-= 7D2 owners unite! Discuss and post photos!

mwsilver wrote in post #18724212
Hah! I love the analogy. Take a look at my image of the lighthouse at Peggy's Cove and that's exactly what it looks like. Every where we went the selfie brigade was out in force. No one seems to just want images of where they've been. They only want self-absorbed snapshots of themselves standing in front of, and obscuring, some beautiful view. I often had to spend considerable time, especially at Peggy's Cove, to get clean shots without people walking through them.

That is why they invented clone stamp however scenes like those are a real pain I don't bother.

digital paradise wrote in post #18724336
That is why they invented clone stamp however scenes like those are a real pain I don't bother.

This is the best I could get without people, but it doesn't show the sea or the beautiful rock formations.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2aqx​wBe

Pondrader wrote in post #18723740

Hosted photo: posted by Pondrader in
./showthread.php?p=187​23740&i=i24487591
forum: Canon EOS Digital Cameras

That is a terrific shot!!

mwsilver wrote in post #18724351
That is a terrific shot!!

Thanks Mark... Moose are a lot of fun to shoot.

Just curious to know what would be your highest comfortable ISO that you use on 7DII , I always thought 3200 was ok but watching a bunch of stuff on utube by wildlife photographers I notice many refuse to go go higher than ISO 800 or at the higher end ISO 1600. They claim loss of detail and too much noise on crop sensors. I always felt it was more about not under exposing and trying to pull out shadows that was more the issue. Now Im curious what others think

I would have preferred this not being iso 4000, but I even pushed it further for the look I wanted.

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

aladyforty wrote in post #18724499
Just curious to know what would be your highest comfortable ISO that you use on 7DII , I always thought 3200 was ok but watching a bunch of stuff on utube by wildlife photographers I notice many refuse to go go higher than ISO 800 or at the higher end ISO 1600. They claim loss of detail and too much noise on crop sensors. I always felt it was more about not under exposing and trying to pull out shadows that was more the issue. Now Im curious what others think

I personally like to shoot at ISO 400 (or less) for all my BIF and static shots. I will go up to 800 if necessary, but even for my birds in flight shots, I'll reduce my shutter speed rather than run my ISO up. For static shots I will also stay under 800 and greatly prefer to shoot at an ISO of 400 and less. I always try to shoot TTR(to the right) and closely watch my histogram and blinkies so as not to blow any highlights. On static shots, I find that I can rely on my lens stabilization to allow me to really shoot at fairly slow shutter speeds, hence lowering my ISO.

Having said all the above, there at occasions where I've gotten away successfully with an ISO of 3200, but more often than not, the image won't pass as acceptable.

aladyforty wrote in post #18724499
Just curious to know what would be your highest comfortable ISO that you use on 7DII , I always thought 3200 was ok but watching a bunch of stuff on utube by wildlife photographers I notice many refuse to go go higher than ISO 800 or at the higher end ISO 1600. They claim loss of detail and too much noise on crop sensors. I always felt it was more about not under exposing and trying to pull out shadows that was more the issue. Now Im curious what others think

My philosophy is to shoot first, ask questions later. A satisfactory pic depends not just on ISO but on shutter speed too, and on over- or underexposure. And on the amount of cropping. And I do a lot of cropping, often severely, and that brings out the noise. So I've never settled on an ISO red line. I shoot in manual with auto ISO and shoot what I see. The ones that suffer too much noise or blur from motion or focus uncertainty get culled. Noise looks much worse if there is blur.

Immaculens wrote in post #18724515
I would have preferred this not being iso 4000, but I even pushed it further for the look I wanted.

Hosted photo: posted by Immaculens in
./showthread.php?p=187​24515&i=i44103607
forum: Canon EOS Digital Cameras

Very nice shot, Will!

aladyforty wrote in post #18724499
Just curious to know what would be your highest comfortable ISO that you use on 7DII , I always thought 3200 was ok but watching a bunch of stuff on utube by wildlife photographers I notice many refuse to go go higher than ISO 800 or at the higher end ISO 1600. They claim loss of detail and too much noise on crop sensors. I always felt it was more about not under exposing and trying to pull out shadows that was more the issue. Now Im curious what others think

In my experience noise is not about lowest iso or meter at zero or crop or full frame sensor.. I do not believe the larger sensor is so much better in any or all situations. I rarely like 100 iso and in the case of the 7DII in normal day light 1600 iso can be my top end.. BUT I have taken some super noise free images at way way higher iso's in some really bad light. I don't think there is a key hole answer to the noise game but proper exposure for a given circumstance is key to less noise and would a full frame sensor do it better for what I've seen.... No.... But thats just my experience.

