neuroanatomist said:
sdsr said:
jrista said:
....
Then, compare the light blue swatch on the color checker card at say ISO 6400 RAW, the one just above the black swatch in the lower right corner. Also, make sure you are in print mode. I've been comparing the 7D II and the D7100. The difference should be pretty obvious.
....
Noticeable, certainly - but again, it varies with where you look - if you move up and compare the four squares above that the relative slight advantages seem to flip - especially the pale turquoise/cyan square at the top right, which is clearly much noisier on the D7100 than the 7DII, so much so that the noise almost hides the splotchiness.
Agreed...and that highlights the issue of personal bias in observations. If you think Canon sensors have 'blotchy' and 'nasty' noise, you'll go looking for it...and most likely find it (even if you have to ignore observations which would lead to the opposite conclusion in the process).
As another demonstration, if you are shown what you believe to be an Exmor file, and you have a love of them, then they will exhibit
'fantastic gradation and tonal values'* even when they are Canon files. Personal bias is displayed with remarkable regularity here, often from both sides in the same thread.
What pixel peeping has done now is 'jumped the shark', which, as a saying I believe has also jumped the shark. Back in the days when we had low pixel counts and regular pixelation from sub 10mp cameras there was a genuine interest and 'need' for knowing where the pixel limits were, and pixel peeping became a quaint badge that was worn to demonstrate better understanding and knowledge to fellow photographers and anybody too immobile to move.
Well with our 1080HD displays, and even our 'I want 4K now' and 'bring on the new Apple screens' attitude, we still can't see a fraction of the pixels captured on full screen, even when we crop hard, we can print to never before printed sizes with ease, and the peepers became a bore.
Pixel peeping has lost it's relevance to the output image. The files from pretty much everything nowadays are so good, so clean, so sharp, and so rich it is obscene, put those files into a copy of any decent RAW editor and the only image limitation most of the time is you. Sure we will always have needs we can't personally meet, a single shot might need a 600 f4, or a 17TS-E, or need 1/250 sec at f4 and 10,000 iso, but we are so spoilt now it is ridiculous, worrying about the noise patterns by swatch colour is crazy.
Enjoy the tech for what it is but don't take this kind of super over analysis seriously, and certainly don't let it impact your purchasing decisions. The 7D MkII will create some world class images by people not reading gear forums but by people actually out there making images, just as the now derided 7D has.
• This is a paraphrase because the original was taken down.........
