This topic is in the 2013 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2013So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
p.4 #1So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
ggreene wrote:
I don't believe Canon is in a rush to cater to people complaining about low ISO DR. How big is that market compared to people wanting better high ISO performance? I don't doubt that Canon is actively developing the technology but I don't think it's as high on their priority list as many believe it should be.
If you wish to continue to use Canon gear you will have to WAIT. That's your only choice.
At this point they really should be in a rush (honestly they should have been in a rush much sooner so they would never even have gotten to the point where they need to be in a rush). High ISO SNR is getting hard to improve. Low ISO DR they have TONS of room to improve.
I don't believe Canon is in a rush to cater to people complaining about low ISO DR. How big is that market compared to people wanting better high ISO performance? I don't doubt that Canon is actively developing the technology but I don't think it's as high on their priority list as many believe it should be.
If you wish to continue to use Canon gear you will have to WAIT. That's your only choice.
At this point they really should be in a rush (honestly they should have been in a rush much sooner so they would never even have gotten to the point where they need to be in a rush). High ISO SNR is getting hard to improve. Low ISO DR they have TONS of room to improve.
Jun 02, 2013 at 12:14 PM
p.4 #2So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Have any of your customers complained about the Noise in the shadows..in any of the files you've given them..or the prints?
Jun 02, 2013 at 01:04 PM
p.4 #3So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
skibum5 wrote:
that was a silly statement
heck even Ansel Adams did both of those things
Actually its not. Have any of his customers complained "this photo has too much noise." "the shadows looks splotchy" etc.
robbymack wrote
Honestly no one, other than dweebs on photo forums, looks at 100% crops or realistically cares about shadow noise.heck even Ansel Adams did both of those things
Actually its not. Have any of his customers complained "this photo has too much noise." "the shadows looks splotchy" etc.
Jun 02, 2013 at 01:05 PM
p.4 #4So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Sunny Sra wrote:
that was a silly statement
heck even Ansel Adams did both of those thingsActually its not. Have any of his customers complained "this photo has too much noise." "the shadows looks splotchy" etc.
He spent countless hours working on emulsions and toiling in the lab dodging and burning and trying this or that to eek out as much DR as he could.
skibum5 wrote
robbymack wrote
Honestly no one, other than dweebs on photo forums, looks at 100% crops or realistically cares about shadow noise.heck even Ansel Adams did both of those things
He spent countless hours working on emulsions and toiling in the lab dodging and burning and trying this or that to eek out as much DR as he could.
Jun 02, 2013 at 01:35 PM
p.4 #5So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Sunny Sra wrote:
Have any of your customers complained about the Noise in the shadows..in any of the files you've given them..or the prints?
I have at at times. But hey if you want Canon just think it's fine to give us 2004 DR forever go ahead. I think that would stink because eventually I'd have to move to Nikon, something I'd rather not do for various reasons.
Defending every last thing they do doesn't help anyone.
Have any of your customers complained about the Noise in the shadows..in any of the files you've given them..or the prints?
I have at at times. But hey if you want Canon just think it's fine to give us 2004 DR forever go ahead. I think that would stink because eventually I'd have to move to Nikon, something I'd rather not do for various reasons.
Defending every last thing they do doesn't help anyone.
Jun 02, 2013 at 01:37 PM
p.4 #6So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
skibum5 wrote:
I have at at times. But hey if you want Canon just think it's fine to give us 2004 DR forever go ahead. I think that would stink because eventually I'd have to move to Nikon, something I'd rather not do for various reasons.
Defending every last thing they do doesn't help anyone.
For what he does...weddings..i doubt if anyone has complained. If you're printing large fine art photos landscapes/wildlife/models etc...then yes some art directors may complain.
I'm not defending, i'm making a point that for his work..none of his customers complain. you can complain about everything canon does..and continue to use the product. Time you shifted camp maybe.
