I normally take 400 to 500 shots per game and I'm a tight shooter, don't believe in excess. Multiply that by at least two and you've some serious culling and managing to do. Time is money!!!
I know. Just razzing ya. It's very annoying to take multiple shots when you don't want to. I think it just takes some practice.
OK, here are mine from last night and I'm totally thrilled with the performance of the camera especially since I am just learning it. Most of these were cropped quite a bit especially the stadium bleacher shot and the touchdown shot. All except 2 were the 7d mkii. Jack, with your help I even semi mastered DPP although I still prefer Capture One. I want to keep the shutter speed set at 1000, but it does get bounced around at times, and the iso on automatic
Pretty remarkable, all things considered. Glad I could help. Looks like the color of the lights was not your friend. It's quite possible there's nothing more you could do about the color, but I wonder if there is.
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
If I had C1 I could have done a little better job but not with DPP, a tad green in spots. I don't have the focus down on the beast yet so I will keep on playing. Thanks again for the help.
When you start needing ISO 3200 and higher, autofocus can begin to struggle some..... Fast lens do make a noticeable difference in the dark - you won't like f4 lenses at all with ISOs higher than 3200, I suspect.
I think these images are quite remarkable given the ISO they were shot at. I agree there is the slightest tendency to a green cast.
Dunno if this is against DG rules, but came across this in the 'completed listings' for 7Dm2 on EB UK.
(body was approx 1 week old, 200 - 300 shots)
Would be interesting to see other comments from those ppl who have both 1dx and 7dm2 ?
pp
<< Q: Given the fact you are selling it, does this mean you found negatives with the camera that make it unsuitable as a backup for your 1D? A: I like shooting wildlife and particularly BIF when the opportunity arises. On Saturday I spent the day shooting gulls in a feeding frenzy at my local lake and came away with a quite positive impression of the 7D2. Later, looking at the photos in detail IQ was OK, ISO performance was good IMO, shooting at ISO 5000 with acceptable IQ on a 7D is unheard of but it does, nothing more to say. There were lots of almost in focus but not quite in focus shots whereas with the 1DX typically I would have captured almost all if not all. Didn't think there was a problem with the camera and probably could have set up a custom shooting function to tailor it to me with a little more mileage. Shooting in raw I very quickly ran into "busy" when the action was constant with opportunities lost, on this day it didn't matter, but this is not something I can easily predict or overcome. Could shoot in jpeg, true, but that is not what I do. For the price the 7d is a damn good camera and I seriously considered keeping it as a walk about tool. Really liked the feel, low weight and quiet operation. Little pop up flash was REALLY useful (I had forgotten just how useful!). Found the menu system easy to navigate, quite 1Dx like. If I wasn't used to a 1Dx I probably would have been quite happy as the only real issue is buffer write speed and I guess you just need to back off a bit but I cant on occasions. In answer to your question, I don't see this as a backup to a 1Dx, maybe as a buddy camera to a 5d3 it would be ideal. I used the old 7d a lot when it first came out and wanted to see if a £1600 version 5 years on might have improved more and it did but not enough for me so I will buy a 2nd 1DX now. Hope that helps >>
You have to choose a camera by what it can do for you and your needs. I find the buffer is exceptional and I used it quite often but not as often as the gentleman in the above quote. If that was his needs then the camera was insufficient. That is what bothers me about forums, the opinion of the subject is taken as gospel and yet we do not know the situation of the shooter to make a honest evaluation. You do not need the top of the line to be a professional photographer, you need to be a professional photographer with the necessary equipment to do the job taken. The camera is a tool. You don't buy a tool and then find a job, you find a job and then buy the tool to do the job.
This opens up conversations and that is a good thing.
I posted my examples to show real life situations and how the camera performs in those conditions. Inadequate lighting conditions, moving subjects at distances and close up, difficult central subject to focus on, at high ISO's what grain looks like in the black sections, how much can I crop and still get a decent file and fps to catch all the action. My specific needs for purchasing the camera were those items and I am very please with it and will consider it as a primary camera for those needs. Simply, for me it works, may not for others.
ebay guy said the deal breaker was buffer write speed. I think we can safely say he is a spray-n-pray style shooter. The buffer is not an issue for accomplished sports/wildlife photographers.
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
I am not surprised that the individual did not think the 7D Mkii was as capable as the 1DX - there must be some reason for the price difference between the 7D Mkii and the 1DX after all.
