Bluewest, looking at your shutter speed you could have easily used a lower ISO or opened up the aperture.
he used a 500/4 IS WITH a 1.4 TC . short of s dremmel drill how could he open the Apature more and also @ an effective 1120 (500x1.6x1.4) 1/400th is pretty slow (Handheld ?)
Yes, the shot was taken hand-held. I know there are people who can shoot this lens (even with the extender) at SS as low as 1/100sec and still get sharp images, but I'm just not steady enough to do that.
And as Ian points out, f/5.6 is the maximum aperture for this lens/extender combination.
Daan B wrote:
I really don't care about grain, as long as an acceptable amount of detail is left. I do care about banding. How about banding in 7D high ISO images? And how do high ISO 7D images respond to the new NR engine in LR3 (which does a great job with my 5D2 files)? Still considering a 7D...
I agree about detail retention. I do find I get more concerned about clean photos when theres potential of printing large.
I found my demends got much higher in ISO performance when I started to view my 5dmk2 files against my other bodies I own.
Looking back at my old photos I used more fill flash so I never really relied on exposure with no flash. I shoot a mix of flash/no flash now and accept ISO 1250 on my 1d3 as a limit of tolerance. My 5d I tolerate iso 1600 and 5dmk2 iso 3200.
I do print more 4x6 and 5x7 so this is a good crutch for grainy photos but anything larger I do get concerned.
I am very happy shooting the 7D at ISO 800 and higher, regularly shooting up to ISO 3200.
There are various factors that influence the result like correct exposure (very important for high ISO on the 7D), how you PP the image (in general I find the 7D noise cleans up easier than, say, my 40D) and what you want to do with the results (how big do you want to print the images?). This last point, as others have noted, is critical.
Some examples, here's an ISO 3200 image I shot with my 7D:
interesting thresholds established here. i don't have a 7d, but when i got my 1dmkiii i dropped my jaw at the quality available at iso3200. i would shoot it anytime, and would not be disappointed stepping up to 6400 if the shutter speed got slow. it's really chroma noise i find distracting - the speckles of rgb. i find grain is a perfectly acceptable texture and i prefer it to the smearing that comes with too much noise reduction. it's very rare that i print large (over 8x10) so perhaps my lack of experience shapes my perspective - i've only printed one image 24"x36" and it was a daytime shot at low iso
dualblade wrote:
it's really chroma noise i find distracting - the speckles of rgb. i find grain is a perfectly acceptable texture and i prefer it to the smearing that comes with too much noise reduction.
Exactly!
Previous bodies had blotchy luminance noise as well, making NR troublesome.
The 7D's luminance noise is very fine-grained and uniform (to my eyes), making the chroma blotches the only thing to worry about.
At 6400, I almost *never* go beyond 20 in LR3's noise reduction...
For a web image, I think 7D at ISO 6400 may be "acceptable". But I always look at images 100% size and thus 1D3 at ISO 1600 and 5D2/1Ds3 at ISO 1250 is my upper limit of *acceptable* in terms of noise. As for 7D? Probably ISO 800 or lower.
terminator wrote:
For a web image, I think 7D at ISO 6400 may be "acceptable". But I always look at images 100% size and thus 1D3 at ISO 1600 and 5D2/1Ds3 at ISO 1250 is my upper limit of *acceptable* in terms of noise. As for 7D? Probably ISO 800 or lower.
wow I thought I was tough on noise....your really not easy to please
I find many photos at ISO 3200 ISO and higher to show subjects that are not human subjects. I think human subjects to be the true quick test of high ISO.
When eyelash details start to fall apart I hate viewing folders of unuseable photos. I dont judge photos websize. When I view full res photos and do 100% crops I really hate my 1dmk3 at ISO 1600 but on odd occasions with "ok" light the noise is tolerated. 7D is on par with the 1d3.
Kisutch wrote:
Those cars look quite grainy to me, but that's just me.
Could be because it's at ISO 12800... ahem.
I use the 7D up to 3200 without qualm. ISO 6400 in a pinch. I never shoot in-camera JPEGs, however. I either use CS5 ACR with built-in NR, or DPP + NeatImage. Either of those methods can improve the results out of the the 7D by a stop or two over Canon's NR processing.
The other thing I do with high ISO images is downsample to 11Mp or even 6Mp when processing in ACR. None of my clients need 18Mp images and this method turns the 7D into a high-ISO tool that is usually superior to a native 6-10Mp camera.
Edit: I should clarify that most of my work involves events and photojournalism, where high ISO imges are acceptible. Obviously, if you are making exhibition prints or doing commercial illustration, expectations are going to be different.