Sunny Sra wrote
Have any of your customers complained about the Noise in the shadows..in any of the files you've given them..or the prints?Defending every last thing they do doesn't help anyone.
For what he does...weddings..i doubt if anyone has complained. If you're printing large fine art photos landscapes/wildlife/models etc...then yes some art directors may complain.
I'm not defending, i'm making a point that for his work..none of his customers complain. you can complain about everything canon does..and continue to use the product. Time you shifted camp maybe.
Jun 02, 2013 at 02:11 PM
p.4 #7So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
I can't recall specifically any of my clients complaining about shadow noise, but I bet they would if I charged more for the service I provide. I have also noticed it in my own images and been a little disturbed at times, even with high color NR. I remember the old days when I used to print ISO1600 from the Rebel XT and even in 4x6" prints the chroma noise showed. To me, these files (when pushed a bit) resemble that effect...except the blotches are much bigger and mostly green/magenta.
I should also note that about 50% of my clients never even give me any kind of feedback after they receive their photos, so that needs to be part of the considered data.
I would not like to have to change systems just to appeal to higher-end clients.
I should also note that about 50% of my clients never even give me any kind of feedback after they receive their photos, so that needs to be part of the considered data.
I would not like to have to change systems just to appeal to higher-end clients.
Jun 02, 2013 at 02:57 PM
p.4 #8So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Beni wrote:
Not seeing any problem in those images that correct noise reduction wouldn't fix, oh and learning how to use fill flash. I'm sorry but I shot weddings with film and then the 10D, 1Ds, 20D, 5D and now 5D3. You don't have a clue just how good the current generation is and your rants about them not being good enough for wedding photography, well all those people you wish you could shoot like in the wedding forum, news for you, they are doing the job with cameras equal or less able than yours and have been doing long before cameras...Show more →
I used Rebel XT, 20D, 40D, 5D, 5D2, D800, 5D3. Yes I have some clue about them and I didn't say they weren't good enough for wedding photography. I have been using them for wedding photography. The fact that they have limitations and flaws is what I bring up. I am shooting with roughly the same camera equipment that many of the wedding photogs on FM use. The noise I pointed out did NOT disappear with even high LR color noise reduction, and it would show up in a print.
I would like a camera that did everything I wanted it to do, yes. I want good high ISO noise control (which is something I pretty much don't complain about anymore since it's mostly satisfactory now), good AF and tracking in both good and low light (specifically the level of low light I often have to work in) - preferably with outer points as well as center (no camera I have used can currently boast very good tracking in low light, center or outer points). and good dynamic range for those low ISO situations where the bright daylight forces me to underexpose areas to preserve highlights. I also appreciate a responsive live view mode. I haven't really complained much/ever about shutter lag or the actual number of AF points because these aren't that important for me - more like a few added conveniences I can easily live without.
I did shoot weddings with the 1dsII...very briefly. Noise was bad, shadows had no detail. Completely unacceptably inflexible files for me. I admit to being spoiled by good stuff, but I think that having so much noise in Canon's modern sensors' shadows at the lowest ISO settings is the result of some juryrigging to control high ISO noise and I think they need to catch up with Nikon - who already has this matter under control the way it SHOULD be.
I didn't say I couldn't shoot weddings with 5d3/D800. I did it, did 3 weddings last week with the 5d3 (and one with only 5d2's), did yesterday's wedding with the 5d3, and then a few weddings before with the 5d3. I did NOT say they were unusable as wedding cameras. Don't make such assumptive accusations.
I AM a craigslist photographer. People seem to ignore that fact.
I have shot well over 100 weddings solo (and a few dozen as second photog), and I would say I have gotten a considerable amount of experience. Before that, I taught myself about exposure, lighting angles for modeling, etc., and off-camera flash use. I haven't given NOTHING to the enterprise of learning the trade, so please don't accuse me of being totally lazy and unwilling to try to learn things myself. What I lack right now is proper understanding of the fine points of managing composition, posing, etc...and it's very hard to get those things without being taught or having readily available models for practice.
