First Production Mark IV images

[arash_hazeghi]

Hi Artie,

Not sure what's up with the link, it works from here but I am embedding the photo here:




Full frame 7D + 400 f/5.6 ISO 1600 1/800 sec f/7.1 (golden light!)
Without ISO 1600 I wouldn't have been able to take this photo.

[arash_hazeghi]

100% crop




Processed with Canon DPP chroma NR only. There is grain in the BG but it is very tight and easy to remove, all the details have been preserved. I can apply luminance NR to smoothen the BG but I usually prefer to keep the details.


If Canon finally OKs posting your samples, it would be nice to post a few crops using DPP so we can also see what is the strength of the low pass filter and the level of sharpness we can expect from the files.


Thanks and looking forward to your samples.

[Roger Clark]

A usable ISO 3200 gives us an extra 4 stops of light to play with.

Doug,
I know what you mean, but technically, when you change ISO you are not changing sensitivity. A digital camera has only one sensitivity. When you change ISO you are only changing post sensor electronic gain. So by upping ISO you make the light meter and camera system use a shorter exposure time, and that means less light captured by the sensor. So ISO 3200 versus 200, for example: the ISO 3200 image used 4 stops less light and that is why the images appear more noisy.

Roger

[Don Lacy]

Just because technology improves doesn't mean that those advances are destined to become a crutch for poor photographers

Doug, I agree with that 100% percent the ones that want to learn and want to get better will learn proper technique, how to shoot in manual mode, how to use spot metering to set tonalities and the other things it takes to make technically competent images and with that knowledge be better equipped to take advantage of the new technology as it becomes available to create their vision. Knowing how to shoot in manual helps me me take full advantage of aperture priority because I know what the camera is thinking but more importantly I know when aperture might not be my best option to achieve the image I am trying to create at the time.

As a hand held BIF photographer, where would I be without ISO 800 and image stabilization?

Using A tripod:) and cursing at it.

I'm sure that there were plenty of times that Artie, Andy, and Art wished they had more shutter speed or DOF when they were shooting at ISO 200. A usable ISO 3200 gives us an extra 4 stops of light to play with.

I am sure there was but they were also out in the field making images not sitting in front of a computer complaining that the newest Canon or Nikon D10,000 was noisy at 1,000,000 ISO:)

We are now on the cusp of ISO 1600-3200 becoming available to bird and wildlife photographers. Imagine what great images we'll be seeing with the help of new technology!

Doug I truly appreciate what the new cameras are capable of and what they mean to photography in general and my on image making. My first post was in regards to an earlier post were the poster stated that the 7D was lacking because the images were noisy at ISO 1600 and they need 1600 to get enough shutter speed to make sharp images which I believe is more an issue with techinque then the camera.
Respectfully

[Doug Brown]

Thanks for putting a smile on my face Don! :)

[Michael Wolf]

Hi Artie,

Not sure what's up with the link, it works from here but I am embedding the photo here:

Full frame 7D + 400 f/5.6 ISO 1600 1/800 sec f/7.1 (golden light!)
Without ISO 1600 I wouldn't have been able to take this photo.

This is not the same image in your original link but it is from the same session I am sure.
Your link is image # 6522 & this is image # 6518

This one looks just a tad noiser then the other....but still very usable just the same.

[arash_hazeghi]

This is not the same image in your original link but it is from the same session I am sure.
Your link is image # 6522 & this is image # 6518

This one looks just a tad noiser then the other....but still very usable just the same.

Sorry, I posted a different image by error, that one did have chroma NR (set to 4), this one did not. Any ways just to show what Canon DPP sw can do.

Best,

[Don Lacy]

Thanks for putting a smile on my face Don! :)

No problem :)

[Arthur Morris]

Quote:

I'm sure that there were plenty of times that Artie, Andy, and Art wished they had more shutter speed or DOF when they were shooting at ISO 200. A usable ISO 3200 gives us an extra 4 stops of light to play with.

