Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-14-2010, 12:49 PM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 581
Canon EOS 7D and the "high ISO sucks" myth

Hi all,

I thought I'd do some further testing to toture both the K20D and the EOS 7D at higher ISOs in response to some wild speculations that higher ISO on the 7D was rubbish. This is not a K20D bashing - it's an older and significantly cheaper body than the 7D, so I would expect the 7D to perform a lot better. The test was similar to before with the following consistencies:

- Use the same lens for both bodies, the Sigma 10-20mm EX DC f/4-f/5.6
- Both lenses set to 20mm
- Manual mode
- f/8
- ISO 1600 and ISO 6400
- Tripod mounted
- Mirror lockup
- Manual focus in live view, although both camera's autofocus systems confirmed focus
- White balance set to tungsten
- NO other tweaks, corrections or changes made in Adobe Camera Raw or photoshop other than converting colour profile to sRGB for web presentation
- NO camera noise reduction
- Noise Reduction and sharpening applied in Noise Ninja, auto profiled with Colour and Luminance set to 0, sharpening set to 120% and 1.2 radius.
- Both cameras set to RAW to bypass JPEG engine
- Adobe Camera Raw v5.6 for RAW to TIFF conversion

From my own experience with the K20D, ISO 1600 from RAW shots had very acceptable noise indeed and tests at the time showed it was just as good as its peers (50D and D300). Things got a bit out of control upwards of 1600, but here are some simple images at 1600 and 6400 ISO from both my bodies to demonstrate the noise levels that I get from both. Again, these are not scientific tests, just simple images and solid facts.

Here are the 100% crops:

K20D ISO 1600:



EOS 7D ISO 1600:



K20D ISO 6400:



EOS 7D ISO 6400:



Without a shadow of a doubt, the 7D retains more detail at higher ISOs although the actual level of chroma noise isn't that much improved with the 7D. The 7D may benefit from increased noise reduction whilst retaining as much detail, but that's purely down to how you choose to do your post processing.

May I remind you that given the price of the two bodies, this is the result I would expect. The K20D is still superb given it's age and cost, that's why I've kept it .

09-14-2010, 03:17 PM   #2
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 73
Ummm...these are 100% comparisons? if so...the 7D sensor has a 5.4MP/cm^2 density, while the K20D sensor has a 4.0MP/cm^2 density...you would EXPECT that the per-pixel noise level should be noticiably higher on the 7D, but it isn't...this is due to a different sensor design that allows the 7D to hold par with the K20D...it also means that shooting the same full-image scene @ 18MP will allow better detail than @ 14MP, due to more information being captured.
09-14-2010, 10:04 PM   #3
Veteran Member
Eruditass's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,207
Yeah uh are these 100% crops? If so, is the K20D closer? I'm confused.
09-15-2010, 01:13 AM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 581
Original Poster
Yes, these are 100% crops - the 7D crops have been resized by the forum it seems as they were "larger" if you like due to higher resolution.

09-15-2010, 06:16 AM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,352
A newer camera is better than an older camera? Well I never! :-)

Unfortunately the 7D has been punched in the face by the D7000. Hopefully this will prompt Canon to make quality smaller bodies...
09-15-2010, 06:22 AM   #6
Veteran Member
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Newrfoundland
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,667
QuoteOriginally posted by Unsinkable II Quote
A newer camera is better than an older camera? Well I never! :-)

Unfortunately the 7D has been punched in the face by the D7000. Hopefully this will prompt Canon to make quality smaller bodies...
If the D7000 is as good the D3 from a noise performance, then where will this put the K-5? I have high hopes for Pentax if they can maintain the reputation they made with the Kx insofar we noise processing goes.
09-15-2010, 09:29 AM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 581
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Unsinkable II Quote
A newer camera is better than an older camera? Well I never! :-)
That isn't the point of the thread, didn't you read:

QuoteOriginally posted by Big G:
This is not a K20D bashing - it's an older and significantly cheaper body than the 7D, so I would expect the 7D to perform a lot better.
This thread is in response to wild myths that the 7D was not good at high ISO and also to Ogl's outlandish claims that the GX20 (or K20D...) had better ISO 1600 performance than the 7D.

As proven above, what he says is complete rubbish.

09-15-2010, 11:14 AM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 581
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
If the D7000 is as good the D3 from a noise performance, then where will this put the K-5? I have high hopes for Pentax if they can maintain the reputation they made with the Kx insofar we noise processing goes.
I think we'll need to wait and see on that one; if the D7000 with the 16.2 MP sensor that's rumoured to be the same (or very similar) to the one in the Sony a55 it'll be great at high ISO, but as good as the D3? I'll hold my breath.
09-15-2010, 12:09 PM   #9
Veteran Member
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,806
I don't think my K20D is nearly that noisy at ISO 1600. The 7D blows it away at 1600, yet they're almost equal at 6400? That's a strange result because 6400 is bad on the K20D.
09-15-2010, 12:31 PM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 581
Original Poster
Chroma noise seems similar, but actual "grain" is a lot less on the 7D (look at the back of the book). Details are also better preserved, the speaker grill at the bottom of the TV shows this the most.