However, I will admit to one strange perspective: In the last several years, I have lost some of the ability to distinguish the WHY/boundary of what should make things difficult to learn. The result is that I perceive that learning should be easy for everything...and why shouldn't it be once you have the adequate foundation for the next step? The difficulty in this is how to find out what the next step is.
Not seeing any problem in those images that correct noise reduction wouldn't fix, oh and learning how to use fill flash. I'm sorry but I shot weddings with film and then the 10D, 1Ds, 20D, 5D and now 5D3. You don't have a clue just how good the current generation is and your rants about them not being good enough for wedding photography, well all those people you wish you could shoot like in the wedding forum, news for you, they are doing the job with cameras equal or less able than yours and have been doing long before cameras...Show more →
I used Rebel XT, 20D, 40D, 5D, 5D2, D800, 5D3. Yes I have some clue about them and I didn't say they weren't good enough for wedding photography. I have been using them for wedding photography. The fact that they have limitations and flaws is what I bring up. I am shooting with roughly the same camera equipment that many of the wedding photogs on FM use. The noise I pointed out did NOT disappear with even high LR color noise reduction, and it would show up in a print.
I would like a camera that did everything I wanted it to do, yes. I want good high ISO noise control (which is something I pretty much don't complain about anymore since it's mostly satisfactory now), good AF and tracking in both good and low light (specifically the level of low light I often have to work in) - preferably with outer points as well as center (no camera I have used can currently boast very good tracking in low light, center or outer points). and good dynamic range for those low ISO situations where the bright daylight forces me to underexpose areas to preserve highlights. I also appreciate a responsive live view mode. I haven't really complained much/ever about shutter lag or the actual number of AF points because these aren't that important for me - more like a few added conveniences I can easily live without.
I did shoot weddings with the 1dsII...very briefly. Noise was bad, shadows had no detail. Completely unacceptably inflexible files for me. I admit to being spoiled by good stuff, but I think that having so much noise in Canon's modern sensors' shadows at the lowest ISO settings is the result of some juryrigging to control high ISO noise and I think they need to catch up with Nikon - who already has this matter under control the way it SHOULD be.
I didn't say I couldn't shoot weddings with 5d3/D800. I did it, did 3 weddings last week with the 5d3 (and one with only 5d2's), did yesterday's wedding with the 5d3, and then a few weddings before with the 5d3. I did NOT say they were unusable as wedding cameras. Don't make such assumptive accusations.
I AM a craigslist photographer. People seem to ignore that fact.
I have shot well over 100 weddings solo (and a few dozen as second photog), and I would say I have gotten a considerable amount of experience. Before that, I taught myself about exposure, lighting angles for modeling, etc., and off-camera flash use. I haven't given NOTHING to the enterprise of learning the trade, so please don't accuse me of being totally lazy and unwilling to try to learn things myself. What I lack right now is proper understanding of the fine points of managing composition, posing, etc...and it's very hard to get those things without being taught or having readily available models for practice.
However, I will admit to one strange perspective: In the last several years, I have lost some of the ability to distinguish the WHY/boundary of what should make things difficult to learn. The result is that I perceive that learning should be easy for everything...and why shouldn't it be once you have the adequate foundation for the next step? The difficulty in this is how to find out what the next step is.
Jun 02, 2013 at 03:14 PM
p.4 #9So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
form wrote:
I used Rebel XT, 20D, 40D, 5D, 5D2, D800, 5D3.
Looks like you haven't used a 7D yet, possibly the noisiest Canon DSLR ever according to common (internet forum) wisdom. I suggest that you shoot with this one, then go back to your 5D3 a happier man, shadow-noise-wise.
I used Rebel XT, 20D, 40D, 5D, 5D2, D800, 5D3.
