test shot 12800 ISO's

Lynton

Lynton

awkward customer
Messages
10,606
Name
Lynton (yes really!)
Edit My Images
No
Would be interested on your thoughts to this - solely in the ISO / Noise area.

Compositionally etc is is very flawed........... but just having a play with new toy tonight and this snap was taken at ISO12,800 in a pretty dark room - one crappy daylight low powered energy bulb..........

Deliberately picked an awkward subject - B&W animal, and only pp is B&W conversion and a small exposure lift to the RAW file (about 1/3 EV)

No noise correction at all.


ISO12800.jpg
 
Looks OK. But then at 800 pixels wide, most photos do.

The mono conversion makes noise less obvious as well, you're eliminating colour noise for a start. And the fact that large areas of the shot are black with no detail is going to hide any noise also.

Top left and bottom right you can see more evidence of noise, where there are mid-tones with little detail to hide it.
 
Ho was the colour picture. Was there colour noise in the large black area before it was converted to black and White?
 
Byker - nothing of any significance.

James - some good points there for consideration - I'll do some more tests over the next couple of days.
 
Take a photo of a person, mate.that's the acid test.
 
I have a thread in the zoo section 'hawk conservancy at dusk' where I was shooting at 12800 not that great results but no light and moving subjects if you want a comparison.

I'm on the phone so can't post the link.
 
I never asked anything about your proclivities. ;)
 
It does not look pretty bad at all! It's 12,800... on a crop!
 
Here you go. 12800 straight out of camera. If you ettr a little it's better, but this is under-exposed a touch.
6124690358_7a3d620203_o.jpg
 
It's a wonderful sensor. The detail in the monitor at this iso is great, although I've yet to have the need for it.
 
Not going to argue with anyone and I need to do some more proper testing, other than the cat in poor light, but think top left is more to do with the colour of the cat and the DOF as opposed to ISO. :shrug:

However, it became habit to delib underexpose on the K20d by 1/3 and lift in necessary, so maybe I need to start trusting 3 1/2 to 4 years of digital enhancement and improvement........

We'll see this weekend.

Expect a load of crap pics from me, and if anyone says "no change there then"...it's :bat: time!

:lol:
 
23rdman is that out your D7000? **** I never thought it was that good. I've found using mine for video that the noise starts to really become noticeable above 2000iso.
 
Ahh, it's a D7000. I was wondering what it was because it's slightly better than my Sony a55, which would make sense given the a55 translucent mirror design.

OP does the Nikon have multi-frame NR? I can get cleaner, with static subjects, using MFNR but it's jpg only unfortunately.

It's a damn good sensor.
 
Lynton has the Pentax with the same sensor, but it does perform the same.

Yes, there is noise, but it is manageable and all but disappears in print.
 
norters said:
I would agree that the top left is certainly DOF not noise.
Click to expand...

I see it differently. That same oof with good light and a low ISO would be far cleaner. It is oof, but its made noisy by high ISO. …

The lack of heavy noise is impressive compared to others and that seems to be the general consensus.


Good thread about ISO and noise ...warning: Its heavy going.
 
I think that is remarkable, and considering were we were say 5 years ago, it makes it even more remarkable

If we make a direct comparison to film, a couple of years ago, film won hands down for grain at high ISO's, now digital is winning by a long way

The D7000 is a remarkable camera all round for the money, I walked in my editing suit and saw a shot on the screen I didn't recognise - a stunning portrait, turned out, photoshop was only showing a very small corner of a shot - face of the 5th chap on the end of a group portrait I shot a couple of weeks ago... Its not often a crop hacks it, but a random one!
 
just read a review on the K-5.. pretty impressive bit of kit. But i know the deal-breaking feature that made you get it Lynton...

'Also new is a dual-axis electronic horizon (now with pitch as well as roll indication)'

So we expect to see plenty of bang on horizons! :gag:
 
It's certainly impressive. Any special functions turned on/off in the menus?
Either way - you've got to be happy with that.
 
Byker28i said:
It's certainly impressive. Any special functions turned on/off in the menus?
Either way - you've got to be happy with that.
Click to expand...

