Anyone here to offer comparison between EX3 and Canon 7D?

L

lifepo4

Well-known member
I have a Panasonic HMC150, as you know the image is soft, but overall I am happy with it. I am thinking to buy a Canon 7D as a backup camera and like to know how sharp it is when compare to EX3?
Many thanks!
 
The 7D is not "real" sharpness, as it skips sensor lines to give you 1080p, as does the 5d. The Ex1 shows you what is in front of teh lesn - there are no missing bis of fine textures, hair, etc.
 
Thanks for the info, how about the sharpless of Canon HV40? I know it is 1440x1080, will the sharpness be close to the EX3?
 
Uh, have you looked at the prices of these cameras? If $1,000 cameras looked like $10,000 cameras, there wouldn't be $10,000 cameras..
 
lifepo4 said:
Thanks for the info, how about the sharpless of Canon HV40? I know it is 1440x1080, will the sharpness be close to the EX3?
Click to expand...
No, but it'll be close to the sharpness of a 7D.

Kellar's answer is the best. There is a reason more-expensive products cost more.

With that said, sometimes the less-expensive product suits your particular needs better than the more-expensive product.

If you want ultimate sharpness in a video product at a low price, the HMC40 does very well and it is quite close in sharpness to the EX3, in great light. In low light the EX3 enjoys a huge advantage.
 
There's also teh lens. The Ex3/EX1 have a great Fujinon lens - not quite like a 20K lens, but damn good. It makes a HUGE difference, as much or more than the sensor.
 
Thanks

Thanks

Barry_Green said:
No, but it'll be close to the sharpness of a 7D.

Kellar's answer is the best. There is a reason more-expensive products cost more.

With that said, sometimes the less-expensive product suits your particular needs better than the more-expensive product.

If you want ultimate sharpness in a video product at a low price, the HMC40 does very well and it is quite close in sharpness to the EX3, in great light. In low light the EX3 enjoys a huge advantage.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the answer, yes, the $10000 is a lot better that $900, but not necessarily in terms of sharpness, since I have a HMC150, all I want to have is another camera that is good in sharpness (needs to be better than HMC150), but I can settle with other deficiency, because I will always use HMC150 except when sharpness is important, such as scenery. To me, spending $10000 for EX3 with rolling shutter is still troubling, even I heard that it is a very very good camera in other important aspects.
No offense to EX3 users!
 
lifepo4 said:
To me, spending $10000 for EX3 with rolling shutter is still troubling, even I heard that it is a very very good camera in other important aspects.
No offense to EX3 users!
Click to expand...

Think of all those poor suckers who bought those $30k REDs with rolling shutter. How they must be suffering...
 
yeah, I'd hate to have a Red.......they are really ****..................WHAT!

Rolling shutter is such an overstated issue, besides plug ins are coming out to deal with the rare occasions that it happens.

If I had the money I'd have a Red in a shot! The Che film looked pretty amazing to me!
 
I found where someone had taken comparable shots on the EX1 and on the 5D Mark II (and also a little consumer camera, Canon HV10). I think most here would agree that the EX1 and EX3 images are basically identical, and the 5D Mark II and 7D's video image is very close (if not, as guys like Kholi assert, basically indistinguishable). So have a look at these pictures to see what you think.

5D Mark II: http://troper10.com/5DMKII-4-24-2009.jpg

EX1: http://troper10.com/EX1_4-24-2009.jpg

Canon HV10: http://troper10.com/HV10_4-24-2009.jpg

These pics come from this post from this thread over on DVInfo:
 
I noticed some artifacts on the horizontal metal bar (D5). This is the exact comparison I wanted. Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
I found where someone had taken comparable shots on the EX1 and on the 5D Mark II (and also a little consumer camera, Canon HV10). I think most here would agree that the EX1 and EX3 images are basically identical, and the 5D Mark II and 7D's video image is very close (if not, as guys like Kholi assert, basically indistinguishable). So have a look at these pictures to see what you think.

5D Mark II: http://troper10.com/5DMKII-4-24-2009.jpg

EX1: http://troper10.com/EX1_4-24-2009.jpg

Canon HV10: http://troper10.com/HV10_4-24-2009.jpg

These pics come from this post from this thread over on DVInfo:
Click to expand...


My god, the 5D frame looks severely aliased. And the shadows are crushed. And the small lettering on the van is unreadable. Overall, a far cry from the EX1 frame.
 
basspig said:
My god, the 5D frame looks severely aliased. And the shadows are crushed. And the small lettering on the van is unreadable. Overall, a far cry from the EX1 frame.
Click to expand...

I probably should have used the 'Neutral' style on that pic taken with the 5DMkII, to reduce the contrast. The crushed shadow is not a problem, but the aliasing is severe, agreed.
 
Thanks for doing that comparison, Tom, I think your subject was well chosen and definitely reveals some examples of how the aliasing (present in ALL the DSLRs, not just the 5D) can really affect a real-world shot.

And that's a still shot. Had he panned left and right, you'd see rippling running throughout everywhere on those diagonals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top