|
1 Attachment(s)
|
Tests and reviews for the camera Canon EOS 7D Mark II - DxOMark
<iframe src="https://www.flickr.com/photos/57553669@N03/15099119133/player/801ef3ede1" height="787" width="1024" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen oallowfullscreen msallowfullscreen></iframe> |
:io:
|
Is it really that bad?!?
|
:bigeek:
:rofl: *sneaks off to see what the canon fanboys are saying |
Guess it won't be selling like hot cakes :bitelip:
And you don't need to worry about Adobe bringing support to LR :O |
Originally Posted by Mizouse
(Post 15225680)
Guess it won't be selling like hot cakes :bitelip:
And you don't need to worry about Adobe bringing support to LR :O I'd also like a D810 for everything else. :whyme: |
Only slightly better than Nikons five year old D300/s, ....:rofl:
|
Canon is its only reason why they would lose profit. high prices with minimal updates and giving lesser to their consumer base.
Sony has already Nikon's business towards them already. so its just matter of time before it takes canon's as well. |
had to do some research on my own......
Canon EOS 7D Mark II Sample Images & Movies | Camera News at Cameraegg DXOmark is a shit site and biased against Canon |
Oh Boy, the Canon 7D Mark II handles Hi-ISO Like a CHAMP!!! Test Photos and Video | Fro Knows Photo
he is a Nikon guy, btw. :smirk: |
:blahblah:
|
Originally Posted by srika
(Post 15225960)
had to do some research on my own......
Canon EOS 7D Mark II Sample Images & Movies | Camera News at Cameraegg DXOmark is a shit site and biased against Canon |
:bitelip:
|
Originally Posted by pttl
(Post 15226047)
Do you really believe that? :what:
by the numbers they do have the 7D2 performing not much "better" than the D300. and that is laughable. |
It is laughable, hence why I'm VERY tempted to say screw it and switch to Nikon.
|
I've seen them give pretty good ratings to other Canon bodies and their lens.
Just tried to go to their website, looks like many are wanting to see how bad the 7D2 is. I got a heavy volume message. |
guess neither of you bothered to look at the sample images for yourself and come to your own conclusion - maybe you don't want to see. suit yourself.
|
Originally Posted by Mizouse
(Post 15226362)
It is laughable, hence why I'm VERY tempted to say screw it and switch to Nikon.
it is laughable because it's not indicative of the camera's actual performance, as evidenced by the sample images and high ISO performance that I linked above - not because the numbers are similar. |
Originally Posted by srika
(Post 15226372)
guess neither of you bothered to look at the sample images for yourself and come to your own conclusion - maybe you don't want to see. suit yourself.
|
and, I'm saying that rating of "70" is bunk. the sample images tell me otherwise. and I'm only talking about the JPG's
|
Originally Posted by srika
(Post 15226401)
and, I'm saying that rating of "70" is bunk. the sample images tell me otherwise. and I'm only talking about the JPG's
|
Originally Posted by jupitersolo
(Post 15226408)
So DXOMark is hating on Canon, so why do other Canon body and lenses get rated well by DXOMark if they hate Canon so bad? You can't have one and be proud and then hate when they test one with such poor results!
I wanted to check for myself but can't access the site due to high volume All I'm suggesting is that the actual images and performance should give you a different impression of this camera. I've had good seat time with D300 in the past and ISO 800 was about as high as I would go on that. It looks like the 7D2 is shooting into ISO 12800 and beyond without much fuss. We've discussed it before and this 7D2 information has reminded me that my position is the same as it was years ago, Dx0mark is not a site to base real world conclusions from. This reminds me of bendgate. It's just internet snake oil designed to tarnish something and people ignorantly latch on to it because they like doing that. |
DXOMark is much better than a bunch of assholes like those of bendgate.
