Canon 7D issues

[E.M.P.]

Hi,

I picked up a brand new 7D to upgrade my 550D last week and used it for the first time this weekend. I have always been happy with the 550D in terms of image quality considering the "entry" level camera it is. I know the 7D uses the same sensor but I was expecting better from it!

Have I just got a bad one or do all 7Ds produce really grainy/noisy images even at ISO100? Apart from the faster frame rate and a better focus system I cant help thinking I have wasted a lot of money to "upgrade" to something that produces images that are worse than the 550D!

I am using a 70-200 f/4 L lens and was shooting in todays sunlight at ISO100 on a shutter speed of between 1/80sec (panning shots) and 1/250sec (head on shots) Apature was auto set but on average I think it was around f/9 a lot of the time. I used these settings on the 550D quite often with no problem.

Is this a common problem with the 7D or is there a setting somewhere I am missing for noise reduction? I am not interested in the "shoot raw and fit it in post" comments. I shoot jpg so I dont need to edit them apart from the odd crop here and there. This is motorsport I am doing and quick turnaround. I shoot raw for every thing else.

 

[Vertigo1]

Whilst noise can be an issue at higher ISOs, not at 100.

You shooting RAW or JPG? If the latter, what are the picture/sharpness settings at? I only ever shoot RAW myself so don't even know what sharpening it might be applying to JPGs.

 

[E.M.P.]

Thanks for the quick reply.

I use the 7D (and before that the 550D) for motorsport. Given the nature of what I am doing I shoot JPG. This is purely for the quick turnaround and to get the images the best I can straight out the camera. I just delete anything I dont like and keep anything I do. Everything else I shoot raw on a full frame body.

The picture settings are exactly as they were on the 550D. sharpness 7 with everything else to 0. Both cameras are set the same but the 7D seems to have more visible grain/noise. I must add this is when viewed at 100%. At 100% the 550D images look smooth. The 7D has noticable grain/noise in the image. I would expect it at higher ISO but not at 100

 

[Willid1]

I was using my 7D and 70-200L today and it still makes me go "wow" when I look at the images.

One piece of advice I would give (not sure if this applies to all 7D's) is to NEVER underexpose your images.

I seem to be constantly dialing in +1/2 or more EC, but the I am most often taking pictures of my kids and the metering does seem to pick up the focus point quite well.

7D is supposed to be diffraction limited after f7.1 according to FoCal data.

http://www.reikan.co.uk/focalweb/index.php/online-tools/lenscamera-information/ Does not work with IE at the moment.

Expose to the right and shoot in RAW

HTH

David

 

[Vertigo1]

ETTR (Expose to the right) is good advice too, I always err on the side of overexposure with the 7D. This was ISO100 with the 70-200 Mk2, shot RAW with no noise reduction applied at all:

This one did need a fair bit of noise reduction but still not bad considering it was at ISO3200:

 

[E.M.P.]

Thanks. I will take the advice and give it a try.

Vertigo1 - Nice example. What is the hi res like at 100%?

 

[E.M.P.]

I posted that before the second pic went up

To be honest I havent ventured past ISO100 yet. To me that was bad enough (worse than the 550D anyway) so I didnt want to go anywhere near ISO3200!! lol

 

[odd jim]

Thanks. I will take the advice and give it a try.

Vertigo1 - Nice example. What is the hi res like at 100%?

Stop pixel peeping!

 

[E.M.P.]

Helpful advice.

If I need to print A2/A1 size prints then the quality of the image is important and surely the level of noise comes into that. Not everything is destined for low res output on the internet. I know in an ideal world raw and post process would be better, but as already said the motorsport stuff is quick turnaround and to be honest post processing all the shots gets tiresome and time consuming.

 

[artyman]

Why not shoot RAW and JPEG then if you really need quick turnaround. I shot the F1 test at Silverstone on my 7D and I'm looking at an A2 print on my wall that was from a cropped shot and it shows none of the problems you were mentioning, but then I did shoot RAW.

1/200 f5.6 ISO100

 

[killwilly]

Don't give up on your 7D, it's a brilliant camera, but there are lessons to be learned first. Spend an hour or so reading the link below and I guarantee you will get the results you want, I did.

Not wishing to devalue this forum in anyway, but that forum is also a must for any EOS owner.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=768556&highlight=7d+faq

 

[jonathan_ed]

Don't give up on your 7D, it's a brilliant camera, but there are lessons to be learned first. Spend an hour or so reading the link below and I guarantee you will get the results you want, I did.

Not wishing to devalue this forum in anyway, but that forum is also a must for any EOS owner.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=768556&highlight=7d+faq

That's good advice. I got one back in June as an upgrade on a 40d and at first i thought I'd made a mistake.

