Options

70D Day 1 very impressed !

jmp2204jmp2204 Registered Users Posts: 197 Major grins
edited January 15, 2014 in Cameras
As some of you know I have been a student on here for a couple years .I mainly hang out in the sports section as Hockey is by far the most challenging thing I shoot. I have been fortunate enough to get advice over that time frame from some top shelf shooters on here .Of course my dream lens was the 70-200 2.8 L ,I managed to pick one up this summer used (non is) .I had planned on the 7D as well but the 70D had me reconsidering .After posting the question on here between the two (and others) my wife kept tabs on where I was leaning .Well I got the 70D for Christmas ! Coming from a T2i I seemed to be just starting to nail down my hockey shots to my satisfaction(see peewee thread in sports) well I must say using the 70D today shooting 6 year olds in the poorest lit rink I shoot in ,this thing is heads and shoulders above the t2i everywhere! I try to shoot at 1600 iso to keep the noise manageable in PP (cs5 C-raw) I shot today at 3200 with no need to hardly correct anything .I have not went through the manual yet but just set it similar to what I set the t2i at and went from there . From what I read I did not expect it to be a whole lot better , but I am convince it is ! If anyone is thinking of moving up do it You will not be disappointed :ivar

Comments

  • Options
    divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited December 29, 2013
    Everybody I know who has one LOVES it; it really does, in many ways, seem to be the long-awaited "7dII". Enjoy the new gear! thumb.gif
  • Options
    pathfinderpathfinder Super Moderators Posts: 14,698 moderator
    edited December 29, 2013
    Good to hear your success.

    Could you post some shots that you took at ISO 1600 and 3200 here on dgrin and leave a link here in this thread, so folks can see for themselves what the 70D will do?

    I am sure there are lots of folks who are wondering if the 70D really is a good 7D replacement, or offers lower noise high ISO images than the 7D.
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • Options
    jmp2204jmp2204 Registered Users Posts: 197 Major grins
    edited December 29, 2013
    http://11500206593_13844fe5b1_b.jpg t2i fairly heavy pp

    [URL]http://[/URL]11626684124_3d039e6a1b_b.jpg 70d cropped , sharpened
  • Options
    davevdavev Registered Users Posts: 3,118 Major grins
    edited December 29, 2013
    pathfinder wrote: »
    Good to hear your success.

    Could you post some shots that you took at ISO 1600 and 3200 here on dgrin and leave a link here in this thread, so folks can see for themselves what the 70D will do?

    I am sure there are lots of folks who are wondering if the 70D really is a good 7D replacement, or offers lower noise high ISO images than the 7D.

    I'm not sure if this is the kind of comparison that you were looking for, but I'll put it out there.
    I was playing around with iso 12800 while shooting in raw+jpg.
    So you can see the difference somewhat of a straight from the camera file to a processed one.

    IMG_8568%20raw%20jpg-X3.jpg

    Full sized here : LINK
    dave.

    Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
  • Options
    pathfinderpathfinder Super Moderators Posts: 14,698 moderator
    edited December 29, 2013
    I am quite impressed, Dave.

    ISO 12800 file from a crop body camera that looks that good, is quite impressive to me, and significantly better than the 7D to my eye.
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • Options
    ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,830 moderator
    edited December 30, 2013
    davev wrote: »
    I'm not sure if this is the kind of comparison that you were looking for, but I'll put it out there.
    I was playing around with iso 12800 while shooting in raw+jpg.
    So you can see the difference somewhat of a straight from the camera file to a processed one.

    IMG_8568%20raw%20jpg-X3.jpg

    Full sized here : LINK
    pathfinder wrote: »
    I am quite impressed, Dave.

    ISO 12800 file from a crop body camera that looks that good, is quite impressive to me, and significantly better than the 7D to my eye.

    Yes, Dave, those are extremely nice results for an ISO 12,800 file from a crop body. thumb.gifclap


    Pathfinder, the Canon 6D and 70D seem to be a major leap ahead of previous Canon bodies when you use Adobe RAW conversion.

    For older bodies I greatly recommend Capture One to process the RAW files instead of Adobe products. It's like Canon and Adobe stopped cooperating for a period of time and the noise signature of Adobe RAW conversion struggled at either high-ISOs or under-exposed and pushed images. Capture One yields much better control over banding and pattern noise in those circumstances, by my testing.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Options
    davevdavev Registered Users Posts: 3,118 Major grins
    edited December 30, 2013
    I played around with the higher ISO's a bit today.
    This is what conclusions I came up with.

