Canon 7D - problems

[alexacatalin]

<p>I've read some forums online and I know 7d can have some focusing problems. <br>

It also hit me at the latest wedding. I felt that something was wrong when shooting at the widest aperture (17 mm for 17-55 or 70 mm for 70-200), but now when I see the photos back home ... it's a little disaster. I missed all the photos that I took at 70 mm. Absolutly no focus. <br>

Another problem. I shot all the time with M raw, but still, I have all the photos at 18 MP, and not 10, as it should've been. <br>

Should I blame it on the camera? On the lens? I'll take it today to a Canon service. <br>

Thanks for all your opinions. </p>

 

[thesaltypeanut]

<p>Catalin, is the 17-55mm the canon or is it the 17-50 Tamron? I ask because I have had disasterous compatability results with the 7D and the Tamron lens. Any other Canon L and I don't have issues!</p>

[john_deerfield]

<blockquote>

<p>I felt that something was wrong when shooting at the widest aperture (17 mm for 17-55 or 70 mm for 70-200)</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>That isn't your widest aperture. You aperture is a designation such as f/2.8 or f/4. You are using your widest focal length on each lens. As to whether you are having an actual malfunction, we would need to see a shot or two. What focusing method and/or focus point were you using?</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p> I shot all the time with M raw, but still, I have all the photos at 18 MP, and not 10, as it should've been</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Pixel dimensions @ 18MP = 5188x3456; @ MRaw = 3888x2592.... what are yours? If indeed you shot MRaw and have 5188x3466 images, then it is a camera issue. But, no offense intended, most of these issues are user error.</p>

[green_photog]

<p>I seriously doubt you can have bad focusing problem with two of the best lenses in the Canon line up. Did you choose the focus point yourself or do you use the auto focus point the camera decides?</p>

[alexacatalin]

<p>@bobbi It is Canon 17-55mm. <br>

@john<br>

You are right. It is the widest focal length. <br>

I used the whole day only MRaw. The photos have like 16-18 mb, but the pixel dimension is 5188x3456 px. </p>

[alexacatalin]

<p>@ green <br>

I always choose the focus point.</p>

[green_photog]

<p>I guess the best thing to do is to bring it to a camera store and have them check it out. It could be either the lens' problem or the 7D's.</p>

[alexacatalin]

<p>I just did it. <br>

Now I noticed that the MRaw files are actually 5184x3456 and not 5188x3456. I wonder what happend with those 4 pixels. </p>

[john_deerfield]

<blockquote>

<p>The photos have like 16-18 mb, but the pixel dimension is 5188x3456 px</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>The megabytes aren't relevant and megabytes will vary depending on several factors. One example: a white wall will have a smaller file size than a high contrast landscape scene. In either case, 18 <em>megapixels </em>will yield roughly 5188x3456.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I wonder what [happened] with those 4 pixels</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>How did you get the images to the computer? Did you <em>import </em>them using a program or did you simply copy and paste? In any event, we would still need to see a couple of the images in question before deciding it is a camera defect. Or, if you have camera store staffed with knowledgable people (that isn't always the case) you can take it to them. If you are sure you had the camera set to MRaw and it is recording 5188x3456 pixels, then something is amiss.</p>

 

[alexacatalin]

<p>I know the size can be different from one photo to another, the resolution was the problem. It should've been 3888x2592 and it wasn't. <br>

I use a card reader to copy the photos, so yes, it was like a copy > paste. <br>

I took camera to a Canon service. I hope they can fix it. </p>

[john_deerfield]

<blockquote>

<p>>I use a card reader to copy the photos, so yes, it was like a copy > paste.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>If you did just copy & paste or drag & drop, then that will probably account for the "lost" pixels. I have always been an advocate of NOT just simply dragging and dropping the files. I would suggest using some sort of <em>import</em> utility to bring the files into the computer system. There is a difference. Now 4 pixels in the grand scheme of things is nothing- but it's the fact that there is a difference that makes me suggest it!</p>

[alexacatalin]

<p>Hmm ... never thought about it. I always used Total Commander to copy my files. What software are you using? </p>

[green_photog]

<blockquote>

<p>If you did just copy & paste or drag & drop, then that will probably account for the "lost" pixels. I have always been an advocate of NOT just simply dragging and dropping the files. I would suggest using some sort of <em>import</em> utility to bring the files into the computer system. </p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I always use the LR import function as well but could you please enlighten me as to why copy and paste wouldn't work just the same? Thanks.</p>

[john_deerfield]

