Mini-Review: Trying To Get the Most out of the 7D High ISO Images

TeamSpeed wrote in post #15840744
@cybercat, so what kind of settings are typical of what you shoot, because we have some shots in this thread that are in quite low light, all the way to the point the AF starts to give up the ghost?

Remember that low light is not the only reason one would need high iso values. Also, the different settings and techniques outlined here help with ANY exposure (or any body really), whether super low light or otherwise, it doesn't really matter you shoot in venues at "lower" exposures than what you see here (even though I have examples either here or elsewhere where I am shooting at 1/15th at f2.8 at 3200, which is nearly so dark, you cannot make out details of objects.

You are right, I forgot to mention that I shoot cat shows indoors usually without any natural light. Only artificial light not on full power as that makes the rooms too warm.
I need to keep the shutter speed at 1/125 or faster to minimize motion blur from the fact that cats are animals and moving.
So low light and relatively faster shutter speeds - that is why I need high ISO.

Here is an example how noisy it gets for me at ISO 1600.

CyberCat wrote in post #15840900
You are right, I forgot to mention that I shoot cat shows indoors usually without any natural light. Only artificial light not on full power as that makes the rooms too warm.
I need to keep the shutter speed at 1/125 or faster to minimize motion blur from the fact that cats are animals and moving.
So low light and relatively faster shutter speeds - that is why I need high ISO.

Here is an example how noisy it gets for me at ISO 1600.

I shoot primarily in all artificial lighting as well. My daughter eating, taken at ISO 6400, 1/15th, f2.8, well below the level of your sample. No post processing other than adjusting the raw accordingly and creating the JPG.

Do you feel the addition of using DPP helps reduce the noise levels then?

I noticed a lot of people here prefer using DPP over ACR/LR for NR. Is it really better? I find ACR does a mighty fine job and when i did try DPP about a year ago i was getting dredful results. Is there a new version out that has improved NR?

boerewors wrote in post #15841239
I noticed a lot of people here prefer using DPP over ACR/LR for NR. Is it really better? I find ACR does a mighty fine job and when i did try DPP about a year ago i was getting dredful results. Is there a new version out that has improved NR?

DPP continually gets updated, I think at the very minimum, each time a new camera comes out. When they update the JPG engine in a camera, for example, DPP has to have the same codebase. If you are an expert at the other tools and can deal with noise first, then sharpening second, then DPP probably offers little to no gain. DPP honors the camera settings which is nice. Since JPG images out of the 5D3 and 1DX are so good, that means that DPP can produce the same results from a raw file now. I only use DPP to produce the JPGs after changing a few sliders around, I actually set values to be less aggressive, then I use photoshop/noiseware to do my post processing.

Since it is free, it just take a little bit of time to try it out vs what you do today.

CyberCat wrote in post #15840900
You are right, I forgot to mention that I shoot cat shows indoors usually without any natural light. Only artificial light not on full power as that makes the rooms too warm.
I need to keep the shutter speed at 1/125 or faster to minimize motion blur from the fact that cats are animals and moving.
So low light and relatively faster shutter speeds - that is why I need high ISO.

Here is an example how noisy it gets for me at ISO 1600.

Two things I think of when I see this shot:
1. are we comparing 100% or heavy crops (this one) to full frame images (many of the other ones we see here)? Lots of noise and artifacting more or less disappears when you downres to a computer screen size.
2. the fringe around the shirt and the top of the cat's head makes me wonder what was done in this image in PP and how much that affects the noise seen. The cat itself doesn't look that noisy although it is hard to tell in the fur but look at his eyes or even her bottom hand in the shadow. No where near as bad as the background.

FWIW I also find that opening RAW files in DPP is very useful for noise control. Makes lens corrections (another topic) easier as well.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #15840735
If you are curious about what each setting does at any iso level, take a test shot and then go to DPP with the raw and look at the nr sliders.

TeamSpeed, thank you very much for taking the time to reply to my question.

Unfortunately I am running Linux, so DPP doesn't work for me.

Your chart however is very enlightening. If it is easy for you, I would appreciate the same information for the lower ISO settings.

Thank you in advance,

Gerry

CyberCat wrote in post #15840900
You are right, I forgot to mention that I shoot cat shows indoors usually without any natural light. Only artificial light not on full power as that makes the rooms too warm.
I need to keep the shutter speed at 1/125 or faster to minimize motion blur from the fact that cats are animals and moving.
So low light and relatively faster shutter speeds - that is why I need high ISO.

Here is an example how noisy it gets for me at ISO 1600.

