My reasons to hate my 7D

[jo7hs2]

<p>I'm becoming increasingly convinced that a large portion of the softness complaints we are hearing about the 7D (and to a lesser extend, other 18+ MP cameras) are related to what Rob has alluded to in his post. I'll admit, I got bitten by this myself when I first viewed images from my 5DmkII in comparison to my 40D. Luckily, I had read a similar discussion to the link Rob posted, and even more to my fortune, I remembered I read it before I freaked out.<br /> <br /> I'll also note that I'm not really seeing objectionable softness in the images from my 7D. I've only had it for 48 hours, so I'm probably a poor example, but I feel it is better than my 40D. I've attached a example I took quickly this morning. It was taken handheld and was one of the very rare instances where I've used autofocus for a macro.<br>

(Attachment deleted - accidentally posted full resolution version)</p>

[ann_overland]

<p>Keith, one question to you, is there <em>any</em> other camera out there that has gotten as many user complaints as the 7D?</p>

[jo7hs2]

<p>Sorry, I meant to post that in-line.</p><div></div>

[Wouter Willemse]

<blockquote>

<p>is there <em>any</em> other camera out there that has gotten as many user complaints as the 7D?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yep. Nikon D7000 sure comes to mind. D300 too. Complaints on back and front focus all over the place - based on hand-held photos. Complaints that the AF is completely off, with everything on auto-mode, the photographer taking zero control over what it should be doing. The problem: relatively cheap (well, accessible) camera with complicated AF system and high resolution sensor. Wrong expectations. A great recipe for threads like these.<br>

Apparently Ann resents this idea, but these cameras are (professional) tools that do require some study and time before you get the best out of them. People upgrading frequently seem to think a more expensive body is going to give them better results just like that. The reverse is usually true, as the relatively inexperienced users start to fiddle with the million settings, and when they made a mess of things, blame the camera "because it does things wrong". One has to get familiar with these complex tools, simple as that. The other WW was spot on in his analysis.</p>

<p>And yes, looking at 18MP photos at 100% is simply not the same as 8MP photos at 100%. If one starts to draw conclusions on sharpness and noise on such comparisons, then you sure lost view on the bigger picture.</p>

[lester_wareham]

Kamra, I up graded from a 20D to a 7D when the 7D came out.

 

Initally I thought I had problems. This is my advice, others may vary.

 

1) don't review pictures for sharpness at 100% and expect the same level of sharpness as your 30D. Try using 50%, then

you are comparing similer magnifications.

 

2) don't let the camera choose which AF point to use ( this goes for any camera IMHO), always use single point AF or fine

point AF unless doing action shots where area AF or single point with expansion might be a good choice.

 

3) check to see if you need to micro adjust for your lenses. On my 20D all my lenses but one happened to be ok, this was

reversed on the 7D. This is just build up of random tollerances between lenses and camera bodies. Canon have given

you the tools to resolve this. I will say I found microadjust much harder to do acuratly than I expected on some lenses, my

experience is here http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/Camera%20Tests/Microadjust/index.htm.

 

4) noise. Jpg I never use so can't comment on. Raw, great though DPP is I always sharpen outside it using mask layers

in photoshop, thus you only sharpen where detail is. I can routinely use ISO 800 without much loss of quality. My "goods

in" tests at the time suggested a 2-3 stop advantage in noise

http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/Camera%20Tests/7D%20vs%2020D/ISO%20Performance/EOS%207D%20

vs%2020D%20ISO%20Performance.htm, in use I would say 1-2 stops is conservative. If you sharpen and expose

correctly noise should be an improvement for you.

 

Have you tried using someone else's 7D, lemons do happen in all products but you should revew all these points first.

[hjoseph7]

<p>"<em>Yep.. Here comes another 7D hater... I own this camera for 3 weeks and and my last word is I'm disappointed and I hate it... I just can't rely on it anymore..."</em></p>

<p>I hate to get into these "Troll" types of discussions, but since I tend to rant myslef I figured I give you the benefit of the doubt. I too upgraded from a 30D and was not very impressed with my 7D initially, but not because of the problems you mentioned.</p>

<p>My 7D focused faster and better than my 30D. The images on the LCD playback were much sharper than on my 30D sometimes too sharp, so it took me some time to get used to them.</p>

<p>Another thing the color was more accurate on the playback compared to my 30D where the colors would shift sometimes depending on the angle of the camera. I really like the improved menu, the weather sealing, the self cleaning sensor and Live-View.</p>