But the 7D Mk ii is a lot smaller, and lighter, and more inexpensive - all good things to me. I will use both cameras as the conditions dictate.
ebay guy said the deal breaker was buffer write speed. I think we can safely say he is a spray-n-pray style shooter. The buffer is not an issue for accomplished sports/wildlife photographers.
Well, I don't consider myself 'accomplished', nor a Spray n Pray type, and whilst it hasn't happened very often, I have experienced situations where I've been forced to wait ... multiple, consecutive short bursts in situations where - imo - it's impossible to know exactly how the result is going to render, but experience suggests that it might be worth having a go
(1Dm3,btw)
I am not surprised that the individual did not think the 7D Mkii was as capable as the 1DX - there must be some reason for the price difference between the 7D Mkii and the 1DX after all.
But the 7D Mk ii is a lot smaller, and lighter, and more inexpensive - all good things to me. I will use both cameras as the conditions dictate.
Well, crop factor issues apart, I certainly don't expect performance equivalence on all fronts, either
It'll still be interesting to see sensible actual user feedback from people like you that have (and use) both bodies, tho.
I'll probably get one (7dm2) in the new yr ...accepting that it it'll be a mix of pros and cons for what - and where - I typically shoot ...
You are quite the water fowler, I like your images a lot. Nice and very low, close to the water level, great bokeh! Carefully crafted.
I have been using a 70D along with my 1Dx over the last year, so I am familiar with the trade offs, I think.
The 70D does a pretty nice job if the light is reasonable, and if it is wearing good glass. I really like its small size and weight. The 7D MkII will be significantly better than the 70D, and will be more weather resistant also, and has that built it GPS. It will be a bit larger than the 70D, but not a lot I think.
Size and weight seem to get more and more important for airline flights these days, a big disadvantage for the 1Dx despite its other nice qualities. Taking a pair of 1Dxs anywhere is a pretty serious commitment, even in your own vehicle, let alone for travel.
I am looking forward to taking the 7D MkII to Alaska this spring. I used a 7D in Alaska a few years ago, so it should be a nice comparison for me. I may leave my 1Dx at home, or not...
Just found out Capture One is updated for the 7d mkii. Just loaded it and sitting here at the dinner table playing to see if it indeed does work. Aperture pre ISO 6400 f4 1/100 6:30 PM and dark with just the kitchen lights.
David, it is safe to say you scared the heck out of me for a second. Those are hot reflections from various lights bouncing off the glass/metal backsplash and micro wave. Nothing more. Did a bunch more shots and did some serious enlarging to find dead or hot pixels. Sensor is fine. I think for 6400 in auto aperture and exposure not bad at all.
Didn't mean to scare you. All's well that ends well. Glad it was microwave related. I've seen white globs in some of mine too from time to time and they weren't reflections that I could figure out (therefore: aliens).
But.. there is also one white blob on the bottom of the cabinet in between the doors, and right in the shadow area? Odd to see a specular highlight in a spot such as that.
My Smugmug
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
Indoor Soccer
Took my 7D2 to my daughter's indoor soccer game tonight, in a putridly lit cave. I'm very impressed with the results and I'm very impressed with the AF. Not that these are anything I would expect to sell or even keep, but it's nice knowing the camera is capable of this. With my 5D3 I've always shot with a single AF point with expansion. Someone suggested shooting the 7D2 with all 65 points active, with the center point as the initial point, and iTR on, so I tried that tonight. I think it works - very well. Surprisingly well in fact, better than I expected. I also had the flicker detection on, and that dropped fps to about 5 or 6 I would guess, but it really seemed to work. I was shooting full manual exposure, and all my shots were consistently exposed. I know the lousy lights in this low-rent dome were flickering as the white balance was all over the place, but the exposure was very consistent. WB was set to fluorescent. So here are some pics. All ISO 6400 (except the last one), f/2.8, 1/500. Processed in Lightroom with luminance NR 24, color NR 36. These make it look much nicer than it did in real life!
1
2
3
4
5
6 - tried shooting from the other side of the field but there was no light over there. This is Shadows +100, Blacks +68, posting just for the heck of it.
7 - ISO 12800. With all 65 points active with the center point as the initial point, you can focus-recompose and the focus points follow your subject!
