5DII high ISO sample

FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 3 4 end

Archive 2008 · 5DII high ISO sample

tonyhart
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #1 · 5DII high ISO sample

Totally know what you mean Tony. I shoot weddings and I actively enjoy noise in my B&W images. It lends the image a sense of filmic reportage that I'm going for. My friend Kieran Kieran Doherty, who is an exceptional and very high end wedding photographer shoots with two D3's, and loves the fact that if needs must he can shoot as high as 12,800, but that said he doesn't shy away from noise, and in fact tends to add some in using AE Exposure 2.0 in PP to acheive the filmic look that he's shooting for (if you'll scuse the pun!)

Tony

P.S. Love that image btw!

Dec 15, 2008 at 09:54 PM

jvarszegi
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #2 · 5DII high ISO sample

Imagemaster wrote:
jvarszegi wrote:
I think it's distracting, and the general softness is not good either. Shoot at lower ISO-- you didn't need 1/320s.

What part of the OP's posting can't you understand?

I understood every part of it: the part where he said he was posting a sample, and the part where he asked for feedback on the image. I gave feedback.

Dec 16, 2008 at 01:11 AM

jvarszegi
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #3 · 5DII high ISO sample

tonyhart wrote:
Yep. Quite agree htbryon, it's the first time someone on the internet has actually suggested they'd physically assault me...

Anyways, jvarszegi believe what you will mate, I don't wish you any physical or mental harm, believe me. I won't be responding to your posts from now on but I hope you find a way to deal with disagreements other than an escalation from angry argument to suggesting violence.

That would do best. I didn't threaten you, and don't play stupid now. I merely said that you wouldn't dare act like you have here in real life, because you'd suffer for it. Grow up and you'll be better off.

Dec 16, 2008 at 01:13 AM

jvarszegi
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #4 · 5DII high ISO sample

tonyfield wrote:
I cannot really understand why some of the expectation of some folks is that the camera should deliver the same image quality and detail as though the images were shot at ISO 200.

I don't expect that to happen. I have seen a serious impact to the image quality based on the samples here, rendering ISO 12800 suitable only for outpout at a small size, but not as bad as the shot you posted. IMO the shot you posted is ruined by noise, but I agree with the general point.

Dec 16, 2008 at 01:17 AM

shrink1
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #5 · 5DII high ISO sample

Okay, here's some more extreme ones from this evening: frigging cold outdside, with wind blowing like crazy.
Shots are with 24-105mm, IS on. On the last one I went into photoshop, noise ninja'ed and did some other stuff...
This is the whole gallery of experiments:
http://helmuts.smugmug.com/gallery/5166935_JzrT8/1/437438101_X9k7D
and here's the before and after on one shot:

This image is copyrighted by the owner

and

This shot was F4, 1/6th sec, ISO 25600, handheld

BTW, I don't care if my exposure values, picture styles, Photoshop abilities or whatever do not satisfy some of the more discriminating customers. Consider what you paid for this post

(Hint: if you put large sums of money into my paypal account, I will immediately care, and cry mea culpa all over the internet for you!)

Dec 16, 2008 at 02:22 AM

Will Patterson
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #6 · 5DII high ISO sample

Here is an ISO 6400 I just took with my shiney new toy... all of these were converted with DPP and no adjustments whatsoever, all set to 0. Then into CS4 for image size adjustment.

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Filtered through Neat Image with all "auto" settings...

This image is copyrighted by the owner

And ISO 25,600 after Neat Image...

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Dec 16, 2008 at 03:36 AM

Imagemaster
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #7 · 5DII high ISO sample

tonyfield wrote:
Here is a shot with the "real noise king" - the Nikon D2H which may (or may not, according to your sensibilities) illustrate that noise is not necessarily "evil".

This image is copyrighted by the owner

I think it's distracting, and the general softness is not good either. Shoot at lower ISO-- you didn't need 1/30s.

Just constructive feedback.

Dec 16, 2008 at 04:22 AM

Spyglass
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #8 · 5DII high ISO sample

This thread began with rhetorical questions about banding and noise. This subjective argument has been a matter of debate for more than half a century. In the old days we called these issue squeege tracks and grain.
Alfred Eisenstadt was the first professional working for Life magazine to throw away his 4x5 press camera and bulbs and pick up a diminutive 35mm Leica; I think it was a IIG. He became the most famous photographer of his time and mentored his students telling them that the question of grain from little negaitves and pushed film was not the issue - the questions were "Did you get the photograph?" and "Was anyone else able to get the shot you did?" The only acceptable answers where Yes and No, respectively.
Another great, who happened to be a fellow flatlander, Gordon Parks, said that grain (noise) was an essential element of the composition that forced the viewer of his pictures to focus on what he wanted to show them while causing visual confusion in the areas that had no importance.
I would tell you what Ansel Adams thought but by now I've already become a name dropper - sorry.
I think all of us should be delighted and grateful that these digital miracles, while no more perfect than any other man made device, give us opportunities to do things that were never possible before and prove that our art and science is just as valid as the masters of canvas and stone who now use air guns and dremel tools.
Thanks to all of you who responded before I did. You have all kept an old man learning.