I am sure there was but they were also out in the field making images not sitting in front of a computer complaining that the newest Canon or Nikon D10,000 was noisy at 1,000,000 ISO:) Respectfully

Hey Don, That one cracked me up but it also accurately reflects how I feel! I hope that everyone here is spending at least some time (when they are not posting to this thread0 checking out the great images made by Matthew Studebaker and Glenn Bartley with their lowly Rebel and 40D camera bodies....

[Arthur Morris]

Arash, Thanks for posting the two heron pix above. For weeks we have been reading threads about the lack of fine detail in 7D images and the poor high ISO performance with regards to noise. The two images look pretty darned good to me. Where are all the naysayers now?

[Don Lacy]

Hey Don, That one cracked me up but it also accurately reflects how I feel! I hope that everyone here is spending at least some time (when they are not posting to this thread0 checking out the great images made by Matthew Studebaker and Glenn Bartley with their lowly Rebel and 40D camera bodies....

Also they should be looking at your early work along with Art Wolfs and Franz Lantings work with film and I might also ad reading John Shaws and your books written before digital and applying those techniques to digital capture.

[Paolo Piazza]

and what about this?
this is the old mark III at f8, 1/1250, 800 ISO, 300 2.8 with 2X TC

[Ken Watkins]

I just looked at the tech info in Andy Rouses's Concepts Of Nature there is only one image created at ISO 800.

This is largely because they are relatively old images, before the high ISO wars started.
When Andy got his MkIII he told me he was happy to use 800 as his standard speed and at a push 1600. I have no idea what speeds he uses for his newer shots with Nikon.

[Desmond Chan]

Also they should be looking at your early work along with Art Wolfs and Franz Lantings work with film and I might also ad reading John Shaws and your books written before digital and applying those techniques to digital capture.

One of the older guys on another general photography forum also said any photograph could be made with the use of a tripod and so any photograph could be made with ISO 100 alone. Hmmm...I'd like to see him shoot action shots in a badly lit local gym where flash is not allowed.

Incidentally, there actually were actions photos made even long before John Shaws and the other wrote their books. But I doubt many of us would choose to use the same techniques these days :)

[Jay Gould]

Will offer you much cropping ability while not loosing on print size , I have printed few of my 12.5 MP D300 images in 30 x 20 size and they look good. My primary interest is in less than 15cm birds ( As far as bird photography ) With 600mm lens and 25MP body , I think I will have great chance of prodcuing images which can be printed in big size. I have not yet nailed 7D as I am not getting that body on rent here and neither I found a guy who can confidently say it works great at 1600 ISO

Harshad, do you generally crop 50++%?

15cm = 6" = smaaaaaall bird. Are you generally using a tripod with your 600, and if so I guess you would not be as concerned with higher SS as compared to those using 500s and 600s HH.

My goals in bird photography is of course to make pleasing images and in that regard I am determined to master HH a 500.

[Jay Gould]

My first post was in regards to an earlier post were the poster stated that the 7D was lacking because the images were noisy at ISO 1600 and they need 1600 to get enough shutter speed to make sharp images which I believe is more an issue with techinque then the camera.

Don, since I am that poster, let's have some fun! :D

Are you suggesting that with proper technique the 7D will have less noise at 1600 than it will have with less proper technique at 1600, or you suggesting that with better technique you could shoot the image attempted at 1600 at perhaps 800 or 400? We are talking about the RAW image before the application of NR programs.

I rarely shoot BIF and even when I do 800 is normally enough.

Don, when you do shoot BIF on those rare occassions, are you HH or on a tripod? How big/heavy is the glass?

What shutter speeds do you need, for years wildlife photographers shot film rated at 50 to 200 ISO. I just looked at the tech info in Andy Rouses's Concepts Of Nature there is only one image created at ISO 800, every image of Art Wolfs the Living Wild was made on slide film with the majority of shutter speeds under 1/250 and looking thru Arthur's last 6 BAA"S again only one image made at ISO 800. It seems to me that new photographers who are learning on digital are using the technology to compensate for poor technique in the field and are not reachathing the full potential the new technology is capable of. The best work from the Mark IV at 1600 to 3200 ISO's will be produce by the photographers who already know how to get amazing images at 100 to 400 ISO.

What shutter speeds do you need? A SS that will accomplish the task that you have chose to pursue!

