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

 
tat3406
Senior Member
Avatar
275 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2013
     
Dec 09, 2014 21:09 |  #61

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.

the second picture have visible noise at shadow area, first image improve a lot.


6D, 100L,24-70 F4L, 40mm pancake, 70-300L
Carl Zeiss MP 50
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/tat3406/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
rgs
Goldmember
Avatar
2,309 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Likes: 909
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
     
Dec 09, 2014 22:34 |  #62

No objective testing and my comparison is from a 50D instead of a 7D but I do have an observation some my find useful.

I have always had trouble with purple fringing and/or blown highlights around small, thin tree branches against the sky. With my 7D2, there seems to be much less purple fringing and the camera has enough DR on the light end that trees against a light sky are MUCH better. I'm impressed with the improvement.


Canon 7d MkII, Canon 50D, Pentax 67, Canon 30D, Baker Custom 4x5, Canon EF 24-104mm f4, Canon EF 100mm f2.8 Macro, Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC

The Singular Image (external link)Richard Smith Photography (external link)
Richard Smith Real Estate Photography (external link)500PX (external link)
Fine Art America (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
clarnibass
Senior Member
792 posts
Likes: 9
Joined May 2011
     
Dec 09, 2014 23:23 |  #63

tshred wrote in post #17322646 (external link)
Clarity, and quality of focus... just for a visual, this:

Consistency would be nice too

You got me on the defective lens bit lol

If you consider that high ISO (e.g. 8000) is much better than I would say this is a significant improvement.
What you call "clarity and quality of focus" in the first photo are things that could have been just as good in this situation with a much older camera. I mean older than the original 7D.
A new camera can have better AF so that can help with getting focused photos, but that's not how I understood the previous posts abotu photo quality.

IMO compare with other similar cameras to see if it makes sense or not. IMO other cameras are not significantly in front in many ways that makes the update small. If a company was coming out with a phone like the original iPhone at current market price, that would be absurd...

BTW I'm not just "defending" Canon, I actually use a Nikon camera :)

Re that defetive lens, it had a very unusual problem that I've never even heard of before. It took a bit of time but eventually I found the conditions to 100% reproduce it. It still was a bit of a struggle to show the people at the store but once I did they replaced it. At first they put the camera on P mode, took a (camera auto small aperture) photo, it looked fine and said they don't see the problem... :)


www.nitailevi.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DanC.Licks
Member
Avatar
229 posts
Likes: 64
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Mauerbach, Austria
     
Dec 10, 2014 00:50 |  #64

Roger Clark really knows his stuff, according to a friend of mine who is a real (professional) telescope expert. How what he shows applies to us daytime photographers I don't know, but I am sure it does.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
raksphoto
Senior Member
474 posts
Gallery: 15 photos
Likes: 56
Joined Jun 2010
Location: California
Post edited over 4 years ago by raksphoto.
     
Dec 10, 2014 00:57 |  #65

DanC.Licks wrote in post #17324050 (external link)
Roger Clark really knows his stuff, according to a friend of mine who is a real (professional) telescope expert. How what he shows applies to us daytime photographers I don't know, but I am sure it does.

One aspect is simple to understand: lower dark noise means higher dynamic range at all ISOs, a fact that does not depend on the time of day.


2x 7D Mark II | 70D
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
My cameras are now all 7-Series

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DanC.Licks
Member
Avatar
229 posts
Likes: 64
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Mauerbach, Austria
     
Dec 10, 2014 01:09 |  #66

Yes, that is also my take on it, and that seems to me to be the biggest improvement in the sensor over the 7D.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stsva
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,360 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 285
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
     
Dec 10, 2014 05:49 |  #67

tshred wrote in post #17323643 (external link)
The link is quite interesting. Low light long exposure photography is perhaps a main strength of the 7D2. Wouldn't have guessed that. I always take reviews that make money if you click-through and buy it through their site with a small grain of salt. Not saying he's wrong.
It is interesting you say how much better the IQ is and then say there won't be much difference at normal sizes. I probably am misunderstanding you there.
I think I understand what the camera's purpose of design is, that's why I bought one. Stepping back 20 paces, my old eyes could see my 1st copy was substandard. Thus this thread and I do appreciate your input.

Here's a question: does autofocus accuracy degrade at higher ISOs? I know your ability to crop is reduced, presumably because of the loss of finer detail. How about AF accuracy?

Your question about high ISO AF was already answered, so all I'll say about that is that the center AF sensor is stated by Canon to go down to-3 EV. As for image quality, while little different in low ISO shots, it's visibly better at higher ISOs (say over 800 or so), and is better at lower ISOs in that the exposure in darker areas can be pushed in post with no visible banding. I underexposed a 7DII shot by 5 stops then pushed it 5 stops in post with no banding, which wouldn't be the case with the 7DI.