Looks like you haven't used a 7D yet, possibly the noisiest Canon DSLR ever according to common (internet forum) wisdom. I suggest that you shoot with this one, then go back to your 5D3 a happier man, shadow-noise-wise.
Jun 02, 2013 at 03:21 PM
p.4 #10So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Liquidstone wrote:
Looks like you haven't used a 7D yet, possibly the noisiest Canon DSLR ever according to common (internet forum) wisdom. I suggest that you shoot with this one, then go back to your 5D3 a happier man, shadow-noise-wise.
The relief is short-lived. Like when I bought a 1dsII, realized how bad its shadows were and felt better about my 5d2's for a while...but soon re-realized that the shadows suck there too. Also like when I bought the D800, loved the sensor....but didn't like the Nikon glass (or the fear of their bad customer support), I figured if I sold it I could stand the Canon noise because I liked the Canon lenses so much. So after I sold it and bought the 5d3, the shadow noise hit home again immediately. Ouch.
form wrote
I used Rebel XT, 20D, 40D, 5D, 5D2, D800, 5D3. The relief is short-lived. Like when I bought a 1dsII, realized how bad its shadows were and felt better about my 5d2's for a while...but soon re-realized that the shadows suck there too. Also like when I bought the D800, loved the sensor....but didn't like the Nikon glass (or the fear of their bad customer support), I figured if I sold it I could stand the Canon noise because I liked the Canon lenses so much. So after I sold it and bought the 5d3, the shadow noise hit home again immediately. Ouch.
Jun 02, 2013 at 03:23 PM
p.4 #11So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
form wrote:
Enough already! You want the camera to do it all instead of learning some technique. If a 5D3 or D800 can't do weddings for you then you may know how to pose or capture a moment but you're no photographer. Go back to craigslist till you learn that photography is a lot more than just pressing the shutter release and expecting the camera to do it all for you. You want to know what your problems are mate? In this and many other threads? You want a 'become amazing wedding photographer for free card' without actually having to learn the technique or put in the legwork or gain the experience about what is actually important that used to be required to actually become a pro shooter....I did shoot weddings with the 1dsII...very briefly. Noise was bad, shadows had no detail. Completely unacceptably inflexible files for me. I admit to being spoiled by good stuff, but I think that having so much noise in Canon's modern sensors' shadows at the lowest ISO settings is the result of some juryrigging to control high ISO noise and I think they need to catch up with Nikon - who already has this matter under control the way it SHOULD be.
...
Are you going to complain endlessly about Canon in a Canon thread, and how the good stuff... that be Nikon... spoiled you to the point you berate Canon users... because they choose Canon... Can I get a simple Yes or No...
I'll have a couple of cold ones while I wait... Curious to know...
Maybe the Nikon boys will take you back if you ask them... but be nice...
Beni wrote
Not seeing any problem in those images that correct noise reduction wouldn't fix, oh and learning how to use fill flash. I'm sorry but I shot weddings with film and then the 10D, 1Ds, 20D, 5D and now 5D3. You don't have a clue just how good the current generation is and your rants about them not being good enough for wedding photography, well all those people you wish you could shoot like in the wedding forum, news for you, they are doing the job with cameras equal or less able than yours and have been doing long before cameras were as good as they are now. Pixel peeping a bit of noise which incidentally is easy to remove and certainly won't show up in print. Shoot a wedding with a 1Ds or 1DsII and then realise just how good this noise is. Enough already! You want the camera to do it all instead of learning some technique. If a 5D3 or D800 can't do weddings for you then you may know how to pose or capture a moment but you're no photographer. Go back to craigslist till you learn that photography is a lot more than just pressing the shutter release and expecting the camera to do it all for you. You want to know what your problems are mate? In this and many other threads? You want a 'become amazing wedding photographer for free card' without actually having to learn the technique or put in the legwork or gain the experience about what is actually important that used to be required to actually become a pro shooter....