In my case I have chosen to pursue as my primary photographic pursuit avian and as my secondary pursuit wildlife in general, and lastly landscapes. Within avian and wildlife, I have chosen to pursue moving subjects significantly more than static subjects.

While all photography is challenging, especially to someone like myself that has only been serious about photography for nine months, I am find the capture of moving subjects using HH techniques a sgnificant challenge. Especially with my physical limitations due to two hand surgeries.

My goal which I believe is achievable is to capture tack sharp images HH with a 500mm lense as is being accomplished by Doug and Jim. That is not achievable FOR ME at ISO 100-400; it is certainly achievable at 1600 and 3200.

There has been a lot of apples and oranges - fruity - discussions here; I think the main apples and oranges discussion is attempting to compare images created by the Masters on a tripod and images attempted and created by Masters (Doug and Jim) and lowly photographers shooting BIF HH.

Freedom is very important - that is what this thread IMHO is all about.

Yes, it is about noise and NR at high ISOs; yes, it is about drooling over the 1D4 possibilities as those in the USA start to look at images coming from the countries that were first to receive the new body; yes, it is about the technicals of shooting at lower and higher ISOs.

However, to repeat, at least for me, it is about FREEDOM.

Rather than leaving this hanging I will explain why I say freedom:

I am a naturist - freedom from textiles :eek: :D

I do not live in an apartment or a home; I have no fixed address - freedom from roots :D

I am seriously pursuing the art of HH capture - FREEDOM FROM A STATIONARY TRIPOD - yes, I use a tripod when appropriate and necessary, e.g., landscapes and macro at ISO minimal. With wildlife, as little as possible! :D:D

To quote one of the HH Masters participating in this very fun discussion

Think of the photographic worlds that were opened up when ISO 400-800 became usable. We are now on the cusp of ISO 1600-3200 becoming available to bird and wildlife photographers. Imagine what great images we'll be seeing with the help of new technology!

NB: This response has been provided in the interest of furthering discussion, having fun, and participating in educational debates. :p

[Harshad Barve]

Harshad, do you generally crop 50++%?

15cm = 6" = smaaaaaall bird. Are you generally using a tripod with your 600, and if so I guess you would not be as concerned with higher SS as compared to those using 500s and 600s HH.

Not all the time actually , less than 15 cm birds from NE India are most amazing one and most colorful. They are very skittish and may not allow you much time to compose, so 25MP sensor will allow me to crop more and still I can print them in big size. Eaglenest in Arunachal Pradesh is on for April & I hope to get such dream body before.
I WAS using triopd on 600mm ( As on now I dont have any gear as Nikon Kit found new home ) and I have developed techs to get sharp images at 1/25.
So what I expect from Canon is , give me 25MP body which will be very very clean at 1600ISO and 800/f5.6 lens. I have talked with lot of people about 800/F5.6 and I have yet to find a man who is not satisfied with that gun
I have no plans for HH , SO I am least worried about SS I get

ps , I dont mind if Nikon offers 25MP + 800mm :D:D

My goals in bird photography is of course to make pleasing images and in that regard I am determined to master HH a 500.

Mine too

[Harshad Barve]

ps , I dont mind if Nikon offers 25MP + 800mm :D:D

Offcourse at competative and reasonable price

[Don Lacy]

This is largely because they are relatively old images, before the high ISO wars started.
When Andy got his MkIII he told me he was happy to use 800 as his standard speed and at a push 1600. I have no idea what speeds he uses for his newer shots with Nikon.

I am sure he is but my point is still the same he was able to make stunning images at lower ISO's and that knowledge will enable him to fully take advantage of his Nikon.

One of the older guys on another general photography forum also said any photograph could be made with the use of a tripod and so any photograph could be made with ISO 100 alone. Hmmm...I'd like to see him shoot action shots in a badly lit local gym where flash is not allowed.

