7D mk II image quality RAW worse than 7D for now

Arthur Morris - 7D II vs 5D III (.gif)

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com …ndian-Lake-Estates-FL.gif


Web Site.
http://www.birdsasart-blog.com …ht-that-it-would-be-easy/

someone0 wrote in post #17235368
So, photography skill is not involved? But when you get your, I'll hope to hear your thought about how it compared to 1D4 in the real world usage, ie: build, ergonomic, AF, tracking and everything that separate the 1D from 1Ds series. It's sad to say, but many review sites now a day are too focus on the final image quality and ignore 90% of what happened before the image hit the sensor.

Yes the photographer matters. If you have the tools and do not use them properly the results will be lacking. My interest in the 7Dii is to gain more resolution for large prints for my birds and wildlife photos. I already own the 600mm ii + TCs so more pixels on target should give me that advantage. Getting closer allot of times is not really possible. Camera build, buffer, speed and performance are all very important to me. Time will tell wether the 7Dii has what it takes but I am pretty confident Canon has produced a winner in this camera body.

peteg1 wrote in post #17235384
Arthur Morris - 7D II vs 5D III (.gif)

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com …ndian-Lake-Estates-FL.gif


Web Site.
http://www.birdsasart-blog.com …ht-that-it-would-be-easy/

And another blog here which is very reassuring this body will give me the resolution advantage I am after:
http://www.romyocon.ne​t …uction-canon-eos.html?m=1

Gabe
Good job on the samples! Could you try to show the whole fabric wheel? It will tell me if the black and white levels are in balance. Also the saturation is pretty weak on some which impacts the presentation.

My process was to set a standard and then try to get every image to tie or best that standard. Being only interested in Canon bodies and feeling that a true comparison would be the the best it could be this go round, I went with the 5DmkIII as the standard and tweeked it in PP using DPP since I had it as the 7DmkII RAW converter.

You could try to do the same with other manufacturer's bodies except there may be one that is even better than the 5DmkIII in overall image quality. This would involve more work but could be very useful if one were will to look at everything as you were keeping your options open and were willing to find out who is overall best.

In looking at the Sony I find it to be very sterile looking. Kind of like eating a steak under greenish fluorescent lighting. Not very appetizing IMO. However if you increased the saturation I bet the Sony would start to become much more like the 5DmkIII image.

When we post our snippets from a larger image we are able to tweek them to almost any extreme to demonstrate our point. However, pulling back to include the entire fabric wheel will demonstrate how well rounded and fair we were to the overall image PP.

Long story short. I need to see the entire wheel to be sure of your results.

This is why I have refrained from posting images. First, I was not sure how much impact the JPEG and resolution down sizing would have and secondly, I cannot account for individual monitor setup/calibration, if any. So I hoped that each one would do their own comparison and see for themselves if my observations were accurate.

At first blush it looks like DPP is not as good to PP in as ACR is.

I think you will agree that uneven saturation in one image compared to another could mislead one to conclude fading. I think this is a large part of what you are seeing.

For example many people were disappointed in the OOC images from the 7D. However, with a good dose of sharpening they came alive and looked very much (ignoring noise) as 5d mk? especially at ISO 100.

How each body works needs to be discovered so the right recipe can be applied to it's unique way of seeing. Applying one fixed set IMO is unfair as you are not working with the individual but rather the group. This leaves IQ undiscovered or if you PP for the one that needs the greatest amount of level change ,it would be over the top for the ones that don't. PP for each to find the best for each and THEN compare. It is more an apples to apples comparison.

Thank you so much for hanging in there with me.

I firmly believe the 7DmkII can be better than the 7D on every comparison point.How much better in some may be small others bigger. But as I have said, for what I use the 7D for, I doubt the $1800 would be best spent on the 7DmkII FOR NOW. I am however, still waiting to see final production samples and then I will dig into those to narrow down my final decision.

I received an Email response from Imaging Resource. In part it gives us insight into where they set adjustments to try to equalize each sample so as to be as close as possible within reason. I quote "We adjust exposure and tweek our lighting so that RGB values in the middle gray swatch in the Macbeth chart are 122 +/- 5 which is a very tight range (tighter than camera exposure adjustments can attain alone), and all 3 cameras met that spec , so we won't be reshooting the older cameras." The 3 bodies were the 5DmkIII, 7D, and I believe the 7DmkII.

