7D grain issues - DPChallenge Forums

09/27/2010 11:13:03 AM · #26

Originally posted by michelaudette:

I have a 7D and I do not have that problem.... Something is definitely very wrong. Even at 64000 I do not get that kind of noise.

I'm assuming this is a typo as the 7D won't go to 64000 ISO.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

09/27/2010 11:39:13 AM · #27

Originally posted by MattO:

When you shoot raw, you lose ALL in camera noise reduction, meaning that YOU then have to be the noise reduction software. IMHO todays cameras are very good at high ISO because of the IN CAMERA noise reduction done of JPEGs because of the software they use to help. You lose all of that with raw, UNLESS you use the manufacturers software to reduce the noise. Have you tried DPP to process the noise then move it to your regular software for processing? I only shoot the 7D in JPEG because of this. Underexposing any photo on the 7D is just asking for trouble. They did shove a few too many pixels on that sensor.

Matt

That's why I was hoping that someone would post their raws, cropped down, but at actual pixels. I can't see why people would be so excited about the 7D if this was what it was like in RAW. I think I did noise reduction 5 times total over 2 years with the 40D, and I always shot in RAW.

Canon 7D

Canon 40D

Simms

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

09/27/2010 12:29:54 PM · #28

MUST READ ENTIRE THREAD B4 POSTING.

Message edited by author 2010-09-27 12:32:46.

09/27/2010 01:14:23 PM · #29

I posted these available light comparisons right after I got the 7D a year ago. 100% crops, no adjustments:

7D ISO1600

40D ISO1600

7D ISO3200

40D ISO3200

I don't hesitate to shoot high ISO on the 7D because it's so clean. Here's one from a charity event a few days ago at ISO1600 (actor Vincent Rivers):

Now I did run a little Noise Ninja on it, but I also shot in MRAW and the grain would have been less noticeable at full resolution.

09/27/2010 01:27:39 PM · #30

Scalvert dare I say the biggest difference in your image and the one the OP posted is proper exposure. Yours are spot on, where hers is 1/3-2/3 underexposed. Do you agree?

Were yours shot in JPEG or raw? and what did you use to process them into JPEG if you did shoot in raw?

09/27/2010 01:48:43 PM · #31

Originally posted by MattO:

but this much noise at 800 & 640 ISO if it's 1/3-2/3 of a stop underexposed? That seems ridiculous -- there are definitely times where you want to underexpose the shot so that part of the shot is exposed correctly. You really have to deal with that much noise unless it's perfect? And I thought that's why you shoot RAW, so that you can tweak the exposure. This never seemed to be an issue with the 40D.

Take a look at this shot: it's very flat lighting because it's a very overcast day. It's possible that I don't know what I'm looking at when looking at the histogram, but it looks like a good exposure -- though very flat lighting.

Here's the full shot: (shrunk down)

here's actual pixels:

This is 640 ISO

Message edited by author 2010-09-27 13:57:06.

MelonMusketeer

Nikon D7000

Nikon MF 50mm f/1.4

09/27/2010 02:06:28 PM · #32

I wonder if it is possible that there is something on your sensor, perhaps a residue from a cleaning solution or the like. The photos shouldn't be that noisy. Also, were you shooting with any kind of filter, UV or other filter? You posted from several shoots, but didn't say anything about that.
ETA, One of my friends got a new 5D a while back, and the first sensor cleaning smeared grease across the sensor. He sent it back to Canon, and they took care of it. They told him that the extra grease around the sensor was a common thing with the camera model.
Something is definitely different from your camera to the others who have posted crops in this thread.

Message edited by author 2010-09-27 14:09:22.

09/27/2010 02:18:09 PM · #33

Yes, I have UV filters on all my lenses -- but I assumed that if it was the filter, that it would happen on the 40D, as well. I guess I am going to send it back in. It's just so frustrating, because I got the 7D because I was tired of my 40D breaking every 3 months.

Now I just have to figure out what to do about the wedding. Shoot with the 7D and try denoising or shoot with the 40D. With the 40D, they can't do much in the way of enlargements, and with the 7D we have the noise issue.

09/27/2010 02:24:59 PM · #34

Have you done any prints with any of your images from the 7D? Can you e-mail me a full res RAW file and let me play with it?
you might be surprised after processing how nice they are. You never really print at Pixel level anyway. I've printed 20x30's with the 7D at 1600 and 3200 ISO and they are nice images.

matt@mattophotography.com

09/27/2010 02:48:23 PM · #35

Originally posted by MattO:

I'm trying to send it now -- I don't think my email can handle a 24mb file, but we'll see if it goes through. If not, my husband can upload it to his work site tonight, and I'll send you a link.

