Comments on: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Sample Images & Movies http://www.cameraegg.org/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-sample-images-movies/ Canon Rumors, Nikon Rumors, Sony Rumors, and more Camera Rumors ! Tue, 12 Dec 2017 14:47:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: Michael Leonard http://www.cameraegg.org/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-sample-images-movies/#comment-20199 Thu, 18 Sep 2014 01:10:00 +0000 http://www.cameraegg.org/?p=16404#comment-20199 You have a good point. My bad. :-(

]]>
By: Michael Leonard http://www.cameraegg.org/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-sample-images-movies/#comment-20198 Thu, 18 Sep 2014 01:09:00 +0000 http://www.cameraegg.org/?p=16404#comment-20198 Fair enough. I see your point. :-)

]]>
By: Şшεετılüα http://www.cameraegg.org/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-sample-images-movies/#comment-20136 Wed, 17 Sep 2014 07:59:00 +0000 http://www.cameraegg.org/?p=16404#comment-20136 yes u right

]]>
By: Perica http://www.cameraegg.org/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-sample-images-movies/#comment-20106 Wed, 17 Sep 2014 03:55:00 +0000 http://www.cameraegg.org/?p=16404#comment-20106 These files look like they have been either shot as JPG or used some sort of agressive noise reduction. Image with ISO 6400 JPG looks great from color noise standpoint. But luma noise is insanse. On my 5Dmk2 i dont have that much noise at ISO12800, but my color noise even at ISO6400 looks far worse then this.

]]>
By: HW Kim http://www.cameraegg.org/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-sample-images-movies/#comment-20103 Wed, 17 Sep 2014 03:17:00 +0000 http://www.cameraegg.org/?p=16404#comment-20103 There would be millions of different jpgs from single RAW file. so quality of RAW is important. because it is digital negative as u said.

]]>
By: Alex http://www.cameraegg.org/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-sample-images-movies/#comment-20026 Tue, 16 Sep 2014 09:37:00 +0000 http://www.cameraegg.org/?p=16404#comment-20026 the first photo at 6400 ISO is simply horrible

]]>
By: ElectricSheep http://www.cameraegg.org/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-sample-images-movies/#comment-20025 Tue, 16 Sep 2014 09:10:00 +0000 http://www.cameraegg.org/?p=16404#comment-20025 Hmm, a bit disappointing to be honest. Noise is still an issue and looks approximately par to a 1D Mk3 but the higher resolution makes the noise more prevalent here. But as Gigi states, it’s hard to judge until we can get hold of sample RAW files vs these compressed JPEGs. Thanks for the samples though, it’s a good indication.

]]>
By: Dimitris Lachanis http://www.cameraegg.org/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-sample-images-movies/#comment-20024 Tue, 16 Sep 2014 09:08:00 +0000 http://www.cameraegg.org/?p=16404#comment-20024 The squirrel shot looks clean but I don’t find it detailed enough. to me it exhibits signs of heavier noise reduction that I ‘d use on my 5DMkIII files (at ISO 3200 I set the luminance NR between 1-10 and chrominance NR 20-25 in LR or ACR) For my work (weddings mostly) where I need higher ISOs (no more than 4000 nonetheless) a bit of noise is not that important, I often add grain! A RAW available for download would give us the chance to process the file for ourselves and better assess the low light capabilities of the camera.

]]>
By: Michael Leonard http://www.cameraegg.org/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-sample-images-movies/#comment-20019 Tue, 16 Sep 2014 08:40:00 +0000 http://www.cameraegg.org/?p=16404#comment-20019 Why do you need to see the RAW files? Are you posting RAW files to the web? Printing RAW files? The RAW file is a digital negative, and the finished Jpeg gives you the final shot of what is possible with the camera. The RAW files are going to be like any other RAW file – bland, baseless and boring. When you post an image to the web for viewing, you will be posting a Jpeg, not a RAW file.

]]>
By: Gigi http://www.cameraegg.org/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-sample-images-movies/#comment-20003 Tue, 16 Sep 2014 05:07:00 +0000 http://www.cameraegg.org/?p=16404#comment-20003 Untill we see raw files the jpeg are useless

]]>