Help needed with 7D IQ

Staszek - I've tried your sharpening figures and found that it's a very subtle effect. Your shot of the band seems to be sharpened more than that, and has remarkably little noise for ISO 4000. If I could achieve that quality, I'd be more than happy!

mansalim wrote in post #12301204
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.

That seems a very useful site - I'll try some of those settings. Thanks mansalim.

Roy-
There is a lot of misunderstanding and misinformation in this thread. Number six said to sharpen after downsizing when doing a 40D/7D comparison and a bunch of people chimed in with recommendations for LR Develop sharpening which is done before resizing. LR's Output Sharpening is done after resizing and is self-adjusting to the amount and type of resizing done. It, however, only comes in three sizes - Low, Standard and High. To do the comparison I would suggest the following; export the two files with exactly the same Develop settings - any editing can affect noise so it is important that they receive identical processing, especially in the Basic, Detail and Calibration panels. (It is also important that they both be accurately exposed in the same light at the same ISO and without a big difference in shutter speed.) Export them both to tifs (can be 8 bit) in order to not be confused by jpg artifacts, the 7D file set to resize to 3888 pixels on the long side and Output Sharpening at Standard for both (remember, the 7D will actually receive more sharpening because of the resizing.

Roy,

Took a quick look at both your DNG files(not sure why you converted). I believe it held on to your processing changes when I loaded them though. Here are some thoughts(figuring that the settings I saw were yours)

1. Too much sharpening
2. Use Sharpening masking
3. Too much noise reduction
4. The police officer looks to have a bit of camera shake(fully possible with moving subject)
5. Both images appear to be a bit front focused.

I believe you are trying to get back detail lost by inaccurate focusing. Check your lens on the 7D to see if it isn't front focusing consistently. If it is then dial in some MFA. Otherwise you might try to work on your focusing technique if MFA is not the issue.

Noise levels looked fine on both images. Detail due to missed focus/camera shake did not look that good.

Sdiver2489 wrote in post #12301553
Roy,

Took a quick look at both your DNG files(not sure why you converted). I believe it held on to your processing changes when I loaded them though. Here are some thoughts(figuring that the settings I saw were yours)

1. Too much sharpening
2. Use Sharpening masking
3. Too much noise reduction
4. The police officer looks to have a bit of camera shake(fully possible with moving subject)
5. Both images appear to be a bit front focused.

I believe you are trying to get back detail lost by inaccurate focusing. Check your lens on the 7D to see if it isn't front focusing consistently. If it is then dial in some MFA. Otherwise you might try to work on your focusing technique if MFA is not the issue.

Noise levels looked fine on both images. Detail due to missed focus/camera shake did not look that good.

100% agree with Sdiver. On the copper shot I changed your Exposure to -0.5, Brightness to 64 and Black to 2. In Detail I set 120/0.5/15/25 and Lum. NR at 6 and Chr. NR 25.

Noise is excellent.

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

Thanks Elie and Sdiver - I'll try all your recommendations, although it might take some time. I will get back to you though.

Roy Mathers wrote in post #12301621
Thanks Elie and Sdiver - I'll try all your recommendations, although it might take some time. I will get back to you though.

If I miss your response feel free to PM me and point me back to the thread

tzalman wrote in post #12301619
100% agree with Sdiver. On the copper shot I changed your Exposure to -0.5, Brightness to 64 and Black to 2. In Detail I set 120/0.5/15/25 and Lum. NR at 6 and Chr. NR 25.

Noise is excellent.

I personally find that level of sharpening too high for my files and causes some weird artifacts (I can see them in the face). Personally I use for sharpening in LR3:

50
1(around)
15-20
40-50

This was the same for the 50D pretty much. I find it gives me the same detail as higher numbers but avoids some of the unpleasant LR3 artifacts.

I do believe the biggest problems are camera shake and front focusing. I think if those were resolved the OP wouldn't be trying to oversharpen the image. The camera shake can mostly be seen in the policeman's hat.

Roy Mathers wrote in post #12298127
I've just tried it Higgs - but my LR3 slider only goes up to 150

Lol, I don't know what I was thinkin! More like 130!

tzalman wrote in post #12301619
100% agree with Sdiver. On the copper shot I changed your Exposure to -0.5, Brightness to 64 and Black to 2. In Detail I set 120/0.5/15/25 and Lum. NR at 6 and Chr. NR 25.

Noise is excellent.

This is at ISO 200 correct? Was exposure corrected on this shot? You can see the grain even in the not-so-dark background wall. Granted, we are looking at a 100% crop here, but still, low ISO noise was one of the biggest thing that bothered me about the 7D when I used to have one. But again, we are looking at a 100% crop here so grain of salt I suppose...

nicksan wrote in post #12301954
This is at ISO 200 correct? Was exposure corrected on this shot? You can see the grain even in the not-so-dark background wall. Granted, we are looking at a 100% crop here, but still, low ISO noise was one of the biggest thing that bothered me about the 7D when I used to have one. But again, we are looking at a 100% crop here so grain of salt I suppose...

I'd have to check when I get home but I have a feeling that's because of the sharpening numbers he used which tend to create artifacts that look like noise from my experience and also very little Luminance NR. I would normally use 10-20 for ISO 200. Probably 15 for this shot.

Re; the comments about front focusing - I did a little test this afternoon with a ruler at 45 degrees and the lens appears to be focusing correctly. The shot can be seen here http://www.mediafire.c​om/?1wcvn8hocem70rc The shot was at f/4 at 105mm

Roy Mathers wrote in post #12302195
Re; the comments about front focusing - I did a little test this afternoon with a ruler at 45 degrees and the lens appears to be focusing correctly. The shot can be seen here http://www.mediafire.c​om/?1wcvn8hocem70rc The shot was at f/4 at 105mm

I can't see it right now since I don't have access to photoshop right now but if its focusing correctly the next question would be do you always use the center point? If not then you should test the other points for front/back focus with your lens. If all those test pretty good then for some reason it appears you aren't getting great focus in your real life images. This could be partially due to camera shake but I'm not sure why you wouldn't get good detail from the image in the flowers without it being front focused. Have anymore real life sample shots? Perhaps you can post them to your website in full resolution?

Yes, I do always use the centre point, as I thought that gave more accurate focus. I haven't got a web site at the moment so I can only use mediafire.

Roy Mathers wrote in post #12302362
Yes, I do always use the centre point, as I thought that gave more accurate focus. I haven't got a web site at the moment so I can only use mediafire.

Just to clarify something since I can't see your photo of your focus test, make sure you test it at multiple distances. I have had lenses that are perfect at MFD but off at 15+ ft.