Are you going to complain endlessly about Canon in a Canon thread, and how the good stuff... that be Nikon... spoiled you to the point you berate Canon users... because they choose Canon... Can I get a simple Yes or No...
I'll have a couple of cold ones while I wait... Curious to know...
Maybe the Nikon boys will take you back if you ask them... but be nice...
Jun 02, 2013 at 03:39 PM
p.4 #12So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Joey - None of our equipment is perfect and we all have our personal suggestions as to how to make it better for us, and we all complain from time to time, but you seem to have developed the unique ability to bitch and whine about every goddamned piece of gear you've ever used. It's the "I'm right and everyone else is wrong" syndrome. That's what seems to rub a lot of folks here the wrong way. I would suggest that you post a link to the raw file that made that image you posted. It might be something as simple as you're not understanding how to use the tools you have or not using the right tool in the first place.
I went from a 1Ds, to a II and then III along with a 5D and used the 5D2 and now finally to the 5D3. Coming straight from a 1DsIII to a 5D3, believe it or not was actually a big step forward. It's all about ergonomics and letting the camera get out of your way and the 5D3 does that better than any other digital camera I've come across. Does it have higher noise at low ISO than the older models? It might, but that noise is also much more "film like" and therefore much more pleasing to the eyes. This whole notion of a quest for noiseless images is a waste of energy. Use the qualities of you equipment to your advantage.
Coming from a 1DsIII to the 5D3, I already had pretty great autofocus, but the 5D3 is even better and in all situations, particularly in low light. I recently did a CD cover shoot where I needed to turn the modeling lights on the subject almost off, but the 5D3 locked on instantly in a situation where any other camera (sans 1Dx) would have hunted forever. And I only use AI Servo, never One Shot.
About twenty years ago (give or take a few) I photographed the jazz great Joe Zavinul at his home in Malibu for a magazine article. The writer was there and asked him what his advice for up and coming musicians would be. Joe answered something to the effect that "anyone can learn where to put your fingers on the instrument and play, but you really have to do that - learn the instrument - and then throw it all away." It was his way of saying that you have to become so proficient at your instrument (the 5D3) that you no longer think about using it, you just use it and are using your intuitive creativity to make your music - or images. That doesn't mean that you never think about the process but more that the process becomes so automated that the mechanics never get in your way. Joe's advice works for anyone in a creative field.
I hope you find the perfect camera someday. Maybe it will exist before you're too old to use it. Probably not. But more importantly, I hope you take Joe's advice to heart. I think you'll be a lot happier with yourself, your equipment and hopefully your images.
I went from a 1Ds, to a II and then III along with a 5D and used the 5D2 and now finally to the 5D3. Coming straight from a 1DsIII to a 5D3, believe it or not was actually a big step forward. It's all about ergonomics and letting the camera get out of your way and the 5D3 does that better than any other digital camera I've come across. Does it have higher noise at low ISO than the older models? It might, but that noise is also much more "film like" and therefore much more pleasing to the eyes. This whole notion of a quest for noiseless images is a waste of energy. Use the qualities of you equipment to your advantage.
Coming from a 1DsIII to the 5D3, I already had pretty great autofocus, but the 5D3 is even better and in all situations, particularly in low light. I recently did a CD cover shoot where I needed to turn the modeling lights on the subject almost off, but the 5D3 locked on instantly in a situation where any other camera (sans 1Dx) would have hunted forever. And I only use AI Servo, never One Shot.
About twenty years ago (give or take a few) I photographed the jazz great Joe Zavinul at his home in Malibu for a magazine article. The writer was there and asked him what his advice for up and coming musicians would be. Joe answered something to the effect that "anyone can learn where to put your fingers on the instrument and play, but you really have to do that - learn the instrument - and then throw it all away." It was his way of saying that you have to become so proficient at your instrument (the 5D3) that you no longer think about using it, you just use it and are using your intuitive creativity to make your music - or images. That doesn't mean that you never think about the process but more that the process becomes so automated that the mechanics never get in your way. Joe's advice works for anyone in a creative field.
