Could these problems exist?

[Lammy]

Getting personal and attacking each other isn't going to lead into anything productive at this rate. Unless you all were willing to go "HA LOOK AT MY FOOTAGE, SEE!" followed by a response like "OH LOOK AT THIS!" and then "OH YEAH? SEE THIS!" That'd be hilarious and healthy competition.

Kholi is right that macroblocking and noise is there even at ISO 100. Try shooting Godfather-esque darkness and you'll notice that immediately. Whereas film would have a fine, sharp grain, you'd get some processed bluey swimmy blured chunks here. Even if you were outside, you'd notice the same thing on barren areas like the sky or plain walls when looked hard enough.

I disagree with Kholi that ISO 100 looks worse than 320/640. Highlight detail on faster ISOs look bleh to me and have that 'digital thin-ness' quality.

 

[...]

Noise is not introduced AT ALL until 1600 ISO, anything less than that the image is PERFECT. So your camera is faulty, period END OF STORY

This is just flat out wrong. :huh:

 

[Derkoi]

By 800 it's muddy garbage.

Mine isn't. :thumbsup:

 

[PerroneFord]

Mine isn't. :thumbsup:

Frankly, mine isn't either. But a lot really depends on what you're used to. If you've been shooting an F35, or a well shot RED, or a Genesis, then maybe ISO800 on a 7D/T2i will be muddy garbage. If you're coming from the world of DV/HDV/handycams, then ISO800 looks pretty darn good.

I'd rate the ISO 800 coming off my T2i as equivalent to my EX1 with +3db of gain.

 

[Derkoi]

Frankly, mine isn't either. But a lot really depends on what you're used to. If you've been shooting an F35, or a well shot RED, or a Genesis, then maybe ISO800 on a 7D/T2i will be muddy garbage. If you're coming from the world of DV/HDV/handycams, then ISO800 looks pretty darn good.

I'd rate the ISO 800 coming off my T2i as equivalent to my EX1 with +3db of gain.

Yeah true, I came from the XL1, DVX100 & HV30.