Reading mode: Light Dark

ISO preformance on 7d2 vs. 50d

Go to last post
P

PBPfoto

New member
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I shoot a lot of pictures i a bad lit bowling center. To get enough light I have to set my Canon 50d to ISO 3200 which will produce massive noice, and specially when i crop the picture.

How high can I go with ISO on a 7d2 before noice breaks the picture in a bad lit room?

With my 50d and 85mm f/1.8 I will say max. 800-1000 iso.

When will ISO noice kick in on 7d2? :-)
 
Why the 7D2 over the 80D? Moving from the 50D, the 80D would be the more logical choice, and it is a little better in low light than the 7D2. The 7D2 is optimized for sports (high speed shooting) and wildlife (complex focusing options for rapidly moving subjects) - but the 80D is MUCH better than your 50D on those aspects anyway.

In both cases, you can expect about a 1 to 1.5 stop improvement in high ISO, where shooting at ISO 3200 on the 80D or 7D2 would be about the same as ISO 1600 on the 50D - and with the right camera set up, maybe you could even go to ISO 6400 and still be OK with the noise level.

Note that a key for low noise is to avoid boosting the shadows in post processing, which means the correct exposure is key. Too often people under expose in low light and boost the shadows in post processing, greatly increasing the image noise (the noise of an ISO 3200 image boosted 1 stop in post processing can be higher than that of a correctly exposed ISO 6400 image).
 
ISO noise is in the eye of the beholder...I bought my 50D in 2008, and there is no comparison what so ever to my 7MK2 as far as noise ...it is IMO way more then 1 to 1.5 stops as stated by the MOD...I´ll go as far as 3 to 4 stops better...the 7Dmk2 or 80D is a great tool for any purpose, not just sport but portrait, or bowling ...

greetings

Matthias
 
matthias jurisch said:
ISO noise is in the eye of the beholder....it is IMO way more then 1 to 1.5 stops as stated by the MOD...I´ll go as far as 3 to 4 stops better..
Click to expand...
I could go with that - it is very subjective. Going from the 40D to a 7D MK1 I saw about a 1 stop advangatge but many claimed it was less. The 80D or 7D2 are reportedly about a stop higher too - partly because the "noise" is more random and less obvious. I was being conservative with the 1.5 stops. Some people would certainly say more, but others would say less!
 
By the way, when I post photo related stuff I am posting as a forum member and not from my perspective as moderator. "Moderators" are only moderating when it comes to enforcing site rules and user behavior. When we post about photography/camera issues, our posts are no more valid than those of any other member.
 
Jeff Peterman said:
By the way, when I post photo related stuff I am posting as a forum member and not from my perspective as moderator. "Moderators" are only moderating when it comes to enforcing site rules and user behavior. When we post about photography/camera issues, our posts are no more valid than those of any other member.

--
Jeff Peterman, Moderator 7D and Phone/Tablet forums.
Not a staff member, or paid employee, of DPReview.
Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are entirely unintentionalal. Sorry.
www.pbase.com/jeffp25
www.jeffp25.smugmug.com
Click to expand...
Kudos Mr.Peterman, your viewpoint is well taken...I don`t really want to make a lot of noise about "sensor noise"...but with my 50D I did have a lot of grainy noise issues...the 7DMK2 took care of that...

greetings and may the light be with you

Matthias
 
Jeff Peterman said:
Note that a key for low noise is to avoid boosting the shadows in post processing, which means the correct exposure is key. Too often people under expose in low light and boost the shadows in post processing, greatly increasing the image noise (the noise of an ISO 3200 image boosted 1 stop in post processing can be higher than that of a correctly exposed ISO 6400 image).
Click to expand...
 
I went from 50D to 7d Mk II and was impressed by the ISO improvement

While I normally shoot birds, an occasional jazz concert demands higher ISO performance.

this at ISO 3200 from a recent outing.



c96a18064afa4abdaa9ff7e8f6edc6b4.jpg





--
www.flickr.com/photos/birddog/
 
PBPfoto said:
I shoot a lot of pictures i a bad lit bowling center. To get enough light I have to set my Canon 50d to ISO 3200 which will produce massive noice, and specially when i crop the picture.

How high can I go with ISO on a 7d2 before noice breaks the picture in a bad lit room?

With my 50d and 85mm f/1.8 I will say max. 800-1000 iso.

