Comparing noise of 7D to 40D (DXO test)

[Romy Ocon]

The 7D is a great camera in a lot of areas, but I've always posted my reservations about its shadow noise at ISO 200-800 particularly when compared to my 40D.

DXO's results (see link below) are parallel to what I see in my bird pictures with the 40D and 7D.

tinyurl.com/ybmppht


Here's a couple of screen shots of the SNR graphs

Screen (per pixel comparo):



Print (per frame comparo):





My interpretation - Comparing pixels-to-pixels, ISO 800 on the 40D has almost as high an SNR as ISO 400 on the 7D. Note that higher SNR results into lower noise. For large prints, I always shot the 40D at ISO 800 and below if I can help it. If held against my same standard, I need to shoot the 7D at ISO 400 and below.

[Romy Ocon]

And here are the DXO test results for the 40D, 7D and 5D2. From an IQ stand point, the 5D2 towers overwhelmingly over both cropped sensors, which should explain why I continue to enjoy my 5D2 as my preferred birding body. I do have to work around non-IQ weaknesses of the 5D2, like less reach and slower fps.

Comparing pixels-to-pixels:




Comparing frame-to-frame:




Comparing other IQ metrics:

[Bobby Kintanar]

Excellent post +1 !! Another factor is the price - paying more for more noise is not my idea of value for money. :-)

Due to many factors, I am actually very seriously considering the "entry-level" EOS 450D (or 500D) as a second body to the 5D2. The 12 MP sensor "puts the EOS 40D to shame" according to DP Reviews, and that range of MP may not be so susceptible to mirror bounce; add the lesser-than-5D2-noise shutter, and I think the "old" 450D" may be the right choice as a second body. The FPS leaves much to be desired, but I can live with it.

This is what may well be as practical a test as any: darwinwiggett.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/the-canon-7d/

Any thoughts on this Ka Mastah? Others?

[Neon Rosell II]

Wow!! Our "sipat-sipat" (eyeballing the shots) test has actual scientific basis!!! Thanks for this link Ka Mastah!! ;D

[Romy Ocon]

Dec 12, 2009 2:23:56 GMT Bobby Kintanar said:

Excellent post +1 !! Another factor is the price - paying more for more noise is not my idea of value for money. :-)

Due to many factors, I am actually very seriously considering the "entry-level" EOS 450D (or 500D) as a second body to the 5D2. The 12 MP sensor "puts the EOS 40D to shame" according to DP Reviews, and that range of MP may not be so susceptible to mirror bounce; add the lesser-than-5D2-noise shutter, and I think the "old" 450D" may be the right choice as a second body. The FPS leaves much to be desired, but I can live with it.

This is what may well be as practical a test as any: darwinwiggett.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/the-canon-7d/

Any thoughts on this Ka Mastah? Others?

IMHO, if HD video is not of interest, a current 12 MP APS-C sensor (in an EOS body) is great for birding.

Yes, I've seen that test early on, Bobby and I tend to agree with the photographer/tester. I haven't participated in discussions on that particular test in FM and DPR because I've much better things to do than engage in debates. ;D

Dec 12, 2009 2:34:02 GMT Neon Rosell II said:

Wow!! Our "sipat-sipat" (eyeballing the shots) test has actual scientific basis!!! Thanks for this link Ka Mastah!! ;D

Yes partner, somehow our eyes can still be trusted. ;D

[Ed Matuod]

I rest my case 'here'. Thanks for the link, Maestro.

[Ivan Sarenas]

Bobby, my back-up body is still the 450D. It's a lot slower than my 40D, but the images are noticeably better. I think that 12mp is the most resolution a cropped sensor can handle optimally.
I find myself sometimes, when a bird so allows, to switch bodies from the 5dm2 to the 450D for the closer image. I have done no tests but I feel that the 450D, when capturing full-frame, outresolves the 5dm2, which I would have to crop. But, I have not done any real testing on this.
Another point of delay in the field, is when I have to switch remote cables as the mount of the 450D is different from the 5dm2.
The AF and framerate of the 450D are very sluggish when compared to the 40D so I find myself doing a lot of manual focusing which is made easier by the presence of live view.

