Best Canon ISO performers?

ajax_andy

ajax_andy

Messages
3,650
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
No
I started with a canon 450d as my first DSLR... not much of a surprise that an entry level DSLR had pretty rubbish hish ISO performance.

I upgraded to a 7d which is ok but I'd still describe the ISO performance as 'average', although I love the camera in every other respect.

I also have a 40d as a backup and the ISO is somewhere in between the 450d and 7d IMO and soon I'm looking to sell this and get a better performer so I can use 2 cameras during shoots no matter what the light conditions.

Ideally I'd like a 5d Mark iii, but are there any better options out there? I've pretty much dismissed the 5d mark i & ii due to the focussing issues... I could get another 7D but as stated I don't view the ISO performance as being all that great.

So what are my options?

I'm happy to look at all camera's in all price ranges... I would consider an older model Canon if the ISO performance was very good, or go for the 5d Mark 3 if it's going to be the best option.
 
Andy - you haven't said what lenses you use.
The 7D is far from average, it's pretty good; there are no magic improvements from here on.
Getting a big aperture and learning how to make the most of it will make far more difference than upgrading the body.
The usual rule applies - glass first!

Sometimes you need a big aperture AND a good body.
Here's a post I made into the 5DIII thread taken at ISO 12800, 1/30s, f1.4, 50mm :gag:
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=4980805&postcount=1314

I have a 5DIII, 5DII and 60D (same sensor as 7D).
So if you have specific questions, fire away!
 
Last edited:
Of all the one's I've used, it's probably no surprise that I'll nominate the 1Dx as being the cleanest at higher Iso levels. It's logical that you should aim for a full frame body to get the best chance of achieving clean images for a similar pixel count (for simlar generation releases).

Bob
 
I have the same issue as yourself. I own the 7D & can't wait to replace it. I would describe its ISP performance as dreadful,
I have a 5D MKii also which handles higher ISO much better, I love this camera but as you say the focus isn't the best.
My thought are with the canon 1D 1V
Good luck with your search & keep us informed.
 
drexyl said:
I have the same issue as yourself. I own the 7D & can't wait to replace it. I would describe its ISO performance as dreadful,
I have a 5D MKii also which handles higher ISO much better, I love this camera but as you say the focus isn't the I have the same issue as yourself. I own the 7D & can't wait to replace it. I would describe its ISP performance as dreadful,
I have a 5D MKii also which handles higher ISO much better, I love this camera but as you say the focus isn't the best.
My thought are with the canon 1D 1V
Good luck with your search & keep us informed..
My thought are with the canon 1D 1V
Good luck with your search & keep us informed.
Click to expand...
 
drexyl said:
I have the same issue as yourself. I own the 7D & can't wait to replace it. I would describe its ISP performance as dreadful,
I have a 5D MKii also which handles higher ISO much better, I love this camera but as you say the focus isn't the best.
My thought are with the canon 1D 1V
Good luck with your search & keep us informed.
Click to expand...

Dreadful?! Bit harsh isn't it?
 
ChrisJ_SLH said:
I can't speak for the mk I, but to describe the mk II as having focusing 'issues' is a bit harsh.

Sure, the focus system is basic but it works reliably in the bounds of what it is.
Click to expand...

It depends what you do with it, but to be fair the AF on 5Dii is almost same as 40D and that is barely adequate for landscapes or other static subjects.

In terms of ISO performance of 7D, there are some tricks you could do to improve the situation (if you haven't already).
1) make sure you have the latest firmware. Sometimes there are silent upgrades take can make a big difference
2) turn off all lighting optimisers, anything like that. They generate more noise. Get rid of low iso NR too - it's better to do it in post, leave long exposure, high iso on though
3) SOFTWARE - that is BIG. Lightroom 4, ACR 7.2 (the latest) deliver far cleaner results than anything else I've tried
4) resize down to 12mp, then it will look better at 100% :D
5) print - you may be pleasantly surprised
6) If you have a cheap TN type monitor you may see the shadows - and the noise - much brighter than they are at some angles. This is obviously false view
7) like with any other camera - ALWAYS expose to the right as far as reasonable. Underexposure = noise (lots of it on 7d)

If that is still not good enough, the following will deliver cleaner files:
1Dx, 5DIII, 1Ds3, 1DIV, {5DII - but AF is pants}, 1DsII and 1DIII (a bit small files, but still amazing compared to your kit). That's quite a few to chose from depending on your budget
 
Last edited:
POAH said:
your 40D is actually better than your 7D - the image quality is better
Click to expand...

that may be actually :lol: (50D was noisier), but to be factually correct we need to compare 7d downsized to 10mp or vice versa (op, hint, hint)
 
daugirdas said:
It depends what you do with it, but to be fair the AF on 5Dii is almost same as 40D and that is barely adequate for landscapes or other static subjects.
Click to expand...

Golly. Barely adequate for static subjects eh? :D

OP. What noise reduction software are you using? Also, if you aren't doing so maybe if at all possible you could try exposing to the right a little and backing off post capture.
 
Last edited:
drexyl said:
I have the same issue as yourself. I own the 7D & can't wait to replace it. I would describe its ISP performance as dreadful,
I have a 5D MKii also which handles higher ISO much better, I love this camera but as you say the focus isn't the best.
Click to expand...
I'm so glad I saw this post. I came on the forum tonight to moan about 7D ISO perfromance and I really thought it was 'just me'. It is dreadful, but I wonder if I'm being unfair or doing something wrong. I see shots from other people with 7D's which are pin sharp, whereas I can see noise before I even consider a crop. My issue is that captures at 100 ISO and 1600 ISO seem (to me) to have the same amount of noise. This shouldn't be the case but I'm still happy to be at fault as this would show me what's wrong.

To be fair to the camera, it has a Canon 1.4x III and a 500mmF4LII stuck on it almost permanantly. Then, at this time of year, I'm shooting during the last hour of daylight. Perhaps I'm just looking for too much. However, I have swapped bodies to the 5DIII (on the same lenses) and there is a huge difference.

Any suggestions to get rid of my 7D noise (without PP) would be gratefully received.

Oh, and anyone who can't take a decent landscape or static subject with a 5DII needs to take-up golf instead.:shake:
 
Last edited:
:shake: :cuckoo:

Any sensible suggestions?

:p
 
Canon Bob said:
Of all the one's I've used, it's probably no surprise that I'll nominate the 1Dx as being the cleanest at higher Iso levels. It's logical that you should aim for a full frame body to get the best chance of achieving clean images for a similar pixel count (for simlar generation releases).
Click to expand...

:plusone:

although i think the OP missed your post?
 
FourRingCircus said:
Oh, and anyone who can't take a decent landscape or static subject with a 5DII needs to take-up golf instead.:shake:
Click to expand...

LOL - my favourite post of the day :thumbs:

Seriously though - there wasn't a lot of difference using my 70-200 f4 with the 60D (same sensor as 7D) and the 5DII used with a 1.4xTC.
The lowlight handling of the 5DII was knocked by needing a teleconverter to restore the effective focal length.
The 5DIII is only a similar sized step on again - about 1 stop.
Moving from the 7D, that's a properly useful advantage for concerts shot with available light, but it is still only 1 stop.

As I said before - glass first!

ryanyboy said:
Nikon
Click to expand...

The clue was in the thread title :rules:
 
Hi guys, thanks for all the replies, apologies that it's taken me a little while to respond :)

Glass:

17-55mm EF-S f/2.8
70-200mm L f/2.8
50mm prime / f/1.4
(all canon)

I don't use noise reduction software I do it in photoshop with inverted high pass layer and a layer mask to paint back in the required areas of focus as find this the most accurate method.

With regards exposing to the right... wouldn't this be a bad idea with brides dresses (I forgot to mention I shoot weddings) as that would blow the dress and loose detail when recovered in PP?

I also have a 40d and anyone who says it's as good or better than the 7d is insane lol... I think the 40d is poor especially at anythign over 800 ISO.