Incidentally, there actually were actions photos made even long before John Shaws and the other wrote their books. But I doubt many of us would choose to use the same techniques these days :)

Really you dont think that the techniques used to get a sharp image with a non IS 600 and 100 speed film would have no benefit using digital today???
Scroll down this BAA http://www.birdsasart.com/bn283.htm and you will see an image created By Arthur with the 800 at 1/3 of a second do you really think anyone with a 800 IS could have gotten a sharp image, I don' t it was a combination of great technique and modern technology. All I am saying is that the photographers that take the time to master technique will be better prepared to exploit the new technology. When I first starting shooting digital and could shoot at ISO 200 I thought I died and gone to Heaven when 400 became clean enough to be my standard ISO I thought I had achieved enlightenment and ascended to Nirvana so trust me I am not raging against the machine when it comes to new technology.:)

[Don Lacy]

Are you suggesting that with proper technique the 7D will have less noise at 1600 than it will have with less proper technique at 1600, or you suggesting that with better technique you could shoot the image attempted at 1600 at perhaps 800 or 400? We are talking about the RAW image before the application of NR programs.

Hi Jay, What I am saying is that with proper long lens technique you would not have to use 1600 ISO as your standard ISO and could use the lower ISO's and yes I am talking about the RAW image you will have a better file at the lower ISO's the better the raw file the better the finale image.

Don, when you do shoot BIF on those rare occassions, are you HH or on a tripod? How big/heavy is the glass?

I do both but I have had my best success on a tripod and gimbal head with my 500f/4 I really do suck at hand holding:D

Quote:
What shutter speeds do you need, for years wildlife photographers shot film rated at 50 to 200 ISO. I just looked at the tech info in Andy Rouses's Concepts Of Nature there is only one image created at ISO 800, every image of Art Wolfs the Living Wild was made on slide film with the majority of shutter speeds under 1/250 and looking thru Arthur's last 6 BAA"S again only one image made at ISO 800. It seems to me that new photographers who are learning on digital are using the technology to compensate for poor technique in the field and are not reaching the full potential the new technology is capable of. The best work from the Mark IV at 1600 to 3200 ISO's will be produce by the photographers who already know how to get amazing images at 100 to 400 ISO.
What shutter speeds do you need? A SS that will accomplish the task that you have chose to pursue!

In my case I have chosen to pursue as my primary photographic pursuit avian and as my secondary pursuit wildlife in general, and lastly landscapes. Within avian and wildlife, I have chosen to pursue moving subjects significantly more than static subjects.

Again what shutter speed do you need you can stop most action at 1/500 (If you are using a tripod and good technique:))

While all photography is challenging, especially to someone like myself that has only been serious about photography for nine months, I am find the capture of moving subjects using HH techniques a sgnificant challenge. Especially with my physical limitations due to two hand surgeries.

My goal which I believe is achievable is to capture tack sharp images HH with a 500mm lens as is being accomplished by Doug and Jim. That is not achievable FOR ME at ISO 100-400; it is certainly achievable at 1600 and 3200.

Why this fascination with hand holding in how many situation is it really the better method then a gimbal head and tripod and while it is possible to get sharp images HH you are still losing some resolution to camera shake it might not be a lot but if I paid to get 21 mega pixels I want all 21 of them:)
Jay if all you want to do is HH for wild life images that is your prerogative but it is not necessary to create great images and i still believe that learning first to produce sharp images on a tripod will help you achieve your goal.

[Desmond Chan]

Really you don't think that the techniques used to get a sharp image with a non IS 600 and 100 speed film would have no benefit using digital today???

You got it wrong, Don. I don't think you understand what I said. Anyhow, people who shoot with high ISOs also shoot with low ISOs. And many people do like to try new technologies, new techniques, and new opportunities and do not believe that the old ways are necessarily better. Also, people do like to talk about new technologies, you know, things. If some people found it annoying ( I don't know why they should be), well, too bad.

[arash_hazeghi]

First more serious AF test here
http://translate.google.com/translat...n&hl=&ie=UTF-8

Taken from Galbraith website (tests done by Danish photographer)

[Kiran Khanzode]

I don't have a PhD in any field.....

IMO, After seeing Arash's review/preview on the 7D AF and IQ negatives a few months back, I would say, it's safe to ignore this individual's feedback/comment on any Canon equipment.

