OK i'm a bit curious on this, i'm looking at a 1d mark 2 and possibly a 30d or a 40d. how do the iso's with the same lenses look? i am mainly concerned with primes around the f2.0 area. if anyone knows of comparison photos of the two or has these similar cameras it would be appreciated. I guess at this point i'm very curious how they handle iso's and image handling at low light in general
thanks
edit: updated with correction. i did mean the 1d mark 2 from canon and am still looking for example photos
It's "1D", not "D1". The high ISO noise performance is nearly identical between the 1D Mark II and the 30D. The 40D has less noise at the same-rated ISOs, but also has a less sensitive sensor by between 1/3 and 1/2 a stop.
So I'd say they're all pretty comparable noise-wise. However, the best camera among them by far is the 1D Mark II.
You may be confused about noise; the aperture doesn't have anything to do with it. It sounds, though, like you may be concerned with AF accuracy and/or speed. Again, 1D Mark II is the winner.
jvarszegi wrote:
It's "1D", not "D1". The high ISO noise performance is nearly identical between the 1D Mark II and the 30D. The 40D has less noise at the same-rated ISOs, but also has a less sensitive sensor by between 1/3 and 1/2 a stop.
So I'd say they're all pretty comparable noise-wise. However, the best camera among them by far is the 1D Mark II.
You may be confused about noise; the aperture doesn't have anything to do with it. It sounds, though, like you may be concerned with AF accuracy and/or speed. Again, 1D Mark II is the winner.
sorry i did mean the d1 been a long day. i understand that the aperture doesn't have anything to do with it. however where i tend to take a lot of photos i have to shoot near 2.0 thus having to push iso a little more than i would like. so while it may not directly have an affect on it, what i am shooting causes this to be part of the problem. basically low light situations that i need faster lenses on. so to get better light i often have to bump the iso which i would prefer not to do but i have to. so that is why i am curious about the iso if they are similar between the two cameras.
edit: sorry if i came off rude there i just am not sure how exactly to explain what i'm going after thank you for the help so far.
anyway to expand a bit further, yes focusing and speed i am looking for as well and i fully understand that the mark2 will give that to me. however in just bad light environments i'm trying to determine the best route for upgrading. at first i thought it would be the mark2, but not i'm unsure because in every instance i will probably have to push the iso and i do not want to do that but will have to. I also understand that at the end of the day if i really want to get around that full frame is needed. so i'm sort of stuck between a rock and a hard place trying to determine the best camera route right now.
You say you meant the d1 as in Nikon? Or the 1D Mark II from Canon? They are very different so please clarify... if you are referring to the Canon 1D Mark II, then all of the above is true... if you meant the Nikon D1, then you will be much better off noise wise with the 30D or 40D from Canon.
1D Mark II is the winner of the bunch. the 40D may take slightly better photos, but the 1D2 will improve the number of 'keepers'... the camera body is just so vastly superior...
I'll leave the MKII examples to someone else, but I'd be surprised if they are better than a 30D, which I show here. My desk a minute ago, typical low living room light, ISO 3200.
Shot RAW, zero noise reduction or any postprocessing. These are just quick grabs, and are about a half stop under .. I could reduce the noise here with another 2/3 stop of exposure.
1DmkII anytime. High ISO noise performance of the 30D/40D is marginally different, but the rest of these cameras is so much different, it's a quantum leap to a 1D mk II. There is no EOSfun like 1D EOSfun
In my experience, no noticeable or meaningful difference. They look so similar, except the 40D does have NR in camera for JPGs, so if you are comparing out of camera JPGs, the 40D's noise level will be lower. In terms of retained detail and color, they're quite similar.
Mike Mahoney wrote:
For a noise comparison to be of any value at all you must show 100% crops .. and also assure that zero noise reduction was applied in post.
But who shoots under high ISO without noise reduction I shoot with a markII for over a year. ISO 1000 is still good without little or no noise reduction. At 1600, you do need some heavy noise reduction with exposure to the right as much as possible.
TooManyShots wrote:
But who shoots under high ISO without noise reduction
Not using noise reduction when comparing bodies allows a clear demonstration of each sensors native noise. Other than that it just becomes a noise reduction contest.
Lower native noise means less noise reduction required in post which equals better quality final files.
BTW we've yet to see any 100% crops from the MKII users Lots of chatter, but no pics
Mike Mahoney wrote:
Not using noise reduction when comparing bodies allows a clear demonstration of each sensors native noise. Other than that it just becomes a noise reduction contest.
Lower native noise means less noise reduction required in post which equals better quality final files.
BTW we've yet to see any 100% crops from the MKII users Lots of chatter, but no pics
Here you go. A real world shot. Taken in the Gamestop convention in Vegas this past Sept. In a huge warehouse. I need to use ISO 3200 at from F2.8 to F4 to maintain 125s shutter speed. These 2 shots have not been undergone noise reduction or whatsoever in Lightroom Contrast and saturation has been adjusted. Fill flash was used. Shot with a 1dmarkII and 24-70L.
This the edited shot with proper noise reduction used.
wow thanks a ton guys that is exactly what i was looking for to compare the these bodies.
one quick question, what is/was the proper noise reduction used for this photo, was it processed with noise ninja, something else or all done in photoshop with just hard work?
This the edited shot with proper noise reduction used.
Well, first, you have to over expose the shot by +1/3 or +2/3 of a F stop if using a very high ISO setting. In PP work, you turn down the exposure a bit. You can eliminate a lot of other color noise that way. The more underexposed the shot is, the harder to get rid of the color noise. In this shot I used fill flash because I want to bring out the shadow. And maybe even to reduce more color noise on the subject. For noise reduction, I find the setting in Lightroom to be enough. Adding some "extra" sharpness to compensate the smoother effect you get with too much noise reduction. As have been confirmed by others, the noise pattern produced with the 1dmarkII that you can easily eliminate with simple noise reduction.
Here is another shot under more worst lighting condition than the those 2. The only light source is from my monitor and my reading lamp. No flash used. ISO3200. Aggressive noise reduction was used in Light Room. Some extra sharpening.
To rank the cameras they measured "Low-light ISO" along with "Dynamic Range" and "Color Depth".
For the "Low-light ISO" metric, the 1D Mk II earned a score of 1003, the 30D was 736, and the 40D came in at 703.
I'm not totally convinced of the validity of their methodology, and wonder how big of a sample of each model they tested. But, as far as I know, this is the first attempt by an independent third party to quantitatively rank the image quality of cameras from various makers. If the system proves to be accurate it could be more useful than reviews that simply assign "Highly Recommended" etc., .... or maybe not.
Overall image quality is a pretty subjective matter. But I never thought that looking at images posted on the internet by individual users was a great way to evaluate and compare the image quality of various cameras either.
The AF on the Mark II in low light is not very good. It will eventually AF spot on but is really slow. I don't know about the other bodies.
The first image and crop below are ISO 1600 from the 1D Mark IIN 135L at f2, 1/80s hand-held. The 100% crop is processed through dpp with sharpening and NR turned off.
Now if you really want a low light high ISO camera look at the 1D Mark III. It is fast to focus in low light, and even though its ISO is less sensitive than the same setting on a 1D Mark IIN, it is really great and holds shadow details much better. The second shot and crop are from the 1D Mark III with the 135L at f2. Most of the noise is chroma.
