• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

mkIII for a bit of everything...? (1 Viewer)

BUT i am an expert Roy :) and i agree many soft images are indeed through to slow a shutter .
When i first got my 7d some of my shots were a little soft so i did a test, i shot at a higher ISO than i normaly use (800 ) and 1/4000 sec .
Results were many more sharp shots over 400iso and 1/2000 sec .
Of cause at times you can get away with far slower shutter speeds but in genral the faster the better.
Rob.
 
Some time ago I have been reading Keith defending his beloved 40D from any megapixel upgrade more than 12 megapixel, as croppability would be quite useless because the subject would be too small and difficult to focus on. :)
Funny how quickly opinions can change!

Nice bit of selective interpretation there...

The point is that I didn't see any compelling argument to move from the (10 mp) 40D to the (15 mp) 50D purely on the basis of the extra croppability available - it wasn't reason enough in itself to persuade me to move to the 50D. But I happily acknowledged that there could be situations where the extra pixels might help.

In the same way, I wouldn't suggest that anyone should buy a 7D only for the extra pixels either - as I said, it's nice to have, but that's all. And it's still true to say that if a bird is a dot in the frame, AF issues can get in the way of being able to make full use of the extra pixels.

But guess what? The 7D's AF is much better than the 40D's, and the Spot AF function allows you to be even more accurate with AF point placement, meaning that you can make use of the increased pixels, more of the time, because the AF can cope far better with dots in the frame.

This is what happens when you actually own and use cameras, y'see: you learn how they work and how to use them to their best advantage.
 
Interesting stuff Keith, I'm actually thinking of chopping in my 5D for a 7D at the moment (If I ignore the dark side calling that is ;))
Have you done much at low iso's (100/200) because i have heard the odd rumour that noise is an issue and they are iso settings I'd use a lot? I'll almost certainly use Lightroom 3 for conversion.
 
Interesting to hear this Keith as I'd been looking again at the 7D... when you say more care is required, in what way? I'd hate to spend the money on one only to find that I'm getting worse results than with my current gear.
Hi Peter,

I've found that to get the best out of the files we need to be a bit more fussy about the conversion and processing decisions we make.

The 7D's sensor has a little "quirk" which causes some folk IQ problems, in that it has (in common with sensors from a lot of other manufacturers - no idea about the whys and wherefores, but it's a common enough thing) a "green channel imbalance" - basically the output of the two green channels isn't perfectly matched. I understand that this isn't an accidental design decision or a fault per se, but I don't know what benefits - if any - it delivers. If the readout difference between the two green channels is beyond a certain limit, and depending on the demosaicing algorithm being used (DCRAW has had a demosaicing option specifically designed for this imbalance for years, and my old favourite Raw Therapee manages it very well too), it can cause a "maze" effect in the files which can look like noise - although usually at 200% view, with Levels through the roof and a heinous level of sharpening!

;)

It needs to be said that the issue is at its worst by far in files converted in say, ACR 5.5 and Lr 2.5 (I think), but as I suggest, some converters deal with the imbalance extremely well - I use Cap One 5 for my 7D files, and although if I really zoom in I can see something of the effect of this annoyance in featureless areas of the file, it is irrelevant in reality, and finished processed files look great at any ISO.

That said, I've been using selective sharpening of converted files since not long after I got the 40D, and that's a good idea for the 7D too.

I will say that Adobe are well aware of the green channel imbalance thing, and although they've efectively ignored it for years (much to the chagrin of Olympus, Minolta, Panasonic and some Sony users, all of whose cameras can exhibit the maze effect) the introduction of the 7D has prompted Adobe to explicitly address it, hence the new demosaicing algorithm in the Lr 3 betas: and I have to say (as someone who has long hated the conversions from Lr 2.x and ACR) that the latest beta is fantastic on 7D files - I'm this close to becoming a fully-fledged Lr fan.

And ACR will presumably get the same algorithm in its next release.

So that's what I mean, Peter - it's easy enough to get great results from the 7D, but for some folk it might mean taking a critical look at their current workflow.

I'm lucky in that my 40D workflow works really well for the 7D - I needed to make less adjustments this time round than I did going from the 30D to the 40D. Indeed, I'd probably still use Raw Therapee fo rthe 7D, but version 3 (the one that suppots the 7D) is very "alpha release" at the moment and is effectively unusable. Besides, Cap One's sharpening is better.
 
Hi Peter,

I've found that to get the best out of the files we need to be a bit more fussy about the conversion and processing decisions we make.

The 7D's sensor has a little "quirk" which causes some folk IQ problems, in that it has (in common with sensors from a lot of other manufacturers - no idea about the whys and wherefores, but it's a common enough thing) a "green channel imbalance" - basically the output of the two green channels isn't perfectly matched. I understand that this isn't an accidental design decision or a fault per se, but I don't know what benefits - if any - it delivers. If the readout difference between the two green channels is beyond a certain limit, and depending on the demosaicing algorithm being used (DCRAW has had a demosaicing option specifically designed for this imbalance for years, and my old favourite Raw Therapee manages it very well too), it can cause a "maze" effect in the files which can look like noise - although usually at 200% view, with Levels through the roof and a heinous level of sharpening!

;)

It needs to be said that the issue is at its worst by far in files converted in say, ACR 5.5 and Lr 2.5 (I think), but as I suggest, some converters deal with the imbalance extremely well - I use Cap One 5 for my 7D files, and although if I really zoom in I can see something of the effect of this annoyance in featureless areas of the file, it is irrelevant in reality, and finished processed files look great at any ISO.

That said, I've been using selective sharpening of converted files since not long after I got the 40D, and that's a good idea for the 7D too.

