7D noise at ISO100? (very large screen cap to show the problem!)

Sakura1234 wrote in post #10466593
Do you have any slightest idea what "Pixel Density" is? Sorry don't mean to be rude, but take a look at this:

• FF vs Crop (Which means 60% extra reach)
  
• 18mp vs 12mp (which means 50% extra resolution)

If their noise performance is anything close to similar, Nikon might as well close down the company.

You might want to shrink the 7D image to 67% or D700 to 150% for a comparison that is not yet even remotely close to fair. (Atleast the resolution will match)

again, THESE ARE NOT THE ONLY IMAGES I HAVE WITH NOISE ISSUES. I also have issue with mRAW and sRAW. It's NOT JUST THE DENSITY. It's canon playing games with low ISOs to give us high ISOs. They do this BECAUSE of the density, but the density does NOT mean you HAVE to have noisy sensors at BASE ISOS.... If they cut the ISOs off at 800 I'd bet 100 would be amazing.

The 5Dii HAS THE VERY SAME ISSUE. Yes it still has more density than a D700, but it's got much lower density than the 7D. So explain that one away so quickly. To say it's just density is ignoring the fact canon is giving us worse BASE ISOs in order to get better high ISO performance WITH MORE PIXELS....

Generally prints smother noise, the process softens the image massively. I sharpen to the point that the image looks "crusty" (dreadful) on screen and its just about right on gloss paper. With softer matte papers it needs to be pushed even further.

Sorry if this has been discussed already, but I assume you have adjusted the on screen views to allow for the 50% more res of the 7D? More pixels sadly also means more noise and magnifying at the same amount will always make the larger mp image look worse than in fact it is. The magnification should be less to allow for it, then the noise will seem less.

I also think that Nikon seem to purposely soften the image in camera (to hide the noise?). I prefer to make my own decisions so actually rather like Canon's approach, give me the data warts and all and let me decide how I deal with it.

Edited to add: I'd be VERY angry if Canon were allowing low ISO performance to suffer just in order to offer the lunatic high ISO figures.

Lowner wrote in post #10466652
Sorry if this has been discussed already, but I assume you have adjusted the on screen views to allow for the 50% more res of the 7D? More pixels sadly also means more noise and magnifying at the same amount will always make the larger mp image look worse than in fact it is. The magnification should be less to allow for it, then the noise will seem less.

this shot is 100% for both, so the 7D is basically 50% closer. But I have mRAWs that I've compared and the same issue persists.

don't confuse sharpness with noise. Noise can reduce sharpness, but sharpness, or a lack of doesn't create noise. Nikon's D700 AA filter is stronger than what canon uses in the 5D and 5Dii (the 5Dc being the weakest I've ever used). So their images with the same lens are generally a tad softer. But nikon's zooms are also sharper, so if you use their 24-70G on a D700 -vs- canon's L on a 5D or 5Dii they'll be very close. Certainly close enough that you won't tell in prints.

But NOISE wise, the nikon wins over the canon. There just isn't much noise or artifacts in the Nikon and it's a stop higher (200). The stop is because nikon cheats it's ISOs up one for a high ISO edge. This is also problematic shooting fast primes outside in daylight... But their noise down low is much better FF to FF. I know a crop will be worse, but to be this bad at base ISO is what's confusing me.

J_TULLAR wrote in post #10465404
You mad? If I look at my 5dII (21mp) at 100% I dont see much noise at 100iso, but when I look at my 7d (18mp) at 100% @ 100iso I see noise... bla blah bla

If you wanna disregard a test then back it up with your own flawless test for everyone to see ...

And another one. There isn't even anything that can be called "comparison" much less a "test" to argue against with in the first place. Please don't be retarded.

There is a reason I will not upgrade past my 40D and mark III (1D/1Ds) bodies until I am forced to. This is it.

jacobsen1 wrote in post #10466648
again, THESE ARE NOT THE ONLY IMAGES I HAVE WITH NOISE ISSUES. I also have issue with mRAW and sRAW. It's NOT JUST THE DENSITY. It's canon playing games with low ISOs to give us high ISOs. They do this BECAUSE of the density, but the density does NOT mean you HAVE to have noisy sensors at BASE ISOS.... If they cut the ISOs off at 800 I'd bet 100 would be amazing.

The 5Dii HAS THE VERY SAME ISSUE. Yes it still has more density than a D700, but it's got much lower density than the 7D. So explain that one away so quickly. To say it's just density is ignoring the fact canon is giving us worse BASE ISOs in order to get better high ISO performance WITH MORE PIXELS....

Ok you really are not getting it.....

I'm not saying 7D has not got any ISO problems. I'm saying your test comparison proves nothing. 100% crop comparison between two different pixel density cameras prove nothing.

If you want fair test. compare by looking at same % of the image in the frame. Even that's not a fair comparison as 7D is a crop camera, but atleast same % of the image comparison will prove FF is better than Crop (Duh?!).

Higher pixel density = more noise. Don't be delusional. That's why some people switched to Nikon. Yes Canon's playing games, Yes Canon's cranking up MP count. No one's forcing you to use Canon.

Edit - "this shot is 100% for both, so the 7D is basically 50% closer. But I have mRAWs that I've compared and the same issue persists." mRaw proves nothing.
"But NOISE wise, the nikon wins over the canon" ya... you gonna need to dig up the corpse of that dead horse before you can beat it. Not sure if there's any flesh left from the previous repeated digging up/beating/burry back in cycle though.

