Hate my 7D, what about a Mark IV instead?

joeblack2022 wrote in post #15333862
You said his ISO 12800 shot was comparable to a P&S shot. More than a few people have said post an example to show us a comparable P&S shot.

I wouldn't mind an OMD, but it hard to find a point and shoot that does both high ISO well and thin DOF!

I forgot to post these 2 ISO 3200 shots up, would be interesting to get an OMD and a fast old FD prime to mimic these. If I get rid of the 7D, it will be for the Olympus.

I think the top 7D image looks pretty clean for 3200. The bottom ISO 3200 shot is pretty nice too, I am very happy with the captured moment.

I hope these show more dynamic range and better color, these were either with flash or more bright natural lighting than the others in artifical light. Thoughts?

Sovern wrote in post #15333884
Go to the point and shoot section and look at G12 and S95 examples.......I've seen much better photos quality wise taken with those cameras at iso 100 vs his 7D photos taken at iso 6400-12800.

wow. I'm out.

Getting the popcorn out and will quietly observe where this is going...

EDIT:
Actually, I thought I'd try to help and figure something out.

Sovern, I'm just wondering if your monitor is playing tricks on you. I know you've mentioned before that your monitor was calibrated. Please don't get me wrong, I'm really not trying to argue; just the opposite, I'm trying to help figure out why you seem to see blown highlights where there don't seem to be any.

I hope Teamspeed doesn't mind that I saved his ISO12800 photo and opened it in ACR. I personally don't see any blown highlights in the histogram, nor on my monitor. I have pretty good, calibrated monitors here work (video editing and graphic support) and at home too (calibrated IPS LED).
I don't know, I'm just stating the facts that I don't see any blown highlights in the photo and neither does my co-worker who is a graphic designer.

Below is a screen shot of the photo opened in ACR, with the histogram in the upper right corner. Granted it's close with a big blue spike near the right end, but it slopes back down before reaching the limit on the right, so I don't think it's blown (her face is safely within limits), and the "highlight warning" is off (little arrow in the corner which indicates if areas of the photo are blown).

So I'm just wondering if for some reason highlight areas that are still good may appear blown on your monitor.

Just an idea.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

gabebalazs wrote in post #15334078
Getting the popcorn out and will quietly observe where this is going...

The movie changed a bit, if you look back.

I have some ISO 1600 popcorn I can share with you if you don't have any. Now I feel like getting real popcorn out...

Sovern wrote in post #15333884
Go to the point and shoot section and look at G12 and S95 examples.......I've seen much better photos quality wise taken with those cameras at iso 100 vs his 7D photos taken at iso 6400-12800.

Lol good one.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #15334006
I wouldn't mind an OMD, but it hard to find a point and shoot that does both high ISO well and thin DOF!

I forgot to post these 2 ISO 3200 shots up, would be interesting to get an OMD and a fast old FD prime to mimic these. If I get rid of the 7D, it will be for the Olympus.

I think the top 7D image looks pretty clean for 3200. The bottom ISO 3200 shot is pretty nice too, I am very happy with the captured moment.

I hope these show more dynamic range and better color, these were either with flash or more bright natural lighting than the others in artificial light. Thoughts?

Those images look good, I can see a lot of noise in the bokeh on the second image but it's still good. As for the post by the guy that said the highlights aren't blown hes just an angry poster. Take what he says with a grain of salt hes still bringing anger from the past threads to this one.

The highlights are clipped, hence why the spike is so high on the far right, the lighting is of poor quality, do you consider green fluorescent color lighting, low contrast and color (low dynamic range) and a green kicker on the underside of the chin good high quality lighting? For heavens sake there's a green cast on her skin....the rest of his photos look beautiful, I like his second to last photo now that has good lighting.

As for my monitor it's a 23" Asus 1920x1080 LED LCD a long with a Nvidia GTX260 and it's calibrated I just don't consider that high quality lighting most of the posters that are flaming are flaming from previous threads and have no photos posted themselves. My computer is more than good enough to handle 18MP images but it will sloe down editing no manner how fast your rig is because with a bigger image requires more processing which requires more processing time.

I have a mid range computer with a good graphics card and monitor.

One of the only mature posters in here is TeamSpeed.

Sovern wrote in post #15334537
Those images look good, I can see a lot of noise in the bokeh on the second image but it's still good. As for the post by the guy that said the highlights aren't blown hes just an angry poster. Take what he says with a grain of salt hes still bringing anger from the past threads to this one.

The highlights are clipped, hence why the spike is so high on the far right, the lighting is of poor quality, do you consider green fluorescent color lighting, low contrast and color (low dynamic range) and a green kicker on the underside of the chin good high quality lighting? For heavens sake there's a green cast on her skin....the rest of his photos look beautiful, I like his second to last photo now that has good lighting.

As for my monitor it's a 23" Asus 1920x1080 LED LCD a long with a Nvidia GTX260 and it's calibrated I just don't consider that high quality lighting most of the posters that are flaming are flaming from previous threads and have no photos posted themselves. My computer is more than good enough to handle 18MP images but it will sloe down editing no manner how fast your rig is because with a bigger image requires more processing which requires more processing time.

I have a mid range computer with a good graphics card and monitor.

One of the only mature posters in here is TeamSpeed.

??? Sorry, I was just trying to help.