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Someone suggested shooting the 7D2 with all 65 points active, with the center point as the initial point, and iTR on, so I tried that tonight. I think it works - very well.
Interestingly, the RRS angle bracket from my 7D seems to fit perfectly on the 7D MKII - Anyone else tried this yet?
I think I don't have to order a new RRS bracket to upgrade - right on!!
Being able to focus on a subject and have the focus point follow that subject is outstanding and was first seen, I think, in the 70D - I do know the 70D does that in video, too
I think the high ISO images are starting to look like 400 AS film used to look - probably a bit better actually.
Interestingly, the RRS angle bracket from my 7D seems to fit perfectly on the 7D MKII - Anyone else tried this yet?
I think I don't have to order a new RRS bracket to upgrade - right on!!
Being able to focus on a subject and have the focus point follow that subject is outstanding and was first seen, I think, in the 70D - I do know the 70D does that in video, too
I think the high ISO images are starting to look like 400 AS film used to look - probably a bit better actually.
Interestingly, the RRS angle bracket from my 7D seems to fit perfectly on the 7D MKII - Anyone else tried this yet?
Close, but not perfect. Have you tried plugging in your remote shutter release? It doesn't go because the camera connector is in a different place. You could modify the the bracket to clear it without too much trouble though.
The other problem is that the curved up bottom portion of the bracket that cradles the back of the camera is not fitting snug against the camera. If you leave the screw a bit loose, you can see that the bracket can twist laterally a bit. That'll put a pressure point on the body if the bracket were to move by force. Plus it could cause the screw to loosen if you torque the body against the bracket which is what you're doing when you move the camera on the ballhead under drag tension. That will also cause that pressure point I mentioned. I may be a bit anal about such things, but I'd prefer to spend the bucks and get the precision fit that RRS usually gives you.
Incidentally, that new bracket which hasn't start shipping yet will be $175 which seems outrageous. I chatted with them about the high price and they told me it's a two-piece design that allows for adjustment of something. It may be to accommodate that wonky new rubber dust cover over the shutter release connectors area. Canon didn't do us any favors with that design, IMO. That's the only gripe I have with this body so far, and it's pretty darn minor in the big scheme of things.
I have the new bracket on pre-order, but it's nice to know I can use my existing bracket for now if I like. If I do that, I'll probably put a piece of electrical tape inside that curve to take up some of the room and cushion the camera.
Honestly, most of my work with this camera will be with long lenses that have their own tripod mounts, so I'm not sure I really need an L bracket on this camera anyway.
Right! Thanks again. What do you think of the pics?
The pics look great of course. Your framing is awesome. That last one really shows off the pin-point focusing, kind like that one shot I posted as well. Fun, fun!
I'm shooting a Bar Mitzvah tomorrow with two of these from the back of the sanctuary. My buddy will be shooting video with one using the 70-200. I shoot the bulk of the ceremony using my 5DIII on a tall tripod using my 100-400. But I'll use the 7DII, 70-200 for additional hand-held roving shots to get alternate angles, as well as some processional work using servo. FF never gave me enough reach for that so I previously used the original 7D, but this will be so much better.
Close, but not perfect. Have you tried plugging in your remote shutter release? It doesn't go because the camera connector is in a different place. You could modify the the bracket to clear it without too much trouble though.
I see that the remote cable release has been moved as you stated - rats!! TOO BAD, I was looking forward to not having to replace a RSS bracket, but apparently I will have to reconsider now. Or do without - like you, much of my use for this body will be with long lenses with their own lens foot. Maybe I will temporize for a while anyway. Short lenses will be shot on a full frame body, so...
Or I may just get the bottom portion of the bracket to allow using the camera on a tripod in landscape mode with tilting the head, for video shooting primarily. That was my decision for the 70D anyway - just little square piece to fit into the RRS bracket flanges on the tripod head.
Wondering if I can learn from the group's talents.
I tried taking pictures of my son's indoor soccer with the 7D MII and 70-200 2.8 at iso 5000 and they are not nearly as clear jmphotocraft's pictures. There seems to be a lot of noise. Any initial recommendations, or would pictures help?
Talking about pictures, I took a test picture in JPG and RAW, both at ISO 16,000, the RAW image is much noisier. Is that normal? I'm using Lightroom 5.7 and importing the RAW image, and having Lightroom convert it to DNG.
