stef247 From Belgium, joined Dec 2005, 4 posts, RR: 0 Posted (2 years 1 week 6 days ago) and read 3697 times:
Does somebody can tel me if this is a issue on the Canon 7D, if you photograph in RAW with a iso of 100 there is mutch noise on the picture.
Because I planning a new body to replace my 40D, but I'm not convinced this is the best option for me.
All helps are welcome
shufflemoomin From Denmark, joined Jun 2010, 480 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3689 times:
I use a 7D and an original 5D. I notice no noise issues at ISO 100 on the 7D. I'm primarily a concert photographer and happily use the 7D at 3200 & 6400. Of course you'll get some noise at those ISOs, but it's nothing lightroom or Dx0 can't sort out. ISO 100 is totally fine. You'll find the 7D an excellent step up from the 40D. It's the best cropframe Canon currently offers, in my opinion.
ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 772 posts, RR: 16
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3675 times:
I would say the 7D can be a bit noisy, even at 100 ISO - I found there was always some 'texture' in blue skies. Also it is very intolerant of the slightest underexposure - if you try and correct this in post, shadows get very noisy.
I found the key was to a) be very careful with exposure and b) apply a little luminance noise suppression in ACR when processing the RAWs.
Of course, the very large file also means that often you will be reducing the image in size for the final version which both reduces noise and improves sharpness.
But the 7D is a bit odd - while at 100 ISO it can't produce the silky images of an original 5D, once you go above 800 ISO it begins to show its worth. Obviously shots at 3200 & 6400 will show some noise, but until the 5D3 came along, it was probably your best bet for high ISO shooting.
You also have to look at the entire package. The AF is very good and the ergonomics were a real step forward for Canon. A real joy to use compared to the 40D or similar models.
Silver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4873 posts, RR: 25
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3621 times:
I agree with everything Colin said. The 7D, on the pixel peeping level will look noisy at low ISOs compared to the 40D but in the real world, it's not an issue as long as you get the exposure right. For airliners.net, you'll probably need to apply small amounts of noise reduction in LR or ACR to avoide a noise/grain rejection in the sky. My workflow involves moving the luminance slider to 15-20 as the first step for every shot taken at ISO 100-400.
If you primarily shoot aviation and don't get wildly creative with processing, the 7D is just fine. However if you also enjoy different types of photography that involve a more creative processing style like HDR or processing that involves popular filter sets from Nik software (for example), it won't take long before image quality begins to break down compared to files from some other cameras out there.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
coninpa From Luxembourg, joined May 2005, 246 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3509 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
There is always noise in a RAW file, even at 100 ISO. It's the purpose of editing software to eliminate it properly. The built-in camera software does it for you if you shoot JPEG. I personally shoot in RAW and use Camera Raw (available in PS and Lightroom). The recent versions are really good at noise reduction without affecting too much the photo.
KFLLCFII From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3318 posts, RR: 29
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 3484 times:
Keep in mind that the individual pixel size on the 7D is actually smaller than that found on the 40D, which is what allows it to have almost twice the amount of megapixels (18.0) than the 40D (10.1) for the same physical sensor size. In other words, the 7D has a greater "pixel density", but this comes as a consequence: Each pixel (since smaller) cannot "tolerate" the same amount of light as the 40D before filling up and losing color clarity...inducing noise faster. But the impressive high-ISO capability of the 7D only goes to show it has better internal noise-handling qualities at high ISO between the sensor and the memory card...Which is not to say the raw data sent from the sensor to the internal processor may not be as impressive as that of the 40D (only the folks at Canon would know), but of course, it's what is sent to the memory card that counts for us anyway.
ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 772 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days ago) and read 3451 times:
I think Canon made a mistake with the 7D - if they'd made it, say 12mp or maybe even 15 it would have been a killer camera. Unfortunately by squeezing those extra pixels in they produced a good camera with an issue. But I guess for marketing purposes the numbers rule.
braby From UK - England, joined Mar 2007, 138 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3445 times:
I have a 7D and a 50D, when shooting side by side and processing for here I find that the 7D requires a little noise reduction whereas the 50 doesn't require any. However as stated in previous post's it's easy to remove, I previously used Canon's own DPP and now use Lightroom and both of these are easy enough to set up noise reduction when importing your photo's.
I think the 7D is a great camera feels so much better in my hands than any previous canon camera I have owned I have been able to use it at it's highest iso setting to get some images that otherwise would have been lost to me granted they wouldn't get on here or be published but i shoot for myself first and foremost.
Dubi From Slovenia, joined Mar 2006, 14 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3361 times:
7D has noise issues. In dark areas. And if you clean noise with Photoshop etc., you must know HOW, WHERE and WHY. Best practice is to compensate for EV by +1/2 or +1 stop on the camera itself if background is the sky, before you take a photo. Then is much easier in Photoshop to compensate in minus.
BTW if at least half of scene in the viewfinder is the bright sky, and you have strong shadows then, you can always comfortably compensate for +1EV.