Sovern wrote in post #15334537
Those images look good, I can see a lot of noise in the bokeh on the second image but it's still good. As for the post by the guy that said the highlights aren't blown hes just an angry poster. Take what he says with a grain of salt hes still bringing anger from the past threads to this one.

The highlights are clipped, hence why the spike is so high on the far right, the lighting is of poor quality, do you consider green fluorescent color lighting, low contrast and color (low dynamic range) and a green kicker on the underside of the chin good high quality lighting? For heavens sake there's a green cast on her skin....the rest of his photos look beautiful, I like his second to last photo now that has good lighting.

As for my monitor it's a 23" Asus 1920x1080 LED LCD a long with a Nvidia GTX260 and it's calibrated I just don't consider that high quality lighting most of the posters that are flaming are flaming from previous threads and have no photos posted themselves. My computer is more than good enough to handle 18MP images but it will sloe down editing no manner how fast your rig is because with a bigger image requires more processing which requires more processing time.

I have a mid range computer with a good graphics card and monitor.

One of the only mature posters in here is TeamSpeed.

1) The green cast on the chin is a reflection of the papers she was coloring on? That has NOTHING to do with the camera at all.

2) The raw image is not blown out to the right at all, with a small amount of blue clipping, but it takes away nothing from the image IMO. There is only about 7 stops of raw data dynamic range due to the conditions.

3) I cannot afford high quality lighting all over my house. We have almost 5000 ft2 to cover with lighting, and that means going to CFL, because I cannot afford LED and incandescent is difficult to find, by law now. I am not sure where that became a necessity of the discussions we were having? I was at the dinner table and pulled out the camera and took my daughter's picture, plain and simple.

4) The last 2 pics I posted, the first is the 7D with sunlight coming in a window in front of her, shot with the 17-55 IS Canon lens. Sure, with flash, pictures look better, there is no doubt. However I shoot almost exclusively ambient lighting. Perhaps that is where the disconnect is. You seem to always shoot with a flash, I don't. You seem to be accustomed to well lit subject material all the time as opposed to shooting events where flash is either not allowed or will have no real impact on the shoot. I am the opposite, I shoot many events where a flash won't do anything for me, or isn't allowed, or I actually want the drab natural look that I see with my eyes. If I were doing modeling shots, then yes, I would use lighting.

5) The 2nd of the 2 images I posted is the 5Dc at ISO 3200. Not only is it a bit noisy, it has banding where the 7D doesn't. This was also with natural lighting.

So knowing that you are really just looking for flash or well-lit subject material at high ISOs (which actually is not high dynamic range shooting, flash can actually help level out your dynamic range to something less extreme), let's see what I can find. Typically, that is not where ISO 1600 and 3200+ would be used, but hey, its a start.

I found this pic pretty quickly (7D ISO 4000) but will post others here in a bit.

Sovern, why are you causing trouble again?

This guy is almost laughable. again talking about things he has no clue about

Lichter21c wrote in post #15334582
Sovern, why are you causing trouble again?

This guy is almost laughable. again talking about things he has no clue about

It does lighten the day though. As long as you don't take his posts seriously it's quite good fun!

I am not sure you pulled me back in, but great thanks a bunch!

Here are a few others from the 7D arena, 1600 or higher. Perhaps these are more what you would expect. OOF areas do indeed exhibit a bit of noise in these, but with a quick brush of controlled surface blurring, those are easily removed. Noise really doesn't bother me as long as it is well controlled. I have never received a critique from recipients of my photos calling out noise. That only happens from forum members, doggone it!

Do these look closer to what your XSi produces? Keep in mind these again are without flash though, these are ambient light shots, and not really that technically great but better lit than my indoor shots.

nellyle wrote in post #15334598
It does lighten the day though. As long as you don't take his posts seriously it's quite good fun!

yeah he got me in another thread. here I will just laugh.

and TeamSpeed. I would have to say you are the king of the 7D everything you post is fantastic. And I'm not just trying to kiss your bum. I have learned more from reading your posts than most other places. THANK YOU! for all your informative posts

OMG - look at all that noise? How can you bare to look at it? And look at all the clipping on the red leaves. It just looks like a big wide red area of BLAGH!.

Really. How can you put things like that out there when I can do this with my P&S at ISO 100?

Hey that's where Skittles, our last tabby, went to live. I wondered what happened to him?

Thanks Lichter21c

I've owned 2 7Ds so far, along with 40D, 50D, 60D, a literally all the Rebels, including the XSi (currently we have a T4i and a T3i in the family).

Since my #1 interest is wildlife, I wish I could afford a 1DIV. But the 7D is also great. I do shoot a lot of images at higher ISOs since in the recent years most of my wildlife pictures has involved action.
I consider the high ISO capabilities of the 7D pretty decent and it never really caused me any problems, especially after my PP workflow.

Let me post a few examples here, many of you have seen my work already.

I'm proud to say that the first 3 photos below titled "Water Droplet", "Ballerina", and "Gone Fishing" swept the very competitive Local Fauna category in the National Center for Nature Photography's (Toledo, OH) annual photo contest (1st, 2nd and 3rd). Our area is a huge birding mecca due to the western Lake Erie marshes.

The last photo "Battle of the Elements" will be published in the January issue of Popular Photography.
(You can see more if you click on my Flickr link in my sig.)

So here are some images from the 7D:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/8​123746144/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/6​205616469/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/5​745126464/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/7​416178762/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/8​017711835/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/6​982833742/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/7​215623566/