Is it a matter of Lightroom's 7DMII RAW (reader/converter?) needs to be tweaked?
Here's a comparison, with RAW on the left and JPG on the right.
Well first of all, JM is shooting at ISO6400. You're shooting at ISO 16000. Big difference. The reason why the JPG looks less noisy is that it's had a good dose of noise filtering applied to it by the JPG conversion process in the camera which basically just blurred the picture. It appears you used no noise control in LR. Learn to use the noise reduction sliders and you can probably end up with a sharper picture than the JPG, but with less noise than the raw. Also, it appears we're looking at a 100% crop. Right? Those always look much worse than a picture viewed at the normal size. JM's photos are either the full-frame uncropped images, or close to it. If there were noise, it would be greatly diminished at that size.
So really there's a number of factors. Plus we don't know how you processed the image. If you pushed the exposure at all then that will add noise too.
One of the things high ISO Images tolerate very poorly is sliding the exposure slider in LR or ACR. I rarely use ISOs higher than 1600 or so by "my choice", but I do shoot a fair bit in Tv ( shutter preferred ) with auto ISO. The camera then chooses the ISO and DOES NOT under Expose - usually - and this helps keep the subsequent noise within reason at the later RAW rendering. I find in Tv I end up with ISOs ranging from 200 to 12800 fairly frequently with my 1Dx, and I expect the same with the 7DMKII.
I don't think any is expecting ISO 16000 to be noiseless with the 7D MKII, it is certainly not noiseless with the 1Dx - it may well require a pass through NoiseWare or at least LR noise reduction to be acceptable, but as kdog says, prints do not show the grain that one sees at 100% views on a monitor. For each single image pixel, there is going to be 4-12 dots of ink on paper, meaning that noise is distinctly less a factor in prints.
As I said earlier, the ISO 16000 image above rather resembles ISO 400 film images, and it is 5 1/2 stops faster, or about 1/50th the amount of light for an image compared to ISO 400 which once upon a time was thought to be really fast film.
The ISO 16000 image looks pretty flat, low contrast, and I'll bet the light was really pretty dark even for seeing with the naked eye, unless this was shot with a very small aperture.
I did use the 7DMii for the first time this morning in a hockey arena and it was fantastic! I went when manual and Auto ISO and with the anti-flicker on. The pictures look great! The white balance is significantly improved as only a few have a redish hue to them due to the flickering of the lights. Shots at 1,600 ISO look great.
I typically average 300+ shots a game, I took 700. Lov'n the high FPS.
Last post on the 7d. I do like the performance at high ISO's. All of the games are night games so I'm interested in the darker areas of the photo to be acceptable and I find it meets my needs. I'm getting better at all the focusing options and very happy with what it does. (thanks to all here on that point) I do like to add contrast and clarity so these might not suit your tastes but mine are satisfied. I shoot shutter priority and auto ISO. Most of these were cropped to some extent which makes this camera even more acceptable.
Comments
Link to my Smugmug site
har har!
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
www.cameraone.biz
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
www.cameraone.biz
I think these images are quite remarkable given the ISO they were shot at. I agree there is the slightest tendency to a green cast.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
(body was approx 1 week old, 200 - 300 shots)
Would be interesting to see other comments from those ppl who have both 1dx and 7dm2 ?
pp
<<
Q: Given the fact you are selling it, does this mean you found negatives with the camera that make it unsuitable as a backup for your 1D?
A: I like shooting wildlife and particularly BIF when the opportunity arises. On Saturday I spent the day shooting gulls in a feeding frenzy at my local lake and came away with a quite positive impression of the 7D2. Later, looking at the photos in detail IQ was OK, ISO performance was good IMO, shooting at ISO 5000 with acceptable IQ on a 7D is unheard of but it does, nothing more to say. There were lots of almost in focus but not quite in focus shots whereas with the 1DX typically I would have captured almost all if not all. Didn't think there was a problem with the camera and probably could have set up a custom shooting function to tailor it to me with a little more mileage. Shooting in raw I very quickly ran into "busy" when the action was constant with opportunities lost, on this day it didn't matter, but this is not something I can easily predict or overcome. Could shoot in jpeg, true, but that is not what I do. For the price the 7d is a damn good camera and I seriously considered keeping it as a walk about tool. Really liked the feel, low weight and quiet operation. Little pop up flash was REALLY useful (I had forgotten just how useful!). Found the menu system easy to navigate, quite 1Dx like. If I wasn't used to a 1Dx I probably would have been quite happy as the only real issue is buffer write speed and I guess you just need to back off a bit but I cant on occasions. In answer to your question, I don't see this as a backup to a 1Dx, maybe as a buddy camera to a 5d3 it would be ideal. I used the old 7d a lot when it first came out and wanted to see if a £1600 version 5 years on might have improved more and it did but not enough for me so I will buy a 2nd 1DX now. Hope that helps >>
Flickr
This opens up conversations and that is a good thing.