I have a very good monitor so that's not an issue... can't remember what version it is but its a 20 inch Dell I think, very clear and crisp :)

I can handle the noise, it's just i am going to get rid of the 40d and upgrade to something much better and demote the 7d to my 2nd camera and as I shoot a lot at high ISO I really just want a camera that minimises the amount of PP later on to remove the noise.

Lots of great posts btw so please keep them coming :)
 
DuncanDisorderly said:
Andy - you haven't said what lenses you use.
The 7D is far from average, it's pretty good; there are no magic improvements from here on.
Getting a big aperture and learning how to make the most of it will make far more difference than upgrading the body.
The usual rule applies - glass first!

Sometimes you need a big aperture AND a good body.
Here's a post I made into the 5DIII thread taken at ISO 12800, 1/30s, f1.4, 50mm :gag:
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=4980805&postcount=1314

I have a 5DIII, 5DII and 60D (same sensor as 7D).
So if you have specific questions, fire away!
Click to expand...

Ooh you just added an extra point to the 5D mark 3's chances of being purchased there! at 12800 ISO that's great performance!
 
ajax_andy said:
Hi guys, thanks for all the replies, apologies that it's taken me a little while to respond :)

Glass:

17-55mm EF-S f/2.8
70-200mm L f/2.8
50mm prime / f/1.4
(all canon)

I don't use noise reduction software I do it in photoshop with inverted high pass layer and a layer mask to paint back in the required areas of focus as find this the most accurate method.

With regards exposing to the right... wouldn't this be a bad idea with brides dresses (I forgot to mention I shoot weddings) as that would blow the dress and loose detail when recovered in PP?

I also have a 40d and anyone who says it's as good or better than the 7d is insane lol... I think the 40d is poor especially at anythign over 800 ISO.

I have a very good monitor so that's not an issue... can't remember what version it is but its a 20 inch Dell I think, very clear and crisp :)

I can handle the noise, it's just i am going to get rid of the 40d and upgrade to something much better and demote the 7d to my 2nd camera and as I shoot a lot at high ISO I really just want a camera that minimises the amount of PP later on to remove the noise.

Lots of great posts btw so please keep them coming :)
Click to expand...

LOL - that answers my 'good glass' comment - an excellent selection of lenses :)

Something one of the other posters mentioned but is worth dragging back up.
Some screens really show noise - some of the low light images from my recent wedding look great on my calibrated wide gamut screen, but look terribly noisy on my neighbours laptop screen.
I suspect display technology has a lot to do with it.
But also important - is your screen calibrated?

Something else that is worth bearing in mind.
Have you tried printing the noisy images?
An image may look dreadful viewed at 100%, but will happily print to A3 with no noise reduction.
My rule of thumb for the 60D is ISO 2500 is as high to push the ISO and still be able to print to A3 with no noise reduction. I also printed to A3 from ISO 6400 and it also looked great, but the noise police would have been having a quiet word with me if they had the opportunity to sniff the print.
Given the 60D has the same sensor as your 7D, how do you find my printing experiences stack up with yours?
 
DuncanDisorderly said:
LOL - that answers my 'good glass' comment - an excellent selection of lenses :)

Something one of the other posters mentioned but is worth dragging back up.
Some screens really show noise - some of the low light images from my recent wedding look great on my calibrated wide gamut screen, but look terribly noisy on my neighbours laptop screen.
I suspect display technology has a lot to do with it.
But also important - is your screen calibrated?

Something else that is worth bearing in mind.
Have you tried printing the noisy images?
An image may look dreadful viewed at 100%, but will happily print to A3 with no noise reduction.
My rule of thumb for the 60D is ISO 2500 is as high to push the ISO and still be able to print to A3 with no noise reduction. I also printed to A3 from ISO 6400 and it also looked great, but the noise police would have been having a quiet word with me if they had the opportunity to sniff the print.
Given the 60D has the same sensor as your 7D, how do you find my printing experiences stack up with yours?
Click to expand...

