7d losing skin texture...quite disappointed.

Today I tested a 7D in great lengths. I've analyzed alot of photos on the web aswell as looking the files I made. I read numerous of reviews too.

I will have to say the 7d is an extremely responsive body and imo its a step above my 1d3 in on board processing.

After many gigs of raw/large jpg files I am quite taken back. The yellowish hue with marginal over exposure seems to be similar to my 1dmk3's characteristic. I am quite certain that this is not copy variations but simply nature of the product. The skin sooc looks like there is post processed skin softening yet the eyelash detail is tack sharp.

The 24L prime combo assures me that there's no lack of resolution that I would see using my zooms.

It appears I would get better skin texture 1/3 stop under exposed but this would just introduce more noise.

I am more impressed in how my old 50D retained tonal details. The 50D and 40D's seems to keep much more defined details in the tonal shades on portraits. Mind you I'm shooting f/2 with ambient available light. Perhaps theres differences with small tight apertures in studio ideal lighting.

I've often had a love/hate with my 1dmk3 due to the orange/yellow hue when slightly over exposed in the sun. The details of skin texture is often smoothed/soften aswell. However I find the 7d to be by far less forgiving.

What has canon done? I must severely over expose my 5dc or 5dmk2 to get this "automatic" smooth skin softening.

How do most 7d users deal with this characteristic. I just see a seriously strong following for this body but I am curious if these are just accepted characteristics.

24L Mark I or Mark II? Both aren't tack sharp until F2.8, but they are definitely not bad at F2.0.

Are you shooting JPG? if so what picture style are you using. There is some different NR processing used in Standard, portrait and possibly landscape. Use faithful and Neutral for the best detail retention out of JPGs.

I shoot large RAW and large jpg. I find iso 800 to have a fine noise patter. I will have to say my 1dmk3 (again love/hate) is without a doubt alot cleaner at iso 800.

I will do some further testing with 85L and 70-200 f/2.8IS mk2 but I am analyzing alot of other flickr accounts and finding alot of plastic skin textures. I always assumed it was post processing but I am find it to be more characteristic of the files.

I also find post work on the 7d files to be alot different then my 1dmk3 and 5dmk2 files. Definitely a different world.

The 7D seems to need more time in PP then even the 40D I had, from my recollection. Another reason I love the 5DII. In and out.

I agree about the nose at ISO800 but, fortunately it doesn't show up in print if you don't massage the image too much.

Thanks for chiming in Bo,

Just did some ambient light photos with my 85L and 70-200. Properly exposed files have overly smooth skin and aprox +1/3 stop EC photos retains more detail. I will say my 1dmk3 is more detailed for a 10mp sensor in this respect.

The 5dmk2 is definitely a different machine.

the colour rendition seems to be quite good on the 7d. I'm doing more photos before sun goes down. I am finding smooth tones regardless with the 85L or white lens.

The photo sooc in raw looks very processed digital smooth. Not sure if its what I appreciate seeing sooc.

Im shooting the 7D+50 1.4 @ 1.4. Looking at raw files, the skin looks fine on my 7D, comparing it to the 50D I have less PP than before. I never messed with skin tones or texture, and I feel that the skin is better on my 7D. But that's just what I see?

Everywhere I read that the 7D has a very strong AA filter.
That might be the problem.

At the noiseless ISO's (400 and lower) I sharpen very aggressively to compensate.

AlanU wrote in post #12280427
I shoot large RAW and large jpg.

What are you using to process the raw files?

Here is a straight JPG from my 7D taken from my full ISO sweep when I first got it. No post processing on my part, taken at ISO 400.

Are you seeing the same thing in my image? Perhaps it is something with the red channel, Canon always has had issues on the red channel it seems.

http://teamspeed.smugm​ug.com …Jfqr#668876581_​kVu7G-O-LB

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

TeamSpeed wrote in post #12282314
Perhaps it is something with the red channel, Canon always has had issues on the red channel it seems.

This is the only fault I've found with the 7D. You've really got to get the exposure correct in the Red's or they'll turn out sorta muted in the shaded areas. Photographing Northern Cardinals can be a challenge.

DutchVince wrote in post #12282149
Everywhere I read that the 7D has a very strong AA filter.
That might be the problem.

At the noiseless ISO's (400 and lower) I sharpen very aggressively to compensate.

Yes, indeed that seems to be true. I have been shooting birds for a while w/ 7D and was also quite disappointed. I cannot get those finest feather details as I did with 5D. Things get even worse if bird has one single color (like white, yellow..). Contrast in feather details are very low in real life - there are very narrow range of tones and shades.
Strong AA filter just cannot pass those finest details. Thus, image sharpening is useless.
You cannot sharpen details that doesn't exist at all.
Only solution is to get even closer to the subject..

Ok, 7D has very nice set of features like nice HD video, AF micro adjust and fast AF etc.
It has almost everything you can wish from the camera. Just not the finest possible IQ

hollis_f wrote in post #12282248
What are you using to process the raw files?

I use LR3.

I do not get this automatic skin smoothing with my 5dc or 5dmk2. I find the older tech 1dmk3 to have terrible metering and exhibits a loss of skin texture when over exposed (especially in the afternoon sun). My previous 50D seemed to retain alot more skin texture without noticeable smudging of shadows on the face.

I am very familiar with LR3 and the characteristic of the files from my personal bodies. The 7D struck me as a detail killer at wide apertures using ambient light unless the image is underexposed marginally.

I have analyzed alot of photostreams and have noticed plastic faces and always thought it was post processing. I know can see the reason for this look. I am assuming this skin texture is retained alot better if the photog shoots smaller apertures like f/4 to f/11.

Here's a quick photo of my daughter. Blinds are diffusing the eventing sun. Using my 70-200 f/2.8iS mk2 I used ISO 1600, f/2.8, 1/125, +2/3 EC. This available light was beautiful and perfect. I converted raw to jpg in LR3. used my xrite passport preset to get better colours otherwise not tweeking on my part. I reduced the size to 1024 for photobucket and hit it with unsharp mask.

Owl_79 wrote in post #12282402
Strong AA filter just cannot pass those finest details. Thus, image sharpening is useless.
You cannot sharpen details that doesn't exist at all.

Actually you can with deconvolution: you only have to know the point spread function of the AA filter.
The details are smeared out/spread in a particular way.
If you exactly know how each point is spread you can "unsmear"/unspread them.
Works very well.

Looks fine to me, I can detail on her forehead even resized this small

I'm not quite sure what kind of skin texture you're looking for. Your daughter is young, has baby-smooth skin still. Maybe I'm missing something. Were you looking for pores? Wrinkles?

Here's an example: Taken with my 24Lii, iso800, f/1.4, 1/320s. I figure that's roughly the same amount of light in your sample shot: iso1600, f/2.8, 1/125s.

Mind you, I did run some light NR via LR3 on this. Natural light from window to camera left (~10' away), CFL from camera right-back. Can still clearly see the roughness on his cheeks due to his eczema.