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 General Gear Talk Camera Vs. Camera 
Thread started 26 Mar 2017 (Sunday) 13:34
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7D II grain

 
ksbal
Goldmember
Avatar
2,745 posts
Gallery: 374 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 2398
Joined Sep 2010
Location: N.E. Kansas
     
Apr 04, 2017 09:19 |  #16

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18318932 (external link)
That's for sure. Shooting at 4000 on a 1.6 crop sensor is unthinkable to me. I don't think one could ever get such images past a review panel at a stock agency. In fact, for professional work where the licensee is inspecting every submission at 100%, I don't think ISO 4000 images from any 1.6 sensor would ever get through QC.

.

Does the OP submit images to a stock agency? It wasn't specified if they were shooting for themselves or for a stock agency.

I would say maybe we need to know the end game for the shots taken to know if we are giving good advice here.

On the other hand, many stock agencies don't even bother to inspect anymore, SS and IS are pretty much accepting anything, nowadays, sadly.


Godox/Flashpoint r2 system, plus some canon stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,203 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5946
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
Post edited over 2 years ago by TeamSpeed. (2 edits in all)
     
Apr 04, 2017 09:54 |  #17

Here is a low light sample between the 5D4 and 7D2 at 100% at ISO 4000 (1/50th, f2.8). There is a distinct difference, but not as huge as has been made out on some threads. This is about a 1 stop difference, and the 6D is a tiny bit better at this ISO level than the 5D4.

http://www.photonstoph​otos.net …20EOS%207D%20Ma​rk%20II_14 (external link)

This is with NO noise reduction performed, sliders set to 0.0 for both, same DPP recipe applied to both raw files.

The only way to compare the 6D and 7D2 would be side by side with the same exposure settings and same raw processing, any other exercise to compare is a futile one, IMO.


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


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


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,911 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2617
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Apr 04, 2017 10:08 as a reply to  @ TeamSpeed's post |  #18

That second image posted in post 17...the same shot above/below...Could you do is the favor of telling us which one is which, as we have to assume from context, and you know what they say about 'assume'


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,203 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5946
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Apr 04, 2017 10:13 |  #19

The noisier one with more in focus on the top is the 7D2.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2739
Joined Oct 2015
     
Apr 04, 2017 12:28 |  #20

Upfront, I am a hobby shooter. All of this high-ISO stuff prompted me to shoot my newest bodies (6D & 80D) at extreme levels, just to see what happens. FYI: I don't consider ISO to be an issue with either camera, though I don't often shoot above 1600. All photos were shot with a 24-105 STM @ f/8, centered meter, Av mode, Custom WB, SOOC JPG. Modestly adjusted STANDARD Picture Style and Standard High-ISO NR for all photos. No tweaking done in DPP or LR. I am happy the the performance of both these bodies at these levels. I'm just not seeing objectionable noise. First up, 80D @ 16000.


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


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




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2739
Joined Oct 2015
Post edited over 2 years ago by Bassat.
     
Apr 04, 2017 12:29 |  #21

6D @ 25600
EDIT: I've used my 1DIV at 6400. I don't mind that, either.


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


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




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,203 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5946
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Apr 04, 2017 14:00 |  #22

Canon employs different noise reduction for the 80d vs 6D even if you use the same high ISO noise setting. NR will reduce the noise of the 80d to a respectable level at the expense of detail. Doing ooc jpg comparisons between these two at what seems to be the same settings doesn't make for an apples to apples comparison, unfortunately. It helps you decide if it is good for you but doesn't set a baseline for others to compare to.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2739
Joined Oct 2015
     
Apr 04, 2017 14:11 as a reply to  @ TeamSpeed's post |  #23

Ok. Wasn't meaning to compare. Just demonstrating that ISO 12800 isn't taxing either body.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,203 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5946
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
Post edited over 2 years ago by TeamSpeed.
     
Apr 04, 2017 14:54 as a reply to  @ Bassat's post |  #24

Understood, but if people shoot raw and use LR/Adobe tools, they are not going to get anything close to the quality of the shot you presented, not without going through a host of filters. However when they are done, the result should be about as noise-free, but also with a bit more detail.

