A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 23rd 14, 01:34 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default 7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400

In article , Whisky-dave wrote:

Sandman:
No, what the thread is about. You can read it yourself, it's
written with text in English.


When you type "7D" how am I supposed to know you're refering to the
7D2


Because I wrote this:

Sandman
7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400
09/21/2014

"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."

If you're still confused or think I'm unclear, feel free to - you know -
ask.

Only you would blame your own typo (or was it delibrate) on someone
elses reading ability.


No typo, and no blame has occured.

I'll have to ask a swedish friend and author whether it's a common
problem for swedes to understand such things.


I think most people understand things to a higher level than you do, not
just swedes.

Sandman:
Android: "Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100 at ISO
6400..." Me: "Yeah, like I said - the 7D is trounced by the D7100"


so how does the 7D and the 7D compare ?


In many ways, dpreview has a compare-function you can use.

Sandman:
Drunk Dave: "Eh, why is he talking about a different camera? I
don't understand!"


Why are you talking about the 7D and why talk about the D7100 ?


Because that's what the thread is about. See the subject?


--
Sandman[.net]
  #22  
Old September 23rd 14, 02:48 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default 7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400

In article , Whisky-dave wrote:

Sandman:
Because I wrote this: Sandman 7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400 09/21/2014


"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."


and because you think it's stupid you ignored it.


Indeed.

Sandman:
If you're still confused or think I'm unclear, feel free to - you
know - ask.


I did I asked for the differences between the 7D and the 7D


And I gave you an answer.

Whisky-dave:
Only you would blame your own typo (or was it delibrate) on
someone elses reading ability.


Sandman:
No typo, and no blame has occured.


So you delibrately typed 7D you didn't miss the 2 or mk II


That should be obvious by now. I've given you enough information to reach
that conclusion yourself.

Whisky-dave:
I'll have to ask a swedish friend and author whether it's a
common problem for swedes to understand such things.


Sandman:
I think most people understand things to a higher level than you
do, not just swedes.


I'm sure I could tell teh differnce between a 7D and a 7D mk ii and
if I were talking about eother of them then I would make sure I
didn't call tehm the same name or give them the same ID.


Good for you. I haven't talked about both, only about one of them, in a
thread about only one of them.

Sandman:
Android: "Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the
D7100 at ISO 6400..." Me: "Yeah, like I said - the 7D is
trounced by the D7100"

Whisky-dave:
so how does the 7D and the 7D compare ?


Sandman:
In many ways, dpreview has a compare-function you can use.


Yes and they are identical.


Then you're using it incorrectly.

Sandman:
Drunk Dave: "Eh, why is he talking about a different
camera? I don't understand!"

Whisky-dave:
Why are you talking about the 7D and why talk about the D7100 ?


Sandman:
Because that's what the thread is about. See the subject?


You just said it was about the 7D2 or the 7D mk ii and comparing it
with the D7100.


Good, you're learning.

Sandman:
Android: "Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100 at
ISO 6400..." Me: "Yeah, like I said - the 7D is trounced by
the D7100"


so why say "the 7D is trounced by the D7100" whatever you meant by
that.


I meant what I said.

you could have said the canon is trounced by the Nikon....


Indeed I could, but I didn't.

You sure have invested a lot of energy in talking about what I've said. Are
you still confused? I did explain what I said and what I meant, do you
still need help? I'm here to help you, just let me know.


--
Sandman[.net]
  #23  
Old September 23rd 14, 04:24 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default 7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400

In article ,
Sandman wrote:

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:

---
Sandman:
No typo, and no blame has occured.


So you delibrately typed 7D you didn't miss the 2 or mk II


That should be obvious by now. I've given you enough information to reach
that conclusion yourself.

Oki...
--
teleportation kills
http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography
  #24  
Old September 23rd 14, 09:23 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
sid[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 385
Default JPEG? Means nothing.

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
  #25  
Old September 24th 14, 04:42 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default JPEG? Means nothing.

In article ,
sid wrote:

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/PROD...-mark-iiA7.HTM

Do you have a raw converter for the 7d2s cr2s?
--
teleportation kills
http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography
  #26  
Old September 24th 14, 07:02 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
sid[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 385
Default JPEG? Means nothing.

android wrote:

In article ,
sid wrote:


There are raw files here if you are interested

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...-mark-iiA7.HTM

Do you have a raw converter for the 7d2s cr2s?


yes, http://rawtherapee.com/blog/features


--
sid
  #27  
Old September 24th 14, 07:42 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default JPEG? Means nothing.

In article ,
sid wrote:

android wrote:

In article ,
sid wrote:


There are raw files here if you are interested

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...n-7d-mark-iiA7.
HTM

Do you have a raw converter for the 7d2s cr2s?


yes, http://rawtherapee.com/blog/features


The last revision of RT was 11/9. The 7d2 was not released then...
--
teleportation kills
http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography
  #28  
Old September 24th 14, 07:53 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default JPEG? Means nothing.

In article ,
sid wrote:

android wrote:

In article ,
sid wrote:


There are raw files here if you are interested

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...n-7d-mark-iiA7.
HTM

Do you have a raw converter for the 7d2s cr2s?


yes, http://rawtherapee.com/blog/features


The last revision of RT was Sep 11. The 7d2 was not released then...
--
teleportation kills
http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography
  #29  
Old September 24th 14, 08:53 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default 7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400

In article , Whisky-dave wrote:

Sandman:
Because I wrote this: Sandman 7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400
09/21/2014

"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."

