BMFin 0 #26 September 6, 2009 Quote The test you are referreing to is using the unit of LW/PH (Line widths per picture height) You are right. I was confused there. LPPM isnt the same as LW/PH Quote In order to utilize the 18 MP of the EOS 7D, the optics would need a resolution of 3456 LW/PH, equal to the vertical number of pixels on the sensor. This im not so sure about just yet. I agree that this is how it seems at first glance, but is it really ? I admit that Im not so familiar with the subject, so I could be wrong. The thing that makes me wonder is that when we look at the photozone test 17-55 f/2.8 @ 8Mpix (350D sensor) the maximum MTF value is measured 2126,5 LW/PH even though the theoretical maximum would be 2304 on that sensor. At first glance it would seem the lens doesnt quite utilize the whole sensor. Right ? However when the test was done with a 15 Mpix (50D sensor) the maximum MTF value at the same aperture as on the previous test was 2536. Now I would be very curious to see what the MTF values would be when the lens was tested on a sensor with even higher resolution. Lets say 20Mpix. Im almost sure the MTF value on that sensor would be even higher than 2536. Dont you agree ? What I mean is that even if you wont measure the theoretical maximum MTF value with the lens on 15Mpix sensor, that doesnt mean it wouldnt perform better on a sensor with larger resolution. Therefore it looks like that going beyond 15 Mpix is beneficial in terms of true picture resolution. Do you agree ? Sure the gain becomes smaller and smaller all the time so it is very likely that the gain is not very large beyond 15 Mpix.. Who knows ? The author of the Photozone Lens Test FAQ is guessing the limit could be somewhere around 20Mpix with the sharp lenses. " Assuming optimal conditions I would guess that a few, very few lenses may have the potential to go up to 20mp on APS-C but only with their center portion. " Intresting subject. Anyway it seems IMO that building a 18 Mpix APS-C sensor isnt just a Canon marketing strategy, but it actually is of use to those with sharp optics. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the_sarge 0 #27 September 6, 2009 Quote... the maximum MTF value is measured 2126,5 LW/PH even though the theoretical maximum would be 2304 on that sensor... I would guess that is due to the measurement method which is used... I don't think one would be able to measure the theoretical maximum. You also have to take into consideration that all SLRs have AA filters in front of the sensor, which will slightly blur the image. But when the measured resolution gets really close to the theoretical max, it is pretty safe to assume that the optical resolution of the lens does exceed the sensor resolution. (Like the 17-55 f/f2.8 @ 8MP test) The theoretical max @ 15 MP would be 3168 LW/PH. Since none of the 15MP tests on photozone.de achieve more than 2600 LW/PH, i really don't think that Canon even produces lenses that exceed the resolution of a 15 MP APS-C sensor. Of course i would also like to see some resolution tests @ 18MP... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surt 0 #28 September 14, 2009 and another problem of so many pixels will be light difraction with apertures of 11 and upper, the diffraction cone will be bigger than the pixel size, so it does not care how good the lense is, it is fisically impossible to get more resolution... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 5 #29 September 17, 2009 Quoteand another problem of so many pixels will be light difraction with apertures of 11 and upper, the diffraction cone will be bigger than the pixel size, so it does not care how good the lense is, it is fisically impossible to get more resolution... Almost. It depends on the size of the sensor. As relates to this cam, you're correct, of course. The 7D is the cam body I've been waiting for for gen purpose everything. Real video, not animotion 30p, and 24p, so it's an amateur and even a low-end pro videographer's dream in addition to the still side. Beautiful images, does great in highspeed environments, built like a brick sh**house. Very nice cam overall. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #30 September 17, 2009 Did you have a chance to play with one yet, Douglas? If so, could you post your opinion as well?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 5 #31 September 17, 2009 I was permitted about an hour with it last month, and was not allowed to leave the building so I shot in very limited circumstances. I did have my own lenses however, and was pleased with what I saw both in the RAW and JPG images. The video is finally mostly ready for prime-time. It's 29.97 vs 30p fixed. If you're already a "Canon-ite" you'll be very familiar with the controls. Scary fast focus. I connected the 580 flash and was surprised at the options and speed. The "Spray n' Pray" photographer will love how fast it is. Dropping the sharpening resulted in a very film/silver-like image vs digital image, so I love that aspect. It's very smooth in how it manages grades. It was noisy at ISO3200 (as expected), but it saw details my eyes couldn't make out. I primarily focused on the video aspects of the camera, as that's the market we're doing a training DVD for. I'll have a 7D in a week or so for that shoot. Scotty Burns had a fair amount of time with the camera at the trade show yesterday, hopefully he'll chime in with his opinion. He was mostly interested in it as a still cam vs video. Canon is making a big deal out of the ergonomics of the camera, but the truth is (from my perspective), that it feels little different from the 5D or even 50D. For 1700.00 (body only) it's a beautiful piece for a mid-level camera. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnskydiver688 0 #32 September 18, 2009 I don't know, I am holding out for enough money to get a Leica S2. Or the M9 with the 50mm f/.95 lens. Ha dream on.Sky Canyon Wingsuiters Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #33 September 18, 2009 Thanks, Douglas...appreciate the info. No more than I get an opportunity to shoot anymore, it'd definitely be overkill and under-utilized...but DAMN does it look sweet.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #34 September 18, 2009 Its a rare time that you are using a camera and your thought is "Damn, this camera is too powerful for my uses" I see this one being popular once prices fall to the levels that the 50D is at now. Its also going to require an investment in L glass to get the most bang for the photos. Then again at 2K for the body what is another couple of hundred for the 17-55? Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #35 September 18, 2009 Quote Its a rare time that you are using a camera and your thought is "Damn, this camera is too powerful for my uses" True, true.... Quote I see this one being popular once prices fall to the levels that the 50D is at now. Its also going to require an investment in L glass to get the most bang for the photos. Then again at 2K for the body what is another couple of hundred for the 17-55? Well, I've got the 24-105 f/4L, the 70-200 f/2.8L (non-IS) and the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L, so I'm pretty much set, there... although some primes are calliing my name... Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMFin 0 #36 October 14, 2009 Some amazing videos shot with the 7d: http://www.vimeo.com/6938509 http://www.vimeo.com/6860546 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 5 #37 October 15, 2009 Very nice, but you can clearly see where he shot 30p vs 60p. Audio is very good, which is one of the other places the camera kicks a$$ over the 5DmkII. Looks like he's using a Microdolly or similar through some of it. Thanks for pointing it out! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnskydiver688 0 #38 October 15, 2009 If only that kind of footage was possible out of the box. I have a few questions though. I wonder if some color correction was used in post because it seems very saturated in some shots and blown out in others? Also, I wonder what glass was being used?Sky Canyon Wingsuiters Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMFin 0 #39 October 15, 2009 No real post processing. He says he bumped up the contrast and saturation a little in the camera. So the picture should be as it comes from the camera. Lenses were Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.0 Canon 50mm f/1.4 Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 He says he uses Glidetrack dolly for some shots. On the other hand a lot was shot hand held. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
six8fbird 0 #40 December 16, 2009 Has any one had the chance to shoot video with it in a skydive? If so does any one have a link to the footage? Thanks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shogo 0 #41 December 16, 2009 Very unlikely. Just swaying it wobbles the image pretty bad. (On the ground.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
melushell 0 #42 April 21, 2010 just got a 7D super impressed until now, still need to learn how to properly use it did some test shooting but as i after uploading the framerate went a bit off footage looks loads better wit no editing (especially the ''sharpness'') video: [URL]http://vimeo.com/11102908[/URL] and some test stills: [URL]http://picasaweb.google.es/100436615281826632443[/URL] Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 5 #43 April 21, 2010 For those coming to this thread late, Canon have more or less fixed their jelloing problem except in some odd circumstances. We're working a segment right now that is entirely shot with a 7d, RazorPrime, and it's looking quite good thus far. More on that later. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
melushell 0 #44 April 21, 2010 googled razorprime no results DSE can you please give us a bit more info on that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ozzy13 0 #45 April 21, 2010 In the video, It looks like any fast movement gets blurry. Am I seeing that right?Never give the gates up and always trust your rears! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shogo 0 #46 April 21, 2010 Wow. Thanks for posting the video! I have had 7D since last year and I never gave it a try videoing in freefall. After seeing that, I will try it. Just curious, why 720/50fps? Do you have IS on your 18-55? If so, did you turn it on? Canon does not recommend turning IS on while videoing because it records the IS motor noise, but I thought that in our case the wind noise would cover that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shogo 0 #47 April 21, 2010 May be blurring (jump suits), but I did not see the jelloing problem like in the Nikon D90 and the canon 5Dmkii, even when he picked up the camera and panned it to chase the airplane. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMFin 0 #48 April 22, 2010 A few talented Finnish skydivers have filmed some nice music videos with the 5dm2 such as this: http://www.vimeo.com/9707347 I remember after the 5Dm2 came out and I thought it was pretty cool and exiting, people were laughing at me in here for thinking so... I dont hear anyone laughing no more. Canon DSLR video has proven to be exellent piece of equipment no doubt. Even some of the bigger budget film makers use it nowadays. (Fox series house, 24 etc...) Im eager to see what people will come up with this in the air.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 5 #49 April 22, 2010 QuoteI remember after the 5Dm2 came out and I thought it was pretty cool and exiting, people were laughing at me in here for thinking so... In fairness....the camera didn't perform well at all in its initial release, and it took Canon over a year to respond to the jelloing issue. DSLR filmmaking is big, no doubt. There are still several issues, but the workarounds now are plentiful, vs what they were a year ago. And of course, you still can't shoot stills and video, nor are video frame grabs a high enough quality to be sellable. Shoto, the uniQoptics lens known as the Razor is a cinematic lens converted for DSLR. http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=1134620&l=48c7c24e4a&id=1032868837 for a photo of it on my camera. They should be shipping quite soon. to add; I didn't leave a space between Razor and Prime....sorry if that messed up your google search! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
melushell 0 #50 April 22, 2010 Quote Just curious, why 720/50fps? Do you have IS on your 18-55? If so, did you turn it on? the lens is and very old kit lens 18-55 that came with my 350D, no IS (image stabilisation) the blurring of the framerates has a lot to do with my poor editing skills and understanding of framerates i choose 720/50i just to see how slowmotion looks at 25 frames really is the first test i did with the cam, and i have loads to learn stay tuned, more is about to come just need some proper lens Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
