Is this type of noise typical?

[hamlet]

This type of noise shows up on spots of pictures i take that are darker

iso 125, f/4, 1/160 sec, 50mm, d7100:

 

[weepete]

You will get more noise in an area that underexposed than one that's exposed correctly, even if you bring it back up in post. I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[PaulWog]

Could you give some more detail on how you've edited the shot? All I see is your exposure settings, and a shot, and no information about how you edited it. If you boosted the exposure, shadows, or blacks (any of which is pulling detail), you'll end up with a noisier photo. If you go to an extreme, you'll get banding and unusable amounts of noise, as well as bad colors, muted darks and lights, overall just a bad photo... you'll see it in the shot, but the histogram is always worth paying attention to, since it's often extremely helpful.

 

[Braineack]

banding. yes.

 

[sleist]

Your shot displays the typical banding that results from very underexposed images corrected in post. I own the D7100 and what I have found is that there is a lot of detail to be pulled from the highlights with this camera. Trying to pull detail from very underexposed shadows with this camera is not the way to go, unlike with the D7000 (or so I hear - did not own it). The D7100 also tends to underexpose slightly so I have made adjustments to compensate. Pulling down the highlights in post gives me much cleaner images with this camera than pulling detail from the shadows. YMMV

That being said, this is a very poor example for anyone to make a judgement about. If this is a crop, at least post the image with some indication of what portion the crop is from. If this is the image itself, please post something that wouldn't end up being deleted anyway - in other words, a real world sample image and not something you shot in the back of your closet.

 

[KmH]

Trying to pull detail from grossly under exposed areas of photos made with any camera will be problematic relative to image noise.

The signal to noise ratio is the problem. The pixels that recorded the luminosity of the dark parts of the original image have little signal because so few photons struck the photo diode in the pixel.
Most of what I see in that image is random noise, and banding noise.
Unlike the color banding in gradients caused by a low color bit-depth that can be fixed post process by adding a bit of image noise, banding noise is not the same thing.

Digital Camera Image Noise: Concept and Types

 

[hamlet]

thanks.

 

[PaulWog]

Hamlet, did you get the Sigma 18-35 Art and Sigma 50 Art?

 

[hamlet]

I don't know, one day i just found them lying around in my house for no reason.


31220 by hamlet on Photography Forum

 

[greybeard]

Trying to pull detail from grossly under exposed areas of photos made with any camera will be problematic relative to image noise.

The signal to noise ratio is the problem. The pixels that recorded the luminosity of the dark parts of the original image have little signal because so few photons struck the photo diode in the pixel.
Most of what I see in that image is random noise, and banding noise.
Unlike the color banding in gradients caused by a low color bit-depth that can be fixed post process by adding a bit of image noise, banding noise is not the same thing.

Digital Camera Image Noise: Concept and Types

Signal to noise ratio, that is something I can understand from my audio recording days. How is this expressed with sensor data?