Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Noise canin7d mark ii
Page <<first <prev 3 of 6 next> last>>
Aug 6, 2017 10:13:00   #
JayB Loc: Northeast US
 
Great thread.

Reply
Aug 6, 2017 10:45:41   #
Szalajj Loc: Salem, NH
 
Nalu wrote:
Many people find the 7DII noise levels acceptable, however, I, like you was bothered by it's capabilities in low light and noise levels at ISO values above 800. I am not familiar with noise reduction software, but at least with ACR and/or photoshop, reducing noise results in degraded images comparatively. Hense, I now only use FF cameras. I would venture to say, at least with the 5DIV, I can crop to the magnification of the provided by the 1.6 crop factor(or more) and get great IQ without any noticeable noise. Its an investment but only you can determine whether its worth it.
Many people find the 7DII noise levels acceptable,... (show quote)

Most people will choose a camera to meet their NEEDS.

If anyone needs a camera for consistent low light situations, then the 7D MII isn't the correct camera for your needs.

When you need numerous consecutive frames shot quickly, then the 7D MII is best for high frames per second, or continuous shooting.

You have to weigh your needs against the equipment that can fulfill those needs, and the price point that you can afford.

So at this point, the question needs to be asked, do you need low light coverage more than you need a high/fast frames per second coverage in a camera? You might not have purchased the correct camera for your needs!

I know what my future needs are, and which camera will fulfill my needs, but have you done enough research to have made that educated decision without forking out the approximately $1,500 for a body that won't meet your needs?

Reply
Aug 6, 2017 12:25:01   #
chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA
 
amfoto1 wrote:
No, it's not.

I regularly make good, usable prints from images made at ISO 3200, 5000 and 6400 with my pair of 7DII. On rarer occasions, even higher...

Canon 7DII test shot at ISO 16000....



Above was shot RAW and post-processed into JPEG through Lightroom 6 with minimal cropping, slight boost in contrast, and only the software's default levels of noise reduction and sharpening applied. I took a lot of care to avoid any under-exposure... no increase in image brightness was needed.

With any digital camera, to minimize noise issues I think the keys are:

1. Avoid underexposure.... if you have to boost exposure in post-processing, it will greatly amplify noise. ETTR is one technique used to help avoid underexposure.
2. Fill your viewfinder with your subject.... minimize cropping. Above image detail on the right is probably close to "100%", and noise begins to show. It will with any camera (though it's pretty well controlled in the above example).
3. Use proper work flow.... noise reduction should be applied early in the process, before resizing the image... and especially before sharpening, which should be one of the very last steps (well after any re-sizing is done). Also take care not to over-sharpen, because that will also amplify the appearance of noise.
4. Be realistic.... Looking at a 7DII's image "at 100%" on your computer monitor is like making a three by five foot wide print, then viewing it from 18 or 20" away! Of course it looks like crap! (Same effect as over-cropping an image.) Sure, it's fine to zoom in to high magnifications for retouching work.... But, when evaluating images for noise, focus accuracy, sharpness, etc., back off to a more reasonable and sensible magnification. View the image at a size close to your intended use of the image (even then, a computer monitor rendition is nowhere near as sharp and fine as a quality print will be... even the best monitors also clip the dynamic range of images, too. I.e., there's more detail in shadows and highlights of a quality print, than you'll see on-screen.)
5. For super high ISOs, it may help to use additional noise reduction... I use a Noiseware plug-in with Photoshop (also available as a stand-alone software, if not a Photoshop user). But I think even Lightroom 6 does a pretty good job.

