Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 06 Dec 2014 (Saturday) 10:06
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7D vs. 7D Mark II IQ

 
hotmouse
Member
Avatar
132 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3
Joined Sep 2006
     
Dec 08, 2014 21:02 as a reply to  @ post 17321262 |  #31

First duck 7D, and the second pic 7DII..




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
bk2life
Senior Member
583 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Likes: 39
Joined Nov 2010
Location: az/ca/hi/afg
     
Dec 08, 2014 23:30 |  #32

jwcdds wrote in post #17319805 (external link)
Shoot at f/8 or smaller aperture and increase the sharpening in post (or in-camera setting) and you will get sharp photos all the time too. ;)


wish this were true, but it's not..


-james
5Diii|7D|Nifty 50|Canon 17-55mm-2.8|Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS ii|2x 600EX-RT|ST-E3-RT|CS6

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jiggo0109
Senior Member
Avatar
376 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Likes: 36
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Philippines
     
Dec 08, 2014 23:59 |  #33

tshred wrote in post #17321614 (external link)
I started this thread to hear others' assessments of their 7D vs. 7DII image quality. If anyone else has a thought to add to that topic it'd be appreciated. Otherwise, let the ramble and/or thread death begin!!

My apologies OP, I do not own any of the two bodies actually. So that could mean I should be out of this thread :oops:. But with regards to it, my friends 7D didn't have any issues for 5 years and he is been capturing great photos with it. 7d2 is not yet available in our country so I can not give any comments on it but would rely on some posts made by some members. Again, I am sorry. To teamspeed, I am not arguing with you about the af issue. Just to be clear and I don't mean any harsh things.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
clarnibass
Senior Member
793 posts
Likes: 9
Joined May 2011
     
Dec 09, 2014 00:45 |  #34

tshred wrote in post #17318323 (external link)
Edit: and it still seems to me after 5 years the IQ of the 7DII should blow the doors off the 7D!

In what way?


www.nitailevi.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jwcdds
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,632 posts
Gallery: 1653 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 4561
Joined Aug 2004
Location: Santa Monica, CA
     
Dec 09, 2014 00:55 |  #35

tshred wrote in post #17321614 (external link)
I started this thread to hear others' assessments of their 7D vs. 7DII image quality. If anyone else has a thought to add to that topic it'd be appreciated. Otherwise, let the ramble and/or thread death begin!!

IQ's very similar in broad daylight. As one would and should expect. In low-light there should be some notable improvements, especially for those who are accustomed to shooting *.jpg strictly. And also with the anti-flicker detection, you shouldn't get messed up exposures anymore when shooting indoors under gym lighting.


Julian
Gear/Feedbacks | SmugMug (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Blog (external link) | Instagram (external link) | YouTube (external link)
My Reviews | "The Mighty One" (external link) | "EF 85mm f/1.4 L IS Review" (external link)
Founding member and President of the BOGUS Photo Club (Blatantly-Over-Geared & Under-Skilled)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bk2life
Senior Member
583 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Likes: 39
Joined Nov 2010
Location: az/ca/hi/afg
     
Dec 09, 2014 00:58 |  #36

clarnibass wrote in post #17321981 (external link)
In what way?

in all ways.

its been FIVE years. look how far computers, cell phones, and cars have come in 5 years..


-james
5Diii|7D|Nifty 50|Canon 17-55mm-2.8|Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS ii|2x 600EX-RT|ST-E3-RT|CS6

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jwcdds
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,632 posts
Gallery: 1653 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 4561
Joined Aug 2004
Location: Santa Monica, CA
     
Dec 09, 2014 01:12 as a reply to  @ bk2life's post |  #37

That's a bit broad. For instance, if you're shooting under bright sunlight conditions, (aside from resolution), a photo taken with the 10D will look as good as one taken by a 70D. That's more than a 5-year spread.

Take the two same cameras and try shooting at night/low-light and the difference should be significant.