Dec 16, 2008 at 05:13 AM

EltonTeng
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #9 · 5DII high ISO sample

Imagemaster wrote:
tonyfield wrote:
Here is a shot with the "real noise king" - the Nikon D2H which may (or may not, according to your sensibilities) illustrate that noise is not necessarily "evil".

I think it's distracting, and the general softness is not good either. Shoot at lower ISO-- you didn't need 1/30s.

Just constructive feedback.

Dude, high ISO is a gimmick. Do real photography already.

Dec 16, 2008 at 05:26 AM

digitalbug30d
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #10 · 5DII high ISO sample

to me its not that the camera can do high ISO of 25,600 but be able to to have no-noise at 3200-6400, so if you get a camera to do 51,200 then I would expect 6400-12,800 with no-noise ...and night shot scenics are kinda silly at 25,600 when you know they would be better at ISO 200 longer exposure ect...

Dec 16, 2008 at 05:28 AM

jvarszegi
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #11 · 5DII high ISO sample

EltonTeng wrote:
Imagemaster wrote:
tonyfield wrote:
Here is a shot with the "real noise king" - the Nikon D2H which may (or may not, according to your sensibilities) illustrate that noise is not necessarily "evil".

I think it's distracting, and the general softness is not good either. Shoot at lower ISO-- you didn't need 1/30s.

Just constructive feedback.

Dude, high ISO is a gimmick. Do real photography already.

Nah, it's filmic. It really gives you that filmic reportage look!

Dec 16, 2008 at 12:28 PM

jvarszegi
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #12 · 5DII high ISO sample

digitalbug30d wrote:
to me its not that the camera can do high ISO of 25,600 but be able to to have no-noise at 3200-6400, so if you get a camera to do 51,200 then I would expect 6400-12,800 with no-noise ...and night shot scenics are kinda silly at 25,600 when you know they would be better at ISO 200 longer exposure ect...

Yep. ISO 3200 obviously looks really good here, ISO 6400 decent, but from there it just doesn't look much good at all, so far.

Dec 16, 2008 at 12:29 PM

brainiac
Offline
Dedicated FM
Account Locked

p.4 #13 · 5DII high ISO sample

>Yes, you have the option in a 3200/6400 frame to push it, but if you require a fast shutter to stillframe the shot, pushing it in post won't change the fact that the image is blurry.

If you need to push on a 1Ds3, or any camera, just set exposure compensation to -1 or -2, and the camera will automatically underexpose the image so that it's ready to push in post. That way you get shutter speeds twice or 4 times as fast as you otherwise would. When light's really low, I set my 1Ds3 to 3200 and -2, and just shoot away, knowing that I can get good results out of the underexposed files in post.

Here's a shot that would not have come out well enough to use if it hadn't been pushed. The only way to get this shot was by shooting at very high iso (12800) because I could not illuminate with flash (and didn't want to), and subject movement needed to be frozen enough. My 200 f1.8 was wide open, and I forgot to bring my 200 f0.75. Some other pictures in this series showed significant subject motion blur, so I was right on limits, but got quite a few usable ones. Nothing but very high iso can solve this problem:

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Here's another picture where 12800 iso and an f1.4 lens were the only way to get a sharp subject:

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Contrary to what some are saying here, iso 12800 didn't ruin these pictures, it made them possible, and my clients benefit. There is visible banding in the second image, but it isn't severe enough to spoil the picture. High iso performance matters a lot to photographers who shoot indoor or night-time sports, theatre, gigs, social events, astro, and many many other kinds of photography. How someone can argue that it is a marginal feature I just don't understand. These iso 12800 cameras are opening up a new world of photography.

Dec 17, 2008 at 10:12 AM

tonyhart
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #14 · 5DII high ISO sample

Cheers for that Braniac. As someone who doesn't really shoot images with pushing in mind, you've taught me a thing or two. Obvious when you think about it now! I've seen it before around FM, but I love that first image. I quite agree, High ISO is there to allow you to get the shot that otherwise might not be possible.

