DSLRUsers.com

All shot with the 7D - only PP was conversion from RAW using DPP and then resize/sharpen - no noise reduction etc

I realise the WB on most is way out but was more interested in noise, sharpness etc.

P.S. Huge thanks to Leigh for letting me play with the 7D and to Gary R for letting me play with his brand new 50mm 1.2L

7D, 70-200 F4IS at 200mm, F/5, 1/100th, ISO 800 edit - image cropped


7D, 70-200 F4IS at 200mm, F/4, 1/100th, ISO 500 edit - image cropped - right hand side only


7D, 50 1.2, F/1.2, 1/1250th, ISO 3,200


7D, 50 1.2, F/1.2, 1/50th, ISO 12,800

Those last ones are underexposed. Why not expose properly at a lower ISO?

Interesting examples regardless.

Interesting testing... but the noise looks pixelated to me? Is the last shot a crop and what were you metering on?

According to the settings you stated (50 1.2, F/1.2, 1/50th, ISO 12,800) I am guessing you metered on a very dark area in the frame?

Really love the DOF in the second shot and the focal point is sharp as a tack!

Thanks for these David. None of my photos with the 7D are accessible as my lightroom can't read it until I upgrade.

As DaveB points out, underexposing at any ISO will cause shadow noise. In fact, a properly exposed photo at a high ISO will look better than a underexposed one at lower ISO [within reason]. I am not trying to defend the 7D, and it's quite clear that 12800 is unusable. What do you think about the 3200 and at a push, 6400 DaveB?

David, I hope you tried the wireless flash commander at dinner. If so, what were the results like?

xerubus wrote:I am guessing you metered on a very dark area in the frame?

Dude, it was really really dark. Think about it; the photo is UNDERexposed at 1/10 f1.2 12800!!! I am surprised he could focus! I certainly couldn't.

i gotta say i'm a bit surprised by these shots...surprised and a bit confused by the results...

i'll be blunt, i think the quality of the 3200 shot considering the abundance of light, (1/1250s??), is pretty poor. are you sure that exif is right and its not 1/25s ? i'd also suggest that the iso800 shot is disappointing unless its like a 100% crop.

i'm more impressed with the 12800 shot. that is a real iso test in low light and while the quality is not great, its iso12800 ffs ! thats amazing.

Rooz wrote:i gotta say i'm a bit surprised by these shots...surprised and a bit confused by the results...

i'll be blunt, i think the quality of the 3200 shot considering the abundance of light, (1/1250s??), is pretty poor. are you sure that exif is right and its not 1/25s ? i'd also suggest that the iso800 shot is disappointing unless its like a 100% crop.

i'm more impressed with the 12800 shot. that is a real iso test in low light and while the quality is not great, its iso12800 ffs ! thats amazing.

The comment on the 800 ISO is exactly what I was thinking.

The comment on the 800 ISO is exactly what I was thinking.

lol, heres a comparsion for yas, D80 at the same time at iso 800 - exposure adjusted, it was a bit dark.....7D still sh$ts over me poor D80 in that game tho...

biggerry wrote:D80 at the same time at iso 800

Gerry, the fair comparison would be d300 or d300s [is the sensor the same on these] Also you have underexposed which dosen't help.
I suppose it maybe fair to compare 7D ISO 6400 vs D80 ISO 800 [provided D80 maximum is 1600]

Where in the world is the detailed dpreview review!

Also, when is poon going to stock this?

DaveB wrote:Those last ones are underexposed. Why not expose properly at a lower ISO?

Interesting examples regardless.

This wasn't a very fair test of the camera. I was playing around with high ISO and different modes etc. Also, I'd never used a 50mm 1.2 before. The light was fading so quickly that most of the shots were all over the place (as far as exposure goes) - the third and fourth were taken in AV mode so the camera decided on the exposure (evaluative metering).

Surenj, Didn't get a chance to play with the flash stuff - we were too busy eating