I have used the 7D "in the field" and have been absolutely happy with the AF or IQ or ISO performance. I guess it just depends on one's *ability* to use a camera to it's fullest extent or to one's ability, in general. I've done BIF's, MIF (mammals in flight), low/high ISO, things are just fine.:eek::D

Merry Christmas,oops, Happy New Year !!

[Joerg Rockenberger]

IMO, After seeing Arash's review/preview on the 7D AF and IQ negatives a few months back, I would say, it's safe to ignore this individual's feedback/comment on any Canon equipment.

I have used the 7D "in the field" and have been absolutely happy with the AF or IQ or ISO performance. I guess it just depends on one's *ability* to use a camera to it's fullest extent or to one's ability, in general. I've done BIF's, MIF (mammals in flight), low/high ISO, things are just fine.:eek::D

On another more gear-oriented photoforum an at least locally famous and popular photographer used to post often spectacular images taken with a Canon Rebel (or similar) and the 400F5.6. In fact, she could be at times quite condescending to folks who with allegedly superior equipment could not produce images of similar quality.

Then she "upgraded" to the 50D.

And the images sucked. AF was off dramatically. Only after getting a second body she was able to show again images of similar quality than she had done previously with a Rebel body. Obviously, her technical skills remained the same during that episode.

The lesson?

- Don't project from your experience with a particular camera or lens that it should be the same for everyone else. Both re positive and negative experiences.
- There is equipment variability.
- reviews under "controlled" conditions have limited value. Rent the equipment you're interested in and form your own opinion in the field. Accept that the unit you buy may behave differently than the one you rented.
- buy only from reputable vendors with good return policies.
- Even talented photographers can be limited by their equipment.

And finally, humility and compassion are valuable virtues. Even online.

JR

[Kiran Khanzode]

@Joerg:
Not sure if you've read his 7D thread, spend some time,if you can. Read our exchange in that thread.

Clearly your friend didn't paint the town red with her "bad experience with a 50D with a weekend's worth of testing" ? And, hopefully, she didn't compare the 50D with a D700 ? Smart person, I would say.

I have stayed quiet for quite a while. But it has began again, in this 1dmk4 thread, could not keep my humility under check, sorry. I was called a Canon Ambassador in that thread...,just paying my dues here.

I usually spare no compassion for fanboys. Peace to you and thanks for the tips. Digital cameras, the internet and disposable income has turned all of us into photographers and teachers.

My advice: Take everything you read with a grain of salt, use the equipment wisely and give it enough time before jumping to ANY conclusions.

[Joerg Rockenberger]

@Joerg:
Not sure if you've read his 7D thread, spend some time,if you can. Read our exchange in that thread.

Been there. Done that. No additional insight gained.

Clearly your friend didn't paint the town red with her "bad experience with a 50D with a weekend's worth of testing" ?

My friend??? Clearly not so. I had assumed that everyone gathered so much from my carefully chosen wording. Please raise your hands if that wasn't clear. And yet, her experience is valuable... to all of us!

...could not keep my humility under check, sorry. I was called a Canon Ambassador in that thread...,just paying my dues here.

Your humility? Huh???

I usually spare no compassion for fanboys. Peace to you and thanks for the tips. Digital cameras, the internet and disposable income has turned all of us into photographers and teachers.

My advice: Take everything you read with a grain of salt, use the equipment wisely and give it enough time before jumping to ANY conclusions.

Thank you, don't need your advice, teacher! Or you lectures about your conclusions.

Thanks for making my point.

Now, where are the ISO 100 - 800 shots of white dogs running in snow taken with the MK IV??? :o

JR

[arash_hazeghi]

I don't have a PhD in any field.....

IMO, After seeing Arash's review/preview on the 7D AF and IQ negatives a few months back, I would say, it's safe to ignore this individual's feedback/comment on any Canon equipment.

!!

Kiran,

If you do not like somebody's comments you can be polite and express your opinions in a civil way as other members of this forum do in line with BPN guidelines and policies. It doesn't take a PhD to realize these things. You have made insulting comments about one of my photos in the past, I ask that you refrain from doing that in future-Thanks.