    Let me say first, this shot was made by shooting in raw and jpg modes.
    Iso is at 6400.

    This is with the Canon 70D with the 18-135 kit lens.
    I used standard picture style set at 4,0,1,0
    NR was set to high.
    White Balance on auto.
    On the raw shot, in ACR I set the NR at 40. That seemed to balance the shots out a bit.

    There is some color difference between the two shots because of these settings.

    I put them both into CS6, copied 1/2 of the jpg file and pasted it onto the raw image, then flattened it.

    I also reduced the size to 1200x800. It's just easier to show what I was seeing at full size.

    So here's what I see.

    If you need to change/adjust the color of your high ISO shot, you want to use the raw file.
    If you need to up the sharpness, the jpg takes those changes much better.

    No sharpening.
    Screen%20Shot%202013-12-30%20at%201.49.02%20PM.png

    Unsharpen mask
    Screen%20Shot%202013-12-30%20at%201.49.24%20PM.png

    Note the increase in the noise on the raw side.

    On to saturation.

    none.
    Screen%20Shot%202013-12-30%20at%201.48.15%20PM.png

    up 55%
    Screen%20Shot%202013-12-30%20at%201.47.45%20PM.png

    Note the blotchy spots that appear on the jpg side.
    (when I reduced the saturation the blotches appeared than also)

    So, when shooting high ISO's which way would you go? Raw, or jpg?
    dave.

    Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
  • Options
    Brett1000Brett1000 Registered Users Posts: 819 Major grins
    edited January 9, 2014
    davev wrote: »
    I

    So, when shooting high ISO's which way would you go? Raw, or jpg?

    I don't have a 70D but RAW is the way to go, from there you can do selective sharpening, noise reduction or anything
  • Options
    David_S85David_S85 Administrators Posts: 13,192 moderator
    edited January 9, 2014
    I'm liking the reviews on the 70D. Not ready to buy one but the tech is looking good. I think Canon has a real winner here, and to think, it isn't an even numbered xxD series. I read the thread, did some other things, and then it struck me… DaveV took some shots in RAW mode. :yikes
    My Smugmug
    "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
  • Options
    davevdavev Registered Users Posts: 3,118 Major grins
    edited January 11, 2014
    David_S85 wrote: »
    I'm liking the reviews on the 70D. Not ready to buy one but the tech is looking good. I think Canon has a real winner here, and to think, it isn't an even numbered xxD series. I read the thread, did some other things, and then it struck me… DaveV took some shots in RAW mode. :yikes

    I've used raw before, but not very often. I rarely have the need.

    A few from the 70D. (all jpg's) :D

    11843461484_5544d392d4_h.jpg

    11717107374_686bd821d1_h.jpg

    11489363816_f8d630496b_h.jpg
    dave.

    Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
  • Options
    divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited January 12, 2014
    Outstanding (although I submit the results are attributable to the photographer's skill as well as the snazzy new gear!! thumb.gif)
  • Options
    davevdavev Registered Users Posts: 3,118 Major grins
    edited January 13, 2014
    divamum wrote: »
    Outstanding (although I submit the results are attributable to the photographer's skill as well as the snazzy new gear!! thumb.gif)

    It's all the camera, I just point and click the shutter. :D
    dave.

    Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
  • Options
    SwartzySwartzy Registered Users Posts: 3,293 Major grins
    edited January 14, 2014
    Thanks for the detailed comparisons Dave.....I've been looking to replace my ..ugh.....40D but had mixed reviews on the 7D. Cracking up over the Dave shooting in RAW comment.....hilarious! Cheers!mwink.gif
    Swartzy:
    NAPP Member | Canon Shooter
    Weddings/Portraits and anything else that catches my eye.
    www.daveswartz.com
    Model Mayhem site http://www.modelmayhem.com/686552
  • Options
    davevdavev Registered Users Posts: 3,118 Major grins
    edited January 15, 2014
    It a good camera Swartzy. I think you'd like it.
    The higher iso's, the 7 shots/sec made it worthwhile for me.
    dave.

    Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
Sign In or Register to comment.