OK, going to say THIS AGAIN, I KNOW IT's BETTER AT HIGH ISO than a D300. So need to stop the butthurt on that..., But at base ISO it's pretty poor! |
4 Attachment(s)
this is not a question of being butt-hurt, it's a question of factual logic.
here are some of the sample images at low ISO (200 or so) from the above link Attachment 104563 Attachment 104564 Attachment 104565 Attachment 104566 please describe to me how they are poor images - again these are just sample images, JPG's |
my opinion on them, you could tell me they are from a D4S, and I'd believe it.
|
Originally Posted by jupitersolo
(Post 15226447)
..... But at base ISO it's pretty poor!
The 7D2 is really a specialty tool. sports and wildlife where the 1.6 crop is needed to get more pixels on target. Generally speaking, these are also the 2 main areas where higher iso is needed. I'd love to have a 7D2 for birding etc...BUT I don't want to have to deal with the disgusting noise that hides in every shadow from a canon sensor when I do landscapes. I wish i could own 2 bodies but I can't....so I'm kinda stuck...and pissed at canon. :annoyed: |
maybe I'll get one haha :)
|
Originally Posted by pttl
(Post 15226471)
That's because canon's base sensor tech is pretty poor. Canon has learned how to massage their sensor tech so hi iso images don't look bad. But their basic sensor tech is still far below the competition of, I'm guessing, every other mfgr.
The 7D2 is really a specialty tool. sports and wildlife where the 1.6 crop is needed to get more pixels on target. Generally speaking, these are also the 2 main areas where higher iso is needed. I'd love to have a 7D2 for birding etc...BUT I don't want to have to deal with the disgusting noise that hides in every shadow from a canon sensor when I do landscapes. I wish i could own 2 bodies but I can't....so I'm kinda stuck...and pissed at canon. :annoyed: You could also consider D750. |
Originally Posted by srika
(Post 15226483)
I suggest D810 for you. It is true the Sony sensor does considerably better with low light. But, in terms of real world application, it is also true that you can produce professional results with any of these cameras.
You could also consider D750. The D750 is looking very strong at this point. Fantastic low light, low iso camera with huge DR and apparently fantastic HIGH iso results as well. It has Nikon's best AF system but I'm a little apprehensive at the relatively slow 6.5 FPS and SMALL buffer. |
Originally Posted by srika
(Post 15226466)
this is not a question of being butt-hurt, it's a question of factual logic.
please describe to me how they are poor images - again these are just sample images, JPG's Just as mentioned, Canon has poor performance at base ISO, their have also had bad noise in shadows. They have always performed around 11 stops of dynamic range, when others get over 12 to 14 stops. http://nikonrumors.com/wp-content/up...comparison.png And until Nikon went to Sony with their design, Sony couldn't make a sensor that could compete with the what Nikon had. |
Originally Posted by pttl
(Post 15226500)
:nod:
The D750 is looking very strong at this point. Fantastic low light, low iso camera with huge DR and apparently fantastic HIGH iso results as well. It has Nikon's best AF system but I'm a little apprehensive at the relatively slow 6.5 FPS and SMALL buffer. |
7D2 handheld with a Tamron 150-600 @ 600mm..
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5606/...67f3be2e_b.jpg 1st 7D2 Moon by lennycarl08, on Flickr |
|
wow there's a shocker... :smirk:
|
:snicker:
|
Originally Posted by jupitersolo
(Post 15226589)
The body size also limits the shutter to top 1/4000th, if you can live with those. It's the perfect camera.