[Bobby Kintanar]

Dec 12, 2009 17:01:00 GMT Ivan Sarenas said:

Bobby, my back-up body is still the 450D. It's a lot slower than my 40D, but the images are noticeably better. I think that 12mp is the most resolution a cropped sensor can handle optimally.
I find myself sometimes, when a bird so allows, to switch bodies from the 5dm2 to the 450D for the closer image. I have done no tests but I feel that the 450D, when capturing full-frame, outresolves the 5dm2, which I would have to crop. But, I have not done any real testing on this.
Another point of delay in the field, is when I have to switch remote cables as the mount of the 450D is different from the 5dm2.
The AF and framerate of the 450D are very sluggish when compared to the 40D so I find myself doing a lot of manual focusing which is made easier by the presence of live view.

Great feedback, Ivan. Your experience with the 450D seems to be positive in terms of IQ, which is my primary concern. A question though, how do you find the ISO 800-1600 noise performance of the 450 vs the 40D?

The AF will be slower for sure, but as a back-up, it will be used only for more or less static subjects anyway, so this may not be too much of an issue for me. The 5D2 is fantabulous, despite it's lack of reach, and I find cropping photos taken with the 5D2 quite OK most of the time for my purposes. :-)

[Ding Carpio]

Ahhh...that's why I'm not buying the 7D!

_{mmm...grapes are really sour...}

[Romy Ocon]

Dec 13, 2009 1:46:55 GMT Ding Carpio said:

Ahhh...that's why I'm not buying the 7D!

_{mmm...grapes are really sour...}

Hehehe, I will still buy one myself and just use it as an ISO 100-400 camera. I'm just waiting for the price to settle down a bit, at P 75 - 78 K, the 7D should be an excellent value for money.

I wonder if there's a way to disable ISO 500 and up on the 7D so I won't be able to select these by mistake? ;D ;D ;D

[Bobby Kintanar]

Dec 13, 2009 2:18:56 GMT Romy Ocon said:

Dec 13, 2009 1:46:55 GMT Ding Carpio said:

Ahhh...that's why I'm not buying the 7D!

_{mmm...grapes are really sour...}

Hehehe, I will still buy one myself and just use it as an ISO 100-400 camera. I'm just waiting for the price to settle down a bit, at P 75 - 78 K, the 7D should be an excellent value for money.

I wonder if there's a way to disable ISO 500 and up on the 7D so I won't be able to select these by mistake? ;D ;D ;D

Hehehe, that's one thing that Canon should address. If they price the camera right (around Php 70,000.00) perhaps a lot of people will take it as it is, noise performance and all. As it is, the price just seems too "unfair."

Still, if the "mushiness" issue has to be resolved. I saw this problem in Osawa's shots, too. Tsl, tsk, he's trying to love the camera...

[Romy Ocon]

Dec 13, 2009 5:29:12 GMT Bobby Kintanar said:

Still, if the "mushiness" issue has to be resolved. I saw this problem in Osawa's shots, too. Tsl, tsk, he's trying to love the camera...

I probably know what you mean Bobby - the 7D's output, while resolving detail better, doesn't have the "pop" or "X-factor" of its older siblings. By "pop" I mean those indescribable pixel qualities that make an image very pleasing to the eyes, and this might include a combination of good colors, contrast, detail, sharpness, etc.



Here are a few 100% crops all taken in golden light (best lighting there is, one can see the unobscured setting sun in the eyes of all the birds) to illustrate this "pop".

EOS 7D + 500 f4 IS + Canon 1.4x TC, f/8, ISO 200, 1/250 sec, bean bag, processed 100% crop





1DM2 + 100-400 IS, 400 mm, f/5.6, ISO 320, 1/400 sec, hand held, processed 100% crop:




5D2 + 400 2.8 L IS + Canon 2x TC, f/9, ISO 200, 1/250 sec, bean bag, processed 100% crop




I tweaked the 7D's KF shot in RAW conversion and in PP, but I just couldn't make it pop as well as the pics taken with larger pixels.