I shoot a lot of action, rarely use my 7DIIs below ISO 400, use them freely up to ISO 3200 and occasionally even higher than that with added post-processing noise reduction, when necessary.
No, it's not. br br I regularly make good, usable... (show quote)


...maybe this is worth a new topic, but you've hit on a bugbear for me, and your workflow is right here for us to see. I use LR/PScc and flip between the two quite a bit. When I'm processing normally, I'll use LR presets since I'm working with a couple hundred images (shot in very similar lighting) at a time. I really can't take the time to process individually. I've seen this workflow before from other good photogs and blogs, etc., so would consider it a meme of sorts. So, when I apply a preset, everything happens at once, correct? I'm not applying sharpening "last" as it *should* be. After applying my preset I generally crop and apply any adjustments I need for that individual shot, but the majority I just blast through with no additional tweaking as my preset is working for me. I *do* do other work, but have become so dependent on presets that I will invariably look for one that *kind of* fits and adjust from there, even for one image. Maybe I should go through my workflow again? My *product* is good and I can process quickly, so I can't go away from presets for that, but I'm just interested in getting better on the artistic side of our passion...

Reply
 
 
Aug 6, 2017 12:38:40   #
Clapperboard
 
Hello MS Donna, You say you shoot birds in flight. The 7D mk2 is one of the best cameras made for that particular requirement. The focus tracking system on that model is superb for that purpose.
Check it is the camera producing the noise and not your editing software. When I first had my 7D (the early model) I was a little disappointed there was some noise in my images. Some time later I discovered the Canon software supplied produced far less noise than the Camera Raw software I was using. Camera Raw had more user friendly facilities and more of them than the Canon software. I would have been better served by using the Canon software and then moving the images over to Camera Raw. Now, of course that has been fixed.
Imagenomic Noiseware is a fabulous programme for correcting noise problems.

Reply
Aug 6, 2017 12:41:02   #
chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA
 
Clapperboard wrote:
Hello MS Donna, You say you shoot birds in flight. The 7D mk2 is one of the best cameras made for that particular requirement. The focus tracking system on that model is superb for that purpose.
Check it is the camera producing the noise and not your editing software. When I first had my 7D (the early model) I was a little disappointed there was some noise in my images. Some time later I discovered the Canon software supplied produced far less noise than the Camera Raw software I was using. Camera Raw had more user friendly facilities and more of them than the Canon software. I would have been better served by using the Canon software and then moving the images over to Camera Raw. Now, of course that has been fixed.
Imagenomic Noiseware is a fabulous programme for correcting noise problems.
Hello MS Donna, You say you shoot birds in flight.... (show quote)


...is it better than Topaz? Have you had an opportunity to compare?

Reply
Aug 6, 2017 13:01:26   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
Consider converting your raw Canon files using Canon's Digital Photo Professional (DPP) - it produces noticably lower noise than ACR (Adobe Camera raw). I have compared, and the difference is visible.

Reply
Aug 6, 2017 13:12:51   #
Clapperboard
 
MS Donna the crop sensor does not give you 'more length'. It gives a narrower field of view. If you fit the same lens on a full frame sensor camera, the subject on the sensor will be the same size as on the crop sensor. The field of view will be reduced on the crop sensor. Just as a 35mm. camera with the same lens as a medium format would have a smaller field of view.
Most likely the crop sensor suits better as with birds in flight it is unlikely you will often fill the frame. Hence the image from the full frame sensor would need more to be cropped from it.
Birds in flight can be a problem for a lot of reasons. The wings travel at a higher speed than it may seem when just watching a bird flying. They are often against a very bright sky as a background. In some cases the light may seem brighter than it is because they are in shade whilst it can be a very bright sunny day. Near cliffs is a case in point.
As the shutter speed needs to kept high lenses with wide apertures are obviously required. Long focal length lenses are also usually required. Long focal length with wide apertures is usually a recipe for high costs.
Your 7D mk2 should make it easier for you to shoot birds in flight than my 7D that I use. I am printing razor sharp images of birds in flight, Gannets, Kittiwakes and Puffins at 24"x17" and A3.
Birds in flight can be a challenging subject to accomplish. Persevere. Check if your lenses are suitable. Above all learn from the problem shots. If it was easy there might be little point in doing it.

Reply
 
 
Aug 6, 2017 13:25:50   #
Clapperboard
 
chasgroh I believe it is. A few years ago Noiseware was undoubtedly the one to use. Then Topaz and a few others became the ones to go for. Then I happened to be reminded of Noiseware by a friend singing it's praises. I'm converted back to it, but a later version!
Noise removal and sharpness are always at loggerheads. I believe Noiseware gives the best results. Of course not removing noise does not help for detail and sharpness.

