• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Canon 7D Mk II is announced and available for pre-order (2 Viewers)

Vladimir Deryabin said:
More than 3 years I photographed birds on 5DmIII on ISO=1600.
To photograph on 7DmII with ISO=1600 it is impossible, - big noise:
http://www.deryabino.ru/test/noice/20151001.html

Such big noise on 5DmIII weren't:
http://www.deryabino.ru/ptaha/20150906/20150906.html
Click to expand...
As I said:
mfunnell said:
From what you've written, I doubt we will ever agree about that. You may well be "right" about it, and I may be "wrong".
Click to expand...
You are right, I am wrong. Let's leave it there.

...Mike

Think: pixel density and sensor size.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist–Shannon_sampling_theorem
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_perception
...before you even start thinking of the noise floor of the relevant sensor tech (where the 7D2 is slightly ahead of the 5D3), in practice negated by the different pixel densities (sensor tech isn't really referenced above, but some results are implied if you care to look)
 
Last edited:
Vladimir Deryabin said:
For photos 800х600 noise accepted, but for 1200х800 noise are noticeable:
http://www.deryabino.ru/ptaha/20150916/20150916.html
Click to expand...

You've got some very nice photos there, though the crops on the Sand Martins may be little too heavy. I don't own the 5DIII so I cannot compare, but what I do know is, that photos with iso 1600 or even 3200 on the 7DII are perfectly possible. Being a full-fnma sensor the 5DIII would logically perform somewhat better, but there is really no reason to avoid the high iso's with the 7DII in my view. Even for sizes beyond 800x600.

Reed Bunting-1600 iso
Griffon Vulture- 200 iso

Regards,
Peter
 

Attachments

  • 19334105408_95dbd7fcef_b.jpg
    19334105408_95dbd7fcef_b.jpg
    125.5 KB · Views: 327
  • 21531432091_b1b411517a_b.jpg
    21531432091_b1b411517a_b.jpg
    266.5 KB · Views: 286
PeterBird:
You've got some very nice photos there, though the crops on the Sand Martins may be little too heavy. I don't own the 5DIII so I cannot compare, but what I do know is, that photos with iso 1600 or even 3200 on the 7DII are perfectly possible. Being a full-fnma sensor the 5DIII would logically perform somewhat better, but there is really no reason to avoid the high iso's with the 7DII in my view. Even for sizes beyond 800x600.
Click to expand...

Mersi.
I prefer large images of birds in the photo. Therefore often I publish photos with crop of 100%.
In this case noise become very noticeable at ISO> 640.
For example:
http://www.deryabino.ru/ptaha/20150926/20150926.html
 
Vladimir Deryabin said:
(...) I prefer large images of birds in the photo. Therefore often I publish photos with crop of 100%.
In this case noise become very noticeable at ISO> 640. For example: (...)
Click to expand...
Well, I understand your problems with these pictures. (Besides, there are some really beautiful and technical great shots on your site!)

But I guess you are expecting too much from your equipment: A crop of e.g. 1,500x1,000 pixels from a 7DII raw represents just 8% of the whole image area (5,472x3,648 pixels). And if you take a 100% crop like this as a basis for your final image you are enlarging not only the bird but all technical issues of your photo - and noise is just one of them. Look for example at the low level of detail in the feathers of the osprey and the harsh sharpening artefacts around its head. That is what all of us get if we try to convert a 500mm lens into a 4,000mm lens by "digital zooming".

Sorry, but the old Capa dictum persists: http://www.magnumphotos.com/C.aspx?VP3=CMS3&VF=MAGO31_9_VForm&ERID=24KL535353
 
Last edited:
forent said:
Well, I understand your problems with these pictures. (Besides, there are some really beautiful and technical great shots on your site!)

But I guess you are expecting too much from your equipment: A crop of e.g. 1,500x1,000 pixels from a 7DII raw represents just 8% of the whole image area (5,472x3,648 pixels). And if you take a 100% crop like this as a basis for your final image you are enlarging not only the bird but all technical issues of your photo - and noise is just one of them. Look for example at the low level of detail in the feathers of the osprey and the harsh sharpening artefacts around its head. That is what all of us get if we try to convert a 500mm lens into a 4,000mm lens by "digital zooming".

Sorry, but the old Capa dictum persists: http://www.magnumphotos.com/C.aspx?VP3=CMS3&VF=MAGO31_9_VForm&ERID=24KL535353
Click to expand...

Mersi.

5DmIII, 500mm + x1.7 (850mm), ISO=1600, crop 100%:
http://www.deryabino.ru/ptaha/shirokohvostka.htm
http://www.deryabino.ru/ptaha/zuek_malyi/zuek_malyi_20130526.jpg

There are much less than noise.
5DmIII - Year of the beginning of sales 2012.
7DmII - Year of the beginning of sales 2014.
 
