Real world ISO - whats usable

JohnN

JohnN

Messages
6,359
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

Just curious as you see it discussed so often.

Canon 1D Mark III

Range (not expanded) 100 - 3200
Clean 1600
Usable 3200

Whats your camera, range and I guess to your eye whats clean and usable.
 
D2x

Range 100 - 800 + Hi1/Hi2 (1600/3200)
Clean 400
Useable 800/1600 depending on how nailed your exposure is
 
For printing up to A4

7D
clean: ISO 800
usable (very): ISO 1600
usable: ISO 3200

However, it really depends upon what you are going to use the picture for and at which size/resolution. For 6x4 prints ISO 6400 can be very usable with a little PP and NR, but I always try to stay below 1600. You can pick up noise at ISO 200 on the 7D but you have to be "picky" to notice it unless 1:1 pixel peeping. I tend to use NR software for any shots taken above 800.
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised to read that of the 7D, my copy was only usable up to 800\1600 realistically, still I heard they did something with the firmware that improved it (on the sly).

Thanks all for the feedback, really high ISO out there, keep em coming and feel free to chuck in images if you have the time\inclination :)
 
My 5DII will print A3 with no noise reduction and produce accurate colours at ISO 3200.
Plenty good enough for me :)

Here's a real word image taken when everything is pushed to the max.
Hence when shooting from the side lines in a cave....
5DII + 1.4TC + 70-200 F4 IS L
Giving ISO 6400, 280mm, f5.6, 1/125s :|
Colours are spot on (i.e. recoverable from the Red/Orange spotlighting), but a tiny of of noise reduction (which this hasn't had) is need to print bigger than A4.
PP lifted the image over half a stop and noise is quite bad in the shadows; don't care as I'll take this image as it is, warts and all!
20120505-123737-IMG2563-M.jpg
 
Fuji S3

Range 100 - 1600
Crystal clear up to 400
first minor hints that there may actually be some shadow noise start appearing at 800 if you screw up the exposure, but a good ISO 1600 exposure is indistinguishable from an ISO 400 shot, and unlike other cameras the dynamic range does not drop off to uselessness as the ISO increases.
 
40D and 1DMK2

What ISO is usable ?

I can't stand stationary 'look ay ISO' example shots

Depends on the required shot.

Slight noise at ISO 400 for a landscape is unforgivable if you couldn't be arsed with minimum ISO & a tripod for a longer exposure.

Much noise at ISO 1600 for an action shot is a pat on the back if you've used it to enable a sutter speed that captures the shot.

To answer the question though ISO 800 is where I start to think about my dinner.
 
Last edited:
5D goes up to 1600 or 3200 expanded. 1600 is absolutely fine and I use it at 3200 quite often without worrying about it.

1DIV goes up to 12,800 and then 102,400 expanded. 3200 is fine, 6400 is OK for most things, and I'll use 12,800 when I have to.

The shot below is at 12,800 1/60th and f/2.8 in horrible pink wash light, very small amount of noise reduction in LR4.

Most of my stuff for work is only ever going to be used online, or in small prints in newspapers or magazines - so unless you're maxing the ISO whilst cocking up your exposure by a stop or more, you aren't going to notice much noise at all.

 
Very dependent on conditions of course.

D700 I try to stay within 6400 but I've had a couple of usable shots that were 25,600. Quite literally stabs in the dark but if exposure is right, the scene doesn't have too big a dynamic range and you don't go mad on finished size, it's surprising what can be achieved. Of course it's also partly personal preference as to what is acceptable. I've taken some very noisy images that I think look ok as the detail is there where I want it. On the other side of the coin, I've taken shots at 400 where I've really cocked up the exposure that are horribly noisy.

Here's an example, this is a shot I took the day I got my D700 to test it out, no NR. I took this in near darkness and to me it would be a usable image (if it wasn't so boring!) as, although it's pretty noisy, the subject has retained detailed and the noise isn't overpowering. Others might say this is unacceptable.