|
I think the ONLY time I've ever shot at 1/8000 was just to hear the shutter or for the hell of it... but never once have I "needed" 1/8000 in ANY situation... but that's just me :dunno:
|
Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
Price: $2199 USD Release Date: November 11, 2014 Ship Date: Unknown Focal Length & Maximum Aperture: 100-400mm 1:4.5-5.6 Lens Construction: 21 elements in 16 groups Diagonal Angle of View: 24º-6’10’ Focus Adjustment: Inner focus system / USM Closest Focusing Distance: 3.2 ft. / 0.98m Filter Size: 77mm Max Diameter x Length, Weight: 3.7 in. x 7.6 in. / 94mm x 193mm; 3.46 lbs. / 1,570g Overview The Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM telephoto lens delivers a superb combination of cutting-edge performance, compact construction and brilliant resolving power that’s great for sports and wildlife photography. The telephoto lens features one fluorite and one super UD element to help provide impressive contrast and resolution with reduced chromatic aberration across the entire zoom range. Canon’s new Air Sphere Coating (ASC) helps significantly reduce backlit flaring and ghosting, while fluorine coatings on the front and rear lens surfaces help lessen smears and fingerprints.A 9-blade circular aperture renders beautiful, soft backgrounds, and a 3 mode (standard, panning and exposure only) Optical Image Stabilizer provides up to 4 steps* of image correction. The Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM telephoto lens is equipped with a new inner focusing AF system to help ensure fast and accurate focus down to 3.2 ft. with a .31x maximum magnification. Usability enhancements include a rotation-type zoom ring with adjustable zoom torque for more precise, customizable zoom performance, a redesigned tripod mount that can be attached and detached without removing the lens from the EOS camera, and an all-new lens hood with a side window that makes it simple to adjust specialty filters-like polarizers-without the need to remove the hood. Ruggedly constructed with advanced dust and water sealing for durability in a range of environments, the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM telephoto lens is a stellar performer with refined controls for a wide variety of situations. https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/acurazi...21b1087a18.jpg https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/acurazi...88a5a1059d.jpg https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/acurazi...7f07bf260e.jpg https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/acurazi...ba2a9bf554.jpg |
is it internal zoom?
|
i dont think it is.
the picture from the rumor thread shows the front end extended. |
:love:
|
:whistle:
Diving Into the Numbers: Is the Canon 7D Mark II as Bad as DxOMark Says it Is? In the end, his interpretation of DxO’s numbers sheds a much more favorable light on the speedy APS-C camera. He shows how vastly improved it is over the first generation 7D, how it falls only slightly behind the best-in-class Sony a6000 sensor, and how it is far superior (based on what matters to him) to the 5-year-old D300s and the MFT competition. |
didn't know Billy Bob Thornton was so into photography :rofl:
|
Let's not forget this
And beyond that, image quality, as Northrup points out, isn’t everything. The focusing system (which you’ve seen is spectacular), the handling, the lens options at your disposal, and more all add to the 7d Mark II’s appeal over other options that might beat it out slightly in the image quality game. Also Its quite clear that you're only looking at the overall score. If you actually looked at the full report it too shows how much better the 7D2 is over the D300S and how close it is to the a6000. :io: |
Originally Posted by Mizouse
(Post 15231187)
Let's not forget this
Also Its quite clear that you're only looking at the overall score. If you actually looked at the full report it too shows how much better the 7D2 is over the D300S and how close it is to the a6000. :io: |
I may be getting a t5i for Christmas to replace my t1. I know that's nothing too fancy to a lot of you peeps in here, but after messing around with my friends t5 and taking back to back shots with my t1, the image quality seemed to be leaps and bounds better. So I'm pretty excited about it.
|
I have a 60D if you're interested.
|
t5i is nice, played with one recently. I found the performance similar to 7D and 70D
|
cool. try greentoe.com its a reverse auction site that you can put your own price offer and see if retailers will counter it, accept it or ignore it in general.
|
yea pttl used it to get his D750
|
Originally Posted by mattg
(Post 15268109)
I may be getting a t5i for Christmas to replace my t1. I know that's nothing too fancy to a lot of you peeps in here, but after messing around with my friends t5 and taking back to back shots with my t1, the image quality seemed to be leaps and bounds better. So I'm pretty excited about it.
|
I keep seeing this pop up from time to time... Anything more concrete that any of you know about?:
Rumor: Canon to Release 46MP Pro DSLR Next Month |
nope.
|
I know I said I was going to buy a D750, but just couldn't make the switch. I have a lot of triggers & shutter releases as well as several Canon mount lenses I don't really want to part with.
Bought a 6d. I honestly don't think it's capabilities are anywhere near the beast that is the D750, but it's more than enough camera for me. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:14 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands