Canon 7D Test Shots

  • Thread starter Thread starter gingerweasel
  • Start date Start date
G

gingerweasel

Guest
I have heard a lot of bad things about the noise on the Canon 7D since I bought it. However until today I haven't really had much of a chance to test the camera.

Here are a number of shots taken today using the Canon 7D and Canon 50mm f1.4. All images were shot in RAW and resized in PP - no other processing has been done.

1/800 / f1.4 / ISO400

4160962106_7648df8428_o.jpg


4160206133_2a38f6578b_o.jpg


1/100 / f8 / ISO3200

4160206703_4426501299_o.jpg


4160962650_a29de69f50_o.jpg


1/500 / f1.4 / ISO3200

4160963624_9e0fc8feba_o.jpg


4160963432_2af0daafb9_o.jpg
 
1/160 / f4 / ISO6400

4160208083_c8d6710b2d_o.jpg


4160964172_d1f58a8189_o.jpg


And to test another lens here is a shot from the 24-70L f2.8

1/60 / f2.8 / ISO400

4160235823_560fd1fafd_o.jpg


4160235689_d63e452200_o.jpg



..
 
I'm a total newbie so a lot of the manual settings were discovered by guessing, taking a test shot, then re-adjusting the settings. I was quite happy with how quickly I found what seemed to be the correct settings.

Do these look okay or are they noisey?
 
Im no expert at this, but i would say for ISO 3200 and 6400 those are not very noisy at all!
 
I'd say that the ISO3200 and 6400 are quite good, but the 400 is a little disappointing. Nothing in the 400 shots that a bit of noise reduction shouldn't sort though.
 
I don't really want to sound nagative, but I don't think that these shots say great things.

My camera can't go beyond 3200 so I can't really comment too much on the 6400 shot but I can't say that I'm too impressed with the 400 shot.

I don't want to offend and I hope that this post is taken in the spirit of looking at what cameras are capable of and nothing more.
 
I know that this reply is going to stir up a "hornets nest" but as I understand it by using RAW the big issue is that you are not allowing the camera to use the x millions of dollars that Canon have spent on putting some very clever tricks in their in camera processing. Therfore noise and a lot of other issues(eg colour and saturation) will not look good. I suspect that is why they have put on the RAW button to encourage jpeg as the normal take mode allowing override in exceptional cases(low light no flash)

I am afraid that to get the best from this camera you will have to start re-appraising the way that it is used and allow the camera to do its job.

I have the the hat on ready for the incoming......................................:)
 
That is one view, another is that third party companies produce better software than Canon so the best thing to do is let the Canon hardware take the shot and then process it with the best 3rd party software.

You also have more control over the look of the final shot. After all, who should decide how saturated your images are, what the white balance is, how much contrast there is or how much noise is visible, Canon or you?
 
woof woof said:
That is one view, another is that third party companies produce better software than Canon so the best thing to do is let the Canon hardware take the shot and then process it with the best 3rd party software.

You also have more control over the look of the final shot. After all, who should decide how saturated your images are, what the white balance is, how much contrast there is or how much noise is visible, Canon or you?
Click to expand...

Pretty much sums up my views. :)

Also the in camera processing power is limited compared to a actual computer, which means photoshop (or similar software packages) can use more complex algorithms for noise reduction and sharpening etc and produce better results.
 
Here are a couple more @ lower ISO

1/250 / f2.8 / ISO400

4161182786_3c43a1e373_o.jpg


4161182592_b4e74b898e_o.jpg


1/800 / f1.4 / ISO400

4161183404_7bf92c920f_o.jpg


4160427445_b34fcb5b49_o.jpg


I will also post some of the jpg versions shortly [I shot RAW+ JPG L] although I would have thought that to retain detail shooting in RAW was the best option.

I guess I just wanted to see what others thought, because if this is not acceptable I'm more than happy to go back to Jacobs and demand a refund.
 
I think that it's perhaps best to look at a whole image or a reasonable and realistic crop rather than pixel peep.

Even my old camera can take an acceptable image at any ISO if the final image isn't cropped too much or printed too big.

In your position I think that I'd think about what my own needs are. The 7D obviously attracted you as you bought it so perhaps it might be better to look at the positives it offers rather than analyse 100% unprocessed crops too much?
 
I am not 100% happy with my 7D and have taken some pics with what I would consider excessive noise. I am trying to stay calm and just see how it all pans out when I can get out to take pics instead of forever pixel peeping and worrying that I've got a duff 7D.
 
Peter, that a very good point.

I've uploaded three samples at the correct size for A3 printing. This is the largest I would need to print...

Don't get me wrong I'm quite happy with the 7D - I just wanted to see what people thought of the noise.

http://www.johnbradbury.com/images/7dtest/



....
 
Your Wife should kick your a*s.lol

You seem to change camera and brand more time than the weather.
 
I think the noise at High ISO's on the 7D are amazing, at least it's one giant leap from my 350D I agree the 400 ISO's don't look that impressive and ramping up the ISO doesn't seem to make it any noisier. Not knowing what the Canon machine is doing in it's processing may well be that they have concentrated on the higher ISO's giving more flexibility than worrying about the 400 area, who knows.

An Interesting point from Paul Philpott, as to letting the camera do it's thing and shoot JPEG, but I would miss the flexibility when I goof the exposure, sure as heck would save processing time though as DPP takes just over a minute to convert a RAW to a JPEG, or do I need a faster PC :)
 
Are you testing equipment, John, or taking photos? :lol:

If you're happy with the level of noise then who cares what others think?

