7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400

http://www.imaging-resource.com has got a "Beta" of the 7D2 and posted
jpegs of their test targets in their camera "comperometer".
Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100 at ISO 6400...
The Canon's on the left: http://tinyurl.com/mhpwv5m
I'm a RAW kind of guy but it's a preview. "Half frame" fanatics should
be ecstatic!
--
teleportation kills
http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography

In article , android wrote:

http://www.imaging-resource.com has got a "Beta" of the 7D2 and
posted jpegs of their test targets in their camera "comperometer".
Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100 at ISO 6400... The
Canon's on the left: http://tinyurl.com/mhpwv5m I'm a RAW kind of
guy but it's a preview. "Half frame" fanatics should be ecstatic!

Yeah, like I said - the 7D is trounced by the D7100, and you wanted to
compare it to the D750, where it would be obliterated.

ISO6400 is Max ISO for the D7100 and the 7D goes one step further, yet at
6400 the 7D doesn't really look that much better. A pity, why can't Canon
handle image noise as good as Nikon?

--
Sandman[.net]

In article ,
Sandman wrote:

In article , android wrote:

http://www.imaging-resource.com has got a "Beta" of the 7D2 and
posted jpegs of their test targets in their camera "comperometer".
Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100 at ISO 6400... The
Canon's on the left: http://tinyurl.com/mhpwv5m I'm a RAW kind of
guy but it's a preview. "Half frame" fanatics should be ecstatic!

Yeah, like I said - the 7D is trounced by the D7100, and you wanted to
compare it to the D750, where it would be obliterated.

It's still 7D2 and as anybody can se: It's not obliterated by the D7100.
It's an interesting ISO since that's what many "action oriented" photogs
wanna be.

ISO6400 is Max ISO for the D7100 and the 7D goes one step further, yet at
6400 the 7D doesn't really look that much better. A pity, why can't Canon
handle image noise as good as Nikon?

The 7D2 does better than the D7100, IMNHO...
--
teleportation kills
http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography

In article ,
Sandman wrote:

In article , android wrote:

http://www.imaging-resource.com has got a "Beta" of the 7D2 and
posted jpegs of their test targets in their camera "comperometer".
Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100 at ISO 6400... The
Canon's on the left: http://tinyurl.com/mhpwv5m I'm a RAW kind of
guy but it's a preview. "Half frame" fanatics should be ecstatic!

Yeah, like I said - the 7D is trounced by the D7100, and you wanted to
compare it to the D750, where it would be obliterated.

It's still 7D2 and as anybody can se: It's not obliterated by the D7100.
It's an interesting ISO since that's where many "action oriented"
photogs
wanna be.

ISO6400 is Max ISO for the D7100 and the 7D goes one step further, yet at
6400 the 7D doesn't really look that much better. A pity, why can't Canon
handle image noise as good as Nikon?

The 7D2 does better than the D7100, IMNSHO...
--
teleportation kills
http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography

In article , android wrote:

android:
http://www.imaging-resource.com has got a "Beta" of the 7D2 and
posted jpegs of their test targets in their camera
"comperometer". Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100
at ISO 6400... The Canon's on the left:
http://tinyurl.com/mhpwv5m I'm a RAW kind of guy but it's a
preview. "Half frame" fanatics should be ecstatic!

Sandman:
Yeah, like I said - the 7D is trounced by the D7100, and you
wanted to compare it to the D750, where it would be obliterated.

It's still 7D2 and as anybody can se: It's not obliterated by the
D7100

Yeah, it is.

Sandman:
ISO6400 is Max ISO for the D7100 and the 7D goes one step further,
yet at 6400 the 7D doesn't really look that much better. A pity,
why can't Canon handle image noise as good as Nikon?

The 7D2 does better than the D7100, IMNSHO...

Why can't you read? The 7D is *slightly* better, which is a clear win for
the $600 cheaper, smaller, lighter D7100 that has better battery life,
higher resolution and better LCD screen. Like I said:

Sandman
Who's the winner?
09/17/2014

"Uh, the D7100 beats the 7D in most areas. The 7D has
slightly better ISO performance and shoots at 10fps compared
to 6fps for the D7100, other than that, it's utterly
trounced."

It has slightly better ISO, and now we see what that gives. Not much. Not
$600 worth of better ISO, and since the D7100 totally owns the 7D in every
other aspect, it's not even a fair comparison to the old D7100. In order
for the 7D to look god, we need to go even lower-end on the Nikon side.


--
Sandman[.net]

In article ,
Sandman wrote:

Why can't you read? The 7D is *slightly* better

The thread is still about the 7D2 and D7100. Not the 7D and whatever...
--
teleportation kills
http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography

In article , android wrote:

In article ,

Sandman:
Why can't you read? The 7D is *slightly* better

The thread is still about the 7D2 and D7100. Not the 7D and
whatever...

It's all you've got, troll. I've been talking about the Mark II the entire
time. I just think Canon's naming scheme is stupid. It's the new version of
the 7D. Focus on irrelevant things instead of staying focused on facts,
Android.


--
Sandman[.net]

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 09:28:00 +0200, android wrote:

http://www.imaging-resource.com has got a "Beta" of the 7D2 and posted
jpegs of their test targets in their camera "comperometer".
Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100 at ISO 6400...
The Canon's on the left: http://tinyurl.com/mhpwv5m
I'm a RAW kind of guy but it's a preview. "Half frame" fanatics should
be ecstatic!

All you're comparing is JPG engines, which have so many variables that
with a few tweaks you could shift "better" from one camera to the
other in minutes. Show me the raw files and then we'll know. This is
for the curious, but really says nothing.

On 23/09/2014 5:48 a.m., Bowser wrote:
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 09:28:00 +0200, android wrote:

http://www.imaging-resource.com has got a "Beta" of the 7D2 and posted
jpegs of their test targets in their camera "comperometer".
Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100 at ISO 6400...
The Canon's on the left: http://tinyurl.com/mhpwv5m
I'm a RAW kind of guy but it's a preview. "Half frame" fanatics should
be ecstatic!

All you're comparing is JPG engines, which have so many variables that
with a few tweaks you could shift "better" from one camera to the
other in minutes. Show me the raw files and then we'll know. This is
for the curious, but really says nothing.

Only if the raw files aren't "cooked". Fuji are the latest culprit,
with raw files from X-trans sensor models showing less shot noise than
would be possible if quantum efficiency was 100%, kicking in at settings
above ISO 1600. In fact, raw data analysis shows exactly the same
amount of shot noise from ISO 1600 to ISO 6400.

Bowser wrote:

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 09:28:00 +0200, android wrote:

http://www.imaging-resource.com has got a "Beta" of the 7D2 and posted
jpegs of their test targets in their camera "comperometer".
Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100 at ISO 6400...
The Canon's on the left: http://tinyurl.com/mhpwv5m
I'm a RAW kind of guy but it's a preview. "Half frame" fanatics should
be ecstatic!

All you're comparing is JPG engines, which have so many variables that
with a few tweaks you could shift "better" from one camera to the
other in minutes. Show me the raw files and then we'll know. This is
for the curious, but really says nothing.

There are raw files here if you are interested

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-7d-mark-ii/canon-7d-mark-iiA7.HTM

--
sid