<p>The camera came with so many customizable features that I still have not finished reading the manual and I had the camera for over a year.</p>

<p>I did run into some problems with Error 30's and error 40's but I think that those can be atributed to the fact that I dropped the camera on hard cement from about 3 feet up. There wasn't a single scratch on the camera, but something obviously went wrong as I would find out later.</p>

<p>The 7D is a finicky camera. Allot of people have complained about the focus. I certainly did not have that problem. My pictures look fine, but I still wish Canon would have made the shutter a little quieter. It is definately quiter than the "clickyty-clack" of the 30D, but not as smooth and silky as the Nikons or as fast ! </p>

<p>Tell you the truth I can't complain and think the $1400 price was a bargain since I paid $1200 for the 30D.<br>

Sometimes there is so much you can do with image quality. It is like getting an expensive stereo, your ears get accustomed to the sound and you wonder if there is something better only to be dissapointed when there is not.<br>

</p>

[don_baccus]

<p>"And yes, looking at 18MP photos at 100% is simply not the same as 8MP photos at 100%."<br>

<br>

How can people not understand this? At the same magnification the 7D image is about 1.5x1.5 the size of the 30D image. People who are pixel peeping and complaining that the 7D image is less sharp at 100% are doing the equivalent of printing the 30D image at 20 cm x 30 cm and the 7D image at 30 cm x 45 cm, sticking a loupe on both prints, and complaining that the larger print looks less sharp when studied under a friggin' microscope.<br>

<br>

Insane.<br>

<br>

</p>

 

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Insane indeed- totally agree. Both Canon, Nikon and Sony keep promising more of everything with 24 to 36 MP on a FF camera, and up to 24 for APS-C... and so people look at 100% to see the benefit of all these new shiny pixels.... The manufacterer's marketing department is as much to blame here as the pixel peepers, I think.<br>

A print is no longer the standard to judge a photo on - HD LCD panels are.</p>

[ann_overland]

<p>Wouter, never in a million years....have there been so many complaints about the D7000 and the D300 as on the 7D.</p>

<p>I came from a background of shooting Nikon Coolpix for many years. I knew nothing whatsoever about DSLR's (or SLR's for that matter) when I bought the D300. Bang sharp from day one, no matter the program mode. And once I had mastered the dof thing, the dept of field was where it should be within the frame.</p>

<p>It would have been impossible to come back from a holiday and find most of my photos from the D300 more or less useless.</p>

<p>And now I am going to hate something, too. I hate the damn add that prevents me from using the photo.net forum. I hate it! Now we are two people hating something, Kamran. God to get that off my chest.</p>

[William Michael]

<p>Aside:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>. . . his former Canon camera died on him.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes. Thank you.<br />On the first (and subsequent second and also the third reading of the OP) I did NOT see this sentence: <em>“I probably wouldn't buy this camera if my 30D didn't die (after 2 times mirror and 2 times shutter repairs)...”.</em></p>

<p>In this regard I was in error.</p>

<p>Accordingly I retract <strong><em>the definitiveness and the vigour</em></strong> with which I described the unpreparedness of Kamran.</p>

<p>In this regard I also retract <strong><em>the comment directed to you</em></strong> <em>‘to read and understand the words and what they mean’</em>, as that has little meaning now.</p>

<p>I also note that I missed a small, but key sentence in the OP which would have changed my first comments on this thread (Ironic, no?).<br /><br /><strong><em>Upon my realization that the 30D died (assuming just before the trip) I can understand the mistake being less of unpreparedness and more of natural human panic and assumption.</em></strong></p>

<p>20 -20 Hindsight is wonderful: so is experience.<br />It is now my point of view that there was error buying a 7D and assuming to be full bottle on driving it, in such a short time and under such physical and mental duress on the trip – but yes: I agree 100% if having noticed the point that the 30D died so close to travel time – I would have made a vastly different first reply.<br />Incidentally the vigour of my first reply was balanced to the (high) quality of work presented by the OP – one always expects more and fewer mistakes, from those who work at an high level. </p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>What was the man supposed to do? Postspone his holiday by 6 months because he had bought a newer version of a Canon DSLR?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It occurs to me that is passion speaking. I believe I have answered that.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Do you really have to go into a 6 months training camp when you buy a Canon 7D? If that is what it takes to upgrade in the Canon line, I'd say something is wrong somewhere.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That I believe is also passion speaking – and also taking out of context my example of cutting over a full studio and workflow, which took me about six months.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Since you think this man is so [foolish] that you had to 'scream' to him in this forum, what would you have done in his place, . . .?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Firstly: I wrote that I disagreed that Karem 'was prepared' and the subsequent comments made were whinging were childlike – I did NOT assume not state that the Man was foolish – there is a very big difference. <br />To answer the second question – I truly believe that I would have bought and used used a 30D or a 40D: and NOT bought a new 7D so close to the trip.<br />I conclude this because it was my intent to use my 5DMkII recently on a trip – and it was purchased for that reason: but I chose not to and I took my 5D as my primary camera instead.<br />Also because I have previously bought a second hand 350D, quite quickly when in need of a camera to use for specific tasks – because I ‘knew’ that camera.<br>