Your argument is that your cellphone takes better images than the 7D. What are your criteria for judging/determining IQ?


Julian
Gear/Feedbacks | SmugMug (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Blog (external link) | Instagram (external link) | YouTube (external link)
My Reviews | "The Mighty One" (external link) | "EF 85mm f/1.4 L IS Review" (external link)
Founding member and President of the BOGUS Photo Club (Blatantly-Over-Geared & Under-Skilled)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
clarnibass
Senior Member
793 posts
Likes: 9
Joined May 2011
     
Dec 09, 2014 03:37 |  #38

bk2life wrote in post #17321991 (external link)
in all ways.

I was looking for a more specific answer.
Remember that this is referring to the photo quality only, nothing else.
It seems that there is improvement in high ISO. Is the 7DII not (more or less) as good as most other APSC cameras available now?
I guess some people disagree on whether this improvement is significant or not, but it doesn't have to be the best to be acceptable.
We are talking about the 7D vs. the 7DII, so what you say makes it sound like the 7DII is significantly behind other cameras... is it?
It is irrelevant how it compares with phones, etc.

I think all DSLR cameras right now are very outdated in many ways, with some more than others. But that's mainly the interface. It's almost hard to believe really. However this was referring to photo quality only. In that respect I don't think the 7DII is really behind other comparable cameras.
Would the photos and examples posted in this thread look significantly (or at all) better if they used a nikon D7100, for example?


www.nitailevi.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tshred
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
127 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2007
Location: The Silicon Prairie, USA
     
Dec 09, 2014 07:19 |  #39

hotmouse wrote in post #17321637 (external link)
First duck 7D, and the second pic 7DII..

Other way around. I was thinking the IQ on the 1st is a bit better or at least as good. My 1st 7DII copy could not match this result.


Tom C. | 7D | 7D MkII |Rokinon 8mm fisheye, 10-22, 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L IS, 100-400L, Σ 30 1.4, 85 1.8, railroad tracks and cornfields
Image Editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lumens
Senior Member
447 posts
Likes: 79
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Mesa, AZ
Post edited over 4 years ago by Lumens.
     
Dec 09, 2014 07:26 |  #40

tshred wrote in post #17322276 (external link)
Other way around. I was thinking the IQ on the 1st is a bit better or at least as good. My 1st 7DII copy could not match this result.

That's what I was thinking other way around, but still not a great deal of difference, it is hard to tell in a lot of ways. The first shows a little more detail more clearly to me so 7DII with the better IQ.

However the small amount of difference in the two just tells me I don't need to spend for the upgrade of my 7D any time soon as I have a 6D to cover my low-light shooting. I like to shoot just about anything and everything so I find a big advantage in owning both Crop and full frame cameras.


FUJI XT-2 & FUJI XT-3 ->
12mm Roki, 16 f1.4, 35 f1.4, 56 f1.2, 80 Macro
10-24, 18-55, 55-200, 100-400

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tshred
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
127 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2007
Location: The Silicon Prairie, USA
     
Dec 09, 2014 07:26 |  #41

clarnibass wrote in post #17321981 (external link)
In what way?

For me, clarity, detail, apparent quality of focus. I guess perhaps sensors (Canon anyway?) do not follow the general rule of other electronics products. In 5 years good strides have been made in clarity and detail on televisions, for instance. Apples to ducks comparison?


Tom C. | 7D | 7D MkII |Rokinon 8mm fisheye, 10-22, 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L IS, 100-400L, Σ 30 1.4, 85 1.8, railroad tracks and cornfields
Image Editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tshred
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
127 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2007
Location: The Silicon Prairie, USA
     
Dec 09, 2014 08:08 |  #42

clarnibass wrote in post #17322096 (external link)
Would the photos and examples posted in this thread look significantly (or at all) better if they used a nikon D7100, for example?