Shooting small birds I will try and keep my iso at a reasonable level but not really 100iso. I will shoot slower to keep it down.. below 1000 in overcast sky.... That goes for big game as well.. Like the moose in the rain at just a few feet last week. I took it down to 1/80th on a walking moving moose to keep the detail..

I know some will say they can shoot much higher say 1600, 2000, 3200.. I can tell you I can pick every one of those images out of a line up. I also find the 7DII terrible in bright sunshine and I think its the noise in the shadows of detail that drives me crazy. I know theres a lot of opinion's on this subject..

I will say my thoughts are based on shooting wildlife... Birds, bears, deer, moose... thats kind of thing so that is my bases for my thoughts.

As for large sensor ver crop in real life I think its very much a neck in neck race and the more educated photographer in that situation will come out on top. Now saying that detail comes down the perfect focus and the larger sensors generally come in more expensive higher end cameras so that can be a factor if the photog's skills are not at the top of their game.

This is a raw exported from lightroomcc to fit here, untouched in any respect.. basically how it came out of the came as a raw. It is at or about at my max iso and slowest speed I would really like to shoot at. This is in the rain as you can see everything is wet.. the sky's opened up right after I took this shot. From here this image would start to fall apart with noise and or motion blur if I had to go any slower or higher in iso. of course a fast lens could really help out here. keep in mind I'm standing on a large boulder about 5 feet around that is covered in mud and sopping wet and I'm shooting handheld..

Honestly I think everyone knows what I think as we've talk about this stuff before and I have a couple thousand images here. I have explained how I think, I hope to be understandable to everyone.

I know some are better at their craft and will have their own opinions.

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

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

aladyforty wrote in post #18724499
Just curious to know what would be your highest comfortable ISO that you use on 7DII , I always thought 3200 was ok but watching a bunch of stuff on utube by wildlife photographers I notice many refuse to go go higher than ISO 800 or at the higher end ISO 1600. They claim loss of detail and too much noise on crop sensors. I always felt it was more about not under exposing and trying to pull out shadows that was more the issue. Now Im curious what others think

I am comfortable shooting up to ISO 6400 depending on the subject and other factors. I can also easily clean up any residual noise in DXO PhtoLab's incredible Prime noise reduction. The first two images are at ISO 2000 and ISO 2500 respectively. The second two are at ISO 6400. Any lack of sharpness in the second two images is a result of the limitations of the Tamron 18-400 lens at 400mm.


At ISO 2000

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/N4ux​MT

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2bPx​R7F

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2bKc​d3L

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2aHG​K7y

Pondrader wrote in post #18724535
In my experience noise is not about lowest iso or meter at zero or crop or full frame sensor.. I do not believe the larger sensor is so much better in any or all situations. I rarely like 100 iso and in the case of the 7DII in normal day light 1600 iso can be my top end.. BUT I have taken some super noise free images at way way higher iso's in some really bad light. I don't think there is a key hole answer to the noise game but proper exposure for a given circumstance is key to less noise and would a full frame sensor do it better for what I've seen.... No.... But thats just my experience.

Shooting small birds I will try and keep my iso at a reasonable level but not really 100iso. I will shoot slower to keep it down.. below 1000 in overcast sky.... That goes for big game as well.. Like the moose in the rain at just a few feet last week. I took it down to 1/80th on a walking moving moose to keep the detail..

I know some will say they can shoot much higher say 1600, 2000, 3200.. I can tell you I can pick every one of those images out of a line up. I also find the 7DII terrible in bright sunshine and I think its the noise in the shadows of detail that drives me crazy. I know theres a lot of opinion's on this subject..

I will say my thoughts are based on shooting wildlife... Birds, bears, deer, moose... thats kind of thing so that is my bases for my thoughts.

As for large sensor ver crop in real life I think its very much a neck in neck race and the more educated photographer in that situation will come out on top. Now saying that detail comes down the perfect focus and the larger sensors generally come in more expensive higher end cameras so that can be a factor if the photog's skills are not at the top of their game.

This is a raw exported from lightroomcc to fit here, untouched in any respect.. basically how it came out of the came as a raw. It is at or about at my max iso and slowest speed I would really like to shoot at. This is in the rain as you can see everything is wet.. the sky's opened up right after I took this shot. From here this image would start to fall apart with noise and or motion blur if I had to go any slower or higher in iso. of course a fast lens could really help out here. keep in mind I'm standing on a large boulder about 5 feet around that is covered in mud and sopping wet and I'm shooting handheld..