Some Canon stuff and a little bit of Yongnuo.
http://www.pbase.com/s​tsva/profile (external link)
Member of the GIYF
Club and
HAMSTTR
٩ Breeders Club https://photography-on-the.net …=744235&highlig​ht=hamsttr Join today!
Image Editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jwcdds
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,624 posts
Gallery: 1651 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 4529
Joined Aug 2004
Location: Santa Monica, CA
     
Dec 10, 2014 08:53 |  #68

stsva wrote in post #17324225 (external link)
Your question about high ISO AF was already answered, so all I'll say about that is that the center AF sensor is stated by Canon to go down to-3 EV. As for image quality, while little different in low ISO shots, it's visibly better at higher ISOs (say over 800 or so), and is better at lower ISOs in that the exposure in darker areas can be pushed in post with no visible banding. I underexposed a 7DII shot by 5 stops then pushed it 5 stops in post with no banding, which wouldn't be the case with the 7DI.

Wouldn't be the case with the 5D3 nor the 1DX either. When shadows are pushed to the extremes, 7D2 noise pattern is better than any Canon I've come across so far.


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
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
7,195 posts
Gallery: 88 photos
Likes: 1053
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Dec 10, 2014 09:17 |  #69

jwcdds wrote in post #17324396 (external link)
Wouldn't be the case with the 5D3 nor the 1DX either. When shadows are pushed to the extremes, 7D2 noise pattern is better than any Canon I've come across so far.

That sounds impressive indeed but this type of "shadow pushing" isn't really an issue with Nikon at all. I'm deep in Canon but the Nikon world smiles with this advantage.

There isn't a miraculous performance improvement in low light so by pushing an underexposed 7dmk2 image will not reap image quality from a 5dmk3 with longer lens. The capabilities of pushing shadows sound great in a discussion but visually its still not a game changer if you compare to the older 70d and 7dmk1. Banding is a serious issue with canon. For birding or the intended target for this product the less banding is great. For Human subjects i think some crafty involved methods of Noise reduction is still required for retaining skin texture at high iso's.

So far many of the photo's of the 7dmk2 have made me decide to put more money in longer lenses rather than going crop. I was seriously considering on buying a 1.6 crop for the first time.

The 7D mk2 appears to still have the plastic look in noise reduction as the previous mk1 version. The hazy/foggy look has not really disappeared either.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 85 mkII L | | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji X-T2 w/battery booster | 16mm f/1.4 | 56 f/1.2 | TT685
Sony 2 x A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Sigma ART 105 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS & V1S

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
McNeese72
Goldmember
Avatar
1,233 posts
Gallery: 909 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2240
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Sulphur, La
     
Dec 10, 2014 09:39 |  #70

tshred wrote in post #17322720 (external link)
Ha ha, no, I didn't want the ball to be the subject. It could certainly be a user problem, but it has happened so much with the 7D2 (both of these were with my 85 1.8) where closer up I have great focus but further away the focus is off. This second copy is better, but still not too great in this poorly lit facility. Perhaps the poor lighting has as much to do with it as anything. I'm trying to learn. Maybe I have to switch to spot AF when the players are farther away, or just not click at all.

What type of focus point were you using? If it was one of the zone focus ones, it will probably put the focus on the closest subject (the ball). I use single point expanded to either 4 or 8 for sports along with AI servo.

If it wasn't zone focus and was single point or whatever, I'd be interested into seeing where the active point was in the photo. If it was on the players somewhere then it definitely front focused for some reason.

Doc


Canon EOS 20D | 1 7D gripped | 2 7D2's gripped | EF 70-200 F2.8 L IS | EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II USM | EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM | EF 50 F1.8 | Sigma 17-50 F2.8 OS | Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM | Canon Extender EF 2x III | Editing of photos is okay.

Doc's Shots (external link) USMMcNeese72 Flickr Page (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
Post edited over 4 years ago by tshred.
     
Dec 10, 2014 12:51 |  #71

McNeese72 wrote in post #17324463 (external link)
What type of focus point were you using? If it was one of the zone focus ones, it will probably put the focus on the closest subject (the ball). I use single point expanded to either 4 or 8 for sports along with AI servo.

If it wasn't zone focus and was single point or whatever, I'd be interested into seeing where the active point was in the photo. If it was on the players somewhere then it definitely front focused for some reason.

Doc

Good question, I will over-answer it.
Shooting mode: Manual exposure
Tv: 1/500
Av: 2.0
Metering Mode: Evaluative
ISO Speed: 3200
Lens: 85 1.8
Image Quality: Fine Jpeg
White Balance: Fluorescent
AF Mode: AI Servo AF
AF Configuation Tool: Case 1
AF area select mode: Manual selection (if it wasn't on single point it was single point expanded to 4 - I don't see where/if that is specifically shown in DPP)


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

I'm not entirely convinced it is front focused - the ball isn't particularly sharp either, nothing's sharp. Indoor soccer moves pretty quickly, I need to try another AF Case, perhaps the AF was still in transit from one position to another? Edit: I used both case 1 and case 2 during this game, also single point, and spot AF. It looks like I hit my target at least 90% of the time, but focus was not on estimating 50% of the time.

