7D - How bad is it? Really?

[TAW]

I used my 7D for two years and loved it. I tried not to go above ISO 1000. The 5D III is just an improvement in so many ways. Many of my pictures are of kids & school related stuff and it seems every gym and fieldtrip is in challenging lighting where the higher ISO of the 5D III was so helpful. With that said, when I am out taking pictures of my kids skiing, I was (and would be today) completely happy with my 7D. IMHO, You will not be unhappy with the 7D unless you need a lot of 1000+ iso. You should at least give the 5D III a test drive. I fall into the armature that loves photography and I can also add that I loved moving to full frame. In a year or two, we will be having this same conversation about the 7D III vs the 5D X. God help us when they introduce a new sensor ;D

Have fun shooting

tom

 

[Wilmark]

Any camera will shoot good pictures and the 7D certainly shoot good pictures even under the conditions you describe with some limitations. If that's all you are going to use to make your decision the 7D will be fine. I owned the 7d and I was terribly disappointed with it especially in lowlight high ISO situations. I was also disappointed with the IQ. I believe that the 7d is a Rebel in a pro body. There is little difference in IQ between the 2ti (and its successors) and the 7D, there is some debate about whether it uses the same sensor. The 7D has almost every pro body feature of the big bodies that does not affect IQ - weather sealing, advanced auto focus, high frame rate, 60p 720 video, etc but i could never get over why canon chose to put a Rebel quality sensor in this body. Canon is already in the dumps with its sensors and the 7D's sensor the lowest performing sensor in their pro lineup. It is old and outdated, and we are just on the verge of a new wave of cameras and possibly new sensors, I would never buy a new 7D at this point. Esp that its rumored a new 7D will be out this year. If you ever plan to make the leap to FF body stop buying any EFS lenses.

 

[DaveQ]

I shoot wildlife for some very demanding clients with the 7D and 100-400L, and a couple of L Telephoto lenses, and do not hesitate to use ISO 3200 and even ISO 6400 when necessary. I process in RAW, and then run the images through Topaz Denoise. My customers and I are very happy with their A2 and A3 size prints. Go ahead...use the camera and don't let the ISO setting limit your creativity!

 

[insanitybeard]

Any camera will shoot good pictures and the 7D certainly shoot good pictures even under the conditions you describe with some limitations. If that's all you are going to use to make your decision the 7D will be fine. I owned the 7d and I was terribly disappointed with it especially in lowlight high ISO situations. I was also disappointed with the IQ. I believe that the 7d is a Rebel in a pro body. There is little difference in IQ between the 2ti (and its successors) and the 7D, there is some debate about whether it uses the same sensor. The 7D has almost every pro body feature of the big bodies that does not affect IQ - weather sealing, advanced auto focus, high frame rate, 60p 720 video, etc but i could never get over why canon chose to put a Rebel quality sensor in this body. Canon is already in the dumps with its sensors and the 7D's sensor the lowest performing sensor in their pro lineup. It is old and outdated, and we are just on the verge of a new wave of cameras and possibly new sensors, I would never buy a new 7D at this point. Esp that its rumored a new 7D will be out this year. If you ever plan to make the leap to FF body stop buying any EFS lenses.

To be fair, to my knowledge, when the 7D was new- ie, 3+ years ago, it WAS a new sensor which, as I understand it was competitive at the time (without getting dragged into arguments involving low ISO noise and banding) against the then comparable models- e.g, Nikon D300. It is only because subsequent Rebels have used basically the same sensor that the 7D now offers no IQ benefits compared to them (disregarding the improved AF, FPS performance etc), so whilst I agree the 7D needs an overhaul/refresh, to say the sensor is 'Rebel quality' is comparing the newer Rebels with a 3 year old camera.

 

[K3nt]

I say get the 7D now, especially if you can find a good price, which shouldn't be too hard. It's a step up from your current gear and will serve you well.
There's always the option of upgrading to the next bells-and-whistles device that's "just around the corner", and then you'll make a decision on keeping the 7D as a backup body or selling it, it's not a hard sell by any stretch.
I will probably keep mine even when I do upgrade as I simply LOVE the way the 7D works. It is awesome. I haven't tried 1D-series stuff which I'm told are brilliant as well.
But, when and if you get the 7D, take the time to learn its ways, it'll pay off.