I will say that Adobe are well aware of the green channel imbalance thing, and although they've efectively ignored it for years (much to the chagrin of Olympus, Minolta, Panasonic and some Sony users, all of whose cameras can exhibit the maze effect) the introduction of the 7D has prompted Adobe to explicitly address it, hence the new demosaicing algorithm in the Lr 3 betas: and I have to say (as someone who has long hated the conversions from Lr 2.x and ACR) that the latest beta is fantastic on 7D files - I'm this close to becoming a fully-fledged Lr fan.

And ACR will presumably get the same algorithm in its next release.

So that's what I mean, Peter - it's easy enough to get great results from the 7D, but for some folk it might mean taking a critical look at their current workflow.

I'm lucky in that my 40D workflow works really well for the 7D - I needed to make less adjustments this time round than I did going from the 30D to the 40D. Indeed, I'd probably still use Raw Therapee fo rthe 7D, but version 3 (the one that suppots the 7D) is very "alpha release" at the moment and is effectively unusable. Besides, Cap One's sharpening is better.

Keith
Interesting this, I recently put some images through DPP, having always used LR, and I was amazed at the difference in image sharpness and it made me realise I had to do more work on them in LR. What is CapOne?

Cheers


Phil
 
Hmm thats a really interesting read keith, i had similar issues with my 7D files when i first got it, and have noticed as i got used to it and customised my attitude to taking the shots and the editing, i have become more and more happy with the results.

Phil, i assume Keith means http://www.phaseone.com/en/Software.aspx this, i havent tried it myself, but sounds like i may have to try a trial version :)

I think i may have to get rid of my Mk3 soon, i've now got a 7D a Mk3 and a Mk4 its far too many cameras lol
 
Thanks for the info Keith, half asleep today so will re-read it once my brain is working again!

I think i may have to get rid of my Mk3 soon, i've now got a 7D a Mk3 and a Mk4 its far too many cameras lol

Well I'm almost swaying towards the 7D but if you do sell the mkIII in the near future drop me a PM first, if the price is right I might be tempted...
 
Thanks for the info Keith, half asleep today so will re-read it once my brain is working again!



Well I'm almost swaying towards the 7D but if you do sell the mkIII in the near future drop me a PM first, if the price is right I might be tempted...

Where in Norfolk are you ? You are welcome to try them both, back to back, see what you think ? May be doing myself out of a sale if i do sell and you decide the 7 is best suited for you lol

Im due to head over to Norfolk a couple of times in the next couple of weeks, harriers, barn owls etc etc
 
Well I'm almost swaying towards the 7D but if you do sell the mkIII in the near future drop me a PM first, if the price is right I might be tempted...

I went down the 1D route and took her out last weekend to do a bit of familiarisation... Was shooting a couple of local Whoopers from the car (til some **** got out of the car and stood on the verge to photograph them - but that's by the by) and it chewed me up and spat me out the other end - as you've already used a 1D2 it shouldn't be a problem - but I now know it certainly can't be used as I would have used the 40D, dialling in the same settings as I'd have done with the 40D for the swans showed me just that (Centre Weighted Average metering / one shot AF) - the green of the field was a bit off and the swans were totally blown out - maybe I should just stick to aircraft and horses (which was what I bought it for!) :-O

ATB,
Dave.
 
have always found the 1 series metering far more accurate than my other cameras, may be why you were struggling with it first time out ! you soon get used to it :)
 
Where in Norfolk are you ? You are welcome to try them both, back to back, see what you think ? May be doing myself out of a sale if i do sell and you decide the 7 is best suited for you lol

Im due to head over to Norfolk a couple of times in the next couple of weeks, harriers, barn owls etc etc

I'm just outside Swaffham and may well take you up on the offer... drop me an PM when you're heading.
 
Hmm thats a really interesting read keith, i had similar issues with my 7D files when i first got it, and have noticed as i got used to it and customised my attitude to taking the shots and the editing, i have become more and more happy with the results.

Phil, i assume Keith means http://www.phaseone.com/en/Software.aspx this, i havent tried it myself, but sounds like i may have to try a trial version :)

I think i may have to get rid of my Mk3 soon, i've now got a 7D a Mk3 and a Mk4 its far too many cameras lol

Thanks Ian..
 
Postcard, for what its worth, I have a 1D Mark IIn and a Mark III. I now only ever use my Mark III, and the Mark IIn is just my back up camera. If you bought the Mark III, I doubt very much that you'll be disappointed.


The Mark IV however, sounds awesome.
 
Postcard, for what its worth, I have a 1D Mark IIn and a Mark III. I now only ever use my Mark III, and the Mark IIn is just my back up camera. If you bought the Mark III, I doubt very much that you'll be disappointed.


The Mark IV however, sounds awesome.

I've avoided looking at the mkIV or even reading reviews as I know I can't afford one. I know I wouldn't regret getting a mkIII and if one turns up at a good price I reckon I'd crack and buy it. I did look at a secondhand 7D recently but decided not to get it as I felt the desire for a mkIII would keep nagging away at me!
 
I've avoided looking at the mkIV or even reading reviews as I know I can't afford one. I know I wouldn't regret getting a mkIII and if one turns up at a good price I reckon I'd crack and buy it. I did look at a secondhand 7D recently but decided not to get it as I felt the desire for a mkIII would keep nagging away at me!

I share your camera desire and have had the same thoughts. :)
I think the mkIII would be realistic for me, but certainly not the mkIV.
 
I've avoided looking at the mkIV or even reading reviews as I know I can't afford one. I know I wouldn't regret getting a mkIII and if one turns up at a good price I reckon I'd crack and buy it. I did look at a secondhand 7D recently but decided not to get it as I felt the desire for a mkIII would keep nagging away at me!

dirty, rotten trick sending me that link to the D3 :-C
 
Warning! This thread is more than 14 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top