kdog agrees, the 7D is still one of THE BEST birding cameras on the market. If you've got stabilized telephoto lenses and shoot steady, you'll probably be in heaven. :-)
I agree on the 7D capability to capture moving targets. I have seen a huge improvement in my capture rate coming from a 50D. I also agree the 7D has and still is requiring some learning and practice on the focus options and my personal shooting skills.
Here are couple examples that are not perfect but if you remember the old Roadrunner Coyote cartoons you know how fast Roadrunners are. This guy was cruising at a pretty good clip when these were shot.
I don't think IS matters with action. It negates hand movement, but not subject movement. In low light with stationary subjects, yes, it really helps. But with any type of action, the feature IS pretty much useless. I agree that shooting steady helps with stationary subjects, and a tripod would be optimal (even a monopod helps).
The 7D is intended for action (mostly), and with action, camera shake doesn't matter much. Sure, it helps IQ, but to stop any moderately fast action, you'll be using a high enough shutter speed that most shake isn't much of a problem. Therefore, I would much rather have a 7D than a 5D2 for action. All of the hi-speed features are much more important than pixel density. For action, I don't think pixel density would matter WRT subject blur, because you need to use a high enough shutter speed anyway. So for action the 7D is better than the 5D2, because the pixel density is not an issue (if I'm correct here). The 7D can be pushed to ISO 4000 (and probably more) and with a little NR produce excellent images with minimal noise.
I'm sure the 5D2 sensor is better with high ISO just because of FF pixel density, but the 7D is pretty darn good at it too.
Comments
I commend Matt on taking a thorough approach to understanding what all the options do. I would also recommend googling "7D settings for action", or for bifs, and see what others do. There are some pretty good tutorials out there for fine-tuning the AF for different scenarios. It's definitely not a P&S camera. Seemingly little things like focus tracking sensitivity can make a big difference in how the camera responds to different scenarios. And knowing how they work can explain seemingly random behavior that you may be seeing.
Here are two shots that I could never, ever do with any other body I've previously owned.
This guy looks like he's hovering, but is actually flying straight at me at probably 30 MPH. And that's against a busy background too! I am thrilled to be able to get shots like this now that I never could before.
Ditto with this shot from Bosque.
I've spent many, many hours shooting BIFs with the 20D and 40D, and I'm telling you the 7D performs infinitely better at action than those older bodies. Hang in there, you'll get it!
Link to my Smugmug site
I have never used a 7D, so I can't speak to how well it works. I tend to push the ISO on the 5D so that I can keep the SS very high. This makes up for a multitude of sins w.r.t. camera motion and vibration, esp. with a 400mm lens. It is one of the main benefits of the 5Dm2 over the 1Dm4, IMHO.
my $0.02's worth...
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
No, that is not the behaviour on the 7D with 1.2.3 firmware. The red flashing AF point(s) only occurs when AF is reached, simultaneously with the green LED and the beep. Also, when multiple AF points are active, only the one(s) that reach AF flash red, the rest stays black.
I have never seen any red flashing focus point(s) at a time other than when AF is reached. I think Canon is standardizing behaviour like this across camera types, so wouldn't be surprised if they changed this with new firmware releases.
About 7D AF vs 5D2 AF: many hope that the 5D3 will have the same AF as the 7D and this is a pretty persistent rumour. True or not, it is an indication that the 7D AF system is often regarded superior to the 5D2 AF.
ciao!
Nick.
Nick.
my equipment: Canon 5D2, 7D, full list here
my Smugmug site: here
It makes sense on a "per pixel" basis. A movement of say, 1/4" at the subject will correspond to a (much smaller) movement on the sensor. If you have more pixels per inch on the sensor, then it will move across more pixels. If you have fewer pixels per inch, then it will move over fewer pixels. But it will always move over the same linear dimension (inches) right? (assuming the same focal length, etc.) So, if you look at the pictures on the same scale, they should look just as sharp.
Another way to get at this: if you shoot the same scene with an 8Mpix 20D, and an 18 Mpixel 7D, then open the RAWs in Lightroom and zoom to 1:1, what do you see? I think you will see the 7D shot "zoomed in" farther, because 1:1 is going to put the same number of *pixels* (not inches) across the screen. If there is any movement, you'll see it more in the 7D shot than the 20D. But, if you set the 20D shot to 1:1, and the 7D to around 1.5:1, you should be able to get the same number of *inches* across the screen. In that view, it seems that the 7D would have to look sharper.
Does any of that make sense? Is it right?
www.photographyjones.com
The 7D is certainly going to be much more effective as a sports camera than the 5D mk2, though not the 1D mk3 of course. Pixel density, and the demand it puts on your hand-holding technique, is WAY less of a factor compared to sheer camera performance. Especially if you use a stabilized lens, that really levels the playing field almost entirely.
I definitely wasn't trying to argue that people ought to disregard crop sensors and only use full-frame sensors for action, I was just trying to point out that with the 7D you'll definitely have to use good technique to get the full 18 megapixels worth of resolution. (And also I wanted to point out that sometimes when people accuse the 7D sensor of being "softer" than the 5D mk2, it's because they're just not shooting as steadily as they ought to.)
But, when pushing the shutter speed envelope a whole LOT, and with an un-stabilized lens, yes you will find full-frame pixels to be a little more forgiving. And, likewise, you'll find a 12 megapixel full-frame camera to be more forgiving than a 21 or 24 megapixel full-frame sensor. Just like a wider angle lens is easier to shoot at slower shutter speeds than a telephoto lens. It's all about magnification...
The 5D mk2 and 7D aren't the greatest examples though, both cameras have pixel densities that are getting kinda high to begin with, and they aren't even the same resolution. Which is why I use the 12 megapixel Nikon comparison- Two sensors of a different format but with identical resolutions.
With respect to the 7D not being able to "match" the 5D's resolution: Too many factors to consider. But, if you compare two sensors of different formats yet the same resolution, at the same focal length of say 200mm, it should be easy to grasp the fact that the smaller sensor will indeed "out-resolve" the larger sensor.
Oppositely, pixel VS pixel, larger sensors will indeed be able capture detail in higher *quality*. So if you were to use "converted" focal lengths and equivalent resolutions, the full-frame sensor would of course capture a higher quality image.
Of course, the real world is not a lab, and as kdog agrees, the 7D is still one of THE BEST birding cameras on the market. If you've got stabilized telephoto lenses and shoot steady, you'll probably be in heaven. :-)
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Here are couple examples that are not perfect but if you remember the old Roadrunner Coyote cartoons you know how fast Roadrunners are.
http://bgarland.smugmug.com/
The 7D is intended for action (mostly), and with action, camera shake doesn't matter much. Sure, it helps IQ, but to stop any moderately fast action, you'll be using a high enough shutter speed that most shake isn't much of a problem. Therefore, I would much rather have a 7D than a 5D2 for action. All of the hi-speed features are much more important than pixel density. For action, I don't think pixel density would matter WRT subject blur, because you need to use a high enough shutter speed anyway. So for action the 7D is better than the 5D2, because the pixel density is not an issue (if I'm correct here). The 7D can be pushed to ISO 4000 (and probably more) and with a little NR produce excellent images with minimal noise.
I'm sure the 5D2 sensor is better with high ISO just because of FF pixel density, but the 7D is pretty darn good at it too.