Reply
Aug 6, 2017 16:01:04   #
rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona
 
At what ISO setting do you see this occur?
--Bob
MS. DONNA wrote:
This camera is awful ISO can any recommend a decent software that would help with noise? Thank you
donna

Reply
Aug 6, 2017 16:24:56   #
mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey
 
LiamRowan wrote:
Same here. Every draws "the line" at a different place, but the quality of the image with an ISO greater than 640 is not acceptable to me with the 7DII for an image where I'm looking for detail. At 640, Topaz DeNoise does a very good job of cleaning up noise.


On my copy there is close to 0 noise at 1600 even when viewing a 100% crop. Even at 3200 most images are very clean. Any noise I do get is easily removed in LR or Canon's DPP. I'm certainly not being critical of your opinion or use of Topaz, but I'm pretty finicky and am surprised you are seeing something you find so objectionable that I do not.

Reply
Aug 6, 2017 18:10:02   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
mwsilvers wrote:
On my copy there is close to 0 noise at 1600 even when viewing a 100% crop. Even at 3200 most images are very clean. Any noise I do get is easily removed in LR or Canon's DPP. I'm certainly not being critical of your opinion or use of Topaz, but I'm pretty finicky and am surprised you are seeing something you find so objectionable that I do not.


Completely agree. The 7D2 is solid to ISO 1600 and OK at 3200. IMHO, if you find anything above ISO 400 noisey, you're either doing something wrong with respect to exposure/noise reduction, or you're pixel peeping way closer than normal viewing distance.

Reply
 
 
Aug 6, 2017 21:30:57   #
tinwhistle
 
I haven't read anywhere near all the replies to this thread, but I have to say, I'm not at all familiar with the "canin" brand of photography equipment...

Reply
Aug 6, 2017 22:02:06   #
chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA
 
tinwhistle wrote:
I haven't read anywhere near all the replies to this thread, but I have to say, I'm not at all familiar with the "canin" brand of photography equipment...


...that's a "genkus" mistake, I'll wager! But proofing your work...

Reply
Aug 7, 2017 10:56:57   #
Clapperboard
 
Ssalajj I think you may have a point in general regarding buying a camera to suit your needs. However as the post says uses for shooting birds in flight the 7D mk2 is very suitable.
Frankly for shooting birds in flight the choice for best camera for the job lies between the 7D mk2 and the 1Dx mk2. The facilities on those cameras and especially the focus tracking make them far better than anything else for that job. Now I know there are going to be plenty of 'other' camera model exponents who will disagree, but the specifications of the cameras I've mentioned are self explanatory.

Reply
Aug 7, 2017 11:48:00   #
MS. DONNA Loc: NEW SMYRNA BEACH FL
 
Lame-Duck wrote:
I use a 7DII quite a bit. I overexpose my pictures by about 1/3 to 1/2 of a stop. It's called shooting TTR (to the right). That will cut down on a lot of the noise. Also, try to keep your ISO at 400 or less. Noise is at is worst when a photo is somewhat underexposed. Also the shadows and dark areas show the heaviest amount of noise. If you can shoot with your ISO around 100 or 200, you'll notice a big improvement.

The software that I often use to help reduce noise is Topaz DeNoise 6. I ordered it online, and it is a plug in with Photoshop CC 2017. Topaz DeNoise 6 can also be use by itself, as a stand alone program (separate from Photoshop). I load my photos from my camera into Lightroom directly off of my compact flash card, and I really like the noise reduction program that Lightroom offers. If I don't get the results I desire from Lightroom, then I send my photos to Topaz DeNoise 6. After all the above is done, I send my images to Photoshop for any finishing up work that is necessary.
I use a 7DII quite a bit. I overexpose my pictures... (show quote)



thank you, so how do I stop the action of bif very new to this type of photography someone said to shoot high iso and 1000 or 2000 and shutter at 1/1000 so how do you get sharp feathers at iso 400? keep in mind im very new to bif so some of this is compilcated for me. I appreciate your comments
Donna

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 6 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.