 

[SPL]

The 7D is a very nice camera that will serve you well. I have had mine for about 2.5 years and have enjoyed it. I have however, on several occasions been very annoyed by its noise and banding (especially with some landscape shots) at ISO 100. Now,..I am an enthusiast and an amateur who very much enjoys his hobby,…but I honestly at times do a good amount of pixel peeping, when I shouldn’t be pixel peeping. I love the ergonomics and functionality of the camera, and the FPS and reach of the crop are very nice when you need it. I recently upgraded to a 5D III and the IQ is far superior. Some people might say this is a lame comment, but as some other posters have said,..there is just something about a FF image,…there is… The current prices that we have seen for a new 7D body are interesting,…looks like a replacement is coming soon,..so as another poster said,..a used body or a refurbished one may be a good choice..

 

[vargyropoulos]

I picked up a 7D about a month ago and I've used it for both studio and wildlife. I have a few decent ISO1600 shots for wildlife that did not lose too much detail during noise reduction but if you want those magazine quality photos try to stick with ISO 640 or less.. .maybe ISO800 with good light

for studio, I do find that FF will give you some better detail resolution but I'm not making money off photos.... so for me the 7D is proving an excellent value... to upgrade it for studio use... is about a $2000 deal... to upgrade it for wildlife use.... is more than a $10,000 deal

 

[Trovador]

Bad?, best camera ever! ;D

All pics on my website taken with 7D: www.ruddyflorentino.com

That said, ISO 1600 is as high as I went, 3200 if absolutely necessary to get the shot. You can always reduce noise on post though. For your needs I think is more than OK, unless you plan to use isos higher than 1600 often, then I'd recommend going full frame.

 

[FatDaddyJones]

I don't think most of the people that replied really cared to read the original post. He's NOT looking to upgrade to full frame.

That being said, I would highly recommend the 7D, having spent the last three years shooting with it exclusively. To be fair, the new t4i is supposed to have one more stop of ISO usability than the 7D, and will benefit from the new Digic 5 processor in noise reduction, mostly in the in-camera processing when your shooting JPEG. They're both great cameras. The 7D is a lot more sturdy and just feels better in your hands. After shooting with a 7D, a Rebel will feel more like a toy. If you don't need that toughness, weather sealing, and 8fps, look into the t4i, which should give you equal, if not better, ISO noise quality.

I just got a 5D Mark III, and I can't bring myself to part with my 7D. With the price of the 7D right now, you can't go wrong if that's your camera of choice for upgrade. The quality is head and shoulders above the 30D, and I'm sure you would be pleased.

If you're not looking to upgrade to FF, don't listen to all these guys going on about how much better it is. There's ALWAYS something better out there for lots more money. You need to look at your needs and your price range and decide what camera is best for you. The 7D will make an awesome upgrade in IQ and ISO quality. There are other options (60D, t4i, etc.) that you ought to look at also when choosing a crop body, but considering that you take sports photos, the 8 frames per second on the 7D might be a deciding factor of what would best fit your shooting needs. Hope this helps.

 

[danjwark]

The 7D still is a great camera. However, ISO wise it is really no better than any other current 18MP APS-C cameras - even the Rebels. The key to having less noise in your high ISO shots is to have good light. In poor (low) light, ISO 1600 will look noisy on a 7D. With better light you can go up to 6400 in a pinch and it may look OK. Just don't try using 6400 in very low light as the noise will be very bad.
In terms of comparing it to your 30D, try this site: http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
It allows you to compare different models side by side. Just bear in mind that these are studio shots with good light so it makes it hard to see huge differences.
Handling wise, you will definitely enjoy the 7D over the 30D. Almost everything about it is a vast improvement.

 

[awinphoto]

As any professional photographer, and you will notice that photographers standards and expectations are different than clients standards and expectations... most noise, within reason, goes un-noticed by most clients... That and crisp razor sharp focus... That being said, what the 7d is good and bad are totally up to user interpretation... In certain situations, I wouldn't blink of bringing the ISO to 1600, even 3200 if the light was bad. I've shot higher than that for paid shoots for different situations with success, it just matters how you light the subject, what method of NR you use, and what's your tolerance. On my 5d3, on a wedding last year in really bad lighting situations, I was able to bump my ISO up to 20,000 and exposed it just right so even on large prints, you would be tasked to find any bad noise. If your really worried about noise, try out a 7d, borrow one, rent one, whatever... test it for yourself to determine what your willing to live with and what you are not.

