t4i to 70d..how much of an improvement?

I have become a bit frustrated withe the t4i s low light inabilities.. seems anything over 800 is not really usable and even 800 is not that great..
So I am looking for an improvement in that area..how much of an improvement would the 70d be?

I mostly use the camera for family events and street photography but I have been getting into portraits latley..it's during those family events that the iso becomes an issue..

I will go full frame eventually bit I'd like a good crop body as well..is this canons best performing crop body? (In terms of high iso)

If you are getting issues with noise at ISO 800 then I would have to say that there is a very good chance that you are underexposing your images. With my 20D I have images shot at ISO 1600, but Exposing To The Right, that have less noise than ISO 100 images that were underexposed by 2/3 rd of a stop and brightened in post. Posting some samples would help though, please try to ensure that the EXIF is also intact.

Alan

The 70D will be almost no improvement over your T4i. The T4i is quite capable of nice results at ISO 6400. My 60D is older and I use 6400 regularly, with more than acceptable results. At that level, you have to shoot raw, you have to expose properly and you have to post process. The advantage is that all of that costs you nothing, and hugely improves your results. If you want to see an even older camera, the 7D, perform well at high ISO, look at TeamSpeed's high-ISO 7D thread. Amazing.

Going to full-frame will get you only 1-2 stops of noise improvement. That gets you to 3200 (optimistically) with similar results. Learning to work with what you have can get you an additional stop and is totally free.

I'll add a voice in agreement of what's been said already. With my T4i I have no issues at all shooting at 3200, and even 6400 is quite acceptable. Of course this is shooting RAW, being careful not to underexpose, and post processing with at least Lightroom, and sometimes also PhotoShop.

groundloop wrote in post #17188102
I'll add a voice in agreement of what's been said already. With my T4i I have no issues at all shooting at 3200, and even 6400 is quite acceptable. Of course this is shooting RAW, being careful not to underexpose, and post processing with at least Lightroom, and sometimes also PhotoShop.

I use Lightroom and Photoshop Elements. Both are quite good, and relatively inexpensive. Certainly a lot cheaper than a 70D or full-frame camera.

I've read in places that it's better so slightly under expose as its easier in post process to fix that as opposed to blown out pics which are alot more difficult. .
I admit my technical abilities aren't that great..I'm still learning..looking to possibly find some hands on lessons

rantercsr wrote in post #17188105
I've read in places that it's better so slightly under expose as its easier in post process to fix that as opposed to blown out pics which are alot more difficult. .
I admit my technical abilities aren't that great..I'm still learning..looking to possibly find some hands on lessons

True enough. How you expose certainly depends on the results you expect.

rantercsr wrote in post #17188105
I've read in places that it's better so slightly under expose as its easier in post process to fix that as opposed to blown out pics which are alot more difficult. .
I admit my technical abilities aren't that great..I'm still learning..looking to possibly find some hands on lessons

Quite the opposite - ETTR or expose to the right, overexposes slightly and reduces noise.

I just upgraded to the 70D. I'm not expecting a huge IQ improvement over my T2i, but I like the advantages in shots/second, buffer, and autofocusing. I plan on writing up a review on the upgrade before too long.

I had a 60D and was bothered by noise, all aps-c are going to be close and while they are usable to decent levels (I have an eosM now as well) even at iso100 I don't much like the "pixel noise" the 6D for me was much nicer, and myabe it was pixel density. If I were you, I'd keep the t4i and go full frame if noise is an issue.

I understand properly exposing images but there is no denying the better noise handling on a full frame and the fact that it will be much more forgiving in post.

But hey, I've gotten some good pics on crop with 3200 just know that it won't look like a full frame, the noise on my 6D is not color noise and much more pleasing than crop. Nature of the beast. Not trying to bash crop (as I said I have one)

iowajim wrote in post #17188160
Quite the opposite - ETTR or expose to the right, overexposes slightly and reduces noise.

How far do you go to the right when shooting a high-key scene where you want to preserve all the details? ETTR is a handy guide-line. It is not an absolute. In most shots I am quite willing to accept blinkies where there is no useful detail. In others, I want absolutely no blinkies.

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17188223
How far do you go to the right when shooting a high-key scene where you want to preserve all the details? ETTR is a handy guide-line. It is not an absolute. In most shots I am quite willing to accept blinkies where there is no useful detail. In others, I want absolutely no blinkies.

Expose so that the brightest thing you want to have detail is right on the edge of the histogram. Sometimes that's everything, sometimes that's most things.

I have just started pushing the ETTR thing and am suprised just how far you can go and still bring the image back. Images on the screen look horribly over exposed but recover amazingly in lightroom (as long as histogram doesnt have any clipping).

On the other hand exposing normally and especially if under exposing and then pushing the shadows the noise is awful.

The advantage of the 70D as far as I can see would be the AF - I would like a better AF as it could use a few more points for tracking subjects. Image quality wise I looked at the 70D and don't see it as a huge enough image quality/AF improvement over the t4i though would have got a 70D had it been out when I bought my t4i. Am quite taken with the 7D2 (released this November) though - small improvement in image quality but potentially ridiculous improvement in AF and custom functions/customisatio​n etc.

travisvwright wrote in post #17188237
Expose so that the brightest thing you want to have detail is right on the edge of the histogram. Sometimes that's everything, sometimes that's most things.

Exactly, it's not hard at all. You use the histogram. If you are not using the histogram to gauge how far left you are going so you can pull up the image later, you are undoubtedly underexposing by a stop or even 2. This could mean that your ISO 800 is really an ISO 3200 shot, but the noise, in my experience, will look a bit worse than actually running ISO 3200 and exposing properly.

Here is a great way to start shooting to the right. Change your EC to be +2/3 in Av or Tv modes and try some higher ISO shots. Shoot in raw and bring back your exposure slider just a tad to get the image where it looks closer to what you saw, then see how your noise handling is. Also try using DPP vs any other 3rd party to compare JPG results out of both.

That will get you a long way in determining where exactly the issue might lie, whether its underexposure, your raw converter, your use of said raw converter, etc.

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17188223
How far do you go to the right when shooting a high-key scene where you want to preserve all the details? ETTR is a handy guide-line. It is not an absolute. In most shots I am quite willing to accept blinkies where there is no useful detail. In others, I want absolutely no blinkies.

Yeah, nothing is an absolute. As the camera sets exposure for 18% grey, bright elements in the scene will drive dark elements to be even darker. ETTR help capture the darker aspects, and simple adjustments to a RAW image in post can recover some of the blown highlights, if any. The worst situation is to boost the exposure in post - major increase in noise results.

I frequently shoot +2/3 stop, but not always. If the detail we're after is in the highlights, we would probably swing the exposure the other way.