Canon 7D Mk ii image quality - what am I doing wrong? (1 Viewer)

[lockbreeze926]

A couple of weeks ago, I upgraded from a 600D to a 7Dii, but have been disappointed by the results, in that the images out of the camera are neither sharper nor more consistent than the 600 produced.

My lens is a Sigma 150-500 5-6.3, 18 months old, which is what I used previously.

The 7D is set up as recommended by various blogs and forums, such as this one - https://photographylife.com/recommended-canon-7d-mark-ii-settings .

I generally shoot in M setting (occasionally trying shutter or aperture priority to see what difference it makes) and the lens is set to AF, OS position 1 .

Many of the images I have made have been very noisy, which I'd expect in January light, but my real issue is that they are very soft. I switched out the Sigma for a Canon 18-55 lens and the general results were similarly soft, even with static subjects (granted that the images had quite different degrees of magnification).

I've been surprised by this, because one of the main reasons for upgrading was image quality. On the other hand, I don't actually know what quality of image to expect, straight out of the camera, so I planned to attach some typical examples from today, but there seems to be a problem with RAW and larger JPEG files on the forum. Therefore, I've attached just one rather compressed and resized JPEG, otherwise (!) unprocessed. Is this any good for assessing the problem, or should I put some images on flickr?

I know the chances of the camera being the problem are slim, so it's likely to be user error - but what? Any ideas gratefully sought.

 

[Robert_Scanlon]

Hi John, you probably know an upgrade of camera body won't give you sharper images, and that sparrow photo looks reasonably sharp to me.

It might be an idea to post some of the poorer photos for comment.

The sigma is a well regarded lens, but the extreme pixel density on the 7Dii will show up any flaw in technique / glass.

 

[Vespobuteo]

can't see any noise in that photo,
light seem to be good,
but it's too small to judge

noise occurs, in most cameras,
7dmkII is not the most noise free camera on the market,
but at lower ISO the differences is not huge
what ISO:s do you use?

you could go to dpreview.com reviews,
there you can study and compare
noise and sharpness of many cameras

 

[lockbreeze926]

Thanks Robert and, er, Vespo.

Unfortunately (sic) I've deleted the really duff efforts, largely because I think I know what's wrong with them; it's the ones that I think "should" be sharper that are bothering me (the noise isn't an issue that concerns me too much and certainly not for that photo, it's the sharpness.)

If the sparrow looks okay at the compressed size of the forum, it's (obviously) less good @ 100%, but I'm not sure how to capture that properly, so I've screen-captured the 100% crop and attached it, which is quite faithful to how it looks to me.

Does that offer any more clues?

 

[lockbreeze926]

...and maybe this gull is a better example of the overall softness I mean.

 

[dabut101]

Here is a pic taken with 7d2 and sigma 150 500 in not very good light https://www.flickr.com/photos/99drb/22619511129/in/dateposted-public/

 

[johnf3f]

On Tuesday I took my 7D2 out to shoot wildlife for the first time after owning it for 2 months - BL*&$%Y weather! A different lens to lockbreeze926 but I thought the IQ wasn't too bad. True it doesn't crop as well as a good full frame camera but with the 1.6 crop factor it doesn't have to.
Unfortunately I shot these in JPEG, my mistake - new camera! ISO was 1600 and 4000 repsectively and no editing/processing.

Overall I am quite impressed with the 7D2 so far - no it's not a 1DX but then it is FAR less expensive!

 

[Vespobuteo]

Thanks Robert and, er, Vespo.

Unfortunately (sic) I've deleted the really duff efforts, largely because I think I know what's wrong with them; it's the ones that I think "should" be sharper that are bothering me (the noise isn't an issue that concerns me too much and certainly not for that photo, it's the sharpness.)

If the sparrow looks okay at the compressed size of the forum, it's (obviously) less good @ 100%, but I'm not sure how to capture that properly, so I've screen-captured the 100% crop and attached it, which is quite faithful to how it looks to me.

Does that offer any more clues?

I think it may be the lens, it's a bit soft at full f-stop.
And the 7d mkII is pretty pixel packed.

Since you have OS/IS in the lens, I would go to f/8, use a slower shutter speed 1/125-1/250 sec, and a lower ISO setting. For flying birds 1/500:ish might be more appropriate.

Also note that at 1/2000 sec (as used in your shot) OS/IS will not have any positive effect, I always turn IS/OS off if it's not needed. I.e a 1/500 sec and above for a 500mm lens (free handed - that is)

Did you check if you have a back/front focus issue?
Check your lens by putting it on a tripod, focus on the center of a ruler placed 45 degrees in front of the lens at 5-10 meters or so. Did the focus hit the mark on the ruler you focused on, or in front, or behind the mark?

