Just a Simple Question About Dynamic Range

Canon are unlikely to make the rebels produce idential IQ to the 7D, some firmware will have been added to see to it.

Neilyb wrote in post #15097585
Canon are unlikely to make the rebels produce idential IQ to the 7D, some firmware will have been added to see to it.

Heh.

Actually, I think the IQ of current rebels is so close to that of the 7D that the difference doesn't matter. The 7D's high ISO performance is just barely better than the T4i's. The difference was visible, yes, but barely so.

kcbrown wrote in post #15097745
Heh.

Actually, I think the IQ of current rebels is so close to that of the 7D that the difference doesn't matter. The 7D's high ISO performance is just barely better than the T4i's. The difference was visible, yes, but barely so.

Actually I think you all have this backwards. Owning both a T2i and a 7D I can tell you that the 7D is slightly softer. This is due to a stronger a/a filter which is there for good reason if you ever shoot anything with lots of lines close together. Of course if you are shooting something where the stronger a/a filter is a benefit, then the IQ could be considered higher. But the usual stuff - portraits, trees, mountains, flowers, birds, pets, etc this doesn't come into play. So if you are shopping on sharpness alone, even the T2i is slightly sharper than the 7D straight out of the camera. Shooting in RAW with some good sharpening techniques, you can make it a non-issue but it is more work. Other than that, it is the same sensor as the T2i, T3i, 60D.

The T4i is new sensor design and from the samples I've seen, the noise is improved on it.

Of course, the 7D is an older camera. It wouldn't be surprising for the sensor on a new rebel to be superior. The 7D isn't about the sensor. It's about having all the other features of a pro model camera on a crop sensor filling a market niche for people who need all that stuff, but aren't convinced that having a full-frame sensor is worth the extra $4000 or more.

The need for an AA filter is determined by outright resolution not pixel density correct?

One rumour was that as resolution increased with the new bodies "around the corner", anti-aliasing filters would not be required. So I got the same impression as you.

The new Pentax K-5 II has a model without AA filter using the 16mp Sony sensor....

Im curious to see how it handles Moire..

That said the 7D gets a hair of extra sharpening from Lightroom and it looks great..

KenjiS wrote in post #15099263
The need for an AA filter is determined by outright resolution not pixel density correct?

Right. So lenses play a part as well. Interestingly, if you had an APS-C sensor that could oversample - perhaps getting to the 24MP resolution level, and you had the lenses to do it, you could do away with the A/A filter entirely. That also happens to be a number that often pops up regarding rumors of a 7D mkII. Also, the delayed development of a new sensor for the 7DII has been rumored to be the cause of the unprecendented 2.0 firmware update that recently came out. The aggressive AA filter is a big gripe of many 7D owners so it leads me to wonder if Canon doesn't have a new trick up its sleeve soon in releasing the 7D replacement with a 24MP sensor that does away with the AA filter entirely. WIth dual digic 5 processors that would be able to put out about 10 fps. That also happens to be just the camera it would take to pry my 7D from my fingertips.

I've heard the D800E does VERY well sans-AA filter (ie very VERY rare Moire problems)

As for a 24mp 10fps 7DII... Oh man, Itd be a hard choice between getting that and saving up towards a 5DIII... Probubly get the 7DII though

kfreels wrote in post #15098241
Actually I think you all have this backwards. Owning both a T2i and a 7D I can tell you that the 7D is slightly softer. This is due to a stronger a/a filter which is there for good reason if you ever shoot anything with lots of lines close together. Of course if you are shooting something where the stronger a/a filter is a benefit, then the IQ could be considered higher. But the usual stuff - portraits, trees, mountains, flowers, birds, pets, etc this doesn't come into play. So if you are shopping on sharpness alone, even the T2i is slightly sharper than the 7D straight out of the camera. Shooting in RAW with some good sharpening techniques, you can make it a non-issue but it is more work. Other than that, it is the same sensor as the T2i, T3i, 60D.

