How does your camera handle high ISO?

[Robin Usagani]

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...8463-testing-my-70-200mm-f-2-8l-day-park.html

You can check the exif data

 

[Neil S.]

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...8463-testing-my-70-200mm-f-2-8l-day-park.html

You can check the exif data

Oh nice!

Grats then.

Ill read it now...

 

[Overread]

Ahh but we must remember not all 100% crops are made equal.

Consider a 6MP camera and a 15mp camera body - don't worry about the specs of the bodies or anything else, just consider the MP count. Now if you take the same photo with each camera and then put both to show them at 100% size you will see a difference. The 6MP photo at 100% will be smaller than the 15MP image at 100%. Thus if you were to compare them side by side the 15MP shot might look softer and more noisy than the 6MP - however were you to resize the 15 down to the same size as the 6 or upscale the 6 to the same size as the 15 you would see a more realistic comparison of the two.

Thus in the end whilst 100% crops are a good way to compare and show absolute details without editing and resizing being a factor they can be problematic when comparing across different sized camera sensors. Of course the best way to tell usable noise levels is with processed shot and actual output uses - ie prints or resizes for the web etc.... with that in mind you can see how well the noise levels and details are shown and preserved for your own needs.

 

[Neil S.]

Ahh but we must remember not all 100% crops are made equal.

Consider a 6MP camera and a 15mp camera body - don't worry about the specs of the bodies or anything else, just consider the MP count. Now if you take the same photo with each camera and then put both to show them at 100% size you will see a difference. The 6MP photo at 100% will be smaller than the 15MP image at 100%. Thus if you were to compare them side by side the 15MP shot might look softer and more noisy than the 6MP - however were you to resize the 15 down to the same size as the 6 or upscale the 6 to the same size as the 15 you would see a more realistic comparison of the two.

Thus in the end whilst 100% crops are a good way to compare and show absolute details without editing and resizing being a factor they can be problematic when comparing across different sized camera sensors. Of course the best way to tell usable noise levels is with processed shot and actual output uses - ie prints or resizes for the web etc.... with that in mind you can see how well the noise levels and details are shown and preserved for your own needs.

Ya I mostly agree with this.

I still think its important for an Iso comparison to show actual pixels though.

This is because if you don't and just resize the image, it can be very difficult to tell how much noise there really is.

They even do this for the professional reviews, as I am sure you are aware.

 

[Derrel]

It does okay, but as the ISO grows higher and higher, the camera becomes increasingly petulant..bratty almost...until it simply refuses to go any higher, and storms off in to its room and locks the door...

 

[Neil S.]

It does okay, but as the ISO grows higher and higher, the camera becomes increasingly petulant..bratty almost...until it simply refuses to go any higher, and storms off in to its room and locks the door...

Is your camera a teenager lol?

Jokes aside you probably do really have cameras that old dont you?

 

[usayit]

Surprisingly, I get consistently good prints from a 6 year old 6mpx camera that got very little recognition. Its the one reason why it stays in my possession even though its fairly "outdated" (released in 2004). I shot this a while back in comparison to the G1. The G1 showed much more unpleasant noise but held more detail due to the increased sensor density.

Epson R-D1 ISO 1600

Crop

I took the same shot again, stopping down the lens and more detail was retained.

At ISO 800... its pretty nice. I bet it could hold its own at ISO3200 (if the dial would let me).

 

[reznap]

Nice I was going to post the 2000 ISO but looks like after what REZNAP posted, I better not. I'll wait on that. BTW, are you using a nikon? Also do you turn on your in camera High ISO Noise Reduction on?

Canon T2i, no in-camera noise reduction and no post processing noise reduction. That's about as ugly as it gets, noise-wise, for this camera.

<snip>

^ Nice m6

That (Epson? Really?) camrea does pretty OK for an old camera at 800 ISO. I have a Fuji Finepix s1500 and it sucks out loud at 800 ISO.

 

[Overread]

Nice I was going to post the 2000 ISO but looks like after what REZNAP posted, I better not. I'll wait on that. BTW, are you using a nikon? Also do you turn on your in camera High ISO Noise Reduction on?

In camera high noise reduction isn't aimed at regular shooting. The idea of the mode is that right after you take an exposure the camera then takes another one with the shutter closed for the exact same length of time that the shutter was open for the first shot. It then calculates the noise "spots" on the sensor that appear on a totally blackshot and removes them from the first exposure.

It's a mode really aimed a very slow shutter speed shots, such as astrophotography, where we are talking 30seconds + for an exposure.

 

[LCARSx32]

Surprisingly, I get consistently good prints from a 6 year old 6mpx camera that got very little recognition. Its the one reason why it stays in my possession even though its fairly "outdated" (released in 2004). I shot this a while back in comparison to the G1. The G1 showed much more unpleasant noise but held more detail due to the increased sensor density.

