[Samsungian]

Hey just noticed their better review including conclusions is up.

Me? I got to handle Canon 7D a couple days ago. Hmmmm, I am tired of paying good money for crop format cameras under the belief that aps-c telephoto effect magically makes my lenses grow. And Canon is 1.6x instead of Pentax 1.5x. So canon has a bit more reach over K-7 ect. Once I get past that telephoto effect does not equal greater reach then for me its just a frames per second increase. And then my wide glass gets all normal and boring.

I'll pass, but Dpreview loved it.

Local shop has sold 52 of these Canon 7D plus local fees and Zero K-7 still.

No K-7 touchy, no K-7 feely, no K-7 sales, no surprises.

30 pages:

Canon EOS 7D Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

---

Last edited by Samsungian; 11-06-2009 at 04:29 PM.

[ll_coffee_lP]

Looks like a monster camera.

c[_]

[Mike.P®]

Canon is 1.6x instead of Pentax 1.5x. So canon has more reach, and dual card slots

Does it .. thought that was just the D300s

[Eruditass]

lol interesting tidbit:

K-7: (in none of our several hundred real-life sample shots that we took while working on this review did we have any issues with focus accuracy)

EOS 7D: As usual we shot a few hundred real-life sample shots while working on this review and only had a very small number of pictures that were not focused properly.

[pingflood]

How, exactly, do you define "reach"?

I look at it as "pixels per duck" -- a higher density sensor will give you a greater # of pixels on the target assuming focal length, subject distance remain the same. It's a great benefit for things like wildlife shooting. Since no FF sensor comes close to the pixel density of a 7D (or 50D) it does effectively give you more "reach" with telephotos.

[Samsungian]

My Bad, you're right its single card slot. So one less reason to buy it.

Now its just a spray and pray platform without security provided by second non existant memory slot.

Seeing dual processors spec made me think dual card slots.

Thanks!

Now thats cleared up I think Canon 7D should be priced like Pentax K-7 's price and not priced like D300s.

Another good reason to pass, and live to shop another day for something else.

Does it .. thought that was just the D300s

[Samsungian]

The only crop bodies I own are Pentax. I compare K20D 14.6mp to 5D Classic 13mp and I just don't see any additional reach. Both my 200-500mm 5.6 and 300mm 2.8 adaptall twos mounted to my 5D produces same exact image as K20D with P-KA adaptall mount except with K20D the outer part of the same exact image is not there. The central parts that I am focused on are identical.

Let me ask you this as you have canon 50D 1.6x aps-c crop format body, does your camera adjust its metadata up when you shoot your 400mm 5.6L ?
Does it record it as 400mm 5.6L or or some other focal length ???

How, exactly, do you define "reach"?

I look at it as "pixels per duck" -- a higher density sensor will give you a greater # of pixels on the target assuming focal length, subject distance remain the same. It's a great benefit for things like wildlife shooting. Since no FF sensor comes close to the pixel density of a 7D (or 50D) it does effectively give you more "reach" with telephotos.

---

Last edited by Samsungian; 11-06-2009 at 05:05 PM.

[pingflood]

I didn't say anything about crop factor. I'm talking _pixel density_ here.

A 5D II has effectively more "reach" than say a "classic" 5D, by virtue of having a higher pixel density. It resolves more detail (assuming a lens that's decent enough), so you could crop out a fair bit of the picture and end up with the same resolution as an uncropped 5D shot.

If your K20D doesn't give you more detail in the shot compared to the 5D cropped to same field of view, it sounds like either your lenses are not up to the task, or your K20D isn't. The pixel density of the K20D is a LOT higher than the 5D, so the amount of detail resolved should be a fair bit greater than a 5D shot cropped to equivalent field of view.

Thus, more "reach".

If your definition of reach is focal length, then a 300mm on 8x10 has the same "reach" as a 300mm on 4/3. Fair enough, but I think it's a rather silly way to look at it. I got the 50D because compared to my 1DsII I can generate a 300dpi print of a given distant subject with far greater detail, effectively bringing it closer. That's my definition of "reach"....

[Samsungian]

My Canon lenses are better than my Pentax lenses. However the pentax 50mm macro and 105mm macro really do well on K20D so I'll guess its my lessor other Pentax lenses not comparing well to Canon.