www.cameraone.biz
www.cameraone.biz
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
But the 7D Mk ii is a lot smaller, and lighter, and more inexpensive - all good things to me. I will use both cameras as the conditions dictate.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Well, I don't consider myself 'accomplished', nor a Spray n Pray type, and whilst it hasn't happened very often, I have experienced situations where I've been forced to wait ... multiple, consecutive short bursts in situations where - imo - it's impossible to know exactly how the result is going to render, but experience suggests that it might be worth having a go
(1Dm3,btw)
Well, crop factor issues apart, I certainly don't expect performance equivalence on all fronts, either
It'll still be interesting to see sensible actual user feedback from people like you that have (and use) both bodies, tho.
I'll probably get one (7dm2) in the new yr ...accepting that it it'll be a mix of pros and cons for what - and where - I typically shoot ...
pp
Flickr
You are quite the water fowler, I like your images a lot. Nice and very low, close to the water level, great bokeh! Carefully crafted.
I have been using a 70D along with my 1Dx over the last year, so I am familiar with the trade offs, I think.
The 70D does a pretty nice job if the light is reasonable, and if it is wearing good glass. I really like its small size and weight. The 7D MkII will be significantly better than the 70D, and will be more weather resistant also, and has that built it GPS. It will be a bit larger than the 70D, but not a lot I think.
Size and weight seem to get more and more important for airline flights these days, a big disadvantage for the 1Dx despite its other nice qualities. Taking a pair of 1Dxs anywhere is a pretty serious commitment, even in your own vehicle, let alone for travel.
I am looking forward to taking the 7D MkII to Alaska this spring. I used a 7D in Alaska a few years ago, so it should be a nice comparison for me. I may leave my 1Dx at home, or not...
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
1.
this one cropped close to 100%
2.
www.cameraone.biz
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
www.cameraone.biz
But.. there is also one white blob on the bottom of the cabinet in between the doors, and right in the shadow area? Odd to see a specular highlight in a spot such as that.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
Took my 7D2 to my daughter's indoor soccer game tonight, in a putridly lit cave. I'm very impressed with the results and I'm very impressed with the AF. Not that these are anything I would expect to sell or even keep, but it's nice knowing the camera is capable of this. With my 5D3 I've always shot with a single AF point with expansion. Someone suggested shooting the 7D2 with all 65 points active, with the center point as the initial point, and iTR on, so I tried that tonight. I think it works - very well. Surprisingly well in fact, better than I expected. I also had the flicker detection on, and that dropped fps to about 5 or 6 I would guess, but it really seemed to work. I was shooting full manual exposure, and all my shots were consistently exposed. I know the lousy lights in this low-rent dome were flickering as the white balance was all over the place, but the exposure was very consistent. WB was set to fluorescent. So here are some pics. All ISO 6400 (except the last one), f/2.8, 1/500. Processed in Lightroom with luminance NR 24, color NR 36. These make it look much nicer than it did in real life!
1
2
3
4
5
6 - tried shooting from the other side of the field but there was no light over there. This is Shadows +100, Blacks +68, posting just for the heck of it.
7 - ISO 12800. With all 65 points active with the center point as the initial point, you can focus-recompose and the focus points follow your subject!
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
That would be me. Glad it worked out for ya.
Link to my Smugmug site
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Interestingly, the RRS angle bracket from my 7D seems to fit perfectly on the 7D MKII - Anyone else tried this yet?
I think I don't have to order a new RRS bracket to upgrade - right on!!
