Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              8      
9
       10       11       12       end
  

Archive 2014 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!

  
 
KKFung
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #1 · p.9 #1 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


TeamSpeed wrote:
I have had 5 7Ds, and 2 were noisy (even at low ISO), and 1 of those 2 was just terrible and I sold it after about 2 weeks of ownership. The other 3 were great, and actually seemed to get better with usage. The 7D can be soft if you don't put good glass on it, and it can be noisy if you don't expose properly.



You remind me my favorite shot using the 7D and sigma 856 taken 3 years ago

iso800, f/7.1

IMG_0852 by marksman01, on Flickr

The ancient canon sensor is not bad



Sep 30, 2014 at 11:05 AM
kaycephoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #2 · p.9 #2 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


KKFung wrote:
You remind me my favorite shot using the 7D and sigma 856 taken 3 years ago

iso800, f/7.1

The ancient canon sensor is not bad


great shot, but the 7D sensor was pretty terrible to me.. what's the Sigma 856? (a google search revealed nothing)

TeamSpeed wrote:
I have had 5 7Ds, and 2 were noisy (even at low ISO), and 1 of those 2 was just terrible and I sold it after about 2 weeks of ownership. The other 3 were great, and actually seemed to get better with usage. The 7D can be soft if you don't put good glass on it, and it can be noisy if you don't expose properly.

However if you put good glass and shoot middle or to the right, the shots came out very well.

The 70D and 7D2 aren't much better, they hold a bit better detail (presumably due to
...Show more

I don't mean to be offensive when I say this, but both of those 100% shots look "smeared" to me. That's the word that first comes to mind.. Perhaps at low-res (digital sports publication purposes) the 7D would provide acceptable results up to ISO1600, but I cringe at the idea of one of my runway clients attempting to send off a ISO800/1600 &D file for magazine/editorial use. Maybe the 7D I had in my hand was a poor copy..



Sep 30, 2014 at 11:27 AM
TeamSpeed
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #3 · p.9 #3 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


Here is the DPP output for the 7D and 7D2 with the NR sliders turned to 0 for a comparison at 12800. To me, this seems to hold to the 2/3 stop improvement we have discussed, maybe a bit less if we resize the 7D2 down to the same size as the 7D? The contrast is definitely better, but I am not sure what lenses were used between the 2 shoots at Imaging Resources.




Sep 30, 2014 at 11:40 AM
TeamSpeed
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #4 · p.9 #4 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


As to the comment about the smearing, that was a 100mm macro lens @ f4 at just a few feet from the subject yielding maybe 1 inch of DOF. It was very thin, and only parts of the face have focus. Perhaps that is not helping the cause, or it was some post processing? I do know that the 7D was touchy with exposure, and if you missed it, and tried to mathematically pull the exposure up, the noise would pop pretty quickly. Nail the exposure, and the noise was minimal.



Edited on Sep 30, 2014 at 12:03 PM · View previous versions



Sep 30, 2014 at 11:44 AM
Bones74
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #5 · p.9 #5 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


kaycephoto wrote:
great shot, but the 7D sensor was pretty terrible to me.. what's the Sigma 856? (a google search revealed nothing)

I don't mean to be offensive when I say this, but both of those 100% shots look "smeared" to me. That's the word that first comes to mind.. Perhaps at low-res (digital sports publication purposes) the 7D would provide acceptable results up to ISO1600, but I cringe at the idea of one of my runway clients attempting to send off a ISO800/1600 &D file for magazine/editorial use. Maybe the 7D I had in my hand was a poor copy..


800mm f/5.6 I assume




Sep 30, 2014 at 12:01 PM
Rusty1
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #6 · p.9 #6 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


TeamSpeed wrote:
The 7D can be soft if you don't put good glass on it, and it can be noisy if you don't expose properly.
However if you put good glass and shoot middle or to the right, the shots came out very well.


That has been my experience and I'm curious to see how the 7DIIs new exposure meter works out. I like to wait till after first firmware update to buy.




Sep 30, 2014 at 01:05 PM
TeamSpeed
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #7 · p.9 #7 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


Here is the 7D at 800 vs the 7D2 at 1600 and 3200. The 7D2 1600 and 7D 800 are very close, with the 7D2 edging out on detail and contrast, but losing a tiny bit on ISO. The 7D2 IQ looks very 70D-ish, so I am now almost fully convinced there is no real improvement of the 7D2 ISO over the 70D, but everything else is great spec-wise. I wish there was a little improvement with all the "tweaks" the marketing department was kind enough to release to the public.




Sep 30, 2014 at 01:40 PM
J-man
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #8 · p.9 #8 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


Teamspeed, the 7D II looks to be a solid stop better than the original 7D for noise. Very nice indeed! It may not have just been hot air about the sensor refinements over the 70D. Unlike the 50D, when Canon went on and on about how much better the sensor was than the 40D. Then in actual tests the 50D was the same or even worse at high ISO. Also you can clearly see a contrast/ resolution advantage to the 7D II file that I would assume would allow for some more aggressive noise reduction in post to achieve a similar level of detail. This gives the new camera an even more distinct image quality advantage.

Jay



Sep 30, 2014 at 03:10 PM
TeamSpeed
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #9 · p.9 #9 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


Now that Canon has released the new version of DPP for the 7D2, I took the raw files from Imaging Resource for the 7D and 7D2, ran them through DPP, slid the NR sliders down to zero, and made sure all other settings were identical (including the sharpening method and values). Here is the result from 2 spots in their test scene from ISO 800 through ISO 12800. Enjoy, this might save you a bit of time if you were considering doing the same.