Point made. I don't think you could tell. You might if shot at 3200 ISO or higher as from what I've seen the D7100 doesn't handle higher ISOs. My first copy of the 7DII had issues. There is such a thing as a bad copy, something I've not experienced before. I'm still not convinced, at ISO 3200, that my 7DII is better than the 7D. Of course at 8000 there's no contest.


Tom C. | 7D | 7D MkII |Rokinon 8mm fisheye, 10-22, 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L IS, 100-400L, Σ 30 1.4, 85 1.8, railroad tracks and cornfields
Image Editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
raksphoto
Senior Member
508 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 96
Joined Jun 2010
Location: California
Post edited over 4 years ago by raksphoto with reason 'added cropped version '.
     
Dec 09, 2014 08:25 |  #43

I'm waiting for my 7D Mark II camera media to be returned by my producer, from a notoriously low-light belly dance club we work together at. Meanwhile, tonight I engaged the 7D Mark II on another foto project I like to do, lunar photography. Out of sheer convenience, I often do this with the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS USM II lens -- the "Nifty Two-Fifty." Mainly because I can get lunar fotos hand-held, just by looking up at the sky, then quickly assembling the aforementioined gear, rather than dragging out my Maksutov-Cassegrain telescope and then attaching the camera to it. The result is a lot smaller size moon in the frame, but at 20.2 Mpixels, there is quite a lot of resolution left to render detail.

I have done a lot of fotos this way in the last 4 years with the 7D, and the later the 70D. Mostly i the past 2 years, with the Nifty Two-Fifty lens.

From all this experience, I could tell immediately that the IQ with these first 7D Mark II lunar fotos is just amazing. I was able to shoot clean JPEGs at ISO 1600 OOC with the 7D Mark II. I would normally need to keep the 7D and 70D in the ISO 400 range, in order to not see the onset of dark noise in the resulting JPEG. The new camera was so much better at this higher ISO regime.

I have not (yet) done a scientific test, using a more strictly controlled experimental protocol. In part because with the 7D and 70D, in the last year or so I had been taken to using Cinema-type of Picture Styles to extend and improve the tone range curve for a much cleaner contrast and noise response for the moon. The 7D Mark II is so new, I cannot yet run Canon's DPP on Mac OS X, so that I can load a matching Picture Style. A task for a later time.

I sense with more constraint, in an experiment where absolutely everything is equal between 7D and 7D Mark II, perhaps the actual scientific difference in better dark noise with the 7D Mark II is closer to 1 stop than to 2 stops.

But wow, already from this smaller test -- tricked-out 7D versus stock 7D Mark II, OOC JPEGs, zero post-work -- I'm thoroughly convinced that the 7D Mark II is quite an improvement in IQ! It's not just improved dark noise (hence dynamic range), it's also much better contrast and detail rendering. Literally, I was shocked at the new lunar fotos from tonight with the 7D Mark II. It was like my goto lunar lens suddenly just got better, and I've had it quite a while.

Attached is the full picture, I guess as resampled by POTN. So, attaching a crop of the same foto as well. Working my way through the new POTN user interface.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


2x 7D Mark II | 70D | 5DSr
EF-S 10-18mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM | EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM |
EF-S 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM | EF 70-200mm f/4L |
EF 135mm f/2L | EF 100mm f/2 | EF 85mm f/1.8 | EF 50mm f/1.2L | EF 35mm f/1.4L EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM MACRO

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tshred
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
127 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2007
Location: The Silicon Prairie, USA
     
Dec 09, 2014 09:04 |  #44

raksphoto wrote in post #17322372 (external link)
I'm waiting for my 7D Mark II camera media to be returned by my producer, from a notoriously low-light belly dance club we work together at. Meanwhile, tonight I engaged the 7D Mark II on another foto project I like to do, lunar photography. Out of sheer convenience, I often do this with the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS USM II lens -- the "Nifty Two-Fifty." Mainly because I can get lunar fotos hand-held, just by looking up at the sky, then quickly assembling the aforementioined gear, rather than dragging out my Maksutov-Cassegrain telescope and then attaching the camera to it. The result is a lot smaller size moon in the frame, but at 20.2 Mpixels, there is quite a lot of resolution left to render detail.