Explaining my answer to your questions - I expect that there would be two issues at play there (for me):<br />firstly total divorce from any passion or attachment to the camera I acquire and the reasons for acquiring it – that is to say I view the cameras (all except one I own) as a tool ONLY and have no attachment to them as a ‘must use’ or ‘must have the latest’ etc.;<br />secondly experience – predicated upon making mistakes - never using a new tool for an important gig; breaking in the new tools over a period of time; always having two cameras and . . . etc.</p>

<p>***</p>

<p>Back to the main theme of the thread - I re-iterate:<br>

<em>"The <strong>raw </strong>files made during Kamran's vacation <strong>l</strong><strong>ikely will be more than adequate to make a final, with which he is happy.</strong></em><br /><br /><em>(Based upon an assumption of more than basic technical camera and metering skills and the possibility a few brackets were shot), I'd suggest the effort be redirected to learning and applying the appropriate nuances of PP to the 7D <strong>raw</strong> files on the holiday: rather than berating and defending the berating of the 7D, per se."</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

WW</p>

<p>Footnote - I am not so sure that 'h-ting' anything (or anybody) is a good position in which to be.</p>

[ann_overland]

<p>At least there was some repent there from you, WW. Good to hear that.</p>

<p>Since I never had this problem, even from day one with the D300, and even more so since my camera before the D300 was a Coolpix 800, I have a hard time believing that it should be so hard to use a 7D.</p>

<p>Maybe I've just been lucky, I don't know. But I do feel sorry for the users that has to go through all this. I am sure Canon would want to prevent this from happening in the future. It is not exactly good marketing for them, no matter the cause.</p>

<p>I am sure I would have hated it even more than Kamran, if this was happening to me :-)</p>

[ann_overland]

<blockquote>

<p>I am not so sure that 'h-ting' anything (or anybody) is a good position in which to be.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Depends on what you hate. Often change will be the result. Hopefully a change for the better.</p>

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p>"I have a hard time believing that it should be so hard to use a 7D."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It is not hard to use - it is <strong><em>necessary to learn</em></strong> how to get the excellent results from it - which includes addressing DIFFERENT post Processing methods to those which were used on the 30D.<br />Let's be clear about those points.</p>

<p>BTW - not 'repentance' merely direct and immediate acceptance of the error which I made: I am not “sorry about it” (aka repentance), but rather infuriated at myself for my oversight. I apologize if I 'upset' Kamran, but he hasn't mentioned that I did and that was NOT my intent anyway. He hasn't mentioned much of late I expcet he is back at work.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<blockquote>

<p>'Often change will be the result. Hopefully a change for the better.'</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Disagree with you - the cost of h-ting is <strong><em>always</em></strong> too much.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<blockquote>

<p>Wouter, never in a million years....have there been so many complaints about the D7000 and the D300 as on the 7D.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I wouldn't be too sure of that. Check here on p.net. Check the DPReview forums, check Thom Hogan's site, and other large sites. Especially the D7000 had a fair share of "the AF is broken" posts in the beginning. It doesn't really matter which one has more anyway. The point is that seriously most of these comments are operator error. And that's OK, these are complex cameras. There is no reason to get defensive about it. Just admit, read the manual once more and back to experimenting.</p>

<p>I've used a D300 for years (which for the sake of staying on-topic is as close as it gets to a 7D). It took me at least a year to get full understanding of its AF and what it could do - including disappointments at shooting sports and flying birds, with unreliable and slow AF tracking results from a camera that should be really good at it. It sent me back to the manual, and to trying more - I could easily have blamed the camera, but given my inexperience, that was just not going to fly. And Ann, hopefully no offense, but it looks like most of your photography is quite static - which frankly means you're making it easy on the AF to deliver a sharp photo, so your experience sounds very feasible. Now try a dog running at you in series, all shots sharp - a whole different game. You'll find with the default AF settings, the D300 will not pull it off.</p>

