Help needed with 7D IQ

Roy Mathers wrote in post #12297761
With the shot of the policeman, the noise shows very clearly at 100%. Perhaps I should stop looking at them at 100%

100% viewing can be useful, but you can't compare the 40D at 100% to the 7D at 100% and come to a valid conclusion. This is the same issue as when the 50D was released and people said it was noisier than the 40D. (It isn't.)

Let me explain.

- The 40D image is 3888 X 2592 pixels. The 7D image is 5184 X 3456 pixels.

- My monitor's resolution is 102 pixels/inch. Let's assume for the moment yours is the same.

- That means viewing at 100% I'm looking at a section of an image that is 50.8 inches wide for the 7D while the 40D's image is 38.1 inches wide.

- Since the sensor width is 0.88 inches, that means the magnification of the 7D image is 58X, while the 40D image is magnified 43X.

So you're looking at the noise magnified 33% more - and the noise will look worse. Because it's bigger.

The only valid way to compare noise between the 7D and the 40D is to resize the 7D image to 3888 X 2592. This won't be valid when judging sharpness, though, because the resizing itself reduces sharpness and post-resizing sharpening is required.

-js

So I should resize one of my 7D files in PS and then compare them? That's what I'll do!

Roy Mathers wrote in post #12297890
So I should resize one of my 7D files in PS and then compare them? That's what I'll do!

Yep.

I was editing as you were posting your last, so would like to draw your attention to the last sentence in my previous post, regarding sharpness.

After resizing I usually apply unsharp mask with settings of 0.7, 300, 4.

-js

Those figures are for PS I assume? You wouldn't know how they relate to Lightroom would you?

Roy Mathers wrote in post #12297976
Those figures are for PS I assume? You wouldn't know how they relate to Lightroom would you?

Nope, sorry. Never used Lightroom.

-js

They relate similarly. In LR3 I use around 180 and .8 or so. Just play with it, you need to be more aggressive than you think.

All cameras produce noise, even at their lowest ISO setting.

All of them.

I'm not sure that last comment was terribly helpful.

Higgs Boson wrote in post #12298081
They relate similarly. In LR3 I use around 180 and .8 or so. Just play with it, you need to be more aggressive than you think.

Thanks Higgs, I'll try it.

I've just tried it Higgs - but my LR3 slider only goes up to 150

Higgs Boson wrote in post #12298081
They relate similarly. In LR3 I use around 180 and .8 or so. Just play with it, you need to be more aggressive than you think.

Seriously? LR3 only goes up to 150 (Amount).


To give some help to Roy, I made a sharpening preset I use on ALL of my RAW files:

Amount: 36 (up from the default 25)
Radius: 1.0 (default)
Detail: 25 (default)
Masking: 50 (default is 0)

I bump the sharpening just a touch, which probably is not noticeable. The important piece is to MASK the sharpening (same as the un-sharp mask in PS). If you hold option (Mac) and move that slider, you can see what is being sharpened (white mask).

This part is important because it does not sharpen all the parts of the image that are blocked together, like the sky, or a black shirt, etc.; the parts where most noise appears.


I rarely use NR. If I do, its only on my ISO 4000+ images. Even then, my NR is set to Luminance ~5, the rest of the settings are default. DO NR BEFORE sharpening, that way you won't sharpen noise.

Roy Mathers wrote in post #12297530
Staszek - your pictures do not look as noisy as mine. What ISO are they?

My landscapes are at ISO 100 or 200. Almost all of my indoor sports photos are ISO 3200+. As mentioned above, I rarely use NR. Both images below have a bump in contrast, white balance adjustment, and my sharpening preset, then exported to Flickr with the LR plugin.

This is ISO 1600:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/s_olszewski/5​593892209/

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Those shots look good.


Well, it's my bed time now, so I'll have to try these suggestions tomorrow morning. Thanks again everyone.

I've now had a chance to upload a couple of photos to mediafire.com as sdiver suggested. They are the original RAWs, straight out of the camera. They can be found athttp://www.mediafire.c​om/?98g8ma9qen94y7g and http://www.mediafire.c​om/?s9uko7mexe7eo4i#1

digging some online site, found this.
maybe worth a shot?

Link here

Link above is a phototestcenter.com website, and they have suggested "best" picture processing with 7D, using multiple programs.

To be honest, i like my 7D to the extend i shoot at 6400 almost exclusively at nightclubs.
but then, newspapers are forgiving.