You do have to make sure you don't underexpose.

Persevere and read up and practise, you'll get there.

And don't forget its a crop sensor with a whole lot of pixels squeezed onto it so you might get a little extra noise.

 

[Phil V]

Helpful advice.

If I need to print A2/A1 size prints then the quality of the image is important and surely the level of noise comes into that. Not everything is destined for low res output on the internet. I know in an ideal world raw and post process would be better, but as already said the motorsport stuff is quick turnaround and to be honest post processing all the shots gets tiresome and time consuming.

If?

Try it, you might just be surprised.

If you are shooting with any DSLR and you spot noise on a print at any size, you have definitely underexposed it or your camera is faulty (but it'll almost certainly not be the latter). (if you can't afford an A2 test print, just enlarge to that size and cut a 10x8 out to print that, but be careful to view from the right distance)

 

[odd jim]

Helpful advice.

its not as unhelpful as you think!

As Phil said, printing, even to A1, most of the noise (certainly the luminance noise) wont show anywhere near as much as on your screen.

Out of interest, do you print large scale?

 

[Turbonetics]

Hi there,don't expect a better image quality against the 550D as they are using the same sensor. what you are paying more for the 7D are its features and build quality.
as for noise present at ISO 100,may i know its under what kind of circumstances?
did u notice the noise only when u cropped it?
it would be better if you could post some photos for us to see.
i don't think it should be a lemon set.

 

[u8myufo]

Hi EMP, my advice would be get to know the 7D, I upgraded from the 50D but there was a time when I was comparing pictures from the 450D I had owned, it pays not to do that imo just get on with what you have to work with. I underexpose much more than I overexpose to be honest, all exif intact.

 

[Durbs]

Do you have a sample pic you can upload?

Also, Sharpness at 7 might be a little high - I noticed a few artefacts in plain blue skies when in-camera sharpening was ramped up.

 

[killwilly]

The images that Rich has posted, are as usual, brilliant, but don't be fooled into believing that it is all down to the camera! The 300L lens is no slouch either, plus his skills.

 

[E.M.P.]

duplicate post. Can an admin remove this one please.

 

[E.M.P.]

This is taken as a 100% crop from the rest of the image. It was from a drift event so maybe the smoke haze has affected the images but I have done plenty of drifts events with the 550D and they have never looked this bad at 100%. The worst part is on the left where the marshal is standing and the windscreen. This was taken with the 7D and 70-200 f/4 L at 200mm

This following one is from a previous event taken with the 550D. If anything there was more background smoke and to me there is much less "grain" to the image. Even the windscreen looks clear unlike the first pic. This was taken with the 550D and 55-250mm at 250mm

I know they are not the best of pictures but I am just using these as examples.

Both images were cropped to exactly the same dimensions. Both images are 100% out the camera with no editing. I know I could remove the noise but the whole point is I dont want to and more to the point at ISO100 I shouldnt have to if I am shooting in jpg.

I wasnt expecting a better quality from the 7D as I know they use the same sensor, but I definitely wasnt expecting worse.

 

[Neil B]

You should of "Googled" 7D iso performance before buying, know one has ever complained about it before

 

[woof woof]

You should of "Googled" 7D iso performance before buying, know one has ever complained about it before

As far as I know the noise in 7D images has been commented on from the first reviews, even at ISO 100, although I hadn't realised that the OP was looking at the images at 100%. I think that the temptation is to look closely and see every fault but I think it'll help to keep the final image size and what will be visible at that size in mind.

Personally, if I had a 7D I think I'd try to expose to the right at least a little and then back it off a bit post capture as a matter of course and then add some noise reduction.

 

[c22w1]

I too was very dissapointed with the noise handling of the 7D and cannot get anywhere near the IQ of these, enough so that I bought a Nikon D7000 with the idea of swapping brands. The Nikon is far better, in my opinion than the Canon at high ISOs, but when it comes to tracking and birds in flight etc the Canon excells.
Now I have both Canon and Nikon brands and cant make up my mind which to go with. It's not all about noise handling, there are plenty of other things to take into consideration. If it were me and and I were in the same situation again I would persevere with the 7D, it is something that I feel needs to be worked at to get best out of.

 

[u8myufo]

The images that Rich has posted, are as usual, brilliant, but don't be fooled into believing that it is all down to the camera! The 300L lens is no slouch either, plus his skills.