Whisky-dave:
and because you think it's stupid you ignored it.


Sandman:
Indeed.


Is that a yes then ?


Do you need me to help you define the word "indeed"?

Sandman:
If you're still confused or think I'm unclear, feel
free to - you know - ask.

Whisky-dave:
I did I asked for the differences between the 7D and the 7D


Sandman:
And I gave you an answer.


No you didn't, you said the 7D trounced the x7100


Not as an answer to that question, no. You are confused.

Whisky-dave:
Only you would blame your own typo (or was it
delibrate) on someone elses reading ability.

Sandman:
No typo, and no blame has occured.

Whisky-dave:
So you delibrately typed 7D you didn't miss the 2 or mk II


Sandman:
That should be obvious by now.


Wasn;t at the time.


But is obvious now.

Sandman:
I've given you enough information to reach that conclusion
yourself.


Now you've admited leaving the information out because you thought
the name was stupid, and I think the name D7100 is stupid.


Good for you! You are free to call the D7100 whatever you like, Dave. I
won't spend four or five posts talking about it, I promise.

Sandman:
Good for you. I haven't talked about both, only about one of them,
in a thread about only one of them.


Which one was that then ?


The one the thread is about.

Sandman:
Android: "Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs
the D7100 at ISO 6400..." Me: "Yeah, like I said - the 7D
is trounced by the D7100"

Whisky-dave:
so how does the 7D and the 7D compare ?

Sandman:
In many ways, dpreview has a compare-function you can
use.

Whisky-dave:
Yes and they are identical.


Sandman:
Then you're using it incorrectly.


No they are both the same.


You are incorrect. There are many differences. The new 7D has higher
resolution, faster processor, better ISO performance, more focus points,
better LCD, higher frame rate and dual memory card slots. You would know
this if you followed my advice and looked it up.

Sandman:
Drunk Dave: "Eh, why is he talking about a
different camera? I don't understand!"

Whisky-dave:
Why are you talking about the 7D and why talk
about the D7100 ?

Sandman:
Because that's what the thread is about. See the
subject?

Whisky-dave:
You just said it was about the 7D2 or the 7D mk ii and comparing
it with the D7100.


Sandman:
Good, you're learning.


So what relivance does the trounching of the 7D by the D7100 have
that's what I couldn;t work out.


Because the D7100 is better *and* cheaper. Pretty relevant.

Sandman:
Android: "Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100
at ISO 6400..." Me: "Yeah, like I said - the 7D is
trounced by the D7100"

Whisky-dave:
so why say "the 7D is trounced by the D7100" whatever you meant
by that.


Sandman:
I meant what I said.


I don't know what you said I can't hear you.


So why did you write "so why say..." above? How do you know I "said"
anything at all, if you're going to be literal about the word "say"?

Which is why I wouldn't have asked you about then pronouncation of a
word. Because I can't hear you (thank god for small mercies I guess)


If you talk as garbled as you spell, I'm glad too.

Whisky-dave:
you could have said the canon is trounced by the Nikon....


Sandman:
Indeed I could, but I didn't.


Because that would have made things clear wouldn't it.


Not at all, the brands of the models I spoke about was never in question.

Sandman:
You sure have invested a lot of energy in talking about what I've
said.


No not really about 10-15mins of lunchtime and about 10mins at tea
time. Don;t think I've used that much energy.


Five posts thus far, Dave. About what I said. That's pretty amazing.

Sandman:
Are you still confused?


If I ignore yuor logic then no. if I use yuor logic, which appears
to be if yuo think a name is stupid you won't use it.


I'm afraid "logic" isn't applicable to you.

Sandman:
I did explain what I said and what I meant, do you still need
help? I'm here to help you, just let me know.


Are you going to continually call the 7D mk II a 7D when refering to
the 7D mk m ii and are you really happy with the ID of the canon 7D
are you sure you wouldn't like to call it the 6D or the 5D, because
you think they have stupid names.


Not sure if there's an actual question in that mess or words.


--
Sandman[.net]
  #30  
Old September 24th 14, 08:54 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default JPEG? Means nothing.

android wrote:
In article ,
sid wrote:

android wrote:

In article ,
sid wrote:


There are raw files here if you are interested

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...n-7d-mark-iiA7.
HTM

Do you have a raw converter for the 7d2s cr2s?


yes, http://rawtherapee.com/blog/features


The last revision of RT was 11/9. The 7d2 was not released then...


Anything based on DCRAW will convert the Canon 7D2 CR2 files.

I didn't check to see exactly, but the usual thing is that
DCRAW only checks the manufacturers name and the model
for the specific number of characters. Hence a "7D" is
what it will see, even if what is there is "7Dxx no such camera".

As long as the parameters are the same as the previous
model, the resulting conversion is just fine. Often
there are small problems to start with due to small
differences. In this case at least there don't seem to
be any, as the above CR2 file looks exactly as one would
expect. I tried both DCRAW 9.22 (July 3, 2014) and the
current source code release of UFRAW.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon new release D7100 Rob Digital Photography 159 March 15th 13 12:09 PM
6400 on the D3? How about 12,800 on a little P&S? RichA Digital SLR Cameras 0 January 24th 08 09:29 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.