 

[paul13walnut5]

I have seen the 7D getting bashed for bad high-ISO performance here, but I also realize that the standards on this forum is VERY high. Since I am not a professional, and probably never going to sell any of these pictures, my view of what is acceptable is somewhat lower.

To be fair, some of the standards on this forum aren't that high. Don't confuse who has spent the most or posts most frequently or whatever with ability.

That said, I do not want to invest a large sum of money into a camera that has bad IQ over ISO 1000, as I already own one of those...

I shoot stills with my 7D at 1600 comfortably and 3200 at a push. The key is in shooting RAW and being subtle with the sharpening and noise reduction. I find applying any NR first works best, then applying as little sharpening as possible, LUMA NR for lower ISO images where required, slight luma and heavier CHROMA NR for higher ISO.

The 7D is mostly maligned by folk who never bothered to set up the AF or cannot work RAW properly. One or two of the dissenters might have got a duff cam, but in my experience for the most part folk just bought a camera that was designed for personal set up, and never bothered setting it up.

The kind of folk, who in the first part of my answer, think that buying a more sophisticated camera makes you a better photographer.

If you compare photos of resolution charts with those from a 5D3 or 1DX then the 7D isn't as good. Handy for those who shoot resolution charts and can afford a 5D3 or 1DX. Which many folks can't.

Within your budget, with your lenses and for your application the 7D is the camera to go for. Just be prepared to crack the manual. It'll really sing if you add a fast aperture USM lens (something like an 85mm f1.8 or 100mm f2.0)

So, the question is: How bad is the 7D on high ISO (1000-6400)? Really?

If you are confident using RAW you'll get great images at 1600, good images at 3200, and 6400 is probably more akin to what your current camera is giving you.

Bear in mind that super-high ISO is a relatively recent trend. I remember the noise from Fuji 1600 print film, to the point where I'd usually restrict myself to 800 or lower. So it's changed days.

The only arguement I can think of to get you to hold off from buying a 7D just now is that there is a new model pending, you might be in line for a bargain on the 7D if you can wait a while.

In the meantime, get to grips with RAW, as it makes the absolute best of the 7Ds images.

 

[sandymandy]

I don't think most of the people that replied really cared to read the original post. He's NOT looking to upgrade to full frame.

Sorry my bad, but why would somebody not want to go FF? Anyway, If not FF then get 7D, best aps-c at the moment.

 

[paul13walnut5]

@sandymandy

but why would somebody not want to go FF?

Performance for cost (6D and 5D2 are very different cameras to the 7D)
Cost alone
They already have a range of EF-s or DC lenses
They find the effective increase in reach useful

 

[papa-razzi]

I agree with all the other posts. The 7D is a great camera, and ISO 1600 is very usable, with 3200 ok in certain situations.

However, my experience with the 7D taught me it is not just ISO in isolation (i.e. ISO 1600 or 3200 is always acceptable) - the amount of light is also very important. For example, if I have reasonably good light, but need a high ISO to push the shutter speed up for sports, then the noise is not too bad. However, if the ISO is pushed up because I have very poor lighting, then the noise at the same ISO (say 1600) will be too much for me.

For what you describe as your uses, the 7D should work just fine.

 

[insanitybeard]

@sandymandy

but why would somebody not want to go FF?

Performance for cost (6D and 5D2 are very different cameras to the 7D)
Cost alone
They already have a range of EF-s or DC lenses
They find the effective increase in reach useful

Yep, cost is the main factor preventing me from going FF! :-\

 

[digital paradise]

ISO 12,800 and NR using CS6

ISO 1600

a crop

Other fun stuff with it

 

[tortilla]

Sorry my bad, but why would somebody not want to go FF?

You tell us. According to your signature you shoot APS-C by yourself

 

[digital paradise]

BIF

Another Crop

Click on it to see it at full size

 

[RLPhoto]

Another thing that factors to help NR in post is having very good lenses. When you have a sharp lens to start with, at High ISO, adding Heavy NR won't affect the sharpness of the photo too much.

But if you combine a duff lens, with high ISO, and Heavy NR... Expect ugly results.