canon 760d advice

G

graeme strange

Messages
8
Name
graeme
Edit My Images
Yes
I've had the above camera for 2 years now and have been very pleased with it's results with regards to landscape and portrait pics. recently I have bought a canon 100-400 lens which is rather good only at low iso levels with my camera. anything over 800 and my camera begins to struggle with a high amount of noise.

my question to you all is ...... am I doing something wrong or have I found the limits to my camera?

your thoughts would be appreciated

graeme
 
Hi Graeme and welcome to TP.

Without seeing exactly the sort of images you are happy with and those by comparison that you are unhappy with I (no one?) can offer a definitive comment.

However, I surmise with the other lens you list and the sort of subjects you mention the 'subjects' are evenly lit and with good overall light, such that you do not have much deep shadow in the frame..........................I also surmise that all you have shot to date has been at less than ISO 800?

Therefore, with a longer zoom you are potentially (likely?) isolating the subject against darker backgrounds and the exposure is compensating by making you raise the ISO to get a higher shutter speed. You may well have reached the noisier limit of the 760D???

Please post some examples for others to give greater insight :)

PS also do please say what camera settings you have used including the image EXIF data and the camera metering setting e.g. Evaluative, Centre Weighted or Spot?
 
Thank you for your reply. sorry I didn't supply images before but have done now. in disgust I binned the poor images but managed to save a few ok ish ones with fairly high ISO'stalk photography 1.jpg
shot at 1/2000 F10. 400mm evaluative metering and one point AF ISO 1000
talk photography.jpg
exp 1/2000 F10. 400mm. ISO 1250. evaluative metering and 1 point AF.
talk photography 2.jpg
exp. 1/1600 F8. evaluative metering and 1 point AF. ISO 200. 400mm. in order to keep the noise down
 
What mode are you using (i.e. Tv, Av, Auto :( ) and why f10 or even f8???
 
please note I've only had this lens for 2 weeks. mode is manual. f10 or F8 because when I first shot in F4-F5 I wasn't getting full focus on my subjects
 
graeme strange said:
my question to you all is ...... am I doing something wrong or have I found the limits to my camera?
Click to expand...

You're going to have to work with that combo and be a bit pro active in terms of deciding when you need speed and constantly adjust depending upon your chosen quarry. Poor light combined with 800+ ISO = noise.

I have a 760 which I bought whilst in denial regarding the need for a 7D2, which incidentally still requires care in terms of being pro active and setting up for the type of shot anticipated and choosing when it's sensible to get rapid in terms of light and just how much noise can be tolerated.

You seem to already know the answer to this problem. The 760 is a capable body which like all bodies has its limitations. Experiment and adapt to what's in front of you all the time is your best option while using that combo.
 
Last edited:
I could not find any Birds in Flight (BiF) settings guides that are 760D specific.

Therefore for your insight and guidance here a Canon guide using the 7D MK2 but the basics will be the same with all bodies.


https://support.usa.canon.com/kb/index?page=content&id=ART168663

More reading for you to aid your getting to grips with the 760D and your new lens........ practice makes as perfect as you can get with your combo :) ;)
 
Last edited:
Box Brownie said:
I could not find any Birds in Flight (BiF) settings guides that are 760D specific.

Therefore for your insight and guidance here a Canon guide using the 7D MK2 but the basics will be the same with all bodies.


https://support.usa.canon.com/kb/index?page=content&id=ART168663

More reading for you to aid your getting to grips with the 760D and your new lens........ practice makes as perfect as you can get with your combo :) ;)
Click to expand...

Thank you for taking the time to look that up for me. Much appreciated
 
graeme strange said:
I’m due to have a hip replacement tomorrow so may be a while before I post again but I will take on board your thoughts and advice. Cheers
Click to expand...

All the best for the surgery and a speedy recovery...........back on your feet soon but in the meantime do keep visiting TP to join in and learn even if you cannot yet "get out and about......".
 
I've just checked the exif data from some photos I took of Kites in flight some years ago that I took with a 50D and a 100-400L and in most cases the auto ISO didn't go above 100 and a couple are 200 (although it was clear bright day).
Given that the 760D is quite a few generations newer than the 50D I would expect it's auto ISO to be on par or better.
I'm assuming you used auto rather than manual but you didn't specify in your op.
Oh and good luck with the op.
 
Two quick tips for reducing the noise in your photos:
  1. Don't use smaller apertures or faster shutter speeds than you need to. That way you won't be using higher ISO values than you need to. I'm not a birder so i can't comment on whether 1/2000th is appropriate, though I'm fairly sure you didn't really need 1/1600th for the swan swimming, and you certainly don't need to be shooting at f/10.
  2. Don't crop your pictures.
A little bit of explanation of the second point. Your camera has a 24 megapixel sensor, so full resolution images are 6000 x 4000 pixels. That's huge. You could easily make pin-sharp A2 prints with that resolution (you'd have ~250 pixels per inch), and if you look at the image on a standard computer monitor (~100 pixels per inch) your image would measure about 60" x 40". I have a 24" monitor on my desk and I'd need about nine of them to display your images at full resolution:
upload_2018-5-22_11-52-17.png

I imagine you usually display images somewhat smaller than that. As you reduce the resolution, what the software is doing is effectively combining pixels by averaging the contents. So at 33% resolution each pixel you see on screen is constructed from a 3x3 block of pixels in the original image. Since high-ISO noise is random variation from one pixel to another, when you average them out you reduce the noise. So you see more noise when you look at images large than when you look at them small. BUT if you crop the images, then you're displaying what's left larger than if you didn't have to crop.