I hope you find the perfect camera someday. Maybe it will exist before you're too old to use it. Probably not. But more importantly, I hope you take Joe's advice to heart. I think you'll be a lot happier with yourself, your equipment and hopefully your images.
Jun 02, 2013 at 03:53 PM
p.4 #13So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Form, this subject is a decade old. Google some "low iso noise" to get some briefing on canon shadows noise. There is tons of it available out there, nothing news here, just accept it while shooting with canon sensor(s) and moving on. It is better to work around these constraints than posting the issue here. None can help you.
Edited on Jun 02, 2013 at 04:18 PM · View previous versions
Edited on Jun 02, 2013 at 04:18 PM · View previous versions
Jun 02, 2013 at 04:00 PM
p.4 #14So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
There's a phrase used (often by police describing an offender) that goes "he's got form" and it's certainly an apt one to use in this forum.
Jun 02, 2013 at 04:18 PM
p.4 #15So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Aaron, this is not about low light and ISO performance (which IMO is good on 5D3) its about dealing with shadows in shots that are otherwise OK. i.e. high contrast situations. A well exposed shot is a well exposed shot no matter the ISO. But sometimes you do need to lift shadows occasionally, if you do not have 100% control over the lighting. Being
I was pretty shocked at how it handles pushing of even a small amount of shadow brings (IMO) a disproportionately high level of shadow noise. Perhaps, Form, you should reassess how you handle shadows i.e. are they really a problem or are you just going for a specific look.
FWIW I think the 5D3 is massively overrated, its DR is comparatively poor. Everyone goes on about what an amazing AF system it has when all they really did was make a camera that focused as well as its competition.
I back Form with what he is saying but really? This topic, again? I think this topic has been done to death and the only conclusion that comes out of it is that there are a bunch of people that avoid high contrast scenes and so don't appreciate that sometimes you just don't have total control over the environment.
Honestly, I do not see that this thread offer anything to the forum whatsoever and as far as Im concerned it needs a good locking.
Form step back. Take a paper and pencil and write down what you are after. Make a priorities list in your gear and live with the consequences. For me, those it was the 85 1.2 and the 35L. When I established I could not do without either of those lenses, I realized there was no sense complaining and so I stuck with Canon.
Please make decisions based on your needs and leave it alone. It will be better for you.
Edited on Jun 02, 2013 at 04:32 PM · View previous versions
I was pretty shocked at how it handles pushing of even a small amount of shadow brings (IMO) a disproportionately high level of shadow noise. Perhaps, Form, you should reassess how you handle shadows i.e. are they really a problem or are you just going for a specific look.
FWIW I think the 5D3 is massively overrated, its DR is comparatively poor. Everyone goes on about what an amazing AF system it has when all they really did was make a camera that focused as well as its competition.
I back Form with what he is saying but really? This topic, again? I think this topic has been done to death and the only conclusion that comes out of it is that there are a bunch of people that avoid high contrast scenes and so don't appreciate that sometimes you just don't have total control over the environment.
Honestly, I do not see that this thread offer anything to the forum whatsoever and as far as Im concerned it needs a good locking.
Form step back. Take a paper and pencil and write down what you are after. Make a priorities list in your gear and live with the consequences. For me, those it was the 85 1.2 and the 35L. When I established I could not do without either of those lenses, I realized there was no sense complaining and so I stuck with Canon.
Please make decisions based on your needs and leave it alone. It will be better for you.
Edited on Jun 02, 2013 at 04:32 PM · View previous versions
Jun 02, 2013 at 04:26 PM
p.4 #16So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
form wrote:
.....Like when I bought a 1dsII, realized how bad its shadows were......
You need to learn how to deal with noise properly if this is the case. The 1DsII had files that would clean up really well for me.
.....Like when I bought a 1dsII, realized how bad its shadows were......