Tbh this is my first year of doing weddings so I haven't printed any images as just supply them on disk to the B&G. I know that I look for the noise where as most people wouldn't even notice it which is probably the main problem here lol, but still I want something that even I don't notice it when using and the 7d will never give me that sadly.

Yeah the monitor is calibrated and like I said it's a really good and expensive monitor.

Like you said printed they might actually look fine, and it's probably me just noticing it because I look for faults I can address in PP or avoid in future, but it's bugging me and as I'm going to upgrade the 40d I might as well buy something that works as well as possible in low light :)
 
daugirdas said:
It depends what you do with it, but to be fair the AF on 5Dii is almost same as 40D and that is barely adequate for landscapes or other static subjects.

In terms of ISO performance of 7D, there are some tricks you could do to improve the situation (if you haven't already).
1) make sure you have the latest firmware. Sometimes there are silent upgrades take can make a big difference
2) turn off all lighting optimisers, anything like that. They generate more noise. Get rid of low iso NR too - it's better to do it in post, leave long exposure, high iso on though
3) SOFTWARE - that is BIG. Lightroom 4, ACR 7.2 (the latest) deliver far cleaner results than anything else I've tried
4) resize down to 12mp, then it will look better at 100% :D
5) print - you may be pleasantly surprised
6) If you have a cheap TN type monitor you may see the shadows - and the noise - much brighter than they are at some angles. This is obviously false view
7) like with any other camera - ALWAYS expose to the right as far as reasonable. Underexposure = noise (lots of it on 7d)

If that is still not good enough, the following will deliver cleaner files:
1Dx, 5DIII, 1Ds3, 1DIV, {5DII - but AF is pants}, 1DsII and 1DIII (a bit small files, but still amazing compared to your kit). That's quite a few to chose from depending on your budget
Click to expand...

Good post... I'll look in to the things you suggested :)
 
ajax_andy said:
I started with a canon 450d as my first DSLR... not much of a surprise that an entry level DSLR had pretty rubbish hish ISO performance.

I upgraded to a 7d which is ok but I'd still describe the ISO performance as 'average', although I love the camera in every other respect.

I also have a 40d as a backup and the ISO is somewhere in between the 450d and 7d IMO and soon I'm looking to sell this and get a better performer so I can use 2 cameras during shoots no matter what the light conditions.

Ideally I'd like a 5d Mark iii, but are there any better options out there? I've pretty much dismissed the 5d mark i & ii due to the focussing issues... I could get another 7D but as stated I don't view the ISO performance as being all that great.

So what are my options?

I'm happy to look at all camera's in all price ranges... I would consider an older model Canon if the ISO performance was very good, or go for the 5d Mark 3 if it's going to be the best option.
Click to expand...

Newer and not necessarily more expensive is always better IMHO.

In my personal kit I have a 1Ds MkII, grand old lady of a camera but lightyears behind my 5D III. 8 years of advancement in technology and a camera half the price...no brainer there.

In my work toy bag I have a D700 and a Canon 500D with a variety of glass. I am quite sure that the 500D will produce cleaner files than the 1Ds II.

I'll leave you to figure out for yourselves where 500D vs 1Ds MkII feature in the Canon line-up.

The key here is newer technology for 90% of the answer:thumbs:
 
DuncanDisorderly said:
I think that only affect in-camera JPEGs and maybe the Canon Raw Converter.
I'm pretty sure the Adobe converters ignore it.
Click to expand...

True true, although I was told that the Raws are also affected to a lesser degree...did not yet have the time to test it though...:bonk:
 
ajax_andy said:
I don't use noise reduction software I do it in photoshop with inverted high pass layer and a layer mask to paint back in the required areas of focus as find this the most accurate method.

With regards exposing to the right... wouldn't this be a bad idea with brides dresses (I forgot to mention I shoot weddings) as that would blow the dress and loose detail when recovered in PP?
Click to expand...

Whenever I think that kit is limiting me I take a look at the results others are getting with the same kit and once I've done that mostly I have to accept that the problem is me. So, in your place I'd take a look at the results others are getting with 7D 's and take it from there. If others are getting shots with better noise control then you may need to review how you shoot and/or how your post capture process.