Sakura1234 wrote in post #10466766
I'm saying your test comparison proves nothing. 100% crop comparison between two different pixel density cameras prove nothing.

Edit - mRaw proves nothing.

which one is it? If I compare the cameras at their native resolution, you tell me "it's not fair" even though I'm asking for people to chime in who've PRINTED shots at the same sizes they have with other cameras?

Then you go on to say mRAW proves nothing? How's that? That brings the pixels down to rough equivalents. Not size equivalents, but pixels in a given print area. Why you'd do that I have no clue, you're either throwing out data from a 7D image just to make it "look better" at 100% or you're faking data in the D700 file to make it compare. Neither is right.

The 7D is a 18mp 1.6 sensor. The D700 is a 12mp FF sensor. No one is arguing that. I'm asking if the noise I'm seeing in the files upon close inspection is normal. That's been proven to be a yes. I'm also asking if it matters in prints. The few people who actually print their images here have said that's a no, as in it DOES NOT MATTER.

so quit barking up my tree and being disrespectful. If you don't like my questions, my "tests" or anything else, go start your own thread and show us how you'd like a test to be done. I've proven to myself the 7D is NOT as good of a sensor at base ISOs -vs- a D700. It's not a shock it looses at high ISOs, but it SHOULD be able to compare better than this at base ISOs IMHO. My question is is what I'm seeing normal (yes it is, and my 40D didn't do this) and does it matter in prints (sounds like a no).

jacobsen1 wrote in post #10467127
I've proven to myself the 7D is NOT as good of a sensor at base ISOs -vs- a D700.

Isn't the D700 base ISO 200? And that ISO 100 is just an in-camera pulled exposure using ISO 200, similar to the 5D's ISO 50?

However, I find your claim that the 7D sensor is not as good as the D700 sensor to be dubious. Looking at 100% screen resolution is not an objective way to measure noise performance. Even if the D700, through proper testing, beats the 7D in noise performance, there are still other aspects to the quality of the sensor such as dynamic range and resolution.

To comment on what others have said, I perceive that the noise from the 7D is worse in the bokeh than in the areas for in-focus subjects. I don't do printing at this time so I can't offer any opinion on printed photos.

Poe wrote in post #10467327
Isn't the D700 base ISO 200? And that ISO 100 is just an in-camera pulled exposure using ISO 200, similar to the 5D's ISO 50?

yes it's base is 200 but that's what the D700 shot is taken at. A base of 200 is problematic with fast lenses in bright light, especially w/o canon's safety shift, but that's NOT what I'm talking about here.

the D700 wins on DR and noise. The 7D on resolution maybe.
but I wasn't expecting noise to be an issue or this obvious at base ISOs, that's my point/question....

jacobsen1 wrote in post #10467362
yes it's base is 200 but that's what the D700 shot is taken at. A base of 200 is problematic with fast lenses in bright light, especially w/o canon's safety shift, but that's NOT what I'm talking about here.

the D700 wins on DR and noise. The 7D on resolution maybe.
but I wasn't expecting noise to be an issue or this obvious at base ISOs, that's my point/question....

Did you read through this thread? https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=759283

Poe wrote in post #10467405
Did you read through this thread? https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=759283

check post #18.

jacobsen1 wrote in post #10467428
check post #18.

So the pattern noise shouldn't be anything new to you, right?

I'm not talking about patterned noise. I'm talking about normal old noise in the image at base ISOs. Vertical banding is a DIFFERENT canon issue that interestingly enough, only effects non 1 series bodies. This is the 5Dii issue all over again. It also has noise at low ISOs. The question I'm asking here, is is what I'm seeing normal (it is) and does it effect prints (I'm hearing no so I'll test it myself).

jacobsen1 wrote in post #10467488
I'm not talking about patterned noise. I'm talking about normal old noise in the image at base ISOs. Vertical banding is a DIFFERENT canon issue that interestingly enough, only effects non 1 series bodies. This is the 5Dii issue all over again. It also has noise at low ISOs. The question I'm asking here, is is what I'm seeing normal (it is) and does it effect prints (I'm hearing no so I'll test it myself).

Except that Panopeeper said that the 5D2 fault is the same fault in the 7D in first post.

J Rabin wrote in post #10466430
Mad, as in crazy? Hope not. One demands a more costly 35mm sensor, costing thousands $$ more, like Nikon 3 series, 5DII or Canon 1 series, to have significantly higher signal to noise ratio performance than a smaller sensor, at any ISO, on areas of images prone to revealing defects (shadow areas, neutral flat tones like skies, etc.).

One can also make yourself crazy comparing 100% screen enlargements. I doubt most of this shows in normal size prints on well processed images.
But, my point is, IF the poster IS going to compare 100% enlargements between different sensors, then at least data needs to be normalized for image resolution enlargement.

In properly conducted up-rez noise tests I've viewed, like 7D vs. 40D noise from Bob Atkins, and the 7D vs. Nikon D300s tests, 7D out-resolved, had lower noise, less digital pattern noise, and made better prints (when they did that step).

Me? I shoot 1D IV and 40D (soon traded for 7D). 1D IV makes the best prints of my life, particularly blacks and dark tones, up to 13x19, all the way to ISO 5000, that I've ever experienced. Ever. Canon sure got the 1D IV quality right. I do mostly macro. In focal length limited birds/airplanes/wildli​fe, the 7D should yield good comparative images, when the comparisons are conducted properly.
Not sure how this makes me mad, as in loony? Jack

I didnt mean mad as in loony lol, I meant mad as in frustrated maybe even blind to the problem... that is all