High ISO hability, myth?

[zcar21]

People are saying that technology has advance so fast that you can see a big improvement in high iso hability. The only difference I see is that iso SETTINGS keep getting higher, but quality stays the same. Or maybe it's just me that can't see the difference.

Here are two example from dpreview.com

First digital Rebel, canon 300d at 1600iso.
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/r...4/img_0210?inalbum=canon-eos550d-beta-samples

Canon 550d also at 1600iso.
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/r...nalbum=canon-eos-300d-beta-review-samples-one

click on the original to see it at 100%.

 

[o hey tyler]

I can't see either of the photos you posted.

 

[MTVision]

This was taken at ISO hi2 (25,600) with my entry level Nikon. No noise reduction performed on this image!

 

[Buckster]

1. Your links don't work.
2. Improvements in ISO capability are HUGE compared to just a few years ago, and ASTRONOMICAL compared to what we used in the film days.

 

[thereyougo!14 2]

Neither link works for me. My browser obviously doesn't have the 'hability' to show it on my iPhone . Are they at 100%? Noone except pixel peepers look at the pixels in a photo at 100%. You'd have to look at a reasonable printing size for the sensor type. You'd need to look at a 6.3mp file to judge the difference equally. A typical save for web size won't be realistic

 

[memento]

I loved my 40D until I used my girlfriends T3i.

And I was blown away at the speeds I was getting using my dads 60D & 50mm 1.4 during thanskgiving dinner.

Bucksters use of HUGE and ASTRONOMICAL are perfect.

 

[zcar21]

links are working now.
the 300d was introduced in 2003, judging from the pictures I posted, 7 years later the improvement is minimum or none.

 

[Starskream666]

His links work fine

 

[nfp]

ISO has made huge improvements. The 2 images that you have links to are both in decent lighting. You will see much more noise in a picture taken in very low light at high ISO than in good light at high ISO.

 

[Ysarex114 108]

Like Megan's photo above this is 25,600 ISO with no noise filtering of any kind. I did sharpen it for web display. This simply didn't exist back in the days of film. Buckster is right on.

Joe

 

[cgipson1]

links are working now.
the 300d was introduced in 2003, judging from the pictures I posted, 7 years later the improvement is minimum or none.

Both images you posted are 600x900 resolution.. one is 157kb and the other is 116kb...

This means they have been resized.. and have had major compression done to them (WEB Images)..... so they are not even good representations to compare image resolution. If you knew anything about imaging, you would realize this.. and stop trying to prove your point. There have been major changes in high ISO capability.. to the better!

This was shot in low light.. at 25600 with a D7000

 

[ann]

check out the d700, it is shocking what I get from that in very low light and high ISO

 

[Buckster]

links are working now.
the 300d was introduced in 2003, judging from the pictures I posted, 7 years later the improvement is minimum or none.

You mean the improvement of ISO 1600 is minimum or none compared to just that one other camera, I guess. Well, I can't say that means much in the scheme of things. We're talking about overall improvements to ISO as a whole range that goes up WAY past 2003's top end of 1600 to numbers that are like 80 times that amount now, which was absolutely unthinkable in 2003 at ANY IQ - it simply didn't exist.

So, first compare it to higher end DSLRs of today at 1600. Here's a nice 300D at 1600 to start with, also from dpreview:

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS300D/Samples/Night/IMG_5910.jpg

If you can't find better shots (less noise) of similar scenes at ISO 1600 on todays' DSLR's, then you're simply not trying.

When you've finished that excersize, THEN compare the top end ISO of 2003 (ISO 1600) with something from today that far exceeds that ISO number (plenty of examples are popping up in this thread for you), and see what you think is going on as far as how far ISO capability has come in that period of time.

That should help you be able to see what all the fuss is about. :thumbup:

 

[zcar21]

links are working now.
the 300d was introduced in 2003, judging from the pictures I posted, 7 years later the improvement is minimum or none.

Both images you posted are 600x900 resolution.. one is 157kb and the other is 116kb...

This means they have been resized.. and have had major compression done to them (WEB Images)..... so they are not even good representations to compare image resolution. If you knew anything about imaging, you would realize this.. and stop trying to prove your point. There have been major changes in high ISO capability.. to the better!

This was shot in low light.. at 25600 with a D7000

Both images can be seen at 100%. And I agree that there has been improvement in high iso, that is higher settings. I am talking about the QUALITY at 1600iso.

 

[KmH]

This was taken at ISO hi2 (25,600) with my entry level Nikon. No noise reduction performed on this image!

Sorry, since you used Hi 2, noise reduction and some other image processing was indeed done by the camera, without asking you.

Once you go outside the base range of ISO into the ISO Lo or the ISO Hi settings software is used instead of the amplifiers on the image sensor the base ISO range uses.