First Time Using Canon R5 .... Noise problem

nandbytes said:
as suggested above by @Gav. working on getting physically closer to your subject is always going to get your the best results.


Disclaimer - canon bashing coming up (no intention of offending but it is what it is), please don't read if you like canon too much

Canon RF doesn't have any affordable lenses I would consider usable in UK weather. I barely get by with a 200-600mm at f6.3 at long end and even then its a massive stretch.
The f7.1, f8, f9 and f11 aperture tele-lens might be super in Australia or Africa or shooting polar bears in August in the arctic but it just doesn't cut it even with latest greatest FF sensors in the UK.
IMO, these lenses are clearly made for a different country or population than those that shoot wildlife in the UK (half which are small/tiny birds sat in tree/bushes with overcast sky!).

R5 is an amazing body with not a single affordable tele-lens I could work with natively (with field craft or no field craft)
Click to expand...
Thats just not fair, why one day last summer it got hot enough for me to take of one of my sou'westers..... :exit:
 
nandbytes said:
as suggested above by @Gav. working on getting physically closer to your subject is always going to get your the best results.


Disclaimer - canon bashing coming up (no intention of offending but it is what it is), please don't read if you like canon too much

Canon RF doesn't have any affordable lenses I would consider usable in UK weather. I barely get by with a 200-600mm at f6.3 at long end and even then its a massive stretch.
The f7.1, f8, f9 and f11 aperture tele-lens might be super in Australia or Africa or shooting polar bears in August in the arctic but it just doesn't cut it even with latest greatest FF sensors in the UK.
IMO, these lenses are clearly made for a different country or population than those that shoot wildlife in the UK (half which are small/tiny birds sat in tree/bushes with overcast sky!).

R5 is an amazing body with not a single affordable tele-lens I could work with natively (with field craft or no field craft)
Click to expand...

absolutely agree , this time of year especially theres just not enough light to be able to use one of those lenses
All my lenses are still EF they work so well on the R5 I’ve not felt the need to change
 
LCPete said:
absolutely agree , this time of year especially theres just not enough light to be able to use one of those lenses
All my lenses are still EF they work so well on the R5 I’ve not felt the need to change
Click to expand...
I've got a nice selection of Sigma ART primes now. 28mm and up. Sadly very little choice of good lens under 28mm. Maybe 24TSE II, maybe 14-24mm ART just just barely OK at wide end subject to stellar copy. We are scraping the bottom of the barrel here. On the long end plenty of big whites that will go down in price. Maybe a 100-400 II. Not impressed with 70-200mm f/2.8 on 8K at all. The wide end is the problem and I just don't see how even RF can solve this problem with 5 stop vignetting overpriced zooms :headbang:
 
Is this better quality for the settings?
Well done to me for choosing a better aperture than f8 !!
I haven't got used to that fact that this camera gives more noise than the 5DMKIV.

fdwasfgds.jpg
 
Last edited:
Dael_Pix said:
I haven't got used to that fact that this camera gives more noise than the 5DMKIV.
Click to expand...
It really doesn't; the higher resolution allows you to see the noise better. At the same resolution (magnification) the noise is about equal; or slightly better than the 5DIV.


Screenshot-2024-02-20-at-11.12.39 AM.jpg
 
sk66 said:
It really doesn't; the higher resolution allows you to see the noise better. At the same resolution (magnification) the noise is about equal; or slightly better than the 5DIV.


View attachment 415276
Click to expand...
I've never really used high ISOs before, so I've never been sure about it. But it looks like I'll have to use high ISOs to get 'decent' quality images when taking photos of birds etc.

Do you have a link to the above?

Thanks
 
I'd guess it is the DPReview R5 review, at least it looks like one of their comparisons.
 
When you say you're experiencing worse ISO than with a 5DIV, have you tested this?

i.e. gone out with both cameras and taken shots from the same place, same conditions, same lens, same settings?

I have to say, I'm currently saving towards an R5 and would feel frustrated if, after upgrading, that it didn't feel any better, but are you expecting too much from it?

Is it simply too dark.
 
The R6 is cleaner - but you don't have the cropability, and you thought it would be ridiculous to buy a camera with a lower pixel count.
 
Dael_Pix said:
I've never really used high ISOs before, so I've never been sure about it. But it looks like I'll have to use high ISOs to get 'decent' quality images when taking photos of birds etc.

Do you have a link to the above?

Thanks
Click to expand...
Sure... LINK
I selected the low/artificial light scenario, and you can select any 4 cameras/ISO/format; you can also select same zoom level, same display size, or print views.

One thing to be aware of is that they vary the SS to get the different ISO's rather than varying the actual light intensity... the results would be different (worse) if they reduced the scene luminance instead (it's what makes most ISO/noise reviews/comparisons somewhat flawed IMO).
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
The R6 is cleaner - but you don't have the cropability
Click to expand...
For the same use/output it's not... Sometimes there's just no real point to the higher resolution.
Phil V said:
and you thought it would be ridiculous to buy a camera with a lower pixel count
Click to expand...
It kills me how many people think they are recording X MP of resolution because that's what their sensor has; that's (almost?) never the case...
 
An important part of getting good high Res images is actually to make sure you are not sharpening the noise, or for that reason anything that is not your subject or is not supposed to be sharp. 8k noise really starts singing with a bit of texture or sharpening applied to it. Use sharp masking, don't ever use texture, and probably also good idea to use lr denoise or denoise ai to push it over the line.
I learn it the hard way. And I have 5ds which is worse for this. I think I can now get old iso 3200 pheasant snaps look ok; it is however important to absolutely nail that exposure. You are not pulling back 3 stops at these isos
 
If you don't have enough light hitting the sensor you will have inherent noise there which you just amplify with the ISO setting.
 
Just letting you all know that I don't care about using a higher shutter speed than what I'm used to (But I do have to get used to the camera producing more noisy shots when doing landscapes).

I can just use the Enhance feature in Lightroom.
 
Dael_Pix said:
Just letting you all know that I don't care about using a higher shutter speed than what I'm used to (But I do have to get used to the camera producing more noisy shots when doing landscapes).

I can just use the Enhance feature in Lightroom.
Click to expand...
As above, it doesn't produce more noisy shots. I have 5DM4 and R5 too. There's something in your workflow that needs fixing or you have a faulty camera that needs repair.
 
TimHughes said:
As above, it doesn't produce more noisy shots. I have 5DM4 and R5 too. There's something in your workflow that needs fixing or you have a faulty camera that needs repair.
Click to expand...
Yeah maybe.

I don't see any problems with the photos here and a couple more photos on my website down to the Mallard (except the wading bird). The Goose is a little noisy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top