patrol50 wrote in post #17188709
thanks team speed very interesting info and mate i take me hat off to ya you know your stuff - must admit bit disappointed at the lack of a clear difference or what appears to be any real improvement at iso 800 between the 7dc and the 7d mk 2 - shoot a lot betwen iso 200 and 1600 and was hoping to see some real improvement in that zone over my current 7 d which is actually not too bad in that zone compared to some i have seen
have a mk 2 on pre order but may hang back for awhile now and wait for the price to drop a bit say under $2k as $2200 -2500 is the current price range in aus
do still like the idea of the af at f 8 and the 65 cross points and will probably still buy due to that advantage - 10 fps well thats nice but not critical for me
Again, though keep in mind my ISO comparisons were done by changing the factory setting of sharpening from the USM method to the older Sharpen method for the 7D2. The 7D2 does better with the USM method and the 7D does better with the Sharpen method, IMO. If you leave those factory steps alone, the 7D2 is about 2/3 stops ahead. If you use the Sharpen method, it is very nearly equal to the 7D. That is the single largest difference between the two.
Also if you see the one post, when you take the 7D2 and take the NR down, and the sharpening down, no matter which method, the differences are virtually nil. That tells me that the 7D and 7D2 (and 70D) aren't all that different AT ALL if there is no post processing performed during the raw conversion process. There are some interesting software steps being employed on the newer 20.2 resolution data over the older 18mpx algorithms. I wish Canon would update the older models' functions too, but that would then really show the lack of progress on sensor performance.
I would love to see somebody take identical 7D and 70D shots (exposed identically) at ISO 6400, and run them through LR, with NR turned off and sharpening turned off. I expect that the ISO difference will shrink quite a bit. I still really believe there is more software trickery than sensor development going on. And yes, that means on the FF front as well, whether in the firmware in the camera on the raw, or in the raw converters.
That all being said, who really cares... if the end result of hardware or software is that you get cleaner images, that would satisfy 90% of the owners. Some of us just have to know a bit more about what is going on under the covers, or at least think they do (I am referencing myself here, and not targeting anyone else).