7d mk2 poor image quality and noise in raw images using lightroom

[Arwphotography]

Hi everyone..

Has anyone else had a problem when downloading raw images into lightroom from the 7d mk2...they have poor image quality and have bad noise even with low ISO (200) .I have tried various versions of lightroom ,various computers etc....

The only satisfactory way of downloading images from the camera is using canons own software....when the results are vastly improved......

Andy

 

[RLJSlick]

Which version of Lightroom are you using?

Hi everyone..

Has anyone else had a problem when downloading raw images into lightroom from the 7d mk2...they have poor image quality and have bad noise even with low ISO (200) .I have tried various versions of lightroom ,various computers etc....

The only satisfactory way of downloading images from the camera is using canons own software....when the results are vastly improved......

Andy

 

[Arwphotography]

I have recently started using the new cc version.... Still the same results as previous...

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Hi everyone..

Has anyone else had a problem when downloading raw images into lightroom from the 7d mk2...they have poor image quality and have bad noise even with low ISO (200) .I have tried various versions of lightroom ,various computers etc....

The only satisfactory way of downloading images from the camera is using canons own software....when the results are vastly improved......

Andy

The images I've seen processed in LR are supurb. Post some examples or links to the raw files and someone might have a chance of helping you. We can't second guess the issue without information.

 

[NancyP]

This sounds like an issue to take up with Adobe.

 

[weixing]

Hi,
I use Adobe DNG converter to convert my 7D2 RAW file and open in LR4.4, no noise issue at low ISO.

May be you can just post a screenshot of the image open in lightroom.

Have a nice day.

 

[jeffa4444]

Are you viewing the images solely with LR CC? Sometimes when you make a series of adjustments the image sharpness doesnt look great until you save the image. I posted a series of shots to Flickr yesterday firstly processed in LR CC, editted in Photoshop CC and they looked much better when they had been uploaded to Flickr than within the LR & Photoshop windows.

 

[Arwphotography]

Thanks for all the replies...i put the new firmware update on this morning but haven't had the time to test if there are any difference...not that that is something mentioned in the update....

i will let you know as soon as i get time..

Andy

 

[jrista]

Hi everyone..

Has anyone else had a problem when downloading raw images into lightroom from the 7d mk2...they have poor image quality and have bad noise even with low ISO (200) .I have tried various versions of lightroom ,various computers etc....

The only satisfactory way of downloading images from the camera is using canons own software....when the results are vastly improved......

Andy

Can you post a demonstration of what bad image quality is?

In my work over the last year with astrophotography, where it is a necessity to dig extremely deeply into the raw data, I've found that AHD demozaicing (which is what's used in Lightroom/ACR, and most other RAW editors for that matter, with the exception of a couple OSS options that let you choose, and CaptureOne) does not handle Canon raw data ideally. There is another form of demosaicing, VNG, which I believe CaptureOne uses an internal variant of, and the results are visibly better.

I've been using VNG to demosaic all my astro data for about six months now, and since doing so, I no longer experience banding unless my exposures have ludicrously low signal. The banding in those cases is simply the banding inherent to the bias signal, any other form of banding that I was used to with AHD demosaicing is nowhere to be seen.

It may simply be the RAW converter your using, and sadly, Lightroom, these days, is not the best at demosaicing data. You might give CaptureOne a try, or one of the open source RAW editors that allows you to select the demosaicing algorithm (RawThearapee does, and it offers VNG as an option). Both should at least give you an idea of whether the issue your seeing has to do with demosaicing, or whether it is something else. If your images look better in RawThearapee and CaptureOne, but still look poorer in LR, then it just might be the way LR handles the RAW data. If your images don't look any better, then it's probably something inherent to the data itself (i.e. too high or low an ISO for the lighting conditions, or perhaps the sensor is overheating, which produces excessive dark current, etc.)

 

[DBC]

In my work over the last year with astrophotography, where it is a necessity to dig extremely deeply into the raw data, I've found that AHD demozaicing (which is what's used in Lightroom/ACR, and most other RAW editors for that matter, with the exception of a couple OSS options that let you choose, and CaptureOne) does not handle Canon raw data ideally. There is another form of demosaicing, VNG, which I believe CaptureOne uses an internal variant of, and the results are visibly better.

I've been using VNG to demosaic all my astro data for about six months now, and since doing so, I no longer experience banding unless my exposures have ludicrously low signal. The banding in those cases is simply the banding inherent to the bias signal, any other form of banding that I was used to with AHD demosaicing is nowhere to be seen.

