6D vs 7D

Mike55 wrote in post #16739287
Interesting. I wouldn't use DPP to compare images, either. There seems to be a bit of noise removal applied there behind the scenes.

I process all my images in LR, and only use DPP for viewing on the road.

Thanks for the heads-up on the 70D. I guess there's not much point in upgrading from the 7D unless you need the video AF.

Just go to preferences and tell DPP to not honor in-camera NR values. It will then not process any noise reduction at all. Info for those that use DPP anyways... I do this sometimes (or most of the time), because good post processing and NR techniques can do better than DPP.

Also, the CF setting for "High ISO Noise Reduction" operates for all ISO levels, not just "high" ISO, whatever that might mean. Also "disabled" doesn't mean "off" or "no NR", it just means it is the least aggressive of all the options. Again info for those that wonder how the NR works from camera raw over to DPP.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16738149
So I'm not sure why you quoted me... did you read the point I was making?

I don't see where I quoted you?

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16739539
I don't see where I quoted you?

Sorry, you didn't quote me entirely, but you responded to me questioning what I said and then later agreed with it...

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16735568
What does doing a 'heavy crop' mean? Was it 1.6? I have run side by side comparisons where I crop the ff to the view of the 7d then resized that crop up to match the 7d, the results were noticeable. Vastly? No, but they were there. Pixel density does indeed make a difference when comparing crops between any 2 differently formatted sensors, then equalizing them.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16739532
Just go to preferences and tell DPP to not honor in-camera NR values. It will then not process any noise reduction at all. Info for those that use DPP anyways... I do this sometimes (or most of the time), because good post processing and NR techniques can do better than DPP.

Also, the CF setting for "High ISO Noise Reduction" operates for all ISO levels, not just "high" ISO, whatever that might mean. Also "disabled" doesn't mean "off" or "no NR", it just means it is the least aggressive of all the options. Again info for those that wonder how the NR works from camera raw over to DPP.

No, it's not that. Or I should say, not only that.
DPP processes my 70D differently from how it processes the 7D, even with all NR settings at 0. Sharpness settings (or unsharp mask) set to the same value, still different processing.
And it is also different for the T4i. If I want equal sharpness to the T4i, I need to bump the sharpness slider by 1 for the 7D and 70D. Same lens, settings, etc. But in that case it may be something in the T4i, it's output image is a bit sharper (and a tiny bit noisier.) When I reduce sharpness a bit, it matches the others and the noise also gets closer to the others naturally.

But just for the record, I rarely use DPP.

gabebalazs wrote in post #16739758
No, it's not that. Or I should say, not only that.
DPP processes my 70D differently from how it processes the 7D, even with all NR settings at 0. Sharpness settings (or unsharp mask) set to the same value, still different processing.
And it is also different for the T4i. If I want equal sharpness to the T4i, I need to bump the sharpness slider by 1 for the 7D and 70D. Same lens, settings, etc. But in that case it may be something in the T4i, it's output image is a bit sharper (and a tiny bit noisier.) When I reduce sharpness a bit, it matches the others and the noise also gets closer to the others naturally.

But just for the record, I rarely use DPP.

I understand, I was just commenting on the DPP always reducing noise when Mike uses it, and that has to do with it honoring the in camera settings. You can turn that off however.

I understand that DPP processes files differently, the JPG code that goes into each camera undoubtedly has a specific routine in DPP so that it produces the same output as if you had just shot JPG OOC. Also each camera has different values under the covers for various things like noise reduction, etc too, that DPP honors. For example, the 6D will have substantially higher NR values at ISO 6400 with High ISO NR set to standard than does the 7D. Different models have different Lum/Chroma values by ISO/CF Setting when compared to each other. I expect that picture styles would show something similar, newer cameras actually employ more of a USM set of values for sharpening vs the old single sharpness value, etc.

As I have refined my 5D3 NR techniques, I have done some very interesting things. For example, I have developed an action that uses no 3rd party NR tools at all for the 5D3, and it cleans things up fairly well with ISO 12800. Something I could not do at all with the 7D, I always had to use Noiseware or something along those lines because the 7D files got "dirty" at those high levels (black spots). I developed this action because I have been asked by some whether I had an action that didn't use any 3rd party tools and I wondered if I could get anything useful at all without 3rd party noise reduction.

Here is a heavy crop of 12800 with NR in DPP set really low on the 5D3, then the action run on it... This just uses various CS3 filters right out of the box. The results are still noisy and a bit blotchy, but much better and can print as is (and much faster). This would work on the 6D as well. This works great on 6400 files though, not so good on 12800.

Yes, your comment about DPP and noise settings is a valid one, that actually makes me shake my head sometimes, since Popphoto always tests cameras using the manufacturers own RAW converter and their default settings, meaning that different bodies will trigger different luminance and chroma values since DPP mirrors the camera settings when processing RAWs, just like you mentioned. So that's why Popphoto often raves about bodies that use the exact same sensor and similar electronics as other bodies (lots of 18mp Canon models) but their settings are different.
So they talk about improvement in noise handling etc. since DPP cranks it up if cranked up in the camera compared to another model.
I remember, according to their measurements following this method, the Canon T1i had better noise number than Nikon's flagship D3X

But even when I set everything exactly the same - picture style, white balance, NR values (to 0), etc. the 70D and the 7D are processed significantly differently by DPP.

gabebalazs wrote in post #16740250
But even when I set everything exactly the same - picture style, white balance, NR values (to 0), etc. the 70D and the 7D are processed significantly differently by DPP.

