search the site
Canon EOS 7D vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II: Low Light ISO Comparison
Previously we took a look at how the Canon EOS 7D fared against the EOS 5D Mark II in a series of ISO comparisons taken in largely average lighting conditions. In this edition, let’s take a look at how the EOS 7D does when the lights are turned off.
For this test we photographed a scene at roughly 8:00 PM, which works out to about near total darkness where we’re located. In the example shot below, the scene is only being lit by the light above the door, and somewhat by lights behind the courthouse building. For the shots, I set the camera to f/11 and then came up with the following shutter times: 15s @ ISO 1600, 8s @ ISO 3200, 4s @ ISO 6400, and finally 2s @ ISO 12,800. White balance was set to auto, picture style was set to standard, noise reduction was disabled in all of its forms (long exposure and high ISO), and for this shot I also disabled auto lighting optimizer. Each shot was then taken into Canon’s Digital Photo Professional, and kicked out with zero noise reduction.
Other Parts In This Series
- Part 1: Introduction to the EOS 7D
- Part 2: ISO comparisons with EOS 5D Mark II
- Part 3: Low light ISO Comparisons
- Part 4: Canon EOS 7D Review (coming soon)
Availability
If you’re considering purchasing an EOS 7D, I strongly recommend getting one through B&H. They have the best prices, selection, and service, and by making your Canon EOS 7D (or other camera equipment) purchase through links like this, you help to insure we can continue to provide you with great content. Further, they also have the Canon EOS 7D in stock (as of this writing)!
Canon EOS 7D SLR Digital Camera (Body Only) Price: $ 1,699.95 at B&H Photo |
ISO Comparison
Use this sample shot to orient yourself to the locations of the crops below. For all crops, the EOS 7D is on the left and the EOS 5D Mark II is on the right. Click to expand each thumbnail to a much larger view. The crops are 100% samples from the original.
Crop 1
 |  |
| ISO 1600. The EOS 7D looks just as usable here as it did in much better light. | ISO 3200 |
 |  |
| ISO 6400 | ISO 12,800 |
Crop 2
 |  |
| ISO 1600 | ISO 3200 |
 |  |
| ISO 6400 | ISO 12,800 |
Crop 3
 |  |
| ISO 1600 | ISO 3200 |
 |  |
| ISO 6400 | ISO 12,800 |
Similar Posts:
- Canon EOS 1D Mark IV Initial Thoughts: ISO and Image …
- Canon EOS 1D Mark IV vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II: ISO an…
- Canon EOS 7D Field Report: Introduction and ISO Samples
- Canon EOS 7D vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II: ISO Comparison
- Pentax K-x vs. Nikon D3000: Entry-Level ISO Comparison
Leave a Reply
About Neutralday.com
Established in 2007 by photographer Patrick Dean, Neutralday.com brings you the latest in photography news and reviews. With insights on photographers, equipment, and how to's, Neutralday.com is focused on and intended for the photography community.
Support Neutralday.com
Canon Instant Savings
Our Most Recent Reviews
Canon EOS 7D In Depth Review
Canon PowerShot G11 In Depth Review
Canon PowerShot S90 In Depth Review
Nikon D3000 In Depth Review
Nikon D300s In Depth Review
Nikon D3s In Depth Review
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35 In Depth Review
Pentax K-x In Depth ReviewRed Hot Pre-Orders
Latest Tweets
resources
Best Sellers at Amazon
flickr
Thanks for the comparisons here, i liked them very much.
But i look like the 7D images looks sharper then the 5DmkII.
Or is it just me?
Marcel,
Your welcome, and I think they may be just a tad sharper…
Excellent test, thank you.
Finally a test that tells the story of low light performance differences in the true sense. None of the usual elementary tests done at other sites.
In summary, I see GREAT 7D performance so kudos to Canon. However, the 5D mark II is at least a half stop better at 1600 ISO and clearly ahead with 1-2 stop advantage above that.
Chuck,
hey thanks for compliment. I think the 7D is doing a fine job too, I had expected worse given the bump in megapixels, but I suppose sensor improvements and dual digics are doing their job. On the other hand, I’m happy to see my 5D2 doing fine over a year into its product cycle!
Thanks for the info. I am a semi-pro photographer and I currently use a Canon XTI and I need to up grade. In you opinion is a jump to a 7D enough or should I look at the 5D. Is the extra cash worth it or do you have another suggestion?
Really depends on just how important image quality matters in your work. If it is the main aspect–the 5D2 is your camera, in nearly all other aspect the 7D is definitely worth it. I’m an I.Q. freak—it’s all I really care about so that’s why I love the 5D2, but in many ways the EOS 7D is a superior camera.
I was in the same boat and I was interested in very nice all around lens also I wanted to buy nice printer (pro 9000 mark ii). I had 2 choices. 7d + 17-55mm (f2.8) or 5dii + 24-105mm. 7d+lens package was costing approx 2700 and
5d kit was available for 3500 ($400 rebate for printer). Considering printer rebate, the difference between both system was 400 (12%) so picking up 5dii was no brainer.
in the pictures I se that 5d has better quality, how you thing that 7d is better?
Besim,
Maybe you misunderstood, I don’t think the EOS 7D is better than the EOS 5D II, when it comes to image quality and ISO performance, the 5D2 is clearly superior.
If I bring D700 into picture, which one will you go with?
gurbally,
I love the D700, if I did sports or more dynamic subjects, I’d probably have one. Since I do more landscape, street, still life type work, I prefer the 5D2’s resolution.
Are the samples in RAW format, or it’s JPEG?
Looks like jpeg. I think 7D has more aggressive post image processing. 7D’s shots looks over-sharped, whilst Marks shot are quite soft. IMHO, additional noise on the 7D shots is nothing but jpeg artefacts caused by sharpening. My guess is rest upon evident blotchy artefacts tipical for jpeg compression.
Does anyone agree with me?
p.s. sorry for my poor english
h1,
the samples are from RAWs, but of course converted for the web to JPEG. Both were set to 0 sharpening in-camera, though that doesn’t mean one is equivalent to another. The additional noise on the 7D files is additional noise, it’s noisier for sure than the 5D2 which even though it is softer, still provides more detail–.
The fact that the EOS 7D fares so well in comparison is remarkable, considering that the EOS 5D Mark II has pixels that are 2.240654 times as large.
It does a good job for sure, which one could also expect from the T2i I would assume. I wish they’d go with bigger pixels by having less megapixels, but at least their NR tricks in-camera keep it competitive.
I’m wanting to upgrade my 40d, I do high school sports photography, night football games and such. Between the 7d and the 5dmII which would be a better choice. I’m looking for higher quality of shots when blown up to small poster size. Lighting is a problem with the football games, shooting fast enough to freeze the picture…I shoot with a
The 7D is much better suited for capturing sports, and the prints are pretty close in size. The issue I see is “night” games. I don’t know what kind of ISO you’d be shooting at, but I suspect ISO 3200 and higher-based on my experiences. I really didn’t want to push the 7D to ISO 3200 and 6400 too often for sports, as the noise takes away from some of your sharpness. If your lens is f/2.8 and you want shutters over 1/1000 you’ll see what I mean, you know you should put the camera at ISO 3200 or 6400, but you won’t want to because of ISO. So the 5D gives better low light, more than stop worth, but slower fps and a less agile AF, meaning likely less keepers than the 7D. So I guess I’d say the 7D. Though the real solution is probably the D700 and battery grip (or D700 replacement when it comes).
Dev,
A wise decision. I loved the 7D, in many ways superior to the 5D2. Except IQ, which is what the 5D2 is all about. Sounds like a good deal too…