[don_baccus]

<p>"Since I never had this problem, even from day one with the D300, and even more so since my camera before the D300 was a Coolpix 800, I have a hard time believing that it should be so hard to use a 7D."</p>

<p>It's not.</p>

<p>"Maybe I've just been lucky, I don't know. But I do feel sorry for the users that has to go through all this. I am sure Canon would want to prevent this from happening in the future. It is not exactly good marketing for them, no matter the cause."<br>

<br />Oh, God, no, please. Please, Canon, don't dumb down your prosumer cameras just because some people refuse to RTFM, insist on pixel-peeping, can't properly post-process their RAW files, can't figure out auto-focus, etc etc.</p>

<p>Feel free to dumb down the Rebel line to your heart's content.</p>

 

<p>And Ann Overland's shown her true colors here ... after playing concern troll early in the thread, it turns out she's really just a Nikon fangrrrl trolling us with her 7D sux line based, of course, on NO personal experience.</p>

 

[kamush1664878711]

<p>Thank you very much for opinions... I appreciate them all.. Couldn't open the page for unknown reasons...<br>

<a href="../photodb/user?user_id=2372607">Dick Arnold</a>. Thank you very much for advise... I'll try to stay at the right side and over 1/200 for lesser noise. But also worried about wide open aperture in interior shooting at lower iso levels... which in return may also lead to noisier photos...<br>

Dear David I really appreciate your reply but when you say</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If it worried me, then I'd Mask the sky and apply luminescence only there</p>

</blockquote>

<p>that means extra processing and slowly getting away from natural appearance... But in terms of+1 I'll try to stay at the right side of histogram...<br>

So many positive experiences can't be a lie of course... So i'll try to understand how to use 7D... And the theory of hand shake reflected on a larger sensor may lead to a blurred unfocused appearance worth of considering... I'll check that too...</p>

[Andy Collins]

<p><em>"is there any other camera out there that has gotten as many user complaints as the 7D?"</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

<em><br /></em>How about the AF issues on the 1DMkIII at its release just before the Beijing Olympics? That was <em>huge!</em> Does anyone remember the endless complaints about the banding issues with the 20D? Then on top of that, there were issues with the 20D's vertical grip, so many that if you had bought an early one you had to take it back and exchange it for a later 'improved' example. It seemed like the banding issue lasted for a good part of the 18-month product run of the 20D. It was (and still is...) a very good camera though. I'd bet that if we were to hear of all of the 7D users who have no issues with their cameras, the number would be astounding, as I do believe the 7D has sold in huge numbers. I say that because I think that those who have issues with their camera are the ones we hear from, and rightfully so. What better way to get help than to make your issue known and ask for solutions from those who have experience. The vast, silent majority though are quite satisfied and shooting away but it seems that because they are silent and the complaints are what we often hear about, the assumption is made that the 7D is a problematic camera or, as another member implied in another thread, that the camera is flawed.</p>

[kamush1664878711]

 

 

<p>Lester Wareham</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Have you tried using someone else's 7D, lemons do happen in all products but you should revew all these points first.</p>

</blockquote>

 

That's probably the first thing I'll do this week...

 

Don Baccus

<blockquote>

sticking a loupe on both prints, and complaining that the larger print looks less sharp when studied under a friggin' microscope.

</blockquote>

Dear Don but noise is visible in small sizes too... it just doesn't look clean... and getting rid of that noise takes extra time... which in turn makes me right at least in one thing I mentioned before: it needs more processing than my 30D...

 

Hence, I wouldn't expect 7D şmage quality to be superior to 5Ds'... That's also obvious in review sites like dp review... there you can compare the raw image quality notes and 7D raw quality mentioned to be about 15-20% lower than 5Ds'... So there's no use to force 7D to be like 5D... Am I thinking wrong?

 

<blockquote>

I am not so sure that 'h-ting' anything (or anybody) is a good position in which to be.

</blockquote>

No one would be happy of hating something and no one hates something just randomly and willingly... There's always a reason... and whatever that thing is (good or bad), it is interpreted by the mind as a bad thing which provokes feeling of annoyance and 'hate'... And there's a thin line btw love and hate... :) I hoped to love 7D but it didn't like me and my love turned into hate... yet because of ''passion''...