That makes sense since the 70D has a different JPG engine than the 7D, and in order for DPP to create the "same" JPG as the camera, it would have to know which JPG algorithm to run based on model. Just my theory though, although I am not sure why they wouldn't want DPP to always produce the best JPG possible regardless of what model the photo came from, so perhaps I am wrong and there is some other reason.

Regarding noise differences in the camera, here are the settings between the 7D and 5D2. If I had the original spreadsheet from this, I would add the 5D3 to the mix.

I also have a question on the 7d vs. 6d topic. I tend to use the outside focus points heavily. i understand that there are less focus points on the 6d, but what differace will i see in AF on the outside focus point going from a 7d-6d? I understand that the only crosstype focus point on the 6d is the center point. I shoot mostly non moving objects, and manualy select the focus point i want. Thanks

streamer wrote in post #16741380
I also have a question on the 7d vs. 6d topic. I tend to use the outside focus points heavily. i understand that there are less focus points on the 6d, but what differace will i see in AF on the outside focus point going from a 7d-6d? I understand that the only crosstype focus point on the 6d is the center point. I shoot mostly non moving objects, and manualy select the focus point i want. Thanks

If you are shooting static objects, the outer points on the 6D should be more than sufficient, I would think. They were on the 5D2 and prior, and the 6D is better than those. The only issue there was that depending on the patterns of the objects and the lighting, the AF sensor may not be able to easily lock in focus, but the conditions would have to be pretty difficult.

The only time outer points get a bit sticky on the old 9pt AF design is when you try to track movements with them, some systems work better than others, but none of them really match what the other models can do when they are set up with more AF points or better overall AF systems.

streamer wrote in post #16741380
I also have a question on the 7d vs. 6d topic. I tend to use the outside focus points heavily. i understand that there are less focus points on the 6d, but what differace will i see in AF on the outside focus point going from a 7d-6d? I understand that the only crosstype focus point on the 6d is the center point. I shoot mostly non moving objects, and manualy select the focus point i want. Thanks

outer points for the 6D are serviceable, not great. The outer points of the 7D are much better, but the reverse can be said about the image quality. I mainly use outer points on the 6D, and dont have much issues. You do have to be aware of high contrast items when using the 6D outer points. It's the biggest downfall of the camera, but if you're willing to work with it, you'll be rewarded with top notch IQ, considerably better than the 7D.

Has anyone else noticed a cartoony quality to the 7D images compared to the 6D when shooting wildlife?

With the same lenses, subjects appear less colorful, more "rounded" along the edges, and slightly smeary looking.

My 7D, when working properly can take some great shots, but you really need to fill the frame. The 6D seems to actually beg for cropping abuse, lol. And the images are silky, clean, colorful and brighter.

I notice that when I use lenses that cannot resolve enough detail, and the 100% crops are very "splattered" looking. I have run about 20 lenses past the 7D, and some work great at 100% and others give a splotchy, cartoony look, if I had to call it that. It is not the camera, but rather the glass being able to get the minute detail down to the dense sensor. The other thing I noticed too was that I needed to up my shutter speeds to really lock in the detail, more so than less dense previous APS-C bodies.

For example the 100-400 did very good, and this is about a 50% crop, through a glass window. Plenty of detail...
http://teamspeed.smugm​ug.com …92491&k=KNFqnNw​&lb=1&s=X3
http://teamspeed.smugm​ug.com …91241&k=kDTzmhG​&lb=1&s=X3
http://teamspeed.smugm​ug.com …32724&k=Tv6jqWh​&lb=1&s=X3
http://teamspeed.smugm​ug.com …32531&k=9kB7V8v​&lb=1&s=X3

100% crop from the 100L at ISO 800, the flower is about the size of a dime.
http://teamspeed.smugm​ug.com …25523&k=cFGwWF4​&lb=1&s=X3

Here was another copy of a 100-400L, but it didn't do very well at all, on the same body, and exhibits ugly artifacts and I don't even know why I still have this in my gallery. I got rid of the lens very shortly after.
http://teamspeed.smugm​ug.com …32844&k=ZF57NWC​&lb=1&s=X3

Example from the 500mm, but my shutter speed was too slow and I didn't have the OS engaged. The bird was moving as was I, and he was just swinging his giant head around toward us. But that very situation creates a bad effect at 100%, not quite the same effect as the prior picture.
http://teamspeed.smugm​ug.com …627169&k=2V8Ddn​S&lb=1&s=O

Now the same Sigma lens, but better shutter speeds, and thus the detail is better.
http://teamspeed.smugm​ug.com …626460&k=skFdc8​M&lb=1&s=O

This one is a bit strange, again from the Sigma, and I think it is just the DOF being thin enough and gradual enough, but am not sure. There is feather detail in various places, but smeared elsewhere.
http://teamspeed.smugm​ug.com …686454&k=35mGfT​n&lb=1&s=O

So glass and shutter together make big differences, but this is just my own observation though... And just because a lens has a red ring, it may still not resolve enough detail on the 7D or its siblings. The 24-105L for example, just like the 100-400L, have a pretty substantial copy variation between them. Some do outstandingly well, others don't resolve enough detail.