When will ISO noice kick in on 7d2? :-)
Click to expand...
1. The noise improvement from the 50D to the 80D and the 7Dmk2 is about 2/3rds of a stop (0.7stop), according to the highly scientific DXO tests.

b2c158c7a14647659f52b38b18a17a27


LINK: https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Com...D-Mark-II-versus-Canon-EOS-50D___1076_977_272

NOTE: take absolute dxo scores with a a sack full of salt, but the graphs are very accurate and revealing, especially the SNR one. However, this is for RAW noise. JPEGs from newer cameras might have better NR due to a faster processor. (maybe another quarter or half a stop)

So quality at ISO 800-1000 in your 50D would be achieved at around 1600.

2. If you want to reduce noise, shoot RAW and consider software like DXO Optics Pro - it's Prime NR is excellent. (or maybe others like Noise Ninja, or Neat Image Pro.)

3. I guess you'd already know that newer cameras would offer other benefits like better autofocus (the 7D2 is the best in this, although it might be overkill), and higher frame rates.
 

Attachments

  • b2c158c7a14647659f52b38b18a17a27.jpg.png
    b2c158c7a14647659f52b38b18a17a27.jpg.png
    40.7 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Member said:
  1. Shaurya2 wrote:
PBPfoto said:
I shoot a lot of pictures i a bad lit bowling center. To get enough light I have to set my Canon 50d to ISO 3200 which will produce massive noice, and specially when i crop the picture.

How high can I go with ISO on a 7d2 before noice breaks the picture in a bad lit room?

With my 50d and 85mm f/1.8 I will say max. 800-1000 iso.

When will ISO noice kick in on 7d2? :-)
Click to expand...
1. The noise improvement from the 50D to the 80D and the 7Dmk2 is about 2/3rds of a stop (0.7stop), according to the highly scientific DXO tests.



LINK: Canon EOS 80D vs Canon EOS 7D Mark II vs Canon EOS 50D | DXOMARK

NOTE: take absolute dxo scores with a a sack full of salt, but the graphs are very accurate and revealing, especially the SNR one. However, this is for RAW noise. JPEGs from newer cameras might have better NR due to a faster processor. (maybe another quarter or half a stop)

So quality at ISO 800-1000 in your 50D would be achieved at around 1600.

2. If you want to reduce noise, shoot RAW and consider software like DXO Optics Pro - it's Prime NR is excellent. (or maybe others like Noise Ninja, or Neat Image Pro.)

3. I guess you'd already know that newer cameras would offer other benefits like better autofocus (the 7D2 is the best in this, although it might be overkill), and higher frame rates.
Click to expand...
The dynamic range on the 80D was a high improvement though.







--
My Flickr : justin holding
 
I've owned the 50D, 7D, and 7DII. The improvement from the 50D to 7DII is far more than 2/3 stop at high ISO for RAW files. The reason that DxO scores are, at best, the start of the answer, rather than the whole answer, is that they don't try to account for how well files will process. One of the problems with the 50D at high ISO is that significant banding creeps in at anything above 3200 (I never had problems at 3200, though others reported they did). The 7D fixed that, so that it was much easier to process 7D ISO 6400 RAW files for acceptable results. The 7DII is even better in that regard (and also has no banding at low ISO). I can process ISO 12,800 files from my 7DII to give easily as good results as ISO 3200 from my 50D. I have my auto ISO set to go all the way up to the maximum native ISO of 16,000. I have made 8.5" X 11" prints of ISO 16,000 shots that look great (and are hanging on the walls of the subjects, who aren't blind!). And that's all using only Lightroom, with no extra NR plugins. I have Photoshop, and a bunch of NR programs, which I used to use with the 50D, but with the improvements in the camera (the 7DII) and the latest versions of Lightroom, I find I just don't need those other programs.
 
boosting the shadow detail on the 80D is actually giving very clean results

From what I've read (not personal experience) this depends on the ISO: the higher the ISO, the more noise in boosted shadows (and not just because it is higher ISO).
 
Look at the DPReview review of the 7D Mark II for the images taken at various ISOs and decide based on what you see how far you think the ISO can be pushed before it becomes objectionable to you. Your tolerance may be different from mine and that of the other readers here.
 
Jeff Peterman said:
Why the 7D2 over the 80D? Moving from the 50D, the 80D would be the more logical choice, and it is a little better in low light than the 7D2.
Click to expand...
Im not so sure - the user interface of the 7D II is much more similar to the EOS 50D - the OP won't need to re-adjust - a particular advantage if he plans to keep your 50D as second camera.

Focus area selection is more convenient with the 7D II as it has the dedicated button (as the 50D) - I use it all the time on my 7D, 40D and 20D.

If the OP plan to sell the 50D, the first point does not matter that much - he will re-adapt quickly.
Jeff Peterman said:
The 7D2 is optimized for sports (high speed shooting) and wildlife (complex focusing options for rapidly moving subjects) - but the 80D is MUCH better than your 50D on those aspects anyway.

