The 7D has landed!!! (3 Viewers)

[Roy C]

Here is a better example of slow tracking sensitivity at work from yesterdays shoot.
The focus point is clearly over the shore/water line some 10 metres behind the bird but the bird is still sharply in focus because the slow tracking has not yet acquired focus. With the 40D it would have latched right on to BG.

EDIT: just seen Ian's post, one look at his great shots with the 7D and 400/5.6 in his BF gallery shows that the lens is well up to it.

 

[MalR]

Thanks Tim, Ian and Roy for your replies. Very informative ... and persuasive, unfortunately!! Now, where's that credit card?:-O

Malcolm

 

[tdodd]

Despite ever diminishing light I thought I'd have a go again today, this time using a tripod. I think the tripod helped my keeper rate quite a bit. Here are a few examples, uncropped and with no edits, simply converted to JPEG and resized in Lightroom. I accept that they could do with some tweaks but I wanted to show what the camera can produce when combined with Lightroom and no fancy trickery.

The first three are at 800 ISO, the last two are at 1600. You can see how little DOF there is from the seeds on the feed table in the fourth image. No margin for focus error at all.

 

[GYRob]

I have to agree with what Tim, Ian and Roy have put togather in the above,i do have a mk3 but the 7d is the camera i use most for birding now as its on par with the mk3 on most things but with a 1.6 crop .
Rob.

 

[Ray.Scott]

Having followed this thread with interest, I have recently took the plunge for the 7D, upgrade from 40D.
I've only managed to try it once, and am quite pleased with the results and most of all the improved focusing system, which is the main reason I bought It. It'll obviousely take a while to get used to some of the new features.
Anyway, my question is, has anyone done any comparisons between raw and Mraw or Sraw as far as IQ is concerned, bearing in mind that I don't intend printing above A4.
I will no doubt try this when I manage to get out again but, in the mean time it would be nice to hear any comments.

I mention this, as I recently read on this thread about excessive noise in certain conditions and pixel bleed etc, and just wondered if, by reducing to Mraw, wether it would imrove noise etc in these conditions.

Sorry if this has already been brought up, but the thread is to long to start searching through again.

 

[GYRob]

although iv not done any tests regarding mraw/sraw in my view as birds or other wild life only give you one chance i want to get the largest file i can so always shoot full raw as that gets the most info.
Just my thoughts on it.
Rob.

 

[edenwatcher]

Here are a few from over Christmas (shot through glass). The weather has limited my opportunities rather, but I feel I'm getting there.
Back to processing in DPP.

Rob

 

[Roy C]

Here are a few from over Christmas (shot through glass). The weather has limited my opportunities rather, but I feel I'm getting there.
Back to processing in DPP.

Rob

They look pretty good to me Rob, especially seeing they were at ISO 800 and through a window - keep up the good work.

 

[GYRob]

Heres a high iso 7d 500f4is+1.4tc shot - 1/1000sec f5.6 iso 3200 it has been through PS and neat image ,i think this is rather good for 3200.
Rob.

 

[Marcus Conway - ebirder]

Heres a high iso 7d 500f4is+1.4tc shot - 1/1000sec f5.6 iso 3200 it has been through PS and neat image ,i think this is rather good for 3200.
Rob.

Very nice. Is it cropped at all? Makes it a real tempter.

 

[GYRob]

Very nice. Is it cropped at all? Makes it a real tempter.

not quite full frame Just a little taken away , by not cropping much you dont bring the noise up so much.
Rob.

 

[hampers]

Heres a high iso 7d 500f4is+1.4tc shot - 1/1000sec f5.6 iso 3200 it has been through PS and neat image ,i think this is rather good for 3200.
Rob.

Nice photo of a great species. I think amazing for 3200iso.

Phil

 

[edenwatcher]

They look pretty good to me Rob, especially seeing they were at ISO 800 and through a window - keep up the good work.

Cheers Roy.
I spent yesterday lunchtime photographing fieldfares and redwings feeding on cotoneaster in St Andrews. Good light, close birds - when I reviewed the pics last night I was blown away by the detail. I'll post something when I get the time to process ...

Rob

 

[GYRob]

Well today i tried iso 6400 ,the shot has been through cs3 and neat image .
almost full frame . 7d 500f4isL +1.4tc 1/2500sec f11 .
its not quite got the detail i saw through the lens but to me its not bad at all .
Rob.

 

[Roy C]

Well today i tried iso 6400 ,the shot has been through cs3 and neat image .
almost full frame . 7d 500f4isL +1.4tc 1/2500sec f11 .
its not quite got the detail i saw through the lens but to me its not bad at all .
Rob.

That certainly looks pretty pretty good to me for ISO 6400.

 

[simon]

I'd be well happy with that at 6400, nice shot

 

[Tectortony]

Rob, the 3200 picture blows me away, the 6400 is good. The trouble i've got is saving enough money-- nearly there now -- with pictures like this I can't wait. A good prime lens helps but with a 1.4tc those pictures are stunning.
Tony

 

[GYRob]

This might be helpfull how i PPd the 6400 iso image
Rob.
Shot taken at
1/2500 f11 iso 6500 slightly over expossed so well to the right. not much cropped off
What i did in CS3 First a bit of levels.
Then went round the bird with the magnectic lasso tool .
sharpend the bird
Then removed Half the noise with neat image
Then select inverse so now working on just the background.
Neat image again but full noise reduction.
save for web
Then reopened in CS3, Mangnectic lasso again and re sharpened just the bird.
save for web again.
Finshed.

 

[hampers]

Another good example of high iso. Thanks for posting.

Phil

 

[tdodd]

Thanks for sharing, Rob. Very nice examples you've posted. I really must get to grips ith Photoshop.