P.S. I never said anything negative about 7D IQ, in fact I have always praised its IQ. Why do you think I posted the samples in pane #101 and #102?

[Doug Brown]

Let's all please try to stay civil! After all, this is a thread about a camera that none of us has gotten to use in production trim. Thank you! :)

[Ken Watkins]

Let's all please try to stay civil! After all, this is a thread about a camera that none of us has gotten to use in production trim. Thank you! :)

Indeed this is becoming like Land Cruiser versus Land Rover except in that case there is only one correct answer.

[Ooievaar]

Indeed this is becoming like Land Cruiser versus Land Rover except in that case there is only one correct answer.

Indeed, Land Rover!:D

[Arthur Morris]

I don't have a PhD in any field.....

IMO, After seeing Arash's review/preview on the 7D AF and IQ negatives a few months back, I would say, it's safe to ignore this individual's feedback/comment on any Canon equipment.

I have used the 7D "in the field" and have been absolutely happy with the AF or IQ or ISO performance. I guess it just depends on one's *ability* to use a camera to it's fullest extent or to one's ability, in general. I've done BIF's, MIF (mammals in flight), low/high ISO, things are just fine.:eek::D

Merry Christmas,oops, Happy New Year !!

I have pretty much stayed away from this thread for previously stated reasons. But I do need to chime in here by saying that I do not think that Kiran's comments above were all that un-civil. Perhaps he could have stated his point a bit more nicely but....

Here is my understanding and please correct me if I am wrong:

1-A while back Arash posted something to the effect that AF, IQ, and high ISO performance was sub-par.
2-Here he posts a link to images showing very good to excellent IQ and high ISO performance.
3-I have, for the most part, found AF on the 7D to be quite excellent in most situations and others have been making great flight images with it.

If the above is correct, then I would agree that folks should not be placing much credence in Arash's evaluations.

Upon further reading I guess that Kiran's comment about "one's ability" was intended to be insulting and thus could be viewed as un-civil.

I see also that Arash is disputing that he ever posted anything negative about 7D IQ. (I can recall reading lots of bad stuff about 7D IQ and focusing in various places by various internet experts.

Kiran, can you please provide a link to those comments.

[C Tiller]

Hi!
Thank you for a nice and interesting discussion (as always with you guys!)

Being from scandinavia, I have had the pleasure of having the 1D markIV for 5 days now :))

I have written a small and preliminary test about the camera on my blog (http://fuglebilder.blogspot.com). It is unfortunately only in Norwegian, but if you use the google translate function (try this link: http://translate.google.no/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=no&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Ffuglebilder.blogspot.com&sl=no&tl=en )you might understand more (although names of birds and other will be translated somewhat wrongly)

I have posted several images that are 100% view of unedited jpgs converted from RAW files (only opened in PS4 rawconverter and no editing).

Hope you find it useful! (it is the only test I have found so far with images of birds)
best regards
Christian Tiller
www.fuglebilder.no

[Axel Hildebrandt]

Welcome to BPN, Christian! Thank you for the link, it's great to see bird images made with the 1D4. Please keep us posted if you upload more images. Thanks for sharing!

[C Tiller]

thank you!

I see now that the english on the blog isn`t very understandable through Googles eyes :) - please note that the images must be clicked on to show fully.

In sum my impressions with the camera is this:
- extremely nice image quality, almost "fullframe" (I have 400 ISO images that are beautifully noisefree and very sharp with perfect colors)
- very nice high ISO performance in general: fully useable up to 1600 with little or no noise and with a personal upper daily use limit for me up to 4-5000. 12800 has an impressingly good quality as well considering, but is probably useful only under special circumstances.
- the video 1080p is really awesome and can be used fully by Hollywood! We will in the coming years see a gradual increased interpolation of stills and film among most nature photographers if you ask me...
- the autofocus was unfortunately not something that impressed me as much, but I will not say anything negative about this yet, because I have tested it way too little to get a real impression of its performance

regards
Christian Tiller
www.fuglebilder.no

[Alan Stankevitz]

Comparing camera's noise levels have to be just that...a COMPARISON under the same conditions with both cameras side-by-side in a focal-length-limited situation. (Meaning you have to photograph from a set distance...you can't just walk up to the bird and take its picture.)

