7D raw qulity on L lens. higher or lower?

So I remember reading somewhere that the 18 megapixels that the 7D has, isn't necessarily all that great with the ASP-C sensor when using L lenses. (higher noise). So my question is that because Im using L lenses in hopes of going FF soon, would it benefit me to drop the Raw resolution in hopes for better IQ (less noise). Right now I use max Raw Res for editing and the smallest Jpep for samples.

No. Noise has nothing to do with resolution; you'd simply be reducing the resolution that you have to work with in the images. You just need to make sure you are getting your exposures correct in-camera; if you do that, you should be able to shoot the 7D up to around ISO 1250 or so, easily, and above with more effort in PP.

Here's a 7D ISO 6400 image shot in full resolution RAW (it took me less than a minute to process this in Lightroom 4.1). This was shot with the EF 70-200 f/4L IS. This image was, of course, downsized for posting, which probably helps "bury" some of the noise, so I also uploaded a 100% crop. I could have been more aggressive in Lightroom with noise reduction; it does a great job of retaining detail.

Check out https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=744235 and https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1079217 for how you can get the best possible high-ISO image quality from the 7D. Realistically, the 7D has around a stop worse high-ISO noise compared to the 5Dii, and maybe two stops worse than the 5DIII. That's plenty good enough for many of us.

The 7D certainly will not be harmed by using good lenses, regardless of resolution or sensor size.

I think it is the opposite. The 7D performs better with quality glass. Some lenses that shot well with older bodies are severly tested by the resolution of the 7D.

As long as you look at pictures, it doesn't matter so much, but there are always those who can't help themselves but blow up images to 200% and more. Then you may very well notice.

I have used EFS lenses originally on my 7D. After updating to L lenses the quality improved greatly. Both the 16-35L II is much sharper than the EFS 10-22, and the 24-105 is better than the EFS 17-85. Not just for resolution, but color as well. Now that I have a 5DIII as well as the 7D, I am glad I got the L lenses.

newphoto wrote in post #14820444
I have used EFS lenses originally on my 7D. After updating to L lenses the quality improved greatly. Both the 16-35L II is much sharper than the EFS 10-22, and the 24-105 is better than the EFS 17-85. Not just for resolution, but color as well. Now that I have a 5DIII as well as the 7D, I am glad I got the L lenses.

The 17-85 is not a very stellar lens, so I could see the improvement there. The 10-22 is a great lens, and I would love to see 22mm on both as a comparison.

The 17-55 and 55-250, for example, are quite sharp, and resolve well to the 7D sensor.

I can plainly see noise in the background images of the dogs. Its easy to see even here.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #14820505
The 17-85 is not a very stellar lens, so I could see the improvement there. The 10-22 is a great lens, and I would love to see 22mm on both as a comparison.

The 17-55 and 55-250, for example, are quite sharp, and resolve well to the 7D sensor.

Just my subjective opinion of course and yes, the 10-22 was the closest to the L lens quality of the two. I don't have any experience with the other two EFS lenses you listed. If that is your daughter, she is lovely!

Of course there's noise, but it's at ISO 6400. Nothing that destroys the picture.

I guess that depends on what you mean by destroys it. I wouldn't want it in something that I had, then again I don't ever shoot at that high an ISO either.

I'm perhaps less sensitive. I don't find the image noise being any problem even in this picture. It's shot at ISO 12800 with a 7D, in order to get a reasonable shutter speed for the focal length used (1/200 s @ f/2.8), then cropped quite a bit.
The dark background is noisy, but the people in the photo are reasonable. White balance is tricky with the mixed and weak artificial lights that were available.

Bsmooth wrote in post #14820672
I can plainly see noise in the background images of the dogs. Its easy to see even here.

You'll see noise at ISO 6400 in the dark background of a 5Dii, 5Diii, or 1DX image too. My point was that the 7D can easily produce usable images at ISOs above 1600. I could print that particular image at least at 8X10 and I daresay the noise would be invisible in the print. That 100% crop that I posted is about an 8.7" X 6.9" (assuming a display resolution of 90 pixels/inch) section of a 57.6" X 38.4" poster-size image, and at the average viewing distance for a computer monitor you're looking at that poster-sized image at maybe an 18" to 24" viewing distance. No matter what the camera, you won't see a noise-free image at ISO 6400 at that size and viewing distance.

There's noticeable noise on the shadows on the faces, at this size and resolution it's good enough, I wouldn't blow it up much.