I printed the last photo I posted here, without any denoising, at 13"x19", and it's not too bad. So it should be fine with denoising at that size. The issue with denoising is that I don't have a high quality zoom, so it's soft to begin with. When you denoise, it gets a bit softer. That's one of my concerns. I could try shooting with a fixed 50mm on one camera and fixed 100 on another, but I'm that'll be a mistake -- that I really need the zoom for the wedding. The group shots and individual shots after I can use my good, fixed-length lenses. So the upshot is: I need to save as much sharpness when denoising as I possibly can.

09/27/2010 02:49:12 PM · #36

After typing all of that -- it looks like the file was sent. Can your email accept a 24mb file?

09/27/2010 02:50:11 PM · #37

Originally posted by MattO:

Scalvert dare I say the biggest difference in your image and the one the OP posted is proper exposure.

Probably. I took this one at the same charity event at ISO1600, but the subject walked in front of a large window and threw the exposure off (no time to compensate and my flash wouldn't have helped across such a large room).

By contrast, this one (same lens and settings at a different event on Saturday) was just barely overexposed and noise is not an issue:

Noise will always be strongest on the left side of your histogram, so you're better off overexposing and recovering detail in RAW than underexposing and trying to bring up the shadows.

Originally posted by MattO:

Were yours shot in JPEG or raw? and what did you use to process them into JPEG if you did shoot in raw?

Mine are MRAW (10MP resolution), converted in Photoshop. Full resolution would likely reduce noise since the grain would be finer detail.

Message edited by author 2010-09-27 14:54:30.

09/27/2010 02:54:56 PM · #38

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by MattO:
Scalvert dare I say the biggest difference in your image and the one the OP posted is proper exposure.

Probably. I took this one at the same charity event at ISO1600, but the subject walked in front of a large window and threw the exposure off (no time to compensate and my flash wouldn't have helped across such a large room).

Noise will always be strongest on the left side of your histogram, so you're better off overexposing and recovering detail in RAW than underexposing and trying to bring up the shadows.

Originally posted by MattO:
Were yours shot in JPEG or raw? and what did you use to process them into JPEG if you did shoot in raw?

Mine are MRAW, converted in Photoshop.

What did your histogram look like on the first one? I assume it was very badly off -- not just a small amount?

09/27/2010 03:00:07 PM · #39

Originally posted by vawendy:

What did your histogram look like on the first one? I assume it was very badly off -- not just a small amount?

Fairly normal:

If I had blown out the background, my subject wouldn't have been nearly as noisy.

Message edited by author 2010-09-27 15:02:18.

09/27/2010 03:03:16 PM · #40

What's your opinion on this, Shannon? Do you think this is an exposure problem? If so, since it's happening on almost everything I shoot, is my meter not working correctly? Or is it all user error?

Here's the full shot: (shrunk down)

here's actual pixels:

This is 640 ISO

09/27/2010 03:09:01 PM · #41

Originally posted by vawendy:

Do you think this is an exposure problem?

It could be. Turn on Highlight Alert on your camera, then adjust the exposure compensation until the brightest areas in your composition start blinking (just a little). Bring the exposure back down during RAW conversion and compare the result to what you've been getting.

Olympus 7-14mm f/4.0 Zuiko Digital Zoom

09/27/2010 03:17:29 PM · #42

Note that the brightest area in your example image is the off-white shirt, yet that shirt is represented by a bump in the histogram roughly 1/4 of the way from true white. I'd say it's underexposed.

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

09/27/2010 03:26:08 PM · #43

here's a semi-technical article discussing under exposing and image noise:

//www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml

one2one

Olympus E-5

09/27/2010 04:17:48 PM · #44

Have you tried bracketing to see if your meter is doing its job correctly? Try taking some shots of the same area with different exposures and compare them.

09/27/2010 04:30:51 PM · #45

Originally posted by vawendy:

After typing all of that -- it looks like the file was sent. Can your email accept a 24mb file?

I did not get an e-mail from you. And to be honest I'm not sure if I can accept a 24MB file or not, I know I can only send 10MB files from my normal account.

Olympus 7-14mm f/4.0 Zuiko Digital Zoom

09/27/2010 04:33:14 PM · #46

just got back -- nope, the email got kicked back. I'll have my husband upload it somewhere tonight.

one2one

Olympus E-5

09/27/2010 04:34:38 PM · #47

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by vawendy:
After typing all of that -- it looks like the file was sent. Can your email accept a 24mb file?

I did not get an e-mail from you. And to be honest I'm not sure if I can accept a 24MB file or not, I know I can only send 10MB files from my normal account.

Gmail.

scooter97

Canon EOS-6D

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

09/27/2010 06:26:41 PM · #48

This has been a very informative thread. I have been having noise issues with my T2i and I blamed it on too many pixels in the sensor. Most of what I shoot does not sit still so I underexpose and hope to get as fast a shutter as possible with as low ISO setting as possible. I rarely go over ISO 400 because of the noise problem.

I have hundreds if not thousands of Bird shots with the T2i that are really lousy with grain.

Please don't think of this as hijacking the thread. I'm interested in getting a 7D and all of this info is vital to my decision.