In both cases, you can expect about a 1 to 1.5 stop improvement in high ISO, where shooting at ISO 3200 on the 80D or 7D2 would be about the same as ISO 1600 on the 50D - and with the right camera set up, maybe you could even go to ISO 6400 and still be OK with the noise level.

Note that a key for low noise is to avoid boosting the shadows in post processing, which means the correct exposure is key. Too often people under expose in low light and boost the shadows in post processing, greatly increasing the image noise (the noise of an ISO 3200 image boosted 1 stop in post processing can be higher than that of a correctly exposed ISO 6400 image).
Click to expand...
 
CameraCarl said:
Look at the DPReview review of the 7D Mark II for the images taken at various ISOs and decide based on what you see how far you think the ISO can be pushed before it becomes objectionable to you. Your tolerance may be different from mine and that of the other readers here.
Click to expand...
My digital pathway has been Olympus C2000z, C4000z, C350z, C750z, the Canon - 350D, 40D, 7D, 7DMkII (And a Panasonic along the way which never quite had a likeable colour Palette). The digital noise has improved from horrendous to very good. Try a 16 Second time exposure at 400ISO on an Olympus C2000z and you'll never complain again!

My wife's upgrade path was the 350D when I got the 40D, before getting the 50D & 6D as hers. But I can borrow them from time to time.

Anyway, as far as noise goes, the 7D was certainly a big improvement on the 50D (which was a nice camera). But when she got the 6D, I didn't bother taking low-light/indoors shots because her 6D would trump the 7D every time. We would always use her images. But with the 7DMkII the gap is a lot narrower. Yes, she may get a little cleaner image, but the 7DMkII kicks the 6D's butt when it comes to low-light AF. So it's no longer a foregone conclusion as to which image we'd keep. We have shot photo's down in caves where tripod's are banned, and the trusty 7DMkII with the 17-55mm IS Canon lens was still happily focussing away when we'd had to put the 50mm F1.4 lens on the 6D, and it was still struggling.

I'm sure the 80D is still a contender in your deliberations, and rightly so. But I certainly wouldn't exclude the 7DMkII by any means. I'd just love someone to drop it's AF into the 6D and make a 6DMkII, and AF is it's weakest point.
 
The Aussie Viking said:
CameraCarl said:
Look at the DPReview review of the 7D Mark II for the images taken at various ISOs and decide based on what you see how far you think the ISO can be pushed before it becomes objectionable to you. Your tolerance may be different from mine and that of the other readers here.
Click to expand...
My digital pathway has been Olympus C2000z, C4000z, C350z, C750z, the Canon - 350D, 40D, 7D, 7DMkII (And a Panasonic along the way which never quite had a likeable colour Palette). The digital noise has improved from horrendous to very good. Try a 16 Second time exposure at 400ISO on an Olympus C2000z and you'll never complain again!

My wife's upgrade path was the 350D when I got the 40D, before getting the 50D & 6D as hers. But I can borrow them from time to time.

Anyway, as far as noise goes, the 7D was certainly a big improvement on the 50D (which was a nice camera). But when she got the 6D, I didn't bother taking low-light/indoors shots because her 6D would trump the 7D every time. We would always use her images. But with the 7DMkII the gap is a lot narrower. Yes, she may get a little cleaner image, but the 7DMkII kicks the 6D's butt when it comes to low-light AF. So it's no longer a foregone conclusion as to which image we'd keep. We have shot photo's down in caves where tripod's are banned, and the trusty 7DMkII with the 17-55mm IS Canon lens was still happily focussing away when we'd had to put the 50mm F1.4 lens on the 6D, and it was still struggling.

I'm sure the 80D is still a contender in your deliberations, and rightly so. But I certainly wouldn't exclude the 7DMkII by any means. I'd just love someone to drop it's AF into the 6D and make a 6DMkII, and AF is it's weakest point.
Click to expand...
 
jay jay02 said:
The Aussie Viking said:
CameraCarl said:
Look at the DPReview review of the 7D Mark II for the images taken at various ISOs and decide based on what you see how far you think the ISO can be pushed before it becomes objectionable to you. Your tolerance may be different from mine and that of the other readers here.
Click to expand...
My digital pathway has been Olympus C2000z, C4000z, C350z, C750z, the Canon - 350D, 40D, 7D, 7DMkII (And a Panasonic along the way which never quite had a likeable colour Palette). The digital noise has improved from horrendous to very good. Try a 16 Second time exposure at 400ISO on an Olympus C2000z and you'll never complain again!

My wife's upgrade path was the 350D when I got the 40D, before getting the 50D & 6D as hers. But I can borrow them from time to time.