I have a question regarding pushing. I'm sure you've covered it before, but still. If you're pushing in post, you're doing exactly the same thing that you're doing in Camera above the native ISO right? You're just amplifying in software what you've already got rather than amplifying the electrical charge on the sensor. Why is it better done inside a computer than inside the camera? Is it because you achieve a better image? You're effectively exposing to the left (the opposite to what I was taught as a good thumb rule using some very persuasive argument) and I would have thought you'd lose the highlights by doing this when you push the image.

I'm probably wrong though, and maybe the idea is that the less inherent noise offsets the slight loss of dynamic range that results from a misexposed image. Either way, I'm probably missing something.

Thanks again.

Dec 17, 2008 at 10:55 AM

Dawei Ye
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #15 · 5DII high ISO sample

Noise I can live with, banding and chroma blotching - no.

Dec 17, 2008 at 11:07 AM

brainiac
Offline
Dedicated FM
Account Locked

p.4 #16 · 5DII high ISO sample

tonyhart wrote:
If you're pushing in post, you're doing exactly the same thing that you're doing in Camera above the native ISO right? You're just amplifying in software what you've already got rather than amplifying the electrical charge on the sensor. Why is it better done inside a computer than inside the camera?

In the case of the 1Ds3, the camera has no 6400 and 12800 iso settings, so the only way to shoot those effective isos is to set exposure compensation to -1 or -2. There's no magic to this. A lot of older film cameras used to have exposure compensation and iso built in to the same knob. If the dial started at 100, then the 200 iso setting and -1EC are functionally, electronically the same thing because they bring about the same shutter speed. The film knows not nor cares what iso was set, it only notices how much light came in.

I don't know too much about sensor amplification and all that, but there is nothing to stop you underexposing a raw file, and seeing what you get when you brighten afterwards. With jpeg the results of pushing will be less good because it's 8 bit already so as you push you will quite quickly start to see some degradation in shadow tones.

I do not expect to see a significant, if any, difference between 5D2 iso 12800 files and 1Ds3 files pushed in DPP to that speed. What a 100 iso raw file pushed to 12800 would look like I have no idea, and I'm not sure we have the means to push that far in desktop software, although I suppose the RGB curve can get you most of the way there. Doing that should make it clear whether setting iso actually makes any difference at all to the way the camera records the raw file. Someone here must know.

At any rate, there's nothing wrong with pushing raw files if that's what it takes to get the shot, and if you are able to push successfully for adequate quality.

Dec 17, 2008 at 05:09 PM

rjk55425
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #17 · 5DII high ISO sample

tonyhart wrote:
I shouldn't feed the troll, but this is too funny. Reminds me of the guy querying the 'connection with his clients'. Classic. Reading this guys previously edited posts is a hoot.

"You've been reported" he proclaims. Oh lord, save me from his reporting ways. The guy should report himself for being a veritable ass.

Sorry... and thanks apdieb for the box shot, great to see how much detail has been retained. It's amazing how quickly hi-ISO capability is improving. I'm told that the D3/700 is still a way better, but looking at these images I couldn't care. I can't really think of anything I couldn't shoot with this camera as far as a typical wedding might go. Unless of course the bride and groom decided to play action sports in the church during late December...

Its too bad people can't be voted off this place. I know who I would vote off first

Dec 19, 2008 at 03:31 AM

gugs
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #18 · 5DII high ISO sample

jvarszegi wrote:
vontom wrote:
jvarszegi
The shutter speed was not a valid point.

Yes, it was. This is a good illustration of why ISO 12800 and above are not really needed for most shots around the house, and also why it generally shouldn't be used for optimal results either, but only as a last resort. 1/320s was not needed for this stationary toddler. If the shutter speed was higher because a wider aperture was needed, the OP made a mistake (and you have no valid point): the extra light would have been better spent on a lower ISO. The OP did not state that he took this shot with the sole aim of presenting an ISO 12800 sample here, but rather just that the shot is an ISO 12800 sample, and that he wanted feedback on how much the obvious noise has impacted the quality.

I never said that ISO 12800 was absolutely useless, but this shot helps to show why it should only be used when necessary.
You seem to have one main activity in life: spend time on forums just to contradict people and insult them whenever you find it appropriate... I thought I was the exception with a recent post but all your posts seem to be of the same kind...
I hope for you that your pictures are much better than everything shown in this forum, and I sincerely hope for you that you enjoy life, have friends and enjoy photography...

Guy

Dec 22, 2008 at 08:03 PM

1 2 3 4 end
FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 end