I must admit Paul I did not realise they were all taken with a different combo
#1 300 F4 L
#2 300 F2.8L +1.4 TC
#3 300 F2.8L
#4 100-400F4.5L @100mm
#5 100-400F4.5L @400mm

 

[u8myufo]

This is taken as a 100% crop from the rest of the image. It was from a drift event so maybe the smoke haze has affected the images but I have done plenty of drifts events with the 550D and they have never looked this bad at 100%. The worst part is on the left where the marshal is standing and the windscreen. This was taken with the 7D and 70-200 f/4 L at 200mm

This following one is from a previous event taken with the 550D. If anything there was more background smoke and to me there is much less "grain" to the image. Even the windscreen looks clear unlike the first pic. This was taken with the 550D and 55-250mm at 250mm

I know they are not the best of pictures but I am just using these as examples.

Both images were cropped to exactly the same dimensions. Both images are 100% out the camera with no editing. I know I could remove the noise but the whole point is I dont want to and more to the point at ISO100 I shouldnt have to if I am shooting in jpg.

I wasnt expecting a better quality from the 7D as I know they use the same sensor, but I definitely wasnt expecting worse.

Well I would be the first to admit that those images are not all that clever, especially #1, but I would like to see them with full exif before trying to come to any conclusion.

 

[Willid1]

Very similar complaint Here

I think your two pictures are taken in vastly different lighting conditions and not really comparable.

As I said in the above thread, coming from film the modern DSLR's are fantastic at high ISO in comparison.

David

 

[Vertigo1]

Thanks. I will take the advice and give it a try.

Vertigo1 - Nice example. What is the hi res like at 100%?

Still pretty good although not pin-sharp due to my lacklustre panning skills

 

[jontwhale]

It looks like over sharpening to me?


Like an orange peel effect.

Turn the sharpness down and see how you get on.

 

[E.M.P.]

Possibly. I just set the picture style the same as the 550D as the sensor is the same. I guess with the processing it could still be different.

Either way I have spoken to the shop and they are happy to refund me if I decide not to keep it.

Brings me on to the next question, what other cameras compare to the 7D in terms of speed, focus, weather sealing etc but provide better image quality with less pixelation/grain in the images? Preferably without spending too much more.

 

[Icee]

My 7D showed noise at 100 iso and no matter what I did it was still there. In the end I p/Xed it and got a 1Dmk3 .

 

[dalegt4]

have you got any links to the full images with exif info?

My 60D exhibits none of the above problems using the sensor and as shown seing the phenominal images from vertigo, rich and Ken it seems interesting that yours suffer so much.

 

[E.M.P.]

At least i`m not the only one to see it then! lol

I`ve been doing a lot of Google searches about it over the last day or so and it seems its quite common to have pixelated images from the 7D. A lot of people work around it, but the way I see things is when spending several hundred ££ on a camera it shouldnt be needed. The camera should give good results with any PP required to enhance the overall image.

As for the examples shown in this post, HOW?!!! lol Was there a lot of LR or Photoshop involved? I would love to see some examples of straight out the camera with no editing at all. Maybe then I will be able to see if I have a bad version or if they all show the same characteristics I am seeing.

 

[dalegt4]

certainly is interesting, not a car as I don't have my motorsport images on my laptop but a bird from today.

To put this into context this is shot at 1600iso and a fair crop too.

 

[odd jim]

Processing and or conversions can have an effect on low ISO noise.

My only advice would be to shoot raw as often as possible, then convert using something like LR4 or Canons DPP.

Out of interest, shoot a few raw files today and use DPP to add a little sharpening then convert to JPEG. You might see a significant improvement.

If you want to shoot jpegs, make sure the ALO and HTP options are deactivated within the menus, these have been known to cause excess noise on the 7d and 50d.

Also, are you running the most up to date firmware?

 

[E.M.P.]

I only picked the camera up a week ago so firmware is up to date (I have checked to make sure)

I have backed the in camera sharpness off a bit and it seems to have improved things. I have also tried a few shots on full auto and this also seems to show an improvement so I am thinking it might be more to do with settings somewhere.

The thing is I REALLY want to like this camera for all the good features, I just think I might be trying to use it too much like the 550D and not use it like a 7D in its own right. At the moment its just a bit disappointing every time I look at an image and see the quality of the 550D is visibly better/cleaner

 

[E.M.P.]

In fairness the more I look at the pictures the more i`m starting to think i`m just being over fussy and "pixel peeping" too much. To put it into perspective here are two shots, both JPG straight out the camera with NO editing at all. Both will display as full high res if clicked on. Viewed at normal screen size they both look ok, but when the full size image is open and zoomed in a bit the 550D to me looks sharp, clear, and generally clean/smooth pixels. The 7D just seems grainy in the background even though it was at ISO100.

