museebfoto

<p>As <strong>Wouter</strong> said Saad, ACDSee preview the embedded jpg format, so if you like this jpg you can extract it from the RAW file by using program like <a href="http://michaeltapesdesign.com/instant-jpeg-from-raw.html">instant jpeg from raw</a> extractor. This program will give you a jpeg file exactly what ACDSee show in view action, but the file size not more than 2M because it is a JPEG ( lossy and compressed ). For a bigger size you should shoot RAW+JPEG from the camera.</p>

<p><strong>Hi David</strong><br>

It seems you are interested in birds and wild photography and 7D is a perfect camera for this purpose. For me I have made the exchange and got 5DII, however, imagine yet I haven't use it !.</p>

<p>I have owned this lens and used it on my old film Nikon 801s ( it is already for Nikon ). It is a good lens for this long focal length. I have did this double expose capture by this lens ( see the size of moon by it ).<br /> <a href="/photo/6822280">http://www.photo.net/photo/6822280</a><br /> As Bob said Vivitar series 1 which they were made around 70s are a very good, very sharp lenses, I also have owned 28-90mm f2.8-3.5, this is really great but very heavy.</p>

<p>As I think 7D works very good only with IS lenses, otherwise you may suffer from focusing.<br>

<a href="/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00bvOP">http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00bvOP</a></p>

 

<p dir="LTR">Go and buy Canon 5D, the camera that you will never leave. Yes it is an old old camera but its image quality up to ISO 800 better better than most newer ( it is almost same as 5D II but at lower resolution ).</p>

<p dir="LTR">I have made the exchange because I am very tuned about this matter.</p>

<p dir="LTR">Just to make a real comparison between them, I have captured two photos ( same lens, same ISO, same aperture, no tripod, about 3m distance, and I did my best to make each capture as close to other ), this is the result.</p>

<p dir="LTR">Again Thanks to all of you.</p><div></div>

<p><strong>David</strong>.. I would like to thank you for your following up the discussion and supporting.<br /> Most of my captures are in RAW format unless a have a limited space of memory. For the lenses I forgot to mention the stranded one 50mm/f1.8 I have and intending to add 24-105/f4 L but not soon.</p>

<p dir="LTR">Dear <strong>William</strong></p>

<p dir="LTR">Sorry about my English and thanks for your interest. In fact I am not much satisfied with my 7D that is why I wanted to explore some other opinions about it. In most cases I found 7D deliver a good captures in a high shutter speed or with IS lens, maybe due to its very high pixel density.</p>

<p dir="LTR">What I meant by "qualitative shift" that if 5DII can deliver a much better image quality than 7d since their production in a time close to some.</p>

<p dir="LTR">As to compare 7D vs 5D, I found that the image colors in RAW for 5D lack the colors from 7D, but after few steps of editing the image of 5D got something very natural and very beautiful. this means that they have a very close color depth. For a JPG the noise reduction already done by 5D dose not affecting at all the image quality, that is why the image still stand to do more sharpness. Another important point, 5D has a very nice logarithmic transition between different tones just like exposure transition in the toe and shoulder regions in film characteristics as well as the good balance between contrast and resolution. I hope I am clear now.</p>

<blockquote>

<p dir="LTR"><strong>Jim.. </strong>Truth is I don't find a great deal of difference, but there is enough to notice.</p>

</blockquote>

<p dir="LTR">This is exactly what I feel.</p>

<p dir="LTR"> </p>

<p dir="LTR">Now I checked the rating of my last three uploaded photo, form ( 20D, 7D, 5D ), the winner is from 7D!.</p>

<p><strong>Dan</strong>.. Thanks a lot.</p>

<p><strong>William</strong>... you are right I have 20D; a 7D and a 5D, and the option I have is to trade 7D for a 5DII and not 5D for a 5DII. I always prefer to use 5D and what I want to know if 5DII represent a qualitative shift compared to 5D. best regards</p>

<blockquote>

<p><strong>Robert</strong><br>

I went from a 7d to a 5dII and never looked back for a second.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think this will be my coming decision too. best regards</p>

 