What do you think of the level of noise? Does your equipment allow you to take the shots you want to take?
 
Hi Will, I am a little concerned about visible noise at ISO400, I wouldn't have expected that. I would imagine that even in daylight on a dull day you could push to ISO800 so if I was getting very visible noise on an A3 size print in those conditions I wouldn't be happy.

Is it normal to get visible noise at ISO800?

I would also be a little concerned about shooting in the house which I do for parties, birthdays, christmas etc... Not sure how much I'd have to push the ISO up in those situations.

Beyond the noise the camera seems superb, love the handling, and love the frame rate [even though I probably won't use it].
 
I know that you can't really judge a camera from what we see on line, but...from the shots I've seen so far the advantages that the 7D seem to offer are the additional bells and whistles, the ability to crop more severely and higher ISO performance.

From what I've seen so far I don't think that the 7D offers vastly improved picture quality at low to mid range ISO, 100-800 for example. Beyond that I think that it probably does better than older APS-C cameras in Canon's range.

I have seen some very good looking shots on line but I think that they maybe say more about the post processing skills of the people posting the shots than anything astounding about the camera. I've also seen many shots that I myself consider to be way over processed.
 
I don't do that much printing, but have you actually produced a test print? It might be completely different to what you're seeing onscreen.

How does the noise compare with pics taken with your D300?

I'm not the best person to ask about 7D noise since I haven't tried the camera and I've been shooting full frame for a while. If you do return the 7D and if low light shooting is your main concern then perhaps a full frame camera might be more suited?

How did you arrive at a 7D anyway? I thought you were looking for a 5D to replace the GF1? Are you intending to shoot stuff that might better suit a cropped sensor?
 
It's a shame that with digital, a technology that just keeps getting better and better in terms of image quality, we are continuously striving for something better rather than getting the most from what we have.

I have a D200, which according to some TP members is an abomination above ISO400 - it doesn't trouble me; I know my shots are good regardless of whether it's at 100 or at 'noisey' 1600. Like someone's said, if the noise doesn't trouble you then what's the issue with your 7D?

To me the high ISO shots look great – I'd be happy with that in my line of work - and the 400 shots are good too.

I always find it hard to judge whether the noise affects the image when the test images are, no offence intended, not exactly masterpieces. If you had a killer shot that was going to be worth a shedload of money and kudos then i would be inspecting the noise but then again, if it's a good shot then it's a good shot regardless of the noise.


Just enjoy what you have, don't worry what others think and don't fret too much about how it stacks up against the competition....
 
I have a few D300 shots at ISO3200 so I'm going to compare those and some at the lower end of the scale if I can.

I'm also going to print some of the test shots...

Will, I went with the 7D because I wanted to also shoot some wildlife stuff and didn't fancy having to pay out for the larger focal length primes..

I initially looked at the 5D but because of the wildlife stuff and the improved AF of the 7D I went for a crop sensor.

** Don't get me wrong I'm not looking to dump the 7D. I just wanted to see how the ISO compared and see what people thought. If it's not up to scratch I'll look at my options but I'm hoping it compares well **
 
I've just compared three seperate shots on my D300 to the 7D @ ISO 3200 and the 7D shots actually look slightly better.

I've also printed some of the test shots at A4 size and they look perfect - even the ISO 6400 one of my kids playing in the kitchen.

I think this shows I'm obsessing.... strange that's so not like me :lol::lol:
 
Great stuff :)

I'm glad you're feeling better about it.
 
Remember the megapixels are higher in the 7D than the D300, so technically your zooming in further into the picture, due to it's extra size.
 
I am lucky enough to have a wide variety of wildlife dropping by in the back garden so even now during winter I manage to get a few shots. Lately I have been putting the 7D and a few lens options to test.

Here is one at ISO 200 and actually this one was shot through glass.
RAW file if someone wants to have a look at it is here http://www.aminstar.com/canonforums/IMG_1807.CR2

4161993177_ab96926e92_o.jpg
 
Anothe one at ISO 400 and even though I think I ran noise reduction on this resized image I just had a look at the RAW file and I hardly find any difference actually. In fact I am starting to think that I might not have run noise reduction on the final image at all even.

4106749108_77ffb0cfc4_o.jpg
 
Print your image. If the noise doesn't show in prints, there is not a problem.

If you don't print, and only ever view your images at 800x533 on a monitor, a 7D is overkill.

I don't really understand the obsession with blowing up images way way bigger than you ever print and moaning about noise. Printing is the best NR you can do.
 
And for the other extreme, if I can get an image usable like this one when I need to bump the ISO to 12800 in order to get a ss of 1/160 with the lens wide open at its maximum then I am quite happy with it.

Again the original file (shot in jpg) really seems to have the noise well controlled and if anyone wants to have a quick look at it here it is http://www.aminstar.com/canonforums/IMG_2441.CR2

4142897613_07fce7c312_o.jpg
 
zulupentax said:
And for the other extreme, if I can get an image usable like this one when I need to bump the ISO to 12800 in order to get a ss of 1/160 with the lens wide open at its maximum then I am quite happy with it.

Again the RAW file really seems to have the noise well controlled and if anyone wants to have a quick look at it here it is http://www.aminstar.com/canonforums/IMG_2441.CR2

4142897613_07fce7c312_o.jpg
Click to expand...

The hideous bokeh and burnt highlight on the chest are worse than the noise. The noise is the least of your problems with that shot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top