Link to larger version


Now the first thing I notice is that there seems to be little difference. Here is an interesting development. The 7D raw file has the sharpness setting to use the sharpness method (the original method in DPP I believe). The 7D2 raw says to use the Unsharp Mask option instead by default. Here is what the difference is on the 7D2 ISO 3200 shot using one sharpening method vs the other. When I did the earlier comparisons, I left the respective raw settings alone for sharpening, this time around I made them equal.



Here is what ISO 3200 looks like from the 7D2 and 7D using the 2 methods of DPP sharpening. Interesting differences... The upper left and lower right are the Canon raw default settings for sharpening. The 7D2 can use either sharpening method, but the non-USM option enhances the noise, almost negating the 2/3 stop difference, the 7D cannot use the USM method, it ruins the image almost completely.



The moral of this story is to always use the USM method for the 7D2 raw image if you use DPP, because if you use the Sharpen method instead, you will get a crisper but more noisy image. Clean up the noise first, sharpen later, I always say.

So what happens if we turn off all DPP sharpening and NR for both at ISO 3200?



Edited on Sep 30, 2014 at 05:47 PM · View previous versions



Sep 30, 2014 at 05:01 PM
Thorsten
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #10 · p.9 #10 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


Bones74 wrote:
800mm f/5.6 I assume



If thats' what it is, it will save us a lot of typing. I love it! We can just write 428 or 440 or 456 lens, instead of 400mm f/2.8, 400mm f/4 or 400mm f/5.6.




Sep 30, 2014 at 05:47 PM
TeamSpeed
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #11 · p.9 #11 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


I used my 7D Denoiser action set on the 7D2 12800 shot to see what would happen. Some of you may know me over on another board, and these actions have helped many a 7D owner clean up their high ISO images.

The good news is that DPP is able to produce about the same results as my raw workflow and 7D actions. I would need much more than 20 minutes obviously to analyze the 7D2 high ISO images to produce a new set of actions exclusively for the 7D2, but the steps I took below look somewhat promising as a launchpad in the future should I get a 7D2 and create a new set of NR actions.

7D2 12800 Raw to JPG via DPP (top) vs my workflow with a raw file then a post NR series of steps as a trial action (bottom)...
(want to see the full 7D2 12800 post processed image? full size here)



Edited on Sep 30, 2014 at 06:38 PM · View previous versions



Sep 30, 2014 at 06:37 PM
Phantom Medic
Offline
• • •
[X]
p.9 #12 · p.9 #12 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


Interesting. They seem closer handling noise that I expected. Still the ability to focus to f/8 with an extender is very important to me. Will quite possibly have one in the near future.


Sep 30, 2014 at 06:38 PM
TeamSpeed
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #13 · p.9 #13 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


If you use either the in-camera JPG engine, or DPP where you leave the in-camera values alone, the 7D2 is definitely about 2/3 stop better. If you change the sharpening method from USM to Sharpen in DPP, your 7D2 image will be even sharper, but the noise will be affected to the point that it is now very close to the 7D ISO performance.

It's a big juggling act! I have no issues pulling just about 1 stop of noise out of any Canon raw file, I just need some quality time with a 7D2 to try different ISOs and different scenes to build up the actions for it, as I have for the 7D, 1D4 and 5D3.

This also seems, to me anyways, that a majority of the ISO improvements have really been more with software than hardware? Or at least a healthy mix of both...



Sep 30, 2014 at 06:48 PM
Phantom Medic
Offline
• • •
[X]
p.9 #14 · p.9 #14 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


I agree about the mix of variables improving low ISO performance and it seems like the software bit seems to predominate over any intrinsic sensor improvements.


Sep 30, 2014 at 06:54 PM
Tom_W
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.9 #15 · p.9 #15 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


Nice work, TeamSpeed!

It would be interesting to see what your "tweaked" 7D2 action might produce.



Sep 30, 2014 at 07:25 PM
TeamSpeed
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #16 · p.9 #16 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


Tom_W wrote:
Nice work, TeamSpeed!

It would be interesting to see what your "tweaked" 7D2 action might produce.


My final action will lie between the other attempt and this one, as I believe I have established the 2 ranges of filters by color channel at this point.

This is attempt 2 to the other extreme of what I usually set as the final action.

Same 7D2 12800 sample, after my NR on top (obviously)...



Different spot in the scene...



Edited on Oct 01, 2014 at 07:17 AM · View previous versions



Sep 30, 2014 at 08:43 PM
Tom_W
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.9 #17 · p.9 #17 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


That's _really_ nice! I wonder if the same action would be productive for the 70D. Assuming a similar sensor, I'd bet a very small sum that it would...


Sep 30, 2014 at 08:47 PM
TeamSpeed
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #18 · p.9 #18 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


Tom_W wrote:
That's _really_ nice! I wonder if the same action would be productive for the 70D. Assuming a similar sensor, I'd bet a very small sum that it would...


Thanks, and I agree whatever I come up with for the 7D2 should work very nicely for the 70D.



Sep 30, 2014 at 09:13 PM
KKFung
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #19 · p.9 #19 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


kaycephoto wrote:
great shot, but the 7D sensor was pretty terrible to me.. what's the Sigma 856? (a google search revealed nothing)



Sorry for typo, is sigma 800mm/5.6




Sep 30, 2014 at 10:18 PM
KKFung
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #20 · p.9 #20 · 7D Mark II Image Quality: Let the comparisons begin!


Thorsten wrote:
If thats' what it is, it will save us a lot of typing. I love it! We can just write 428 or 440 or 456 lens, instead of 400mm f/2.8, 400mm f/4 or 400mm f/5.6.



You guess right we chat in a Hong Kong forum like this



Sep 30, 2014 at 10:33 PM
1       2       3              8      
9
       10       11       12       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              8      
9
       10       11       12       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.