Long lenses often need micro adjustment of the focusing.
The longer lens the shorter DOF.

 

[robinsslee]

I would consider to do static test shot, in your garden or somewhere you have plenty of distance to work with. Use a single subject and do few shots at different aperture and FL on your 150-600mm using single point centre. This is to confirm if your lens have back/front focus. If yes, then AFMA required.

Secondly test with other lenses that you had, this will enable you to find out whether it is the camera at fault or was it your lenses. Also if you have buddies who use Canon, borrow their camera body and try with your lenses.

This will identify who is at fault, it could be the human error though

 

[lockbreeze926]

Many thanks for the advice - I stopped down to f8 and the shots immediately improved 100%.

 

[Michael McKee]

Many thanks for the advice - I stopped down to f8 and the shots immediately improved 100%.

I agree that the sparrow is not sharp and it looks like the branches in the foreground are sharper. If your lens was sharper on your last body then I think it is a calibration issue between your new body and the lens resulting in the lens front focussing. You can either have the lens and body calibrated by a Canon service centre or you can use the micro-adjustment facility within the camera (as robinsslee has suggested). There are several ways to calibrate a lens but this is one option.

I think the reason your photos improved at f8 is because you have increased the depth of field. If you calibrate the lens properly your photos should be sharp at all apertures.

 

[lockbreeze926]

For the record - I did a focus test and the lens was consistently shooting long. I made some in-camera adjustments and the focus point is much truer now.

Thanks again for all the help.

 

[mart46]

John
I found that I had to micro adjust all my lenses to get them pin sharp. There are various methods on the internet, but I used a metre / yard ruler, angled it at 30 degrees. With the camera on a tripod say 3 metres away, I picked a point on the ruler,say 18" as the focus point, and then it was just a case of taking a pic, loading it onto the computer and zooming to see if it was front or back focusing, and then made the adjustment (I think its custom func 7 on the camera!) Made a big difference to all my lenses.

 

[john miller]

I think with a sigma 150-600 he will have difficulty using a ruler 3m away. As I said on a previous thread, with long lens's, I park at 30degrees to a barbed wire fence, focus on a post at 30m away, take a few shots and count the barbs in focus in front of and behind the post.

John

www.kellingnature.zenfolio.com

 

[glm2006ITALY]

Hi!
I have had in the past the Sigma APO DG 150/500
In my humble opinion it is a good goal BUT NOT SUITABLE if you seek high-quality images even less so with a 7d / 7d II who have very dense sensors
Now I have a Canon USM L 400 f / 5.6 and is definitely more performance

Being an example the image seems to me that:
A) the distance is still too much (you can have the most expensive equipment in the world but if you do not approach the subject enough .... nothing you do not get decent results!)

B) I am not aware for the 7D II but on the "old" is very difficult to have a 100% crop of good quality: better to stop at 70/80%

C) The image comes from a RAW? seeing the crop seems to me that you have set an excessive sharpness

 

[MJN]

I notice that Mart46 and John Miller are using 30 degrees angles for MFA. I just assumed 45 was the correct angle. Have I been going wrong here?
Regards.

 

[hoan]

My Sigma 150-600 (nikon mount) is back focus all the usual focal lenght. I have to re-calibrate it using SpiderLens Cal target. And register these offset values into the lens using Sigma USB dock. Now, my sigma is dead on.
Long and pain calibration procedures, but worth it.

 

[john miller]

I notice that Mart46 and John Miller are using 30 degrees angles for MFA. I just assumed 45 was the correct angle. Have I been going wrong here?
Regards.

Not sure about that, I just thought that the lower the angle the less the change of angle when focusing beyond and in front of the point of focus. I tried various methods but the way I do it now produces good results and is quick.

 

[glm2006ITALY]

According to your theory the final image quality also varies depending on the angle of the photo shoot?

 

[Mick Sway]

Interesting thread. I'm a Sigma user too and bought a 7D2 in March 2015 , along with two others who bought them about the same time.
All three of us have had problems with image quality and in particular, though not exclusively in flight shots.
All three of us have had the Camera sent away for repair, basically re-calibration (whatever that means) .
None of us are much happier with the results.
OK I'm not a technical genius but given its limitations, I had no problems with flight shots with the old
40D and a Sigma 150-500.
The bin rate on the 7D2 is unacceptably high in my view.
Thanks anyway.