Low Noise Champion at 1600 ISO

I have read a lot of reviews comparing the 7D, 5D MkII and 1D MkIV. Most of these were written soon after the bodies came out. Now that the dust is settled, which seems to be performing best in the field at higher ISO settings?

I know a lot will note that the 5D is a landscape camera and the 1D is more for moving objects, but when one is in the wilds at low light, often the opportunities overlap.

Also, anyone wish to speculate if the high ISO noise will be getting significantly less in the next generation of any of the above? (whenever that is).

The 7D is not even in the running.

I think the 5D Mark II is a little cleaner than the 1D4 at ISO 1600 and maybe 3200. At ISO 6400 and especially at ISO 12800 the 1D Mark IV is better than the 5D II.

I do not have access to all the different models to run my own head to head comparisons...

But I would encourage you to pick up a film camera and go shoot a roll of ISO 1600 slide film, then and a roll of Velvia ISO 50 for the finest grade (but at the cost of having to shoot at ISO 50).

After that, I think you'll be very happy with any DSLR on the market!

Experiment with noise reduction softwares. I honestly think camera manufacturers have gone about as far as they can reducing noise with the hardware and firmware... LIkely the next big improvements will come in post processing softwares. There have already been some really significant NR improvements in Photoshop CS5 and Lightroom 3, coming from the previous versions.

Are you evaluating prints, or what you see on your computer monitor? LCD screens are back lit and exaggerate noise. CRT screens, which no one makes or uses any more, were kinder to the images. This is coupled with people using too high a magnification when evaluating their shots. 100% with an 18MP or 21MP camera is huge compared to 100% with a file from an 8MP or 10MP camera. In the end, prints would give you much more valid comparison.

I'd call the 5DII the champ at the moment (I'm sure the 1Ds MkIII is equal, same sensor, but it only goes up to ISO 3200).

IMO the 7D is in the running, just as the best 1.6X crop sensor camera.... surprising how good it is considering it has such a crowded 18MP sensor. I think it has a little more noise at lower ISOs, than previous models. Likely it's just not applying as much or enough NR to images in the lower ISOs, so that's generally an easy thing to fix.

1D Mk IV is pretty much bound to be better than 7D... With its 1.3X size sensor and at 16MP (slightly lower resolution than the 7D), it's got a far less crowded sensor .

Alan, Jeffrey,
thanks for the comments. I actually shoot the 7D and previously had 30D and before that the original digital rebel. I have shot my share of film in 'the good old days'. I know each step has been an improvement.

The reason I want more is that I shoot big glass (500mm plus T/c) and slow glass (my 100-400) at wildlife near dusk and in the early morning. I also like to print large (13x19 upward to 20x30) for my target customers. I am constantly wanting more shutter speed or another f-stop or two. I also shoot my share of high iso sky/landscape night shots and long exposure night shots. While these come out nice, shooting the 7D at >800 is going to show noise and lost detail when the histogram is heavy to the left.

I guess I am thinking I can use the 5D mkII for the landscape/sky work, but worry that the focus will suffer in the low light situations. The ID mkIV comes at a 2x price penalty, so if 5d is equal or lower ISO, I am thinking this may be my compromise. In day, when animals move faster, I can use the 7D. End of day shots (elephants, giraffes, etc.) don't move fast, so the slow focus may be okay ... if it focuses. My 30D used to search pretty bad when shooting low contrast animals in low light and I worry the 5D MkII will be that bad on focusing.

Sorry, rambling, but still struggling over: money/cost vs. waiting vs. 5D mkII vs. 1D MkIV vs. 1Ds MkIII so I really appreciate comments on this.

Not sure how the 7D even made it on this list, at least with my copy 1600 ISO is noisier than when I shoot 3200. I rarely if ever will use 1600 on my 7D and almost always will favor moving up to 3200 ISO as I seem to get better results.

JeffreyG wrote in post #11516299
The 7D is not even in the running.

Maybe not, but the current crop cameras are getting VERY good in regard to high ISO performance. As an example, I just shot this Jpeg with my "lowly" 50D at 3200 ISO. I intentionally chose a bakground that would provide some shadow areas. The in camera NR was set to "standard" and the file is as clean as a whistle.
Link to full res file... http://ericmcferrin.sm​ugmug.com/photos/11381​53434_meydp-O.jpg

ISO 6400 shot with the 50D, same standard NR setting as above...
Full Res file, http://ericmcferrin.sm​ugmug.com/photos/11381​50360_qWWCj-O.jpg

District_History_Fan wrote in post #11519510
ISO 6400 shot with the 50D, same standard NR setting as above...
Full Res file, http://ericmcferrin.sm​ugmug.com/photos/11381​50360_qWWCj-O.jpg

neither load.

They should show up now. There was a setting issue in the new gallery I set up for them.

I see them now and they are impressive with hardly any noise.

Donte wrote in post #11519731
I see them now and they are impressive with hardly any noise.

The 3200 shot is amazingly clean. There is a bit of pattern noise in the 6400 shot, but it is entirely useable. ISO 12800 is a disaster in the 50D, but that is to be expected.

Such performance was unheard of just a few years ago. They just keep getting better!

Those shots blow the doors off what I could do with my 50D. I would have a hard time getting that at 800 ISO a lot of the time even properly exposed.

The best shot I ever got with my 50D @ 3200 (and one of the few I ever kept at that ISO on the 50D)

And how do they look on a 16 x 20 or larger print. Web downsized images are not very useful for analyzing noise levels.

With my 5DII I haven't used any NR for images up to 30 on a side, ISO1600/3200

I've hardly used my 7D since I got it so don't know and don't have high ISO shots worth printing so can't comment how they would compare other than I know they won't.

bohdank wrote in post #11519881
And how do they look on a 16 x 20 or larger print. Web downsized images are not very useful for analyzing noise levels.
With my 5DII I haven't used any NR for images up to 30 on a side, ISO1600/3200

I shoot the 5D2 as well. It is more forgiving in marginal light due to the bigger pixels, but we should expect an improvement in a camera that costs much more. Since I got the 17-55IS, I actually prefer shooting the snappy little 50D for most of my photography (typically not high ISO).

The posted 3200 file sould print large very well. As for the downsized files being less than useful for evaluating noise, check out the links I posted to the full res jpegs.

@buddy4344

I had/have all the cameras you listed.
In my eyes the 7D in not in the some class then others two. That why I sold the 7D.
I use the cameras for birding, and with 7D ISO 800 was the max I could use to get good results.
With 5Dmk2 or 1Dmk4 I can go 3200 and more with no problem.

1Dmk4 ISO3200