Ouch that's noisier than my XTi

TeamSpeed wrote in post #15840735
If you are curious about what each setting does at any iso level, take a test shot and then go to DPP with the raw and look at the nr sliders.

Hey, TeamSpeed -

When you first open the image to be edited in DPP, do you use the above NR settings in DPP or some others?

Thanks for a very useful thread!

Yogi

Yogi Bear wrote in post #15841845
Hey, TeamSpeed -

When you first open the image to be edited in DPP, do you use the above NR settings in DPP or some others?

Thanks for a very useful thread!

Yogi

These are the DPP settings that come across from the camera. I found it very enlightening (almost reverse-engineering in a sense) to see what the engineers at Canon thought about the noise levels on the 7D vs 5D2 (and other cameras) when they set the defaults. It would be very interesting to have a spreadsheet laid out with cameras on top, and ISO levels down the side, with 4 pairs of values in each cell, so we could start to get an idea of the different ways Canon works out the details of the JPGs.

For example, at standard or strong at ISO 12800, the 5D2 and 7D are nearly identical. At other levels, the 5D2 has more luminescent NR dialed in than the 7D, but the reverse at the chroma noise. The reason we see "dirtier" low ISO shots from the 7D is because, in my opinion, Canon didnt' dial in enough Lum. NR vs what they had on the 5D2. I also wonder if the 60D, and other bodies have different settings as Canon had time to re-evaluate their settings based on public opinion.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #15841268
DPP continually gets updated, I think at the very minimum, each time a new camera comes out. When they update the JPG engine in a camera, for example, DPP has to have the same codebase. If you are an expert at the other tools and can deal with noise first, then sharpening second, then DPP probably offers little to no gain. DPP honors the camera settings which is nice. Since JPG images out of the 5D3 and 1DX are so good, that means that DPP can produce the same results from a raw file now. I only use DPP to produce the JPGs after changing a few sliders around, I actually set values to be less aggressive, then I use photoshop/noiseware to do my post processing.

Since it is free, it just take a little bit of time to try it out vs what you do today.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #15841905
These are the DPP settings that come across from the camera. I found it very enlightening (almost reverse-engineering in a sense) to see what the engineers at Canon thought about the noise levels on the 7D vs 5D2 (and other cameras) when they set the defaults. It would be very interesting to have a spreadsheet laid out with cameras on top, and ISO levels down the side, with 4 pairs of values in each cell, so we could start to get an idea of the different ways Canon works out the details of the JPGs.

For example, at standard or strong at ISO 12800, the 5D2 and 7D are nearly identical. At other levels, the 5D2 has more luminescent NR dialed in than the 7D, but the reverse at the chroma noise. The reason we see "dirtier" low ISO shots from the 7D is because, in my opinion, Canon didnt' dial in enough Lum. NR vs what they had on the 5D2. I also wonder if the 60D, and other bodies have different settings as Canon had time to re-evaluate their settings based on public opinion.

OK - but what settings in DPP do you use for the NR? The default 'from-the-camera settings or do you have some specific settings?

Thank you!

Yogi

Yogi Bear wrote in post #15842004
OK - but what settings in DPP do you use for the NR? The default 'from-the-camera settings or do you have some specific settings?

Thank you!

Yogi

I usually use "standard" in the camera, then take the chroma slider down a few notches in DPP. I then use a very mild sharpen on the hue/saturation/sharpne​ss tab (maybe 5-10), and then on the first tab, take that sharpen down to 1 to 2, for all my high ISOs.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #15842209
I usually use "standard" in the camera, then take the chroma slider down a few notches in DPP. I then use a very mild sharpen on the hue/saturation/sharpne​ss tab (maybe 5-10), and then on the first tab, take that sharpen down to 1 to 2, for all my high ISOs.

Thank you very much, TS!

Yogi

Here you go Gerry.

Teamspeed,

Thank you very much. Wow, they are heavy handed on chroma correction!

I guess one could argue that up to 3200 the NR is not radically different in-camera (once you choose to apply NR). So I might as well leave the High correction... In really low light conditions, I have to shoot RAW as well.

Last night I was experimenting with ETTR comparing noise textures at ISO 6400 when it came to me to try the (non)ETTR shot at ISO3200 at high NR in camera. I was impressed by the result. Yes, I can do better in Darktable (I have 4 different ways to NR) but it takes a few minutes. The results in-camera were satisfactory right off the bat!

So I started wondering whether I take any hit in sharpness by choosing NR High vs Standard (I had been using all along) and at what ISO there is High ISO NR.

After seeing these tables, I think that up to ISO 3200 I don't have to worry about it and at 3200-6400 there is a small hit, but I would probably work the RAW anyway...