7D, 5D classic, and 5D2 noise and detail

I borrowed a 5D2. Have to say, while it's an awesome camera, for what I shoot, I cannot justify the extra cost over a 5D. I also happen to have LR 1.4 and PS CS3 which do not support the new CR2 files, so having to add the extra step of converting the files to .dng is just a hassle.

That all being said, the difference in high ISO is definitely noticeable. The 5D2 wins over the 5D without a doubt.

Great thread and thanks for taking the time to do the comparison.

Tom W wrote in post #8995195
Thanks, versedmb - I saw that thread a while back but had forgotten about it.

To papucla10, I already sold my 5D so no more testing can happen. The 7D/5D2 combination covers a LOT of territory. I will say this - the 7D has a very superior feature set to the 5D. It's high-ISO noise performance is very close to the level of the 5D. It's AF is superior. Better rear screen. Video. Ultra-fast. Extreme pixel density.

But there is still some magic in the 5D's files. You can really work with a typical ISO 400 file from a 5D without ruining it. Bump it up a stop or two to expose shadow detail. Pull it down a stop or so to show highlight detail. Very workable. And you do get that excellent shallow DOF that full-frame brings out more easily.

I think that it really comes down to the type of shooting you're going to do, and your budget. The 5D is a bargain these days, showing up used at around $1200 USD. That's a lot of image quality for a low price. But if you're going to be shooting sports, birds in flight, or other fast activities regularly, the 7D might be the direction you want to go.

Thanks, that fredmiranda thread really helped, I had hoped you could do something similar to compare IQ but you don't have the 5D classic anymore perhaps if you can do some tests with against the 5D II at Low ISO like 200 to 400 with +3 sharpness and all NR turned off, preferably RAW converted in DPP.

Thank you.

No new tests, but I processed the ISO 6400 comparison that I shot at the same time that I did 3200. These were shot at the same time as the previous test shots were made, with all parameters the same for the shoot. Note that for the 5D, since it doesn't have ISO 6400, I underexposed 3200 by 1 stop and then raised exposure by 1 stop in post processing.

A word of caution - DO NOT COMPARE THESE SHOTS TO PREVIOUS SHOTS IN THE THREAD. I processed them with a completely different method, using Photoshop Elements 7 with Camera Raw 5.6 (beta), and tweaked each for the best I could get in terms of noise, detail, and sharpness.

As before, I down-rezzed both the 7D and 5D2's output to match that of the 5D (4368 X 2912 pixels). This does play in favor of the higher pixel-count cameras but it also simulates equivalent-sized output.

The results were interesting. First, I really like the way Camera Raw 5.6 works with the 7D's files as compared to the dull, low-contrast results I got from DPP. Second, while the 7D was quite comparable to the 5D in terms of detail on the black-and-white portion of the scene, it seemed to struggle more with detail on the black background of the back of the DVD case. It still has a bit more detail than the 5D on the black/white but it's close. On the black background, I don't see an advantage of the 7 over the 5 and I see some of the effects of agressive noise reduction in the printed names just under the images on the DVD case.

Both the 5D and 7D struggle with this very fine detail at 6400. The 5D2 does much better.

First, the 7D:

Hey Tom,
I know everybody love to see sensor on equal footing.

But could you do the same photos/pp (this last set) at native resolution and show the same crop.
for me, this is how i would use the camera.

Nice work btw.

_Mark

Thanks Mark. It was easy to re-crop the original files since they were still there at their native resolution.

I can see that a slightly different approach to noise reduction might have been appropriate when viewed full size. The 5D2 in particular, needs a little tweaking.

First, the 7D:

thanks tom.....
perfect.

interesting to see both series on the same page.

Yes, thanks for those.

Great thread!

Much more enlightning than the "crop vs ff war" threads!

JeffreyG wrote in post #8927290
One small point, I don't think pulling back the lights for the 5D is reasonable. If the 5D is 'more sensitive' as you noted this simply means that the ISO labels on the 5D are not aligned with the other two cameras. By making it shoot a darker scene (moving the lights) you are fixing an arbitrary value (the ISO label) and varying a constant (the actual light). This is not good methodology.

+1 also to be fair no noise reduction should be used as it can be added in pp

Tom W wrote in post #8927406
OK, I have some visual evidence to post.

First, the test scene. Nothing fancy - just a bunch of stuff lined up with some incandescent lighting. I purposely put some fine print up to show some of the detail acquisition of the 3 bodies.

I chose the crop primarily because it has some detail in both dark and light areas.

First, the old 5D classic...

the 7D...

and, the 5D2...

My observations - the 7D appears to be very slightly cleaner than the 5D at ISO 3200, at least with this image. The difference isn't all that readily visible, but the black text on the white background appears to have less color noise on the 7D version, at least on my monitor. The text on the back of the DVD case appears to be a little sharper as well. The 5D2 clearly is cleaner, and the microdetail is crisper as well. A little more contrast, and the text all has a sharper edge to it.

I will note that the following noise reduction settings were applied in DPP, even though all cameras had in-camera NR turned to OFF (the 5D has no setting for this):

5D Lum - 2; Chrom - 0
7D Lum - 4; Chrom - 8
5D2 Lum - 4; Chrom - 4

One could try many combinations of NR, in various programs, but I wanted to use what Canon uses as a default starting point.

I disagree. In your on test I think the 5DII is much clearer and sharper.

canon shooter wrote in post #9513575
I disagree. In your on test I think the 5DII is much clearer and sharper.

I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with. Here's my quote from the post to which you replied:

There are a few more comparisons made in the thread. Same setup, different settings to satisfy the concerns of being fair.

Great test! The 7d and 5d do very well at ISO3200 but wow, the 5dmkII still looks much better at ISO6400. I hope the 60D (when it comes out) will be as good as the 7D at ISO6400, perhaps I'll end up with that camera before I can afford a 5DmkII.

Tom W wrote in post #9513764
I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with. Here's my quote from the post to which you replied:


There are a few more comparisons made in the thread. Same setup, different settings to satisfy the concerns of being fair.

Sorry my mistake, I now see you were saying 5D not 5D2.
Sorry

canon shooter wrote in post #9521058
Sorry my mistake, I now see you were saying 5D not 5D2.
Sorry

That's OK - no worries. Strange thing is that 3 or 4 years ago, I claimed that I would never sell my 5D. Now, here I am without my 5D.

You can still read the text on the bottom part of the DVD cover on the 5D2...wow.