I then explained what my/our concerns were for the red fabric possibly fading and that I would be happy to let them use my body. I have yet to here back. Time will tell. Again they sound like good intention-ed folks.

However, (can you tell I like to use that word ), armed with this gray swatch value I believe we can work out if the 70D and 7DmkII are over-saturating the red channel by sampling the fabric and noting it's value and sampling the red Macbeth swatch and noting it's value and then comparing it to other bodies. I have not given this much thought but my hunch is this could work. Is there anyone who sees this as working or not? Let me know. For now I must get to work. I will check in later.

AllenF wrote in post #17235660
I received an Email response from Imaging Resource. In part it gives us insight into where they set adjustments to try to equalize each sample so as to be as close as possible within reason. I quote "We adjust exposure and tweek our lighting so that RGB values in the middle gray swatch in the Macbeth chart are 122 +/- 5 which is a very tight range (tighter than camera exposure adjustments can attain alone), and all 3 cameras met that spec , so we won't be reshooting the older cameras." The 3 bodies were the 5DmkIII, 7D, and I believe the 7DmkII.

I then explained what my/our concerns were for the red fabric possibly fading and that I would be happy to let them use my body. I have yet to here back. Time will tell. Again they sound like good intention-ed folks.

However, (can you tell I like to use that word ), armed with this gray swatch value I believe we can work out if the 70D and 7DmkII are over-saturating the red channel by sampling the fabric and noting it's value and sampling the red Macbeth swatch and noting it's value and then comparing it to other bodies. I have not given this much thought but my hunch is this could work. Is there anyone who sees this as working or not? Let me know. For now I must get to work. I will check in later.

Sounds like it could work.

peteg1 wrote in post #17235384
Arthur Morris - 7D II vs 5D III (.gif)

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com …ndian-Lake-Estates-FL.gif


Web Site.
http://www.birdsasart-blog.com …ht-that-it-would-be-easy/

He has a comparison at ISO 400 with the 5D3 and 1DX. Too close for me to tell. Wishful thinking and other stuff makes it even harder.

2n10 wrote in post #17235677
He has a comparison at ISO 400 with the 5D3 and 1DX. Too close for me to tell. Wishful thinking and other stuff makes it even harder.

I cheated and checked the EXIF data, which was intact this morning for his JPEGs in the three-way comparison (he's now stripped the EXIF data from the JPEGs). I was surprised by which one turned out to look the best to my eyes; it had a little higher contrast than the other two, so may not have been a completely even comparison. That being said, they are extremely close in appearance.

stsva wrote in post #17235782
I cheated and checked the EXIF data, which was intact this morning for his JPEGs in the three-way comparison (he's now stripped the EXIF data from the JPEGs). I was surprised by which one turned out to look the best to my eyes; it had a little higher contrast than the other two, so may not have been a completely even comparison. That being said, they are extremely close in appearance.

And you are not divulging your find? Hmmmm... not sure about you now.

DPP 4.1 is out and supports the 7D2. Might be worth checking out this issue with it.

http://www.usa.canon.c​om …ark_ii#DriversA​ndSoftware

2n10 wrote in post #17236043
DPP 4.1 is out and supports the 7D2. Might be worth checking out this issue with it.

http://www.usa.canon.c​om …ark_ii#DriversA​ndSoftware

Good news - thanks for posting!

2n10 wrote in post #17236043
DPP 4.1 is out and supports the 7D2. Might be worth checking out this issue with it.

http://www.usa.canon.c​om …ark_ii#DriversA​ndSoftware

Well that was fast. I wonder if Canon got a whiff of what we were seeing?

Looks like I have some more homework to do.

OK, I went to update DPP and sadly it is the 9/29/14 version I/we already have. So, for now, it looks like there is NOT a updated version beyond Version 3.14.41

OOPS It is there if you have windows 7/8/8.1 64 bit versions only. I do not have any of these windows versions so I must wait.

AllenF wrote in post #17237910
OOPS It is there if you have windows 7/8/8.1 64 bit versions only. I do not have any of these windows versions so I must wait.

I'll try to run the ISO 200 sample I used previously through DPP 4.1 tonight, to see if it has any effect on how the red leafy cloth looks. I suspect it will be much the same as I already saw, some parts looking good and some not so good. I have to get my wife off of her Facebook groups first so I can use our computer (she's a mod. for the groups so has more than just a personal interest), so I make no promises.