Anyway, as far as noise goes, the 7D was certainly a big improvement on the 50D (which was a nice camera). But when she got the 6D, I didn't bother taking low-light/indoors shots because her 6D would trump the 7D every time. We would always use her images. But with the 7DMkII the gap is a lot narrower. Yes, she may get a little cleaner image, but the 7DMkII kicks the 6D's butt when it comes to low-light AF. So it's no longer a foregone conclusion as to which image we'd keep. We have shot photo's down in caves where tripod's are banned, and the trusty 7DMkII with the 17-55mm IS Canon lens was still happily focussing away when we'd had to put the 50mm F1.4 lens on the 6D, and it was still struggling.

I'm sure the 80D is still a contender in your deliberations, and rightly so. But I certainly wouldn't exclude the 7DMkII by any means. I'd just love someone to drop it's AF into the 6D and make a 6DMkII, and AF is it's weakest point.

--
The Aussie Viking
http://members.iinet.net.au/~ausviking/AUSVIKING.GIF
Click to expand...
I'm a little surprised because the center point AF on the 6d is known to be impressive in low light.
Click to expand...
AF performance needs to assessed over all focusing points thereby the 7D Mk II is able to track moving subjects more accurately than the 6D so no surprise there.
 
Dareshooter said:
jay jay02 said:
The Aussie Viking said:
CameraCarl said:
Look at the DPReview review of the 7D Mark II for the images taken at various ISOs and decide based on what you see how far you think the ISO can be pushed before it becomes objectionable to you. Your tolerance may be different from mine and that of the other readers here.
Click to expand...
My digital pathway has been Olympus C2000z, C4000z, C350z, C750z, the Canon - 350D, 40D, 7D, 7DMkII (And a Panasonic along the way which never quite had a likeable colour Palette). The digital noise has improved from horrendous to very good. Try a 16 Second time exposure at 400ISO on an Olympus C2000z and you'll never complain again!

My wife's upgrade path was the 350D when I got the 40D, before getting the 50D & 6D as hers. But I can borrow them from time to time.

Anyway, as far as noise goes, the 7D was certainly a big improvement on the 50D (which was a nice camera). But when she got the 6D, I didn't bother taking low-light/indoors shots because her 6D would trump the 7D every time. We would always use her images. But with the 7DMkII the gap is a lot narrower. Yes, she may get a little cleaner image, but the 7DMkII kicks the 6D's butt when it comes to low-light AF. So it's no longer a foregone conclusion as to which image we'd keep. We have shot photo's down in caves where tripod's are banned, and the trusty 7DMkII with the 17-55mm IS Canon lens was still happily focussing away when we'd had to put the 50mm F1.4 lens on the 6D, and it was still struggling.

I'm sure the 80D is still a contender in your deliberations, and rightly so. But I certainly wouldn't exclude the 7DMkII by any means. I'd just love someone to drop it's AF into the 6D and make a 6DMkII, and AF is it's weakest point.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
jay jay02 said:
The Aussie Viking said:
CameraCarl said:
Look at the DPReview review of the 7D Mark II for the images taken at various ISOs and decide based on what you see how far you think the ISO can be pushed before it becomes objectionable to you. Your tolerance may be different from mine and that of the other readers here.
Click to expand...
My digital pathway has been Olympus C2000z, C4000z, C350z, C750z, the Canon - 350D, 40D, 7D, 7DMkII (And a Panasonic along the way which never quite had a likeable colour Palette). The digital noise has improved from horrendous to very good. Try a 16 Second time exposure at 400ISO on an Olympus C2000z and you'll never complain again!

My wife's upgrade path was the 350D when I got the 40D, before getting the 50D & 6D as hers. But I can borrow them from time to time.

Anyway, as far as noise goes, the 7D was certainly a big improvement on the 50D (which was a nice camera). But when she got the 6D, I didn't bother taking low-light/indoors shots because her 6D would trump the 7D every time. We would always use her images. But with the 7DMkII the gap is a lot narrower. Yes, she may get a little cleaner image, but the 7DMkII kicks the 6D's butt when it comes to low-light AF. So it's no longer a foregone conclusion as to which image we'd keep. We have shot photo's down in caves where tripod's are banned, and the trusty 7DMkII with the 17-55mm IS Canon lens was still happily focussing away when we'd had to put the 50mm F1.4 lens on the 6D, and it was still struggling.

I'm sure the 80D is still a contender in your deliberations, and rightly so. But I certainly wouldn't exclude the 7DMkII by any means. I'd just love someone to drop it's AF into the 6D and make a 6DMkII, and AF is it's weakest point.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top