Noise Ninja could be set to suppress the chroma noise further without removing the detail, but on the K20D the detail is already pretty damaged.
09-15-2010, 02:49 PM   #11
Veteran Member
Fl_Gulfer's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida Gulfer
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,054
If the K-5 dosen't surpass the K-7 by a whole hell of allot I'm just going to keep what I have. The D7000 looks really impressive, I sent a link to my friend and he is a Nikon mad (his words) He says he is getting one as soon as they are out.
09-15-2010, 04:10 PM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: on the wall
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 715
The test was fun, but who uses an ISO that high with a tripod?
09-15-2010, 05:43 PM   #13
Veteran Member
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,806
QuoteOriginally posted by Big G Quote
Chroma noise seems similar, but actual "grain" is a lot less on the 7D (look at the back of the book). Details are also better preserved, the speaker grill at the bottom of the TV shows this the most.

Noise Ninja could be set to suppress the chroma noise further without removing the detail, but on the K20D the detail is already pretty damaged.
I would rather have seen the files with no noise reduction. I'm not sure your method is doing the K20 files any favours. I get much better images at 1600 just using the in-camera NR set for Weak.

At DXO these two are indistinguishable for sensor noise. I think your K20 is defective or your method is somehow lacking.

Last edited by audiobomber; 09-15-2010 at 06:40 PM.
09-15-2010, 06:03 PM   #14
Veteran Member
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Forestville, NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,801
QuoteOriginally posted by Fl_Gulfer Quote
If the K-5 dosen't surpass the K-7 by a whole hell of allot I'm just going to keep what I have. The D7000 looks really impressive, I sent a link to my friend and he is a Nikon mad (his words) He says he is getting one as soon as they are out.
Well, they're said to use a sensor that's pretty close to identical. K-5 is speculated to use the 16mp Sony sensor seen in the A580 and A55 (already shown to be excellent, a step up from the K-x at least) while the D7000 uses a 16mp speculated to be manufactured by Sony to Nikon's design, though possibly manufactured by another company (renesas?) altogether. Should be pretty close either way.

Chase Jarvis made some "good as D3 comments," but he also posted a full-res SOOC jpegs at ISO 3200 and I have to say it didn't look more than a stop better than jpegs under similar conditions from the K-x. Certainly not as good as some files I've seen from the D3. It's an excellent sensor, no doubt, but it's not going to be magic.
09-16-2010, 04:23 AM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 581
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by dragonfly Quote
The test was fun, but who uses an ISO that high with a tripod?
The whole point of the test was to demonstrate ISO noise; both cameras were tripod mounted for consistent test conditions and nothing to do with "who does what in the real world". :ugh:

QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
I would rather have seen the files with no noise reduction. I'm not sure your method is doing the K20 files any favours. I get much better images at 1600 just using the in-camera NR set for Weak.

At DXO these two are indistinguishable for sensor noise. I think your K20 is defective or your method is somehow lacking.
Sorry this post is just what I've come to expect on these boards; unsubstantiated talk. If you can provide detailed tests backing up your claims, lets see them. I have access to two K20D bodies and both exhibit the same noise levels. DxO numbers are just .... numbers. I'm providing test images.

Did you not read that I said the NN profiles was set to "0" for luminance and "0" for colour? This is minimal noise reduction, I could apply a lot more to both files to clean them up more; but to repeat myself yet again, this was to show high ISO noise, not the effectiveness of Noise Ninja and not the in-camera noise reduction of the bodies. It is RAW sensor output, so your "I use weak and it looks better" is a moot point as we are not testing in-camera NR.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
7d, bodies, camera, canon eos 7d, eos, iso, k20d, noise, reduction, tests
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon EOS 7D and the soft image myth Big G Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 13 09-10-2010 05:42 AM
What does is mean to say the K-7 is "bad" at high ISO? justtakingpics Pentax DSLR Discussion 15 05-19-2010 04:09 AM
k20D "fine sharpness" SUCKS! Too much noise! rburgoss Pentax DSLR Discussion 8 06-22-2008 06:59 AM
"high iso noise reduction" function - good news? platinum Pentax News and Rumors 1 04-19-2008 11:45 AM
Better high ISO performance on "K20D"? switters Pentax News and Rumors 39 12-02-2007 01:06 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:28 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top