You need to learn how to deal with noise properly if this is the case. The 1DsII had files that would clean up really well for me.
Jun 02, 2013 at 04:29 PM
p.4 #17So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Perhaps a Scott Kelby course in lighting is in order...the indoor shot is quite nice, exposing for the sky the correct choice...but why no diffused fill flash to chase the darker bits; the couple's faces, attire, away with a bit of soft silky light, a small reflector would have enhanced the image...even the low power 90EX or 220EX with a piece of tissue would have helped 
Edited on Jun 02, 2013 at 05:31 PM · View previous versions
Edited on Jun 02, 2013 at 05:31 PM · View previous versions
Jun 02, 2013 at 04:32 PM
p.4 #18So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Form, this gets at what I was saying in my other post. You are overthinking this. Submit the shot as is, as a silhouette. Its great. Leave the shadows.
form wrote:
Looking at tonight's wedding for a few things...and I came across a new favorite image. Not sure if I'm taking full advantage of it in post, because I don't feel it's quite as good as it could be...but even in an image like this, dynamic range matters (in this case, sky detail combined with shadow detail):
http://www.joeyallenphoto.com/D&A-001sm.jpg
form wrote:
Looking at tonight's wedding for a few things...and I came across a new favorite image. Not sure if I'm taking full advantage of it in post, because I don't feel it's quite as good as it could be...but even in an image like this, dynamic range matters (in this case, sky detail combined with shadow detail):
http://www.joeyallenphoto.com/D&A-001sm.jpg
Jun 02, 2013 at 04:34 PM
p.4 #19So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
These are all over thinks mate, nothing wrong with these shots at all. Im convinced you need a good lesson in LR noise management. Use my method, its very good.
As a rule for shots like with the couple, I pretty much always use a touch of on camera fill its a good habit but I would have no issue with any of those shots, they wouldn't even be on my radar.
It saddens me to think how many great shots hit the bin
form wrote:
To back up my dynamic range claims, I bring forth this example, @ ISO100:
http://www.joeyallenphoto.com/T&K-001sm.jpg
Closeup:
http://www.joeyallenphoto.com/T&K-001c.jpg
In this situation, dynamic range exceeded the ability of the sensor to gather everything...just on the face and clothing combined alone, to say nothing of the bright background. The shadows have been boosted 2 stops, LR color noise reduction of 25 (default). To make it tolerable in the suit I have to boost it up to 70+. if I had shot the identical image with a D800...the noise would simply not be there. I would not have to obliterate detail to make the image less noisy.
This...Show more →
As a rule for shots like with the couple, I pretty much always use a touch of on camera fill its a good habit but I would have no issue with any of those shots, they wouldn't even be on my radar.
It saddens me to think how many great shots hit the bin
form wrote:
To back up my dynamic range claims, I bring forth this example, @ ISO100:
http://www.joeyallenphoto.com/T&K-001sm.jpg
Closeup:
http://www.joeyallenphoto.com/T&K-001c.jpg
In this situation, dynamic range exceeded the ability of the sensor to gather everything...just on the face and clothing combined alone, to say nothing of the bright background. The shadows have been boosted 2 stops, LR color noise reduction of 25 (default). To make it tolerable in the suit I have to boost it up to 70+. if I had shot the identical image with a D800...the noise would simply not be there. I would not have to obliterate detail to make the image less noisy.
This...Show more →
Jun 02, 2013 at 04:38 PM
p.4 #20So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
^ I agree with morgan. I would clean up the dirty glass roof a bit, but as a silhouette it looks great.
Form - I also dont understand why you gave up the d800...because you were worried about customer service if somthing broke because you read complaints on the internet? So, no actual experience with Nikon's customer service?
Form - I also dont understand why you gave up the d800...because you were worried about customer service if somthing broke because you read complaints on the internet? So, no actual experience with Nikon's customer service?
Jun 02, 2013 at 04:48 PM