Noise

[Trevoreast]

Re: Noise

It's still one stop

Yes you're right MX5, ISO 100 to 200 is just a stop too but the difference is 100 rather then 800

I'm suggesting testing with thirds of a stop when you get beyond 800 ISO provided you don't need an extra full stop faster shutterspeed. imho higher ISO is the option of last resort, and never going to higher ISO than I absolutley have too is what I always tend to do.

I see people with cameras shooting at higher ISOs to the point were they've overexposed a snap.
Or produced a noisy snap were they didn't have to !
It's like they think because their camera is less noisy they must push it, to get their money's worth

Nice shot Woooley.

Trev

[DrJon]

Re: Noise

The 5D and 5dII are perfectly OK to 1600 - I would expect the same from the 7D

The 7D has significantly smaller pixels than a 5DmkII so will be noticeably worse for noise (see the image links I posted earlier in this thread for an idea, it will be quite a bit worse again in low light). That doesn't make it bad, just not as good.

However if you are going to resize the full image down a great deal, and do it with good (or even reasonable) resizing software, you are actually reversing the effect and increasing the pixel size again. Images in this thread are less than half a megapixel, so would look pretty good noise-wise from a P&S if they are full-ish images scaled.

My suspicion is the first image in the thread is actual pixels and the rest are much larger images resized down. I could be wrong.

John

[Trevoreast]

Re: Noise

My suspicion is the first image in the thread is actual pixels and the rest are much larger images resized down. I could be wrong.

I pretty logical suspicion, I think.

Another thing I've noticed is that a slightly noisy jpg image printed as a smallish glossy print seems almost noiseless under "normal scrutiny"

Trev

[paul linton]

Re: Noise

Another thing I've noticed is that a slightly noisy jpg image printed as a smallish glossy print seems almost noiseless under "normal scrutiny"

Have to agree with you there Trev,I've done Prints A4 and A3 and on screen the noise looks as though it may be a slight problem,but when printed they look fine and i really have to look hard to find any noise even on an A3 !!

Paul

[colin C]

Re: Noise

There seems to be a direct correlation between noise and "Wow".

The more "Wow" the photo has, the less noise you notice.

Colin

[DrJon]

Re: Noise

Plus sometimes noise actually helps the look...

[Tareq]

Re: Noise

Which is better in term of noise, 7D or 1D markIII? And what about 1D3 and 1D4?

[colin C]

Re: Noise

I can only talk from experience with the 1D MKIII and MKIV. The MKIV has approx a 2 stop noise advantage over the MKIII.

Colin

[Tareq]

Re: Noise

I can only talk from experience with the 1D MKIII and MKIV. The MKIV has approx a 2 stop noise advantage over the MKIII.

Colin

Ah ok, then i have to pray to get that 1D4 to work beside my 1D3, i will sell my 1D2n then but it sounds my 1D2n will never give me even 40-50% price of 1D3.

[colin C]

Re: Noise

You have left it a little late to maximise the used price of the MKIIn, but the MKIV will work well with the MKIII.

I use the MKIV as my main body, with the MKIII as my back-up. They are very similar to use and set up for the custom functions and at times, difficult to tell the difference.

Colin

[Tareq]

Re: Noise

You have left it a little late to maximise the used price of the MKIIn, but the MKIV will work well with the MKIII.

I use the MKIV as my main body, with the MKIII as my back-up. They are very similar to use and set up for the custom functions and at times, difficult to tell the difference.

Colin

I know, in sports i can see the difference in IQ between 1D3 and 1D2n which is bothering me, so i am thinking to replace or to get another body with 1D3, 1D4 is tempting but i hate when CAnon now producing new gear and increasing the price up higher than their old previous same series versions original price, i remember i bought 1D2n and 1D3 each in less than US$4000

[colin C]

Re: Noise

In the UK, launch price was around £4,500 in October 2009. By the time stock was starting to be available in Jan 2010, price was around £4,000. Now a year later, current price is around £3,400.

It's now not too far divorced from the original MKIII price. Good used MKIII's go for around £1,500, a little more for boxed minters.

Colin

[Tareq]

Re: Noise

In the UK, launch price was around £4,500 in October 2009. By the time stock was starting to be available in Jan 2010, price was around £4,000. Now a year later, current price is around £3,400.

It's now not too far divorced from the original MKIII price. Good used MKIII's go for around £1,500, a little more for boxed minters.

Colin

And how much that mint 1D2n could be there?

[Woolley]

Re: Noise

Yes you're right MX5, ISO 100 to 200 is just a stop too but the difference is 100 rather then 800

Not sure I go with that. 800 what's? Considering it's just re-using a numbering system that was designed for something else, you could just as easily call it 1x, 2x, 3x, 4x or maybe 1, 2, 4, 8 if you insist on keeping the reciprocal. I'd guess in digital terms, 100 - 200 means twice as much light and twice as much noise subject to what the internal software can deal with.

[briansquibb]

Re: Noise

And how much that mint 1D2n could be there?

1D2n's are selling for about £700