I have done a lot of fotos this way in the last 4 years with the 7D, and the later the 70D. Mostly i the past 2 years, with the Nifty Two-Fifty lens.

From all this experience, I could tell immediately that the IQ with these first 7D Mark II lunar fotos is just amazing. I was able to shoot clean JPEGs at ISO 1600 OOC with the 7D Mark II. I would normally need to keep the 7D and 70D in the ISO 400 range, in order to not see the onset of dark noise in the resulting JPEG. The new camera was so much better at this higher ISO regime.

I have not (yet) done a scientific test, using a more strictly controlled experimental protocol. In part because with the 7D and 70D, in the last year or so I had been taken to using Cinema-type of Picture Styles to extend and improve the tone range curve for a much cleaner contrast and noise response for the moon. The 7D Mark II is so new, I cannot yet run Canon's DPP on Mac OS X, so that I can load a matching Picture Style. A task for a later time.

I sense with more constraint, in an experiment where absolutely everything is equal between 7D and 7D Mark II, perhaps the actual scientific difference in better dark noise with the 7D Mark II is closer to 1 stop than to 2 stops.

But wow, already from this smaller test -- tricked-out 7D versus stock 7D Mark II, OOC JPEGs, zero post-work -- I'm thoroughly convinced that the 7D Mark II is quite an improvement in IQ! It's not just improved dark noise (hence dynamic range), it's also much better contrast and detail rendering. Literally, I was shocked at the new lunar fotos from tonight with the 7D Mark II. It was like my goto lunar lens suddenly just got better, and I've had it quite a while.

Attached is the full picture, I guess as resampled by POTN. So, attaching a crop of the same foto as well. Working my way through the new POTN user interface.

thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by raksphoto in
./showthread.php?p=173​22372&i=i88139497
forum: Canon EOS Digital Cameras


thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by raksphoto in
./showthread.php?p=173​22372&i=i211934756
forum: Canon EOS Digital Cameras

More noise out of my 7D at ISO 400. Very nice, I will have to remember the 7DIIs usefulness for long exposures and possibly astrophotography! Feel free to post pics are you get 'em. I can't edit the title of this thread to say that because apparently no one has replied to it! :D


Tom C. | 7D | 7D MkII |Rokinon 8mm fisheye, 10-22, 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L IS, 100-400L, Σ 30 1.4, 85 1.8, railroad tracks and cornfields
Image Editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tshred
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
127 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2007
Location: The Silicon Prairie, USA
Post edited over 4 years ago by tshred. (2 edits in all)
     
Dec 09, 2014 09:05 |  #45

Lumens wrote in post #17322281 (external link)
That's what I was thinking other way around, but still not a great deal of difference, it is hard to tell in a lot of ways. The first shows a little more detail more clearly to me so 7DII with the better IQ.

However the small amount of difference in the two just tells me I don't need to spend for the upgrade of my 7D any time soon as I have a 6D to cover my low-light shooting. I like to shoot just about anything and everything so I find a big advantage in owning both Crop and full frame cameras.

A nice combo, and one I've been contemplating, especially with the good deals on the 6D right now. Would still leave me lacking in high ISO sports area - my son plays soccer in some of the most poorly lighted facilities... edit: 6D is great high ISO, but for indoor sports I just don't know if 4.5 FPS would do the job. I don't spray and pray but quick three shot bursts are sure nice.


Tom C. | 7D | 7D MkII |Rokinon 8mm fisheye, 10-22, 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L IS, 100-400L, Σ 30 1.4, 85 1.8, railroad tracks and cornfields
Image Editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

18,606 views & 5 likes for this thread
7D vs. 7D Mark II IQ
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is dayuan99
1855 guests, 312 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.