Demonstrating noise capabilities of a particular camera of a bird in a focal-length limited situation are based on many factors such as:

-- The crop factor of the camera's sensor. A full-frame camera will require heavier cropping than a 1.3x sensor and a 1.3x sensor will require a heavier crop than a 1.6x sensor.

-- Proper Exposure: Under exposing an image will require "pushing" of the ISO, increasing noise levels.

-- Post-processing software. As an example, post-processing a RAW image with Photoshop ACR produces higher noise levels than Canon's DPP with certain Canon cameras.

-- Third-party noise reduction software will vary the results.

Just trying to add sanity back to this thread...continue on...

Alan

[Jay Gould]

Hi!
Thank you for a nice and interesting discussion (as always with you guys!)

Being from scandinavia, I have had the pleasure of having the 1D markIV for 5 days now :))

I have written a small and preliminary test about the camera on my blog (http://fuglebilder.blogspot.com). It is unfortunately only in Norwegian, but if you use the google translate function (try this link: http://translate.google.no/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=no&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Ffuglebilder.blogspot.com&sl=no&tl=en )you might understand more (although names of birds and other will be translated somewhat wrongly)

I have posted several images that are 100% view of unedited jpgs converted from RAW files (only opened in PS4 rawconverter and no editing).

Hope you find it useful! (it is the only test I have found so far with images of birds)
best regards
Christian Tiller
www.fuglebilder.no

Hi Christian, I can see from the few images at ISO 2000 why you say you have had the pleasure of using the 1D4, and why you indicate that an upper limit of 4-5000. I think 1600-3200 is going to becoming the standard in most situations.

Looking forward to you joining this great membership as a brother and posting more wonderful images.

[Axel Hildebrandt]

Thanks for the summary, Christian! It is much appreciated. The low light you had to deal with is a good indicator of the high ISO performance.

thank you!

I see now that the english on the blog isn`t very understandable through Googles eyes :) - please note that the images must be clicked on to show fully.

In sum my impressions with the camera is this:
- extremely nice image quality, almost "fullframe" (I have 400 ISO images that are beautifully noisefree and very sharp with perfect colors)
- very nice high ISO performance in general: fully useable up to 1600 with little or no noise and with a personal upper daily use limit for me up to 4-5000. 12800 has an impressingly good quality as well considering, but is probably useful only under special circumstances.
- the video 1080p is really awesome and can be used fully by Hollywood! We will in the coming years see a gradual increased interpolation of stills and film among most nature photographers if you ask me...
- the autofocus was unfortunately not something that impressed me as much, but I will not say anything negative about this yet, because I have tested it way too little to get a real impression of its performance

regards
Christian Tiller
www.fuglebilder.no

[arash_hazeghi]

I have pretty much stayed away from this thread for previously stated reasons. But I do need to chime in here by saying that I do not think that Kiran's comments above were all that un-civil. Perhaps he could have stated his point a bit more nicely but....

Here is my understanding and please correct me if I am wrong:

1-A while back Arash posted something to the effect that AF, IQ, and high ISO performance was sub-par.
2-Here he posts a link to images showing very good to excellent IQ and high ISO performance.
3-I have, for the most part, found AF on the 7D to be quite excellent in most situations and others have been making great flight images with it.

If the above is correct, then I would agree that folks should not be placing much credence in Arash's evaluations.

Upon further reading I guess that Kiran's comment about "one's ability" was intended to be insulting and thus could be viewed as un-civil.

I see also that Arash is disputing that he ever posted anything negative about 7D IQ. (I can recall reading lots of bad stuff about 7D IQ and focusing in various places by various internet experts.

Kiran, can you please provide a link to those comments.

Hi Artie,

1) If you read all the threads again I never stated anything negative about 7D IQ. Here is the original article I put together about 7D, please read it and show me where I say IQ is bad so I can gladly correct it.

http://www.stanford.edu/~ahazeghi/Photos/EOS7DAF/

I said in the conclusion that it delivers very good photos up to ISO 800 and here I showed that even at 1600 you can get good results with careful processing. Please show me one example where I said IQ was bad.