The Canon JPG engine is much improved, and the gap between raw processed images and OOC jpg is greatly reduced these days over the models before the 70D/SL1/6D/5D3 era, but you can still eek out a better result using raw first, and post processing second. Whether that effort is worth it, that is a subjective call. :)

Again, I would love to see a raw file from the OP, as well as a description of how the file was processed that ISO 4000 was so grainy.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scrumhalf
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,427 posts
Gallery: 61 photos
Likes: 3917
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Portland OR USA
     
Apr 04, 2017 15:03 |  #25

It would be great if someone had a LR workflow and settings that replicate or improve on the SOOC JPG NR algorithm. That may be something I try to play around with when I have some time. I still like to shoot in RAW because I want to have the complete flexibility of tweaking things and I don't have any deadlines or time pressure to get things right in the camera.


Sam
5D4 | 6D | 7D2 (2 bodies) | Reasonably good glass
Gear List

If I don't get the shots I want with the gear I have, the only optics I need to examine is the mirror on the bathroom wall. The root cause will be there.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2739
Joined Oct 2015
     
Apr 04, 2017 18:23 |  #26

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18319461 (external link)
Understood, but if people shoot raw and use LR/Adobe tools, they are not going to get anything close to the quality of the shot you presented, not without going through a host of filters. However when they are done, the result should be about as noise-free, but also with a bit more detail.

The Canon JPG engine is much improved, and the gap between raw processed images and OOC jpg is greatly reduced these days over the models before the 70D/SL1/6D/5D3 era, but you can still eek out a better result using raw first, and post processing second. Whether that effort is worth it, that is a subjective call. :)

Again, I would love to see a raw file from the OP, as well as a description of how the file was processed that ISO 4000 was so grainy.

Agreed. I struggle to make my own processed raws as good as the 80D does in-camera JPGs. With the 6D & 1DIV, I shoot high-ISO raw. The 80D does as much as I can, with no effort at all.

Agreed again about the 7DII at ISO 4000. The original 7D didn't struggle much with 6400. I can't believe the 7DII can't handle 4000.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
14,019 posts
Gallery: 149 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 4119
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Apr 04, 2017 18:45 |  #27

ksbal wrote in post #18319153 (external link)
Does the OP submit images to a stock agency?

I have no idea. What the OP does with his/her photos really has no effect on me or the way I shoot.

ksbal wrote in post #18319153 (external link)
I would say maybe we need to know the end game for the shots taken to know if we are giving good advice here.

I had no intention of offering any advice to the OP or to anyone else. The sole reason for writing my post was to share my own experience and opinion, and I need not know other people's end game to do that. I shared my own end game and how it relates to noise grain levels.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,203 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5946
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
Post edited over 2 years ago by TeamSpeed. (2 edits in all)
     
Apr 04, 2017 22:37 |  #28

Here is a post processed 12800 from the 7D2, it wouldn't pass Alamy's standards, but works for the office for whatever use they see fit. I will try to do some landscapes at ISO 4000 tomorrow if time permits. Maybe something happens with landscape detailed images at that ISO, where the detail falls apart?


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


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


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,203 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5946
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Apr 04, 2017 22:52 |  #29

Here is another, and after post processing, I an still make out arm hair. :)

There is still a bit of grain, I try to leave some in. At the point the grain is gone, the detail is as well.


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


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ksbal
Goldmember
Avatar
2,745 posts
Gallery: 374 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 2398
Joined Sep 2010
Location: N.E. Kansas
     
Apr 05, 2017 07:38 |  #30

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18319625 (external link)
I had no intention of offering any advice to the OP or to anyone else. The sole reason for writing my post was to share my own experience and opinion, and I need not know other people's end game to do that. I shared my own end game and how it relates to noise grain levels.

Hmm... so the above photos are outside your grain/noise tolerance? Which is fine, but I guess my tolerance is a bit higher. :-D

I think in the past, saying that anything above x level was unacceptable on a crop camera held some merit, but I'd take 4000 iso on a crop camera from the 7D2 and newer any day of the week, properly exposed, and not even sweat. 10 years ago 4000 may not have been possible on a crop except for H1/H2

But I'm also thrilled to get anything not blurry/decent at higher iso.. I still remember when all we had was 1600 speed film for the masses...


Godox/Flashpoint r2 system, plus some canon stuff.

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

8,781 views & 39 likes for this thread
7D II grain
FORUMS General Gear Talk Camera Vs. Camera 
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 stapelt
991 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.