My shot is utterly untouched from the RAW. All in camera nr turned off.
 
here's a straight out of camera shot on my 5d mark 2 at ISO 25600

no processing done


isoH2 by MrJoeBoy, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
That's quite noisy in the darks Joe, especially on the DVD case, but then that is top of the shop. I think my 50D does that at 6400. For comparison, what's it like at 12,800
 
ISO 12,800. JPG mode. In camera DRO on and high iso noise reduction on:



ISO 25,600 This is a multi shot mode. JPG Takes 6 and combines. Not sure I'd use it much as you'd wear the shutter out in no time!



Both shots are SOOC with no further alterations. Interestingly I tried positive exposure compensation on the 12,800 shots and that made them more noisy. The in camera exposure was the least noisy even though it had exposed slightly to the left on the histogram.

Better get the hoover out as I can see too much fluff!
 
Byker28i said:
That's quite noisy in the darks Joe, especially on the DVD case, but then that is top of the shop. I think my 50D does that at 6400. For comparison, what's it like at 12,800
Click to expand...

that's also with an exposre bias of +2/3 EV so I can bring that back to 0 and it will become cleaner. I deliberately put black and white in the scene to push the result.

at 12800 it looks like this at 0EV


h1 by MrJoeBoy, on Flickr
 
srichards said:
ISO 12,800. JPG mode. In camera DRO on and high iso noise reduction on:

http://hobnob.smugmug.com/Other/pics/9641304_NL6p9b#1468928014_v6x3KbZ-A-LB

ISO 25,600 This is a multi shot mode. JPG Takes 6 and combines. Not sure I'd use it much as you'd wear the shutter out in no time!

http://hobnob.smugmug.com/Other/pics/9641304_NL6p9b#1468928270_p5kLPgg-A-LB

Both shots are SOOC with no further alterations. Interestingly I tried positive exposure compensation on the 12,800 shots and that made them more noisy. The in camera exposure was the least noisy even though it had exposed slightly to the left on the histogram.

Better get the hoover out as I can see too much fluff!
Click to expand...

I find, if I ETTR at such a high ISO, the noise appears more defined but there's also more detail. By the time I pull the exposure back in post, the noise is less visible than the standard exposure.

I'm using MFNR a lot. Even at low ISO. Not only does it give much lower noise (by a considerable margin) but it seems to improve DR and colour slightly as well. Whether the difference is enough to justify shooting in jpg is debatable, but it's a great option to have for low-light still life work.
 
The23rdman said:
Joe, its not exactly fair to compare a ff camera to a crop.
Click to expand...

I've never really 'got' that - why not? I understand all about pixel density etc, but at the end of the day they're both cameras, one is better than the other in terms of noise, and there are reasons for that. A Ferrari is better at handling and top speed than a Landrover but they're both cars. I can compare the Landrover to the Ferrari and say that one is faster than the other, some car nerd coming along and saying 'but its not fair to compare them because the ferrari has a bigger engine' or whatever doesn't make any sense. It's not like comparing apples with oranges. It's comparing a granny smith with a golden delicious.

Obviously, I'm very bored at work...

I never know what to think about high ISO. My old 50D never seemed any good past 400, yet others have posted amazing shots way past that. I've been very underwhelmed with my 1Dmk4 at even as low as 250 ISO where although noise is almost non existent the detail has seemed to be lost. I've then gone on to shoot at 6400 with the same camera and its blown me away with the clarity and detail it's produced. I've since decided to not worry too much about ISO, shoot as low as I can but when needs must just turn it up and see what happens. If I ETTR then I usually do alright, plus as Dean rightly says, noise virtually disappears when printed, which generally is where it matters most.
 
Last edited:
Forgot to say, we did a side by side test with my 1Dmk4 and Deans D700 at 3200 and 6400 and on the LCDs I would have put money on the D700 coming top, however Dean told me the Canon had the edge when we downloaded the RAWs. Sorry Dean mate but I haven't actually got around to comparing the shots myself yet! I still believe your D700 was better.
 
leftcurl said:
just read a review on the K-5.. pretty impressive bit of kit. But i know the deal-breaking feature that made you get it Lynton...

'Also new is a dual-axis electronic horizon (now with pitch as well as roll indication)'

So we expect to see plenty of bang on horizons! :gag:
Click to expand...


Damn. Rumbled! :nuts:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top