Regarding ETTR and brides dresses, well, obviously the brides dress would be at the front of your mind when you metered the shot so some degree of ETTR may/may not be possible but as a general principle it's there to consider.
 
If you're thinking about the 5DIII I'd personally wait for the 6D to be released. If anything it'll drop the price of pre-owned 5DII's. :D
 
:bang::bonk::bang:
2Thumbs said:
If you're thinking about the 5DIII I'd personally wait for the 6D to be released. If anything it'll drop the price of pre-owned 5DII's. :D
Click to expand...

A tough call that...newer technology + 16Mp vs good camera with truckloads of resolution, fair ISO performance and less than ideal AF...:thinking::thinking::thinking:

My bad, confusing the D4's 16 Mp with the 6D which has 20 Mp of course...

Maybe there will be a fair number of 5D IIs coming into the market after all!:thumbs:
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Whenever I think that kit is limiting me I take a look at the results others are getting with the same kit and once I've done that mostly I have to accept that the problem is me. So, in your place I'd take a look at the results others are getting with 7D 's and take it from there. If others are getting shots with better noise control then you may need to review how you shoot and/or how your post capture process.

Regarding ETTR and brides dresses, well, obviously the brides dress would be at the front of your mind when you metered the shot so some degree of ETTR may/may not be possible but as a general principle it's there to consider.
Click to expand...

Just for the record my pics aren't a horrible noisy mess... I can handle noise, know what to avoid (i.e. under exposing and lifting in PP), and know how to remove it effectively. What I would like is a camera where the noise is less to begin with so the after shooting workload is more streamlined :)
 
ajax_andy said:
Less sharpness would just make the images softer and that's not really a solution... would rather sharp and noisy as can remove a lot of the noise in PP :)
Click to expand...

I have never been bothered by noise enough to buy noise removal software.

On my older Canons I typically over exposed and pulled back in ACR, did the trick.

How do you post or what do you use to get rid of noise?
 
ChrisJ_SLH said:
I can't speak for the mk I, but to describe the mk II as having focusing 'issues' is a bit harsh.
Click to expand...

Well I can speak up for the defence of the original 5D Chris! :)


daugirdas said:
It depends what you do with it, but to be fair the AF on 5Dii is almost same as 40D and that is barely adequate for landscapes or other static subjects.
Click to expand...

I ended up browsing this forum last night (following a link while searching for neoprene lens covers) and stumbled across this thread and your post in particular.

Would you believe I registered just to get the chance to reply? I couldn't let this go by unchallenged! ;)

So...let me get this right. According to your experience the 5D MKII (and by default the 5D which I own) has an autofocus system that is barely adequate for landscapes or other static subjects?

That's where I must have been going wrong since 2005 then! None of my pictures could possibly have been in focus then whether they were landscapes taken with a stopped-down 17-40mm f/4L on a tripod with a remote release, still life with 100mm f/2.8 Macro, handheld with a 24-105mm f/4L or panning fast moving aircraft with 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L :lol:

What an unbelievable statement to make. I am guessing profanity filters would prevent me from saying it how I feel like saying it and I wouldn't want to get banned...not on my first post anyway!:D

According to your (flawed) logic hundreds of thousands of 5D users who between them must have taken millions of photographs were lucky to even get static landscapes in focus then?

Hmmm...while I concede that certain models of camera may be more suited to taking certain types of pictures than others you most certainly can take great photos of any subject with any camera. Put a professional behind a P&S and I'm betting he/she could take a better picture than someone who may not have the experience with a high-end body/lens combo.

To say that the 5D MKII is barely adequate for landscapes or other static subjects is misleading at best and total BS at worst. :eek:

A biased, blinkered & wholly incorrect & misleading statement such as this could put prospective buyers off what is a great camera.