2) Regarding AF again I never said that the AF was flat bad and unusable, there are plenty of in-focus flight shots in the article as well. I said that it in my opinion and some conditions the professional camera such as the 1DSMKIII and Nikon D3/D700 delivered a higher percentage of in focus shots when tracking raptors against foliage. Again please have a look at what I actually said in the conclusion.


Since then I have taken 15,000 photos with 7D and my opinion of its AF is pretty much unchanged, overall it is very good but in some conditions I still get OOF images every now and then that are not operator error. I try to overcome these conditions by 1) overriding AF with MF whenever I feel the camera might have trouble picking up the subject. 2) trying to cover the bird with all the AF points so they don't see the BG.

BTW, I remember when the 50D came out you said that 50D AF was much faster than MKIII, do you still believe that is a correct statement? Since 7D is much better than 50D and 50D was better than MKIII then 7D is much better than MKIII and there is no need for anyone here to buy or be interested in a MKIV :)


Best

[Axel Hildebrandt]

Just a friendly reminder that this is a thread about the 1D Mark IV. ;)

[arash_hazeghi]

Just a friendly reminder that this is a thread about the 1D Mark IV. ;)

Thanks Axel for reminding me, but before being convicted of the crime of spreading misinformation I wanted to get the facts straight. I apologize for the diversion.

[Don Lacy]

You got it wrong, Don. I don't think you understand what I said. Anyhow, people who shoot with high ISOs also shoot with low ISOs. And many people do like to try new technologies, new techniques, and new opportunities and do not believe that the old ways are necessarily better. Also, people do like to talk about new technologies, you know, things. If some people found it annoying ( I don't know why they should be), well, too bad.

I in no way said the old ways are better I would never return to film and my standard ISO is 400 if I decide to get a Mark IV and can get clean files at ISO 800 or 1600 then I will use them, all I am saying is that a strong understanding of the fundamentals of photography will only enable you to exploit the technologies to their fullest. I do not disagree with you on the benefits of digital trust me again I would never go back to film I love shooting at ISO 400 and higher I produce better images today then I ever would have with film:)
people are free to ignore my advice if they want:)

[Jan Wegener]

http://manginphotography.net/2009/12...-with-mark-iv/

The guy actually liked the AF and said he could rely on :)
You can also download a RAW @ Iso 200 at the end.

In Germany they delievered the first Mark IVs today. However, even the big dealers only got 1-2 bodies.... :( So it may take a while...

[Doug Brown]

Thanks for the link. ISO 200 looks really good.

[Pao Dolina]

This may be of some interest to those concerned with the AF

http://manginphotography.net/2009/12...-with-mark-iv/

[Ed Cordes]

This may be of some interest to those concerned with the AF

http://manginphotography.net/2009/12...-with-mark-iv/

I just read this and WOW!!! These images are outstanding. Now maybe the Canon - Nikon banter can end and we can all concentrate on making images with the tool we feel suits our needs best! ;)

[Pao Dolina]

I just read this and WOW!!! These images are outstanding. Now maybe the Canon - Nikon banter can end and we can all concentrate on making images with the tool we feel suits our needs best! ;)

Just wait until the ISO noise comparison begins. 1D4's 3.1MP/cm^2 vs D3S' 1.4MP/cm^2 pixel densities.

[Jan Wegener]

I am just unpacking my new toy :)

I happened to run into a store who had one, so it was a no brainer :)

Hope I can do some BIF for all of us tomorrow :)

[Axel Hildebrandt]

I am just unpacking my new toy :)

I happened to run into a store who had one, so it was a no brainer :)

Hope I can do some BIF for all of us tomorrow :)

Lucky you! Enjoy your new toy and yes, please post some images. :)

Ein schönes neues Jahr!

[Doug Brown]

Enjoy the new purchase. Looking forward to your images and impressions!

[Jan Wegener]

Ein schönes neues Jahr!

Danke, das wünsche ich dir auch :)

And everybody else, too ;) (<-- Happy New Year) :D