The 7D is not a D3s, but for an APS-C camera, high ISO capability is very good, particularly when downsampled.
terminator wrote:
For a web image, I think 7D at ISO 6400 may be "acceptable". But I always look at images 100% size and thus 1D3 at ISO 1600 and 5D2/1Ds3 at ISO 1250 is my upper limit of *acceptable* in terms of noise. As for 7D? Probably ISO 800 or lower.
thats the problem, why look at a file at 100%? your never going to print it out that big and your never going to view it screen like that.
with these mega MP cameras we have now (and its only going to grow in the future) we have to train ourselves to STOP usng that 100% .
and if you must use 100% then at least make it a fair fight and bring the 10mp 1d3 file upto the same res.
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
thats the problem, why look at a file at 100%? your never going to print it out that big and your never going to view it screen like that.
with these mega MP cameras we have now (and its only going to grow in the future) we have to train ourselves to STOP usng that 100% .
and if you must use 100% then at least make it a fair fight and bring the 10mp 1d3 file upto the same res.
until you see the 7d 6400 in print 11x14 or larger, you can't say too much. I see photos I've taken with my 7d and even 1d3 at 3200+ reproduce largely several times by fight promoters whwho I can assure you have zero interest in quality of print/ paper and more concern with getting them printed cheaply. they look very good.
looking at different cameras and comparing their 100% resolution is ridiculous.
especially when 100% isntba true representation of the print.
Ernie Aubert wrote:
TeamSpeed, what did you use for noise reduction on those shots?
I use a mix of CS3 actions coupled with very mild Noiseware runs on each color channel, since each channel adds noise differently to the overall image.
I like that the 7D puts more pixels on the subject, and has more focusing options then previous 1.6 crop cameras.
All processing in RAW only, no JPG
What I did not like was ...
graininess at all ISO settings
white pixels all over image at higher ISO settings (1000 and above)
higher noise level at ISO 400 and above
The 7D can be a fine camera from ISO 100-400 or even 800 if exposed right.
The 7D could produce good shots but they often had a graininess, noise, or lower contrast to deal with in post processing. The higher the ISO the more post processing required.
In the end, the extra noise reduction processing required was not worth the time required to produce clean images. (DPP, CS4, CS5 all tried out).
I think Canon simply crammed to many pixels into the small APS-C sensor size. A 7D with 10 MP and low noise would be an awesome camera.
To each their own. If the 7D is working for you then life is good.
Personally, I am much happier using a 5D II even for wildlife
I will save up for a 1D IV, or see what the 5D III offers for a wildlife specific camera
abqnmusa wrote:
I tried hard to make the 7D work for me.
I like that the 7D puts more pixels on the subject, and has more focusing options then previous 1.6 crop cameras.
What I did not like was ...
graininess at all ISO settings
white pixels all over image at higher ISO settings (1000 and above)
higher noise level at ISO 400 and above
The 7D can be a fine camera from ISO 100-400 or even 800 if exposed right.
The 7D could produce good shots but they often had a graininess, noise, or lower contrast to deal with in post processing. The higher the ISO the more post processing required.
In the end, the extra noise reduction processing required was not worth the time required to produce clean images. (DPP, CS4, CS5 all tried out).
I think Canon simply crammed to many pixels into the small APS-C sensor size. A 7D with 10 MP and low noise would be an awesome camera.
To each their own. If the 7D is working for you then life is good. ...Show more →
I wonder if you had a dud.
I have the T2i with the same sensor and the IQ is simply astonishing up to 1600 ISO (in RAW). I'm really not seeing any of the issues you did.
Did you shoot raw or JPG? If you use picture styles and bump the sharpness in-camera up, you could end up seeing "grain" from the sharpening of the mosaic patterns. Keep in-camera sharpening down no more than 3 or so, and use post processing to sharpen. I have started to just leave the style alone at either standard or faithful, then process a little bit in DPP, convert to JPG, and then do most of everything else in photoshop.
"your never going to print it out that big" - how do you know that?
"your never going to view it screen like that" - I am looking at the photos like that all the time!
As said, if you shrink the size of photos, you can hide those noise and make the photos look pretty. But if you ever need to make huge prints, you have to fight very hard towards the noise, even at ISO 800!
I can live with 10mp 1d3 because of the super clean images it produces. But I cannot tolerate the photos of 7D for a single second even though it has about twice of the pixels as 1D3.
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
thats the problem, why look at a file at 100%? your never going to print it out that big and your never going to view it screen like that.
with these mega MP cameras we have now (and its only going to grow in the future) we have to train ourselves to STOP usng that 100% .
and if you must use 100% then at least make it a fair fight and bring the 10mp 1d3 file upto the same res.