That Epson's better than my Rebel. I can see why you're hanging on to it! Nice Leica, too. Is that M42 mount (the Leica)?

EDIT: I just looked on eBay to see if anyone was selling one of those Epsons. It turns out it's a little out of my price range. The last one that sold went for $1,575.00. http://cgi.ebay.com/Epson-Rangefinder-Digital-Camera-R-D1-/170538190025?pt=Digital_Cameras&hash=item27b4de44c9

That (Epson? Really?) camrea does pretty OK for an old camera at 800 ISO. I have a Fuji Finepix s1500 and it sucks out loud at 800 ISO.

He was actually shooting at ISO 1600. He was just saying he's ok with shooting at ISO 800 for shots he wants to keep. ISO 800 is as high as I'll go on my 300D, as well.

It's a mode really aimed a very slow shutter speed shots, such as astrophotography, where we are talking 30seconds + for an exposure.

I wish my camera had that!!! I love astrophotography. I'll have to post some of my stuff. I have to go in and clone out all of the "hot spots". Sometimes, it can take hours to remove all the little specs.

 

[reznap]

Nice I was going to post the 2000 ISO but looks like after what REZNAP posted, I better not. I'll wait on that. BTW, are you using a nikon? Also do you turn on your in camera High ISO Noise Reduction on?

In camera high noise reduction isn't aimed at regular shooting. The idea of the mode is that right after you take an exposure the camera then takes another one with the shutter closed for the exact same length of time that the shutter was open for the first shot. It then calculates the noise "spots" on the sensor that appear on a totally blackshot and removes them from the first exposure.

It's a mode really aimed a very slow shutter speed shots, such as astrophotography, where we are talking 30seconds + for an exposure.

You're a little bit mixed up I think.

There are 2 different features:
High ISO noise reduction (in camera)
Long exposure noise reduction (in camera)

The one you're talking about, where it takes an exposure with the shutter closed, is the latter. I actually used it the other night. Basically, it takes twice as long to take a photo - but the results are good.

The high ISO noise reduction is basically the same as noise reduction software on your computer, only performed in-camera.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe this info to be correct..

 

[Overread]

Ahh it might be reznap!
I might have mixed the two up since my camera only has the long exposure noise reduction mode.

 

[usayit]

Surprisingly, I get consistently good prints from a 6 year old 6mpx camera that got very little recognition. Its the one reason why it stays in my possession even though its fairly "outdated" (released in 2004). I shot this a while back in comparison to the G1. The G1 showed much more unpleasant noise but held more detail due to the increased sensor density.

That Epson's better than my Rebel. I can see why you're hanging on to it! Nice Leica, too. Is that M42 mount (the Leica)?

Isn't it surprising? When I first got the camera, I had low expectations. Its a rangefinder so that puts it against the likes of Leica (at least my expectations). Its from Epson with little photographic background. Again... its from Epson who isn't really a leader in sensors. Turns out that Epson established some good partnerships; Voigtlander for the body and Sony for the sensor. It is a very quirky camera but still surprises me up to this day.

Really bummed out that Epson actually lost money on these beauties and decided not to take the line any further. An R-D2 with a 10mpx, full frame and a wider array of framelines would be awesome.

It is a M-mount rangefinder.... so Leica's glass ( as well as voigtlander and zeiss) mount up and even couple to the rangefinder. The short rangefinder base distance does limit its ability to focus longer than 50mm lenses.

That (Epson? Really?) camrea does pretty OK for an old camera at 800 ISO. I have a Fuji Finepix s1500 and it sucks out loud at 800 ISO.

He was actually shooting at ISO 1600. He was just saying he's ok with shooting at ISO 800 for shots he wants to keep. ISO 800 is as high as I'll go on my 300D, as well.

He's correct... the samples are at ISO 1600 with, IIRC, a 50mm Summarit f/2.5 lens. 1st is wide open and the second was stopped down 2 stops. ISO 800 is darn clean... which is normally what I try to stay at in low light.

 

[usayit]

EDIT: I just looked on eBay to see if anyone was selling one of those Epsons. It turns out it's a little out of my price range. The last one that sold went for $1,575.00.

Wow!!!! oh Wow!! Haven't seriously looked into the current market prices. I paid $1200 in 2006 as a refurb direct from Epson, Japan and shipped all the way to the U.S.

 

[reznap]

Today I learned that Epson made a badass digital rangefinder...

Never would have guessed - I thought the Leica m9 was the only digital rangefinder (and it's full frame too I think), and now the Fuji that was just introduced.