Being able to focus on a subject and have the focus point follow that subject is outstanding and was first seen, I think, in the 70D - I do know the 70D does that in video, too
I think the high ISO images are starting to look like 400 AS film used to look - probably a bit better actually.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Yup, on the 7D RRS bracket
http://danielplumer.com/
Facebook Fan Page
The other problem is that the curved up bottom portion of the bracket that cradles the back of the camera is not fitting snug against the camera. If you leave the screw a bit loose, you can see that the bracket can twist laterally a bit. That'll put a pressure point on the body if the bracket were to move by force. Plus it could cause the screw to loosen if you torque the body against the bracket which is what you're doing when you move the camera on the ballhead under drag tension. That will also cause that pressure point I mentioned. I may be a bit anal about such things, but I'd prefer to spend the bucks and get the precision fit that RRS usually gives you.
Incidentally, that new bracket which hasn't start shipping yet will be $175 which seems outrageous. I chatted with them about the high price and they told me it's a two-piece design that allows for adjustment of something. It may be to accommodate that wonky new rubber dust cover over the shutter release connectors area. Canon didn't do us any favors with that design, IMO. That's the only gripe I have with this body so far, and it's pretty darn minor in the big scheme of things.
I have the new bracket on pre-order, but it's nice to know I can use my existing bracket for now if I like. If I do that, I'll probably put a piece of electrical tape inside that curve to take up some of the room and cushion the camera.
Honestly, most of my work with this camera will be with long lenses that have their own tripod mounts, so I'm not sure I really need an L bracket on this camera anyway.
Link to my Smugmug site
I'm shooting a Bar Mitzvah tomorrow with two of these from the back of the sanctuary. My buddy will be shooting video with one using the 70-200. I shoot the bulk of the ceremony using my 5DIII on a tall tripod using my 100-400. But I'll use the 7DII, 70-200 for additional hand-held roving shots to get alternate angles, as well as some processional work using servo. FF never gave me enough reach for that so I previously used the original 7D, but this will be so much better.
Link to my Smugmug site
I see that the remote cable release has been moved as you stated - rats!! TOO BAD, I was looking forward to not having to replace a RSS bracket, but apparently I will have to reconsider now. Or do without - like you, much of my use for this body will be with long lenses with their own lens foot. Maybe I will temporize for a while anyway. Short lenses will be shot on a full frame body, so...
Or I may just get the bottom portion of the bracket to allow using the camera on a tripod in landscape mode with tilting the head, for video shooting primarily. That was my decision for the 70D anyway - just little square piece to fit into the RRS bracket flanges on the tripod head.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
I tried taking pictures of my son's indoor soccer with the 7D MII and 70-200 2.8 at iso 5000 and they are not nearly as clear jmphotocraft's pictures. There seems to be a lot of noise. Any initial recommendations, or would pictures help?
Talking about pictures, I took a test picture in JPG and RAW, both at ISO 16,000, the RAW image is much noisier. Is that normal? I'm using Lightroom 5.7 and importing the RAW image, and having Lightroom convert it to DNG.
Is it a matter of Lightroom's 7DMII RAW (reader/converter?) needs to be tweaked?
Here's a comparison, with RAW on the left and JPG on the right.
So really there's a number of factors. Plus we don't know how you processed the image. If you pushed the exposure at all then that will add noise too.
Link to my Smugmug site
I don't think any is expecting ISO 16000 to be noiseless with the 7D MKII, it is certainly not noiseless with the 1Dx - it may well require a pass through NoiseWare or at least LR noise reduction to be acceptable, but as kdog says, prints do not show the grain that one sees at 100% views on a monitor. For each single image pixel, there is going to be 4-12 dots of ink on paper, meaning that noise is distinctly less a factor in prints.
As I said earlier, the ISO 16000 image above rather resembles ISO 400 film images, and it is 5 1/2 stops faster, or about 1/50th the amount of light for an image compared to ISO 400 which once upon a time was thought to be really fast film.
The ISO 16000 image looks pretty flat, low contrast, and I'll bet the light was really pretty dark even for seeing with the naked eye, unless this was shot with a very small aperture.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
http://froknowsphoto.com/canon-7dmk2-pre-review/
And expecting similar results.
I did use the 7DMii for the first time this morning in a hockey arena and it was fantastic! I went when manual and Auto ISO and with the anti-flicker on. The pictures look great! The white balance is significantly improved as only a few have a redish hue to them due to the flickering of the lights. Shots at 1,600 ISO look great.
I typically average 300+ shots a game, I took 700. Lov'n the high FPS.
1.
2.
3.
4.
www.cameraone.biz