After downloading several full-sized samples from the dPreview gallery, it's clear that the Canon 17-55 EF-S f/2.8 lens looks absolutely horrible when paired with the 7D's high-density,small-pixel sensor. The pixels are packed really tightly on a small sensor, which would translate to 46 Megapixels on a FF sensor. Clearly, the 17-55 EF-S f/2.8 is being out-resolved by the sensor,and the lens is simply not up to the task.
There's a certain "video-like" mix of poor acutance and slight chromatic aberration in the dPreview full-sized samples. The London shots of the buildings and downtown landscape taken at 17mm look dreadful when opened up on my 30 inch Cinema Display--the images look about like a 20D shot with a cheap 18-55 pre-IS Canon kit lens. It's hard to describe, but I see a sort of veiling distortion,almost as if the images were shot through thick plexiglass. Fine,fine detail is simply not being resolved, even at f/8 and ISO 100 and shutter speeds that ought to be sufficient, like 1/320.
The few dPreview full-sized samples shot with the 70-200 f/4 L lens look better, but it seems clear to me that there's a problem with the IQ with the 17-55,especially at the wider end of its range, but overall, that lens is not up adequate to maximize the highest-density APS-C sensor yet made. What is troubling is the shot of the metal deer head sculpture: look at that image and see there's an overall veiling that's puzzling.
The Stephen Eastwood studio samples are not that impressive at a per-pixel level. Shooting a human face,professionally made-up under studio flash, and covering an area less than one foot tall and one foot wide is not much of a test. Large areas of even-toned makeup, a bit of hair, some eyes. Not much of a challenge for ANY camera, since the area is so small. Even the 14 MP Kodak SLR-n looked GREAT of model close-ups, but it had the infamous Italian Flag color banding and weird, very ODD problems with incredible color rendition problems on certain subjects, like yellow daisies, and brick wall masonry...but it looked killer on in-studio fashion headshots.
I have not seen the Robgalbraith shots much, but the one Reggae singer shot with the 85/1.2-L looks pretty good; I have a feeling that the 18MP pixel count will make a lot of lower-quality zooms like the 17-55 f/2.8 EF-S show every weakness they have. THis is not a direct fault of the 17-55 EF-S f/2.8, but it was designed when the highest MP sensor anon had in APS-C was what? 10 megapixels? Or was it back when they had 8.2 MP on APS-C? 18 on 1.6 equates to 46 on FF, so...it looks like lens quality will be paramount,if early samples are indicative of what the final camera will look like.
And the last point is important: remember how BAD, how very,very BAD Canon's original 5D official samples looked? They looked poor. Most all of the early 5D samples looked crummy--but the actual,production run 5D's images were and still are quite stellar. Maybe this is a similar situation, but I still am aware that this is the highest-MP count APS-C camera ever, and it will probably test most zoom lens designs,and it's possible I suppose that what I am seeing is *diffraction* problems at f/8. I would,in fact, think that tis high MP count will mean that stopping down past f/5.6, to even f/6.3, will COST YOU resolving ability, and so, the dPreview samples shot at f/8 would look less than optimal.
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/39/39289-c5ea6a611707fdd5786347f4a67d63ae.jpg?1734173256)
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/41/41894-692c98920dde335de241400937ed6166.jpg?1734176247)
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/41/41891-e5bba75ac5ce57c6892ade4cfc3f7d4c.jpg?1734176244)