It may simply be the RAW converter your using, and sadly, Lightroom, these days, is not the best at demosaicing data. You might give CaptureOne a try, or one of the open source RAW editors that allows you to select the demosaicing algorithm (RawThearapee does, and it offers VNG as an option). Both should at least give you an idea of whether the issue your seeing has to do with demosaicing, or whether it is something else. If your images look better in RawThearapee and CaptureOne, but still look poorer in LR, then it just might be the way LR handles the RAW data. If your images don't look any better, then it's probably something inherent to the data itself (i.e. too high or low an ISO for the lighting conditions, or perhaps the sensor is overheating, which produces excessive dark current, etc.)

Would this apply if the file was converted to DNG first. Were does demosaicing occur?

 

[jrista]

Conversion to DNG should preserve the original RAW pixel structure...however I honestly do not know if it maintains the same precision of the data, or if any other processing may be done.

I used DNG for a while when I first got my 7D years ago, and I ended up going back to simply importing my CR2 files as they were. I never felt I got the same quality with DNG, but I could never figure out exactly why, however I learned later on that the 7D used two different kinds of green pixel filters, and it is possible that conversion to DNG was losing that little nuance. (The other reason was the conversion process doubled or more my total import time...simply copying the CR2 files off my memory card was significantly faster.)

I would try importing your original RAW files as they are. It's possible the 7D II is still using two kinds of green filters, and conversion to DNG may be losing that distinction, which would indeed cost you on the IQ front. It may also be that the data is simply stored in a monochrome raw pixel matrix in the DNG, but since it is a DNG rather than a CR2, LR may not process it exactly right. You would be surprised at how much special code there is in the ACR raw rendering engine for each and every camera out here...no two CR2 files from different Canon cameras are the same, every single one has slight differences, so LR has to handle each one differently. Who knows exactly what Adobe's code is keying off of to make those distinctions, so conversion to DNG is not something I recommend.

 

[Sabaki]

Hi everyone..

Has anyone else had a problem when downloading raw images into lightroom from the 7d mk2...they have poor image quality and have bad noise even with low ISO (200) .I have tried various versions of lightroom ,various computers etc....

The only satisfactory way of downloading images from the camera is using canons own software....when the results are vastly improved......

Andy

Hey Andy

I'm not sure if this is relevant to your issue but with my first copy of the 7Dmkii, I also experienced extremely poor quality images in Photoshop RAW.

When I got the 2nd and then 3rd bodies, the problem disappeared.

Regards

 

[jeffa4444]

Hi everyone..

Has anyone else had a problem when downloading raw images into lightroom from the 7d mk2...they have poor image quality and have bad noise even with low ISO (200) .I have tried various versions of lightroom ,various computers etc....

The only satisfactory way of downloading images from the camera is using canons own software....when the results are vastly improved......

Andy

Can you post a demonstration of what bad image quality is?

In my work over the last year with astrophotography, where it is a necessity to dig extremely deeply into the raw data, I've found that AHD demozaicing (which is what's used in Lightroom/ACR, and most other RAW editors for that matter, with the exception of a couple OSS options that let you choose, and CaptureOne) does not handle Canon raw data ideally. There is another form of demosaicing, VNG, which I believe CaptureOne uses an internal variant of, and the results are visibly better.

I've been using VNG to demosaic all my astro data for about six months now, and since doing so, I no longer experience banding unless my exposures have ludicrously low signal. The banding in those cases is simply the banding inherent to the bias signal, any other form of banding that I was used to with AHD demosaicing is nowhere to be seen.

It may simply be the RAW converter your using, and sadly, Lightroom, these days, is not the best at demosaicing data. You might give CaptureOne a try, or one of the open source RAW editors that allows you to select the demosaicing algorithm (RawThearapee does, and it offers VNG as an option). Both should at least give you an idea of whether the issue your seeing has to do with demosaicing, or whether it is something else. If your images look better in RawThearapee and CaptureOne, but still look poorer in LR, then it just might be the way LR handles the RAW data. If your images don't look any better, then it's probably something inherent to the data itself (i.e. too high or low an ISO for the lighting conditions, or perhaps the sensor is overheating, which produces excessive dark current, etc.)

Jrista this is valuable information Ive been unhappy with banding in grey skies (I live in Britain its a common problem) and no amount of adjustment in LR seems to eradicate it (reducing magnta or purple for instance) on the 6D its my one bug bear with the camera. I will try the VNG route.

 

[Lee Jay]

Almost universally, these "problems" are caused by the fact that the user doesn't know a simple fact:

DPP applies noise reduction by default.
Lightroom has noise reduction turned totally off by default.

Try this.

Set your detail panel settings in Lightroom, top to bottom, to the following numbers:

Sharpening
40
1.0
25
40

Noise reduction
40
90
0

25
50
50

Now compare.