So, on your Canon 50D does your metadata say "400mm 5.6L" or something like 640mm 5.6L.

My Pentax metadata adds the a 1.5x crop factor to focal length on my FA lenses.



What Pentax dslr do you currently own?

I didn't say anything about crop factor. I'm talking _pixel density_ here.

A 5D II has effectively more "reach" than say a "classic" 5D, by virtue of having a higher pixel density. It resolves more detail (assuming a lens that's decent enough), so you could crop out a fair bit of the picture and end up with the same resolution as an uncropped 5D shot.

If your K20D doesn't give you more detail in the shot compared to the 5D cropped to same field of view, it sounds like either your lenses are not up to the task, or your K20D isn't. The pixel density of the K20D is a LOT higher than the 5D, so the amount of detail resolved should be a fair bit greater than a 5D shot cropped to equivalent field of view.

Thus, more "reach".

If your definition of reach is focal length, then a 300mm on 8x10 has the same "reach" as a 300mm on 4/3. Fair enough, but I think it's a rather silly way to look at it. I got the 50D because compared to my 1DsII I can generate a 300dpi print of a given distant subject with far greater detail, effectively bringing it closer. That's my definition of "reach"....

[palmor]

My Bad, you're right its single card slot. So one less reason to buy it.

Now its just a spray and pray platform without security provided by second non existant memory slot.

Seeing dual processors spec made me think dual card slots.

Thanks!

Now thats cleared up I think Canon 7D should be priced like Pentax K-7 's price and not priced like D300s.

Another good reason to pass, and live to shop another day for something else.

So you think increased cost of the D300s is justified only because it's dual card slots and the lack of them should put the 7d in the same price range as the K7? I think I disagree

I wouldn't categorize the 7d as "spray and pray" either. A lot of people get hung up on the fps but it is a lot more then that. The AF is like having a mini 1d series.. not only focus speed but all the customizations you can do to it. For example you can configure the AF to quickly or slowly acquire focus on new objects that pop into the frame... for example if you are tracking a bird and they fly by a telephone pole you can set it so it won't try to grab focus on the pole. You don't find that in any Canon body short of a 1d.

The 60d (when/if it is announced) will be priced closer to the k7


John

[palmor]

mparing well to Canon.

So, on your Canon 50D does your metadata say "400mm 5.6L" or something like 640mm 5.6L.

My Pentax metadata adds the a 1.5x crop factor to focal length on my FA lenses.

Pentax seems to add a "35mm equivalent focal length" in addition to the true focal length. The thing about this is that it really should be 35mm equivalent field of view because the focal length doesn't change. As far as I can tell the Canon does not include that info.



John

[Samsungian]

Here's another Canon 7D review

In some ways a far more enjoyable read than dpreview

Enjoy


Canon EOS 7D Review The World According to Roland

[LeDave]

Here's another Canon 7D review

In some ways a far more enjoyable read than dpreview

Enjoy


Canon EOS 7D Review The World According to Roland

Very nice, The 50D really held up well against the 7D. I am really surprised by the IQ of the 5D MK 2 compared to the 7D, I didn't know full frames had so much more detail over APS-C, it's nuts.

[pingflood]

My Canon lenses are better than my Pentax lenses. However the pentax 50mm macro and 105mm macro really do well on K20D so I'll guess its my lessor other Pentax lenses not comparing well to Canon.

So, on your Canon 50D does your metadata say "400mm 5.6L" or something like 640mm 5.6L.

My Pentax metadata adds the a 1.5x crop factor to focal length on my FA lenses.



What Pentax dslr do you currently own?

Canon doesn't translate focal lengths. It shows 400/5.6L just like it should -- the focal length of the lens does not change regardless of the camera it is mounted on.

I am not entirely sure what you're on about otherwise; thought we were discussing whether higher density sensors give you more "reach" or not?

[pingflood]

Very nice, The 50D really held up well against the 7D. I am really surprised by the IQ of the 5D MK 2 compared to the 7D, I didn't know full frames had so much more detail over APS-C, it's nuts.

Why surprised? The 7D sensor isn't that radical -- it's a slightly higher res one with a little better noise handling. The time for major leaps from one camera to another is in the past...

The 50D is probably one of the most underappreciated cameras out there, all thanks to DPreview.