Honestly I think everyone knows what I think as we've talk about this stuff before and I have a couple thousand images here. I have explained how I think, I hope to be understandable to everyone.

I know some are better at their craft and will have their own opinions.

Hosted photo: posted by Pondrader in
./showthread.php?p=187​24535&i=i127863264
forum: Canon EOS Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by Pondrader in
./showthread.php?p=187​24535&i=i199706800
forum: Canon EOS Digital Cameras

I don't do much wildlife and I know its the basis for your opinion on high ISO shots, but is it that obvious to your eyes that my images below were shot at high ISO? Do you see a lot of noise? Neither of these are from a top performing lenses, just the Efs 15-85 for the first one which was taken through a glass case, and the Tamron 18-400 for the second one. Both are slow lenses not intended for low light shots. The ISO of the first one is 2500 and for the second 6400. I think the 7D Mark II handled it very well. They were processed using DXO's Prime noise reduction BUT there is a limit to what any noise reduction software can do. By the way, the speckles you see on the top edge of the Pepsi Cola sign is accumulated dust and oils from hanging near the kitchen of a seafood restaurant and is not noise.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2bPx​R7F

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2aHG​K7y

aladyforty wrote in post #18724499
Just curious to know what would be your highest comfortable ISO that you use on 7DII , I always thought 3200 was ok but watching a bunch of stuff on utube by wildlife photographers I notice many refuse to go go higher than ISO 800 or at the higher end ISO 1600. They claim loss of detail and too much noise on crop sensors. I always felt it was more about not under exposing and trying to pull out shadows that was more the issue. Now Im curious what others think

I shoot upwards of 3200-4000 if I have to, normally I'm around 800-1600. Quality of light helps with noise, even if there isn't a lot of it. This shot could have been shot at a much lower ISO but I was trying to take the shot quick since I rescued this little guy from the road and forgot to change my settings after swapping out my 150-600mm for my 90mm macro.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from Squa7ch2112's gallery.

mwsilver wrote in post #18724560
I don't do much wildlife and I know its the basis for your opinion on high ISO shots, but is it that obvious to your eyes that my images below were shot at high ISO? Do you see a lot of noise? Neither of these are from a top performing lenses, just the Efs 15-85 for the first one which was taken through a glass case, and the Tamron 18-400 for the second one. Both are slow lenses not intended for low light shots. The ISO of the first one is 2500 and for the second 6400. I think the 7D Mark II handled it very well. They were processed using DXO's Prime noise reduction BUT there is a limit to what any noise reduction software can do. By the way, the speckles you see on the top edge of the Pepsi Cola sign is accumulated dust and oils from hanging near the kitchen of a seafood restaurant and is not noise.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2bPx​R7F 7D2_0178_DxO by mwsilver, on Flickr

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2aHG​K7y LP0A3924_DxO by mwsilver, on Flickr

Mark...Your images shot at high ISO values look very good to me. I am not seeing any noise issues. With the types of images you are shooting, noise issues have not been a problem. You mentioned that you do not shoot much wildlife, but I'm sure you have taken some bird and other wildlife pictures at these higher ISO numbers. I would be very appreciative if you would post a few of them, mainly birds in flight and animals that are on the move. I'm guessing that you've shot some under conditions that are not so favorable as do all of us wildlife photographers. If you could post up a few of them also, that have be shot at high ISO values, I personally would like to learn how to improve my own images from what you do to get successful shots. I thank you in advance, Mark, and look forward to viewing some of your high ISO wildlife shots.

regards,

Mike

Lame-Duck wrote in post #18724567
Mark...Your images shot at high ISO values look very good to me. I am not seeing any noise issues. With the types of images you are shooting, noise issues have not been a problem. You mentioned that you do not shoot much wildlife, but I'm sure you have taken some bird and other wildlife pictures at these higher ISO numbers. I would be very appreciative if you would post a few of them, mainly birds in flight and animals that are on the move. I'm guessing that you've shot some under conditions that are not so favorable as do all of us wildlife photographers. If you could post up a few of them also, that have be shot at high ISO values, I personally would like to learn how to improve my own images from what you do to get successful shots. I thank you in advance, Mark, and look forward to viewing some of your high ISO wildlife shots.

regards,

Mike

I'm not sure if I have any high ISO wildlife shots much above ISO 800 - 1600. I will have to take a look.