A little while ago I did some tests on my sister's Canon 650D, because she was going to Iceland in search of the northern lights and wanted to know how high she could push the ISO. What I found was:
  • 6400 was clearly awful
  • 3200 wasn't brilliant and should really be avoided
  • 1600 was OK when viewed at 20% magnification, but not at 50% or 100% - which meant she could get away without the noise being apparent, so long as she viewed the image on screen or don't want to make too big a print
  • 800 downwards were fine
I'd expect a 760D to be a bit better than a 650D, maybe half a stop or thereabouts, so ISO 1600 should be OK for most uses except big prints.
 
Last edited:
Long lenses are not as easy to use as some folks think. It's not exactly difficult but takes a bit of practise. Everything is more critical, particularly focus (learn your AF setting options) and keeping shutter speeds up - there's a lot of basic handling technique and practise involved in both.

As far as noise is concerned, the two enemies there are cropping (it's just throwing away image quality - get closer, also reduces atmospheric pollution) and under-exposure. Don't be afraid to push the ISO, it's far better than trying to brighten in post-processing. Shoot Raw and optimise noise reduction, avoid low light, avoid dull overcast conditions (reduces apparent sharpness).
 
HoppyUK said:
As far as noise is concerned, the two enemies there are cropping (it's just throwing away image quality - get closer, also reduces atmospheric pollution) and under-exposure. Don't be afraid to push the ISO, it's far better than trying to brighten in post-processing. Shoot Raw and optimise noise reduction, avoid low light, avoid dull overcast conditions (reduces apparent sharpness).
Click to expand...

....Hmm, if you shoot wildlife then 95% of the time you will not be able to avoid cropping unless you are happy not to bother to take many of your potential shots.

I much prefer to shoot under a slightly overcast sky (thin cloud) rather than bright harsh sunlight unless it's the 'golden hour' before dusk.

I usually shoot in Manual-mode with ISO set to Auto with an upper limit dependent on which camera body I'm using.

If you are serious about your photography, shooting RAW format is a no-brainer unless you are a journalist etc.

A fast shutter speed of at least 1/2000s is usually needed for birds in flight and 1/8000s for fast small birds.

BAR-TAILED GODWITS by Robin Procter, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
RedRobin said:
....Hmm, if you shoot wildlife then 95% of the time you will not be able to avoid cropping unless you are happy not to bother to take many of your potential shots.
Click to expand...

There's cropping, and there's CROPPING. If you're consistently cropping the heck out of everything just to get a bigger subject, image quality will take a serious hit.

I much prefer to shoot under a slightly overcast sky (thin cloud) rather than bright harsh sunlight unless it's the 'golden hour' before dusk. <snip>
Click to expand...

Yes, bright sun is difficult - good for exposures but prone to bleaching out highlights and creating dark shadows. Wedding photographers hate it, and it was clearly a problem at the Royal wedding. Hazy sun is much more forgiving, the favoured light for all sorts of subjects because it looks great and is still plenty bright enough to optimise camera settings.
 
HoppyUK said:
There's cropping, and there's CROPPING. If you're consistently cropping the heck out of everything just to get a bigger subject, image quality will take a serious hit.
Click to expand...

....In my case it's usually a cropping to improve the composition but that often involves some enlargement but not extreme if I see that image quality is obviously badly suffering. I bin the whole image if it's that bad!

I know that cropping JPEGs throws out / loses pixels but what about cropping a RAW file in a RAW editor such as Capture One? Cropping is usually my very first step.

I stand by my photos on Flickr as testament to some enlargement being able to work well and satisfactorily but perhaps some photographers may be a bit too anal in their preferences.
 
RedRobin said:
....In my case it's usually a cropping to improve the composition but that often involves some enlargement but not extreme if I see that image quality is obviously badly suffering. I bin the whole image if it's that bad!

I know that cropping JPEGs throws out / loses pixels but what about cropping a RAW file in a RAW editor such as Capture One? Cropping is usually my very first step.

I stand by my photos on Flickr as testament to some enlargement being able to work well and satisfactorily but perhaps some photographers may be a bit too anal in their preferences.
Click to expand...

Processing from Raw won't make any difference, you still end up with a JPEG either way - either produced in-camera or in post-processing. There's more control available by post-processing from Raw, things like local sharpening and noise control, holding a bit more highlight detail etc, but once you've thrown away half the image data by cropping, it's gone.

Nothing wrong with a bit of minor cropping for composition, as you're images testify (y)
 
All

Thank you very kindly for your thoughts on my problem with high noise. I shall take all your inputs into consideration for when I'm able to get out and about next. As photography does, it creates debate, but that can only lead to making better pictures.

again thank you all for taking the time and indeed looking up things to help others become better at what we love doing. Talkphotography seems to have a great community amongst it's members and for that I shall enjoy being a member for some time to come.

Graeme
 
I don't know if the uploading did something to your images, but I can't see the focus point. Everything looks soft.
 
Just to make another suggestion - do you have a filter on the 100-400? When I got my (now upgraded) 100-400 I was very disappointed- everything was soft and it would barely focus. Then I took off the filter and found a very sharp, accurately focusing lens hiding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top