ISO 3200 Usable on Canon 30D?

Discussion in 'Beyond the Basics' started by feRRari4756, Jan 18, 2009.

  1. feRRari4756

    feRRari4756 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey guys I recently shot a basketball game at ISO 1600, Shutter Speed: 1/125, and Aperture f4 (my largest).

    My images had a moderate amount of noise but noise ninja reduced most of it. now, i discovered Imagenomic Noiseware Pro and it works a lot better than noise ninja.

    here are some examples:
    (original)
    [​IMG]

    after run through Imagenomic Noiseware Pro:
    [​IMG]

    Now my question is, if i raised my ISO to 3200 (since theyre a little underexposd), do you think the images would still be clean after a run through that program?
     
  2. tirediron

    tirediron Watch the Birdy! Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    37,371
    Likes Received:
    10,658
    Location:
    Victoria, BC
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I can't see your images (Blocked my work firewall) but why not simply do some experimentation; it's digital, the film is cheap.
     
  3. Katier

    Katier TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2009
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    0
    as tirediron said it's digital so experiment although 3200 is usually very noisy. Personally I'd work on improving the lighting as the images do feel a bit flat to me.
     
  4. RyanLilly

    RyanLilly No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,478
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    St. Louis, Missouri, USofA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
  5. feRRari4756

    feRRari4756 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for all ur input everybody!

    What do you mean they look flat? What do I do to improve that without adding lighting or using a flash (I will be shooting cheerleading rather than basketball in the gym and I don't have a flash anyway)?

    And I will try the ISo 3200 tommorow. Do I really need to mess with ALL those setting with noiseware or not really? If so how do I learn What each one does?

    Thanks
     
  6. tsaraleksi

    tsaraleksi TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Greencastle Indiana
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I'd say that you'd be better off getting a correct exposure with 3200 than underexposing with 1600.
     
  7. feRRari4756

    feRRari4756 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay guys I just tested my Canon out at ISO 3200 and it did have a lot of noise...until i ran it through Noiseware. I swear that is the BEST noise reduction software out today.
    I will now shoot very confidently with Noiseware at ISO 3200.

    Look at the difference:
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  8. RyanLilly

    RyanLilly No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,478
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    St. Louis, Missouri, USofA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    The standard settings in noiseware are pretty good, I only recently got the program, so I have not move too much into the advanced settings either
     
  9. Katier

    Katier TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2009
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's just a very flat uniform image.. nothing pops or sings out. Partially down to the under exposure but more so the fact your using ambient light. Really could do with additional controlled lighting IMO.
     
  10. ksmattfish

    ksmattfish Now 100% DC - not as cool as I once was, but still

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2003
    Messages:
    7,021
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    You can adjust contrast with levels or curves. Controlled lighting isn't usually an option during the game, and the fluorescent lights most gyms use just suck.

    I agree that in general you'll get less noise with a well exposed higher ISO than an underexposed lower ISO. All of the photos you've posted look underexposed to me, and if you can get more exposure you will see a noticeable decrease in noise before youu use the noise reduction software.
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2009
  11. JerryPH

    JerryPH No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    6,111
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    Montreal, QC, Canada
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Though Noiseware does remove a lot of the grain, it is also removing a ton of detail when over-used at the higher settings. In facial shots, it will give them that plasticy or fuzzy feel. This is why it is so important you nail the exposure. All your shown shots are still always badly underexposed. There will be LESS noise in the picture if you start nailing the exposure in camera over depending on PPing to correct for user level errors.

    The Santa shots also had a severe colourcast. Your WB was quite far off. The beard looks orange, not white and the hat looks more black than red. ;) It could have come closer looking something like this:
    [​IMG]

    Not having the original to work with, one was very limited in the amount of correction possible, but you get the idea.

    The consistent underexposure leads me to ask you... are you even looking at the camera meter? If yes, it could be your camera has an issue. If not, it could be that you are not paying attention to a critical tool.

    Ferrari, here is an ISO 3200 Ferrari for you (lol)... with NO post processing other than added sharpening and conversion from RAW to JPG. This area of the car show was OBVIOUSLY very dark and did indeed need ISO 3200 to get a minimum of 1/30th shutter speed (any less and I could start to introduce motion blur due to camera motion). I could have opened up the aperture, but that would have reduced my DOF, making the red Ferrari behind it blurry, which I did not want.
    [​IMG]

    Note the top right B&W Ferrari sign... the white looks white and black looks black, neither look grey (as it would, if the when the exposure compensation was incorrect), details are clear and the exposure is good... not underexposed, and no blown highlights either. This is the goal you are aiming for. Now, your camera won't be able to touch this level of detail, but thats not the point. You have to concentrate on proper exposures to minimize noise and then practice with and get to know Noiseware. Use the most minimal settings to preserve detail as every bit helps.

    Now, I know you were practicing with higher ISO settings on the Santa, but when they said it was a flat picture, they meant that the lighting across the scene was uniform and boring. It has nothing to do with your tests, but it does make for good info for you in the future. Sometimes extra flash is important, but for what you are now discussing, it is not possible nor even a good idea. The last thing you want to do is give some poor cheerleader at the top of a 3-tier pyramid a face full of full power flash from 6-feet away at a game. Not only would you be endangering her, at that point, you would also likely be escorted out.

    As a final note, be aware that the higher up the ISO scale that you go, saturation and contrast drops, dynamic range drops (rather drastically in your case), detail is lost and more PPing work is required. In the end, understanding how your camera works, what are it's limitations and what are the consequences of higher ISO over say, fast glass or supplementary lighting are all part of the photography equation.
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2009
  12. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,818
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    It can be hard to do when shooting sports...but you can really reduce noise by slightly overexposing. Your examples, on the other hand, are underexposed...and if you had tried to brighten them in post, it would really have brought out even more noise.

    Here is a good article about maximizing the signal to noise ratio and exposing to the right.
    Expose Right
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

30d iso 3200

,
30d high iso
,

30d iso

,
canon 30d high iso noise reduction
,
canon 30d iso
,

canon 30d iso 3200

,
canon 30d iso performance
,
canon 30d usable iso
,
how do you expand iso on canon 30d
,
iso 30d