<blockquote>

<p>could you please enlighten me as to why copy and paste wouldn't work just the same? Thanks</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Truth be told, I'm not a computer engineer I can only give you my real word experiences. Way back in the late 90's if you simply dragged & dropped a music file off of a CD there was the possibility that you would get corrupted data: either "pops" in the song or something not quite right. Essentially, the music was "out-of-sync" with itself. You had to use a program to <em>rip</em> the music off of the disc in order for it to properly move from one medium to the other. </p>

<p>I apply this same philosophy to my images. I often hear of "issues" when bringing images to the computer and my first question is always: how did you get them there? I had a student last fall (if memory serves) that every time he copied and pasted the images from the camera he had black bars across the top and bottom of the image (not shot in panoramic). He was copying and pasting the images. When I asked him to use the cameras import utility, the issue went away. In this case, it seems the computer is disregarding 4 pixels. Again, in the grand scheme of things it isn't that big of deal. But what is happening is that the computer doesn't <em>know</em> what type of file it is copying. To a computer it is all data. <em>However, </em>that data should be in a certain order so to speak and by using the right tools for the job, all of that data comes over in the right way. Now once the data has been transferred, it can be copied all day long as it is already in the right sequence so-to-speak. </p>

<p>Now some may happily go about their whole lives with never having an issue with copy & paste. But I have known many, who, by simply using something like Lightroom to import their images have had far fewer problems doing so. I would be interested to hear from the OP that if she uses an image import utility if she has the "right" number of pixels. As they say, the proof would be in the pudding.</p>

<p>For the record, I am on a Mac and I use Image Capture to download my files. Which might also beg the question: why have such a utility (it is free on the Mac) if copy and paste does the same thing?</p>

[ruslan]

<p>I always just copy images and never lose pixels, as for black/green/gray bars on the photo, I once had them when copying the ready files to ЕРУ corrupted/broken flash memory . It seems you should bring the camera to the Canon service. I use much cheaper camera (Olympus E-420 and 25/2.8 pancake) and if I have focus missing at least no more than 1-2 % of <em>ALL IMAGES</em>. </p>

[randallfarhy]

<p>Catalin- While early models of the 7D were reputed to have focusing problems, many many times it's not the camera at all, but rather how it is set up and used. The focus system on a 7D is extremely sensitive, and accurate when set up properly for your shooting style and conditions. Without seeing the example you're talking about, it's difficult to address specifically. (Soft images due to camera shake or too slow a shutter have also been incorrectly attributed to the 7D's focusing system). Some needed info to offer possible solutions:<br /> Which AF mode are you shooting in? I prefer single shot for portraiture and still subjects (this way AF won't hunt once it's attained) and AI Servo for everything else. I feel AI Focus doesn't work as advertised and a nuissaince to use.<br /> Have you mapped the focus to a back button and removed that action from the shutter? Doing so allows you to focus and recompose without the need to hold the shutter halway down. It also prevents AF shift or hunt when the shutter button is depressed to take the picture.</p>

<p>I also prefer single point focus for the majority of my work, this allows the user to place the cursor (focus point) where they want it, thus reducing the chance that the camera will select an area other than intended.</p>

<p>Have you set the AF tracking sensitivity? When it's set on high, it will quickly adjust for minute subject movements, the downside being it can actually be hunting when the picture is snapped resulting in less than critical focus.</p>

<p>Another consideration occurs when using flash- in dimly lit situations the flash assist may cause the camera to focus on a spot other than the intended focus point- something that is most noticeable when using a wide aperture as the focal plane becomes narrower the closer you are to a subject.</p>

<p>Also, as others have noted- it may not be the camera at all. The 7D is equipped with the ability to adjust for lenses that are slightly out of calibration. User testing will be required to verify if this is the case.</p>

<p>All this said, nothing is perfect.</p>

[KenPapai]

<p>Medium Raws in the 7D are indeed 10 MP (full raws are of course 18MP, I have never seen a truly logical, compelling reason to purposely shoot, paid session or not, in a lower res).</p>

<p>A 7D's Medium raw file sizes will average around 17 MB.</p>

<p>The 7D does not have any "focusing issues or problems." In fact it's one of the best focusing Canon EOS bodies there is, short of the 1D line.</p>

[green_photog]

<blockquote>

<p>(full raws are of course 18MP, I have never seen a truly logical, compelling reason to purposely shoot, paid session or not, in a lower res).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Agreed. Memory cards are dirt cheap nowadays. Shooting in lower res defeats the purpose of getting a premier camera like the 7D.</p>