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
474 posts
Gallery: 15 photos
Likes: 56
Joined Jun 2010
Location: California
     
Dec 10, 2014 13:05 |  #72

AlanU wrote in post #17324429 (external link)
That sounds impressive indeed but this type of "shadow pushing" isn't really an issue with Nikon at all. I'm deep in Canon but the Nikon world smiles with this advantage.

There isn't a miraculous performance improvement in low light so by pushing an underexposed 7dmk2 image will not reap image quality from a 5dmk3 with longer lens. The capabilities of pushing shadows sound great in a discussion but visually its still not a game changer if you compare to the older 70d and 7dmk1. Banding is a serious issue with canon. For birding or the intended target for this product the less banding is great. For Human subjects i think some crafty involved methods of Noise reduction is still required for retaining skin texture at high iso's.

So far many of the photo's of the 7dmk2 have made me decide to put more money in longer lenses rather than going crop. I was seriously considering on buying a 1.6 crop for the first time.

The 7D mk2 appears to still have the plastic look in noise reduction as the previous mk1 version. The hazy/foggy look has not really disappeared either.

One of the hugely underated and not-as-well understood features of all Canon EOS cameras is Picture Styles. This "programmable digital film" feature greatly enables management of skin tones.

Your comment about 7D Mark II "plastic look," and "hazy/foggy look" seems unqualified. Can you show some examples to illustrate this viewpoint? Are there only particular conditions where you see this? If so, what are they?

I say this because my own studio-lighted fotos of belly dancers at f/8 to f/11 made on the 7D, 70D and 7D Mark II are extremely clean and bright. Or clean against dark/unlighted backgrounds, if we chose that look. In particular, also more glamorous: ~f/8 and operation near the DLA is far more glamorous than a clinical look obtained with extreme sharpness. The model does not want to see her lovely face look like an extremely sharp scientific foto, where every facet of her face looks like the lunar surface.

And I say this because my early testing of the 7D Mark II on actual lunar photography -- without Picture Styles -- showed immediate improvements in rendering, contrast, and dynamic range, compared with the late-modern 70D -- with Picture Styles. All using the same lens.

The data I've collected does not appear to match your anecdotal assertion.


2x 7D Mark II | 70D
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
My cameras are now all 7-Series

  
  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 10, 2014 13:32 |  #73

tat3406 wrote in post #17323777 (external link)
the second picture have visible noise at shadow area, first image improve a lot.

Interesting - the second picture with the 7D is at ISO 100, the first with the 7DII is at ISO 250. That's encouraging if not overwhelmingly so ;)


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 10, 2014 13:35 |  #74

rgs wrote in post #17323900 (external link)
No objective testing and my comparison is from a 50D instead of a 7D but I do have an observation some my find useful.

I have always had trouble with purple fringing and/or blown highlights around small, thin tree branches against the sky. With my 7D2, there seems to be much less purple fringing and the camera has enough DR on the light end that trees against a light sky are MUCH better. I'm impressed with the improvement.

Sounds like you got a good copy and are happy with your purchase. I am glad for that. My first copy of the 7DII had extreme purple fringing with my 100-400L lens. My second copy seems much better and makes me feel like I have an "L" lens again instead of an old 75-300! :)


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 10, 2014 13:41 |  #75

clarnibass wrote in post #17323957 (external link)
If you consider that high ISO (e.g. 8000) is much better than I would say this is a significant improvement.
What you call "clarity and quality of focus" in the first photo are things that could have been just as good in this situation with a much older camera. I mean older than the original 7D.
A new camera can have better AF so that can help with getting focused photos, but that's not how I understood the previous posts abotu photo quality.

IMO compare with other similar cameras to see if it makes sense or not. IMO other cameras are not significantly in front in many ways that makes the update small. If a company was coming out with a phone like the original iPhone at current market price, that would be absurd...

BTW I'm not just "defending" Canon, I actually use a Nikon camera :)

Re that defetive lens, it had a very unusual problem that I've never even heard of before. It took a bit of time but eventually I found the conditions to 100% reproduce it. It still was a bit of a struggle to show the people at the store but once I did they replaced it. At first they put the camera on P mode, took a (camera auto small aperture) photo, it looked fine and said they don't see the problem... :)

A Nikon shooter - aaaaaahhhhhh!! My first experience with Nikon digital was shooting next to a fellow with a D3X. Oh my, what a camera, the photos it produced SOOC were so sharp and clear. Wow. But I looked and at the time it was an $8,000 camera I believe.


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)

18,079 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 masoudyas
846 guests, 319 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.