I take it you have owned 5D series cameras and were unable to get any correctly focussed pictures from them? :naughty:

Seriously though you have some stunning pictures on your website Daugirdas...some even taken with the 40D which we all know is barely adequate for landscapes or other static subjects! :p

Hah...way to go Glyn. First post and here I am butting heads with one of the locals already. :nuts:

That won't endear me to the natives and doesn't bode well for my future in here does it? :lol:

Kind regards,
-=Glyn=-
 
Last edited:
POAH said:
your 40D is actually better than your 7D - the image quality is better
Click to expand...

sorry mate disagree with you there I have both cameras :)
I would say they are both excellent to ISO 800 but the 7D is slightly better at 1600:) but to be honest theres not much in it
 
GlynHugh said:
Well I can speak up for the defence of the original 5D Chris! :)




I ended up browsing this forum last night (following a link while searching for neoprene lens covers) and stumbled across this thread and your post in particular.

Would you believe I registered just to get the chance to reply? I couldn't let this go by unchallenged! ;)

So...let me get this right. According to your experience the 5D MKII (and by default the 5D which I own) has an autofocus system that is barely adequate for landscapes or other static subjects?

That's where I must have been going wrong since 2005 then! None of my pictures could possibly have been in focus then whether they were landscapes taken with a stopped-down 17-40mm f/4L on a tripod with a remote release, still life with 100mm f/2.8 Macro, handheld with a 24-105mm f/4L or panning fast moving aircraft with 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L :lol:

What an unbelievable statement to make. I am guessing profanity filters would prevent me from saying it how I feel like saying it and I wouldn't want to get banned...not on my first post anyway!:D

According to your (flawed) logic hundreds of thousands of 5D users who between them must have taken millions of photographs were lucky to even get static landscapes in focus then?

Hmmm...while I concede that certain models of camera may be more suited to taking certain types of pictures than others you most certainly can take great photos of any subject with any camera. Put a professional behind a P&S and I'm betting he/she could take a better picture than someone who may not have the experience with a high-end body/lens combo.

To say that the 5D MKII is barely adequate for landscapes or other static subjects is misleading at best and total BS at worst. :eek:

A biased, blinkered & wholly incorrect & misleading statement such as this could put prospective buyers off what is a great camera.

I take it you have owned 5D series cameras and were unable to get any correctly focussed pictures from them? :naughty:

Seriously though you have some stunning pictures on your website Daugirdas...some even taken with the 40D which we all know is barely adequate for landscapes or other static subjects! :p

Hah...way to go Glyn. First post and here I am butting heads with one of the locals already. :nuts:

That won't endear me to the natives and doesn't bode well for my future in here does it? :lol:

Kind regards,
-=Glyn=-
Click to expand...

Doing well so far, M8:thumbs:

Welcome to the nut house:D
 
ajax_andy said:
Just for the record my pics aren't a horrible noisy mess... I can handle noise, know what to avoid (i.e. under exposing and lifting in PP), and know how to remove it effectively. What I would like is a camera where the noise is less to begin with so the after shooting workload is more streamlined :)
Click to expand...

But you are complaining about noise so I wonder if you are getting the results that others get. It's not meant as an insult to your ability, I'm just being honest and saying that whenever I think that kit is limiting me I Google my way to what others are doing with the same kit.
 
GlynHugh said:
To say that the 5D MKII is barely adequate for landscapes or other static subjects is misleading at best and total BS at worst. :eek:

A biased, blinkered & wholly incorrect & misleading statement such as this could put prospective buyers off what is a great camera.
Click to expand...

This is the stuff of the internet. Over reaction and BS are the norm. Sadly.

Other than that. Welcome, Glyn :D
 
LCPete said:
sorry mate disagree with you there I have both cameras :)
I would say they are both excellent to ISO 800 but the 7D is slightly better at 1600:) but to be honest theres not much in it
Click to expand...
I agree

I have used both cameras, having upgraded one for the other.

At 100% there is not much in it, the 40D just having the edge and lower ISO. However there is a whole bunch more MP on the 7D, and downsizing the 7D images to a similar size as the 40D changes the game somewhat - the 7D smokes the 40D then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top