Who can guess what image came from the 550D and what one came from the 7D? Both pictures taken with the same lens (from memory) Either way the 7D image was taken with 70-200mm f/4 L at 200mm and the other image was either the same lens or the Sigma 150-500mm

 

[chimper]

Who can guess what image came from the 550D and what one came from the 7D? Both pictures taken with the same lens (from memory) Either way the 7D image was taken with 70-200mm f/4 L at 200mm and the other image was either the same lens or the Sigma 150-500mm

They may well have been taken with the same lens, it's also very apparent they were taken under vastly different lighting conditions.

Stew.

 

[Phil V]

They may well have been taken with the same lens, it's also very apparent they were taken under vastly different lighting conditions.

Stew.

This.

If you've only had the 7d out in that crappy light, unless you shot them side by side you're comparing apples and pears.

On my soap box again, but photography is about the subject, composition and light, the gear is a long way down the pecking order. If you shoot in crap light you get crap pictures - that's the same whether you're shooting Sebastien Vettell with a 1dx or banger racing with a 300d.

 

[LCPete]

Processing and or conversions can have an effect on low ISO noise.

My only advice would be to shoot raw as often as possible, then convert using something like LR4 or Canons DPP.

Out of interest, shoot a few raw files today and use DPP to add a little sharpening then convert to JPEG. You might see a significant improvement.

If you want to shoot jpegs, make sure the ALO and HTP options are deactivated within the menus, these have been known to cause excess noise on the 7d and 50d.

Also, are you running the most up to date firmware?

Yes agree lightroom 4 is excellent for converting 7D raws but DPP is good too
You have to get the exposure right, I normally expose to the right by 1/3 to 2/3

 

[Fireproof Creative]

My earlier post was mentioned in this thread.

I've just had mine back from fixation and I'd like to point out a few things, that may benefit the OP and the other posters in here.

1. It's all well and good to share a 1024px wide shot, but that doesn't properly demonstrate the performance of the camera, for these purposes. Especially in terms of how much post editing/NR you had to do.

2. If you have to crop a lot because of lack of reach then you need to get closer to 100% view, this is not necessarily pixel peeping. I printed shots at A3 prior to repair, with no crop and the quality was noticeably lacking compared to those taken with my old 40D. I am a graphic designer and I have extensive experience with both screen and print imagery - I am qualified to determine crap image quality.

3. The 7D is noisy at low ISOs, that is a fact. But it's relative to what you find acceptable and that is different for everyone. Its also heavily dependant on your intended outcome for the image - the advent of retina screens and digital publications for example, has a massive bearing on what is and what is not acceptable in terms of image noise.

4. There is an apparent fan boy mentality that seems to jump on the user, regardless of the evidence they present. This occurs everywhere it seems, SOMETIMES what you think is good - just plain isn't.

Fixation identified a number of issues with my 7D (a Nov 12 - brand new), I have a repair report demonstrating body alignment issues, these have been corrected and the body recalibrated, initial tests show much improved sharpness to images. The noise is still an issue but this is less apparent when the camera focuses correctly.

Just because yours works fine doesn't mean there is not an issue with someone elses. While I'm not saying every instance is necessarily faulty, there is clearly enough smoke to indicate a fire, many of the responses I got were less than helpful (not all I hasten to add, I did get some genuine lines of guidance).

Good luck and the best advice I can give if you are still not happy send it in for a repair check or trade for the 60 or if you can wait for the 70.

What I can say is, that I noticed a significant improvement on my copy when using a monopod and applying a constant downward pressure to the lens (not too much) and levering the body against it. Not very scientific but this did indicate that there was a misalignment in the body (as the lens was perfect on 3 other bodies - not 7Ds) - this lead me to get it repaired

Here's a comparison, first is an example of the tat I was getting - both images are straight raw conversions from the camera

ISO 100, 400mm - 400mm f5.6 1/800 RAW

7D issue by Fireproof_Creative, on Flickr

Heres the fullsize image - and unlike everyone else I urge you to look at this 100% <----8/10 images would come out looking like this regardless of lighting

Now with pressure technique (still prior to repair)
ISO 100, 400mm - 400mm f5.6 1/320 RAW

7D ok by Fireproof_Creative, on Flickr

Heres the fullsize image -if you cant tell the difference well...I don't know what to say <-----8/10 would come out with this level of clarity when using the cackhanded technique

Grain is still intrusive but its much less so IMO compared to the first shot.

Raw will allow you much better control of this noise - as its not degrading the detail as much as in the first. And I have to disagree that DPP is good for processing images, its OK for straight conversions but its utter crap for any sort of image adjustment, particularly in the case of RAW. Lightroom and/or photoshop do a hugely better job with camera raw (I cant stress that enough), while I appreciate this is not an option for everyone - I would imagine elements is ok too but no experience of it.