<blockquote>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Thank you all for your attention and response.<br /> <strong>Jeff</strong>.. Most reviewer said that II has a more sharpness compare to 7D.<br /> <strong>David</strong>.. All the lens I have are for full frame: 17-40/ f4 L + 70-200/ f4 L + 28-105/ f3.5 .<br /> <strong>JDM</strong>.. I still have my old Canon 20D as APS-C .<br /> <strong>Phil</strong>.. Both of them are used, 7D almost new but 5DII in a very good condition sure it is not refurbished.<br /> <strong>David</strong>.. Mostly I like to shoot Flowers and Nature.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks Glenn.. but just now I wanted to rate and have the same problem.</p>

<p dir="LTR">Most time I receive the following message when I want to rate image.</p>

<p dir="LTR"><strong>Server Error</strong></p>

<p dir="LTR"><strong>The requested URL cannot be accessed due to a system error on this server. </strong></p>

<p dir="LTR">Is there a specific reason?.</p>

<p dir="LTR">I have an opportunity to exchange my Canon 7D plus some money with Canon 5D II. Aside of money, and for folks they have used both cameras, do you prefer this barter?. I already have 5D and I feel it is much better than 7D from image quality side. </p>

<p dir="LTR">The image is not in a position to reflect the truth, but it is part of visual art and must have impact. In art the impact is something relative, very in time, vary from status to another and from society to another. So if there is processing or not, the important is the final result and how much appreciated from majority of viewers.</p>

<p>I agree with what has been put forward by <strong>Sarah</strong>, she pointed an important issue rarely mentioned.</p>

<p>I think Sony RX1 is the best chose but be aware it cost $2800 !. Or Sony RX100 for about $600<br /> <a href="http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Database/Sony/Cyber-shot-DSC-RX1">http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Database/Sony/Cyber-shot-DSC-RX1</a><br /> <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx1/">http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx1/</a></p>

<p>The lens here is more critical than camera.</p>

<p>Creative chaos… A new regime of a new Middle East!.</p>

<p>I totally agree that most of B&W photos are more appealing from film than digital, as I think this belong to the very steep characteristic of sensors comparing to the films. In modern sensors the gap almost fade. On the other side and for a coloured photo, minority can get the colours ( the photos ) they want from film.</p>

<p>RAW is the name which define itself = Film which was captured (used) but doesn't yet processed .. WOW!.<br /> So you can process it later as you like and how much you like!.<br /> One another good benefits that it can give more capability for highlight recovery!.</p>

<p><strong>Hi Everyone<br /></strong><br /> <strong>Glenn Palm found a very kind compromise solution to my situation. </strong><br /> <strong>He gave me a 6 month free subscription, pending he find solution for the problem. </strong><br /> <strong>So I would like to express my sincere thanks and appreciation to all photo net moderators </strong><br /> <strong>for their attention. Thanks Glenn</strong></p>

<p><strong>Glenn Palm</strong><br /> I am from Iraq, Iraq doesn't listed in a country selection, so my MasterCard dose not work properly with Photo.net subscription.<br /> Thanks for attention.</p>

<blockquote>

<p dir="LTR"><em><strong>Photo.net</strong></em></p>

<p dir="LTR"><em>One winner will be chosen by <strong>member voting</strong>. </em><br /><em> One winner will be chosen by a <strong>guest judge</strong>. </em><br /> <br /><em> These two winners will each receive a one year subscription to photo.net and a $100 Amazon gift certificate.</em></p>

<p dir="LTR"><em><strong>Michael R. Freeman</strong></em></p>

<p dir="LTR"><em>But non-subscribers may get the impression that they are "lower class citizens" and therefore their artistic contributions are unworthy of exposure and recognition.</em></p>

<p dir="LTR"><em><strong>Cara St Hilaire</strong></em></p>

<p dir="LTR"><em>We're going to stick to trying this as a subscriber-only contest for now.</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p dir="LTR"> </p>

<p dir="LTR">I am a Non-subscriber!, I have no opportunity to be a subscriber, even if one year.</p>

<p dir="LTR">Thanks Cara St Hilaire</p>

<p><strong>Tim Chakravorty</strong><br>

The more important is how the colours are on monitor not on Camera LCD.</p>