[Ivan Sarenas]

Why do they all look like they have pop to me? Even your 7d sample looks excellent Mastah!
Anyway, Bobby, I don't remember having tried to use any ISO above 500 with the 450d so, I can't answer your question.
I would get the 7d, wallet willing, for its reach and video. Noise in video is still very acceptable when compared to even pro HD video cameras.

[Bobby Kintanar]

Well, I can agree with Ivan on the photos above - the KF also looks very good, but the other photos do exhibit the "pop" quality even more. The thing is that Ka Romy has nailed his techniques while the rest of us are still going uphill; and the 7D is one unforgiving camera. It literally shows your weaknesses in it's output.

I wish Canon comes up with a 12-13 MP camera with specs similar to the 7D and noise like the latest Nikon models. That would be awesome! :-)

[Romy Ocon]

Dec 13, 2009 5:29:12 GMT Bobby Kintanar said:

Hehehe, that's one thing that Canon should address. If they price the camera right (around Php 70,000.00) perhaps a lot of people will take it as it is, noise performance and all. As it is, the price just seems too "unfair."

Hehehe... interesting that the D300s is being sold now at these prices in Hidalgo:

D300s

Henry's - 74,000
Mayer - 75,000 (free SD&CF)
Definition - 76,800
JT Photo - 82,000 (order basis)
DW Zoom GB5 - 92,000 (CDSC)

Ref. - www.pinoyphotography.org/forum/index.php?topic=23467.msg699761;boardseen#new



I think CMPI should target a pricing range of PHP 75 - 78 K for the 7D to be a serious contender. Its PHP 89K'ish pricing now is just too tough.


If the 7D would have been a 12 MP camera with all other features the same, I'd buy it at PHP 120K. ;D

[Tonji Ramos]

I like the features of the 7D. Most especially the weather proof body and the new AF.

But from what I have seen the pictures of the 50D and 7D look very similar. The optimum ISO range of the 50D and 7D are also similar. I try to set my ISO on the 50D in the 100-400 range as well.

Since the 5D mk2 has the nice full frame sensor in a non-pro body maybe they should have used the 1.3 crop sensor of the 1 series and put it in the 7D body. The sensor of the new 1D mk4 in a non pro body! Then they should sell it for the price of a 5D mk2. I think that would be a killer birding camera.

[Romy Ocon]

I just did some controlled tests between my 40D and 7D, shooting a scene from ISO 100 to 3200 in 1 stop increments. My results closely match the DXO results:

1. The 7D is noisier at the pixel level than the 40D at ISO 200-3200.

2. When I upressed the 40D files to 18 MP, then compared these to the 7D files, both have very similar noise levels at ISO 200 - 800. At ISO 1600 and 3200, the 7D is slightly cleaner.

3. The 7D is yielding a slightly brighter photo than the 40D at the same aperture, shutter speed, ISO and fixed artificial lighting levels. The 7D is more sensitive in the order perhaps of 1/4 - 1/3 stop.

4. The 7D is yielding slightly more detail when both files are equalized either to 18 MP, or 10 MP.

5. At ISO 100, files from both cameras are virtually noise free at the pixel level. At this ISO, when using a very sharp lens (like the 400 2.8 IS), the 7D delivers a markedly higher resolution at similar perceived noise levels even when comparing pixels to pixels.

Dec 11, 2009 22:46:02 GMT Romy Ocon said:

The 7D is a great camera in a lot of areas, but I've always posted my reservations about its shadow noise at ISO 200-800 particularly when compared to my 40D.

DXO's results (see link below) are parallel to what I see in my bird pictures with the 40D and 7D.

tinyurl.com/ybmppht


Here's a couple of screen shots of the SNR graphs

Screen (per pixel comparo):



Print (per frame comparo):





My interpretation - Comparing pixels-to-pixels, ISO 800 on the 40D has almost as high an SNR as ISO 400 on the 7D. Note that higher SNR results into lower noise. For large prints, I always shot the 40D at ISO 800 and below if I can help it. If held against my same standard, I need to shoot the 7D at ISO 400 and below.