 

 

[don_baccus]

<p>" I hoped to love 7D but it didn't like me and my love turned into hate"<br>

<br>

I'll trade you my last 50D I've got up for sale straight across for your 7D.<br>

<br>

Interested?<br>

</p>

[William Michael]

<p>. . . by all means keep the 'passion' - stop blaming the 7D for not liking you and use your passion to learn the 7D and also the nuances of the Post Production necessary.<br>

WW</p>

[don_baccus]

<p>BTW I owned the 20D (which has essentially the same sensor as the 30D), still work with many of the RAW files I shot with it, and you're just nuts if you think the IQ is higher than the 7D.</p>

<p>"Dear Don but noise is visible in small sizes too... it just doesn't look clean... and getting rid of that noise takes extra time... which in turn makes me right at least in one thing I mentioned before: it needs more processing than my 30D"<br>

<br>

I don't agree with this at all. Given a print the same size, your 30D pixels will be printed at > twice the size of the pixels of the 7D, and noise will be more visible. In film terms, you're arguing that film with large grain will result in prints with less grain than film with fine grain.<br>

<br>

And I post-process my 7D RAW files pretty much the same as I've done with the 20D. The main difference is that I'll shoot birds in dark conditions such as the current winter Oregon weather at ISO 800 or 1600 and have extremely good results, which wasn't true with the 20D.<br>

<br>

If you're not interested in trading your 7D for my last 50D, maybe someone will trade you a nikon dslr for it ...<br>

<br>

</p>

[ann_overland]

<p>WW, I have birds flying, dogs running towards me and past me, and also some sports pictures. I like to shoot action pictures. They are just not in my portfolio. I'm not so much into bird photography anymore, now that I have three dogs. I like to bring the dogs with me. It is my slow telephoto lenses, not the AF skills that prevents me from getting many of the photos I would like. The big mama Sigma is slow. The Nikon 70-300 is faster to focus with. But there are faster lenses out there.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Disagree with you - the cost of h-ting is <strong><em>always</em></strong> too much.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Disagree with <em>you</em>. Very few things are <strong>always</strong> this or that, certainly not when it comes to emotions and how strong they are. The ' I hate the add thing' was more to sympathize with Kamran and a joke. So not always too much. I understand what you mean, though. But negative emotions are not all bad, they are often the cause of change. And change can be good.</p>

<p>If you are too happy about something or angry about something in these forums, many men will come running to put you down, blaming those being happy or upset so they can treat them as bad as they want. Something is always wrong with the OP. And they will blame those who try to stop them doing so, in this case me. <em>You have bad manners.</em> The OP doesn't, and neither do I. The OP did what he did, it was his choice at the time, he is not stupid. AND he is a good photographer.</p>

<p>There are basically two subjects where the participants will not bring you down in these forums. And those are if you share photos of older cameras or lenses, or if somebody share a link to a funny video or article. Otherwise, race is over before it has begun. Not every time, but most of the time. Too bad, in my opinion.</p>

[William Michael]

<p>Ann, thanks for the unsolicited appraisal of my manners, I chose to disagree with it.<br>

Notwithstanding that fact, the remainder of your last post makes little sense to me.<br>

I am happy for you that have photographed flying birds and etc and it is good that the Nikon 70 to 300 focuses fast for you too but I don’t know why that is important or relevant to me . . . moreover how it is relevant to this thread<br>

That aside - on the question of the OP's capacity as a Photographer - if (this time) you duly note what was previously written - I agree he is made good photos with (I assume) the30D.<br>

AND - as you want to continue this on (and on): I reiterate, nowhere did I assume nor state he was ‘stupid’: so it would be professional of you to desist playing these silly games by attributing new words which were never written and the make-up meanings, just to suit you and your continuous side topics.</p>

<p>WW</p>

 

[ann_overland]

<p>I am done with you, William. </p>

[don_baccus]

<p>"WW, I have birds flying, dogs running towards me and past me, and also some sports pictures"<br>

<br>

Let's see your über skills, then, which prove the superiority of your gear.<br>

<br>

Fan grrl.<br>

<br>

Maybe you and Kamran should just get a room, so those of us who shoot with the 7D can ignore both of you.<br>

<br>

While I no longer shoot for money (I have in the past), I may do so again moving forward, and the 7D will not hold me back.<br>

<br>

Meanwhile, my offer to trade my last 50D for Kamran's horrible, hateful, suxor'd 7d still stands.<br>

<br>

Kamran?<br>

</p>