Last edited:
Vladimir Deryabin said:
(...) 5DmIII, 500mm + x1.7 (850mm), ISO=1600, crop 100%:
http://www.deryabino.ru/ptaha/shirokohvostka.htm
http://www.deryabino.ru/ptaha/zuek_malyi/zuek_malyi_20130526.jpg (...)
Click to expand...
If the first picture of the Cettia cetti really is a 100% crop of a 1,600 ISO raw shot with an 1.7x extender (presumably an old Kenko/Soligor) behind your 500mm lens, the result is absolutely stunning to me. Congratulations!

But the pictures below as well as the shot of the Charadrius dubius show a visible weaker image quality - at least to my eyes: sharpening artefacts, grain and lack of sharpness.

Hence I stick to my opinion that you crop too heavily to obtain optimum image quality. That said, the 5DIII delivers - all else being equal - still better image quality than a 7DII. I think this is what everybody expects if you compare full format with crop sensor cameras. But the latter are nonetheless very useful for the most of us. YMMV.
 
Typical current retail price range in the UK for a 5D111 is from about £1469 to £2249, the 7D11 is £859 to £1299.
You would expect the 5D111 to perform better in some aspects otherwise the whole marketing stratedgy would be undermined.
If Vladimir thinks he'll get all the latest technology that Canon can offer in a 7D11 it's no wonder he's disappointed. No doubt most of that will be in the mega bucks 1DX replacement and even then you wonder if some things are deliberately held back if the competition isn't already offering them.
Manufacturers want you to upgrade on a regular basis so you get drip fed the offerings.
 
Vladimir Deryabin said:
Mersi.
I prefer large images of birds in the photo. Therefore often I publish photos with crop of 100%.
In this case noise become very noticeable at ISO> 640.
Click to expand...

Yes, it will do that.

Your expectations are way too high. A 100% crop of a 1.6 crop camera with such a high megapixel count is not going to work unless the original image is absolutely perfect. To be quite blunt, you are taking photos that in many cases do not have good lighting and are poorly composed.
 
Robert,

I think you'll find this a lost cause. The only problem is with the equipment, which I'm sure you'll be told soon enough.

...Mike
 
Like I said. You are cropping far too heavily and also taking many photos in harsh light. Try to take advantage of morning or evening light or so you're not taking photos with the sun too much overhead, that will give you a starting point, then work on your post-processing techniques. Not being rude but a huge, badly lit and badly composed picture of a subject is of little value, noise or no noise. You are obviously lucky enough to live somewhere where you have lots of good subjects, so hopefully you can get your equipment to produce some worthwhile images.
 
Not a very good shot I know but here is a sample taken yesterday with the 7D2 taken at ISO 6400 and cropped fairly heavily (it is around 40% of the full frame). I also have the 5D3 and although the high ISO performance on the 7D2 is not as good as the full frame Cam of course I find that it is usable up to ISO 6400 with a bit of selective noise reduction.
 

Attachments

  • marsh tit at ISO 6400.jpg
    marsh tit at ISO 6400.jpg
    257.9 KB · Views: 738
Last edited:
Roy C said:
Not a very good shot I know but here is a sample taken yesterday with the 7D2 taken at ISO 6400 and cropped fairly heavily (it is around 40% of the full frame). I also have the 5D3 and although the high ISO performance on the 7D2 is not as good as the full frame Cam of course I find that it is usable up to ISO 6400 with a bit of selective noise reduction.
Click to expand...

Roy I think that that shot at ISO 6400 is very good.

I don't bother with ISO with the 7D ii I just leave it on auto ISO and it never lets me down.Earlier in the week I took some shots in very gloomy conditions at my local patch when the ringer was on site.I was amazed when editing the shots that the camera was also on ISO 6400 and the shots were pretty decent.My old 7D went to pot at ISO 1600.

Max
 

Attachments

  • _MG_9924.JPG
    _MG_9924.JPG
    48.3 KB · Views: 465
Just took my new camera out and needn't have bothered :(
For some reason I didn't change the aperture when shooting in AV so everything was at F13. The shutter speeds were too slow and even at ISO 2000 the shots were really grainy. The weather was overcast and miserable, but I wanted to fire off a few shots. I needn't have bothered :(

6L5A3492.jpg

6L5A3458.jpg
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

B
Canon EF 400/f5.6 L USM + EOS 7D Mk II combo anyone???
Replies
2
Views
979
BoldenEagle
B
canonman77
Canon 1.4x ii or 1.4x iii??
Replies
2
Views
795
Roy C
Roy C
N
Advice: Not too expensive toss in the pocket/bag compact binoculars?
2 3
Replies
49
Views
6K
julay
J
G
Camera Land July Update
Replies
0
Views
619
gr8fuldoug
G
yarrellii
Canon vs Kite stabilized binoculars
2
Replies
24
Views
5K
DRodrigues
D

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top