ISO 25600 by G.A.D, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Oh my :gag:. This is the most subjective topic ever and 'clean' or 'acceptable' will attract some very different interpretations out there. The only way is scientific measurements under controlled conditions, and that has been done a few times.

JohnN said:
Hi,

Just curious as you see it discussed so often.

Canon 1D Mark III

Range (not expanded) 100 - 3200
Clean 1600
Usable 3200

Whats your camera, range and I guess to your eye whats clean and usable.
Click to expand...

erm, no not even close. 100 is clean, 400 is good, 1600-3200 is for when it has to be used, and 6400 that's emergency

iancandler said:
canon 500D

Range 100-3200 (without expansion)

Clean 800
usable 1600/3200
Click to expand...

That should look better than 5DII then from my experience
 
Oh, agreed it is very subjective, but also interesting - the scientific tests are uninteresting and will never be taken where you would take them, ie in the park, at a gig, in the woods etc - thats why I thought I'd ask about real world experience - after a while (or at least with me) people just stop using a certain level instinctively because they know the post processing will be excessive.
 
JohnN said:
Oh, agreed it is very subjective, but also interesting - the scientific tests are uninteresting and will never be taken where you would take them, ie in the park, at a gig, in the woods etc - thats why I thought I'd ask about real world experience - after a while (or at least with me) people just stop using a certain level instinctively because they know the post processing will be excessive.
Click to expand...

I see excessive noise, and excessive processing (HDR for example) too frequently on flickr and most other places. I am sure the threshold is different for landscapes vs dark concert as well.
 
daugirdas said:
I see excessive noise, and excessive processing (HDR for example) too frequently on flickr and most other places. I am sure the threshold is different for landscapes vs dark concert as well.
Click to expand...

Indeed and a lot of it is about presentation size too. That example I posted above is awful at 100% but if somebody were shooting a dimly lit football match for the local rag they'd probably get away with very high noise levels on a little 4" print.
 
In my terms...
'Acceptable' means good enough to print A3 with accurate colours and looking noise free.
If I have no choice, then I'll settle for being able to print to A4.
For web use I'll settle for for a fair bit of noise and some slightly iffy colours.
 
I love it when there's photos to back up claims, makes for a much more interesting read :)

Isn't the dynamic range also effected with high ISO?

Here's ISO 9000.

beau.jpg
 
Not really played with my D7000 yet in terms of high ISO.... seem good at 3200 but a proper day's shooting will tell.

I see a useable image as one where the noise doesn't detract the eye.... I like noise in some instances, in the same way I like grain on specific films (Neopan 1600 anyone?). Unless the noise makes your eyes bleed and totally loses what the image is trying to show, I don't see an issue with it....
 
gman said:
I love it when there's photos to back up claims, makes for a much more interesting read :)

Isn't the dynamic range also effected with high ISO?

Here's ISO 9000.

beau.jpg
Click to expand...

See, I love the noise in that shot because it's grain-like and works well with the colour palette....

I read DR is affected by one stop for every stop you increase the ISO by, but not sure how much that theory holds water - if you have 12-stops at base ISO (say 100) then by the time you get to 6400 you'd have lost six stops of DR....
 
Last edited:
specialman said:
See, I love the noise in that shot because it's grain-like and works well with the colour palette....

I read DR is affected by one stop for every stop you increase the ISO by, but not sure how much that theory holds water - if you have 12-stops at base ISO (say 100) then by the time you get to 6400 you'd have lost six stops of DR....
Click to expand...

Cheers! The poor boy is getting a hard time these days as there's a wee one year old staggering about searching for his tail!
 
specialman said:
See, I love the noise in that shot because it's grain-like and works well with the colour palette....
Click to expand...

Ah, now interestingly I recall saying to my wife when I had the 5D classic - yeah, the noise is pretty bad but it looks like grain so I don;t mind it - to my mind that is one of the advantages to a full frame camera, the way it handles noise rather than its presence. Oddly the 1D3 as a 1.3 crop is a bit of a middle ground, not as good as the 5D noise quality wise but close enough to keep me from bitching about it.

This leads me to wonder about the Nikons and I believe their crop is 1.5...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top