I agree with the above for low ISO images, but if you're talking about ISO 12800, the sharpness difference becomes moot, and the noise signature itself dominates. The 7D's noise signature is slightly better than the T4i's based on the imaging-resource.com samples I've played with. Not by much, mind you, but it's there. Now, it's possible that the difference is merely the result of copy variation, but that result seems to be consistent between their 7D and every other 18 megapixel camera image of theirs that I've played with.

In JPEG, yes, but RAW is what I'm using as my basis of comparison, and for that, it's not improved in the slightest from what I've seen.

Exactly. I'm not arguing that the 7D is superior to the others on the basis of its imaging sensor, only that it's not worse despite the fact that it's older. Canon has made no improvements whatsoever to its 18 megapixel sensor that I can discern. The sharpness differences at low ISO are the result of different antialiasing filter choices. I'm planning on having the AA filter removed from one of my 7Ds to see how much of a difference it really makes.

kcbrown wrote in post #15099729
Exactly. I'm not arguing that the 7D is superior to the others on the basis of its imaging sensor, only that it's not worse despite the fact that it's older. Canon has made no improvements whatsoever to its 18 megapixel sensor that I can discern. The sharpness differences at low ISO are the result of different antialiasing filter choices. I'm planning on having the AA filter removed from one of my 7Ds to see how much of a difference it really makes.

I want to see that!

KenjiS wrote in post #15099737
I want to see that!

YES. Please do post a thread about it.
Just keep in mind, I think this same filter blocks IR and also may change other optical properties.

bigVinnie wrote in post #15082901
Back in the 80's I played this game. Switched between Canon, Nikon, Leica, Hassleblad, Mamiya (2 models). Wised up and figured out the limiting factor was not the equipment, it was my skills.

Only person who can figure out what images of mine were taken with what camera is me. That is because I remember, not because I can see the differences.

Brilliant! Especially the last two sentences.

I just miss my film sometimes I think, Looking through old slides makes me go "Gee i wish i could still do x" but i simply cant get the same effect because i dont have an equivalent lens... lol

I love the "look" of a 35mm equivalent lens from what I can gather, but there isnt a GREAT 35mm equivalent for my 7D (Not like the 35mm f/1.4L on a full frame cam) well..maybe the 24mm f/1.4L i suppose thats closeish...

KenjiS wrote in post #15099997
I just miss my film sometimes I think, Looking through old slides makes me go "Gee i wish i could still do x" but i simply cant get the same effect because i dont have an equivalent lens... lol

I love the "look" of a 35mm equivalent lens from what I can gather, but there isnt a GREAT 35mm equivalent for my 7D (Not like the 35mm f/1.4L on a full frame cam) well..maybe the 24mm f/1.4L i suppose thats closeish...

1st. Thanks everyone for your discussions on dynamic range. This has been a very informative and educational post. Probably one of the best I have seen in a while.

To KenjiS. What about the Canon 20mm f/2.8 USM? I don't know anything about this lens so not sure of it's quality. Sure it's just a bit wider than 35mm (@ 32mm) but you can crop into the image. I do agree with you tho. I missed being able to look through my view finder and see what I expected to see on a 50mm when I had my 50D and other than high ISO noise it was a major reason I went to the 5D. But you are right, there is something about film and the feel and look it produces. I guess that's why I still shoot film too haha.

kfreels wrote in post #15099861
YES. Please do post a thread about it.
Just keep in mind, I think this same filter blocks IR and also may change other optical properties.

Well, that's the plan, anyway. Some additional reading shows that there are actually two low pass filters, one vertical and one horizontal, and typical removal takes care of only one of them. If that's really the case, then I can't see how removing one will improve things, because now suddenly I'll have less sharpening latitude in one direction than the other.

I'll do more research before committing to an action like this. I won't be doing the work myself, of course. I'll probably have some place like Maxmax do it -- some place with a clean room and experience.