I own a mark IV but never shoot jpeg so I cannot help you with the in camera settings. If you shoot raw you will have much more control over the noise and how you deal with it.
I don't think there is anything wrong with your camera. However if you are going to a paid gig with a camera you have used only once, then you are asking for trouble.
I will also guess that focus is slightly off in the ISO 4000 one. With my mk4 (as well as my mk3 and 5d2), the more the focus is off, the noiser it looks. At 6400, I need to be pretty much right on or the noise looks worse.
Daveyboy3 wrote:
...You all honestly think these pictures are just fine.
Yes, as far as noise goes. Too much noise reduction going on, though, which is adversely affecting resolution. The focus might be a bit off as well.
Daveyboy3 wrote:
...I was not joking about the quality of these pictures. Do any of you even have a Mark IV or are you just bashing me because you thing I'm a newbie and I don't know how to operate a camera?
One needn't own a Mark IV to judge the noise level of a posted photograph. As far as "bashing" goes, you asked us what we thought, and we're telling you.
Daveyboy3 wrote:
...I just need to know if you have a Mark IV and you would consider these pictures good? I did not process this pictures in any way. They are straight from the camera - I don't have the optimizer or any of that other stuff turned on.
But they are JPEGs, and you do have NR set to "Standard." Turn it off.
Daveyboy3 wrote:
...I'm not going to get a chance to use the camera again until Thursday (fashion week) - I'd love to show off my new camera. I just need to know if it need to go back to Canon [in the] morning!!
I don't think it needs service. I think the posted examples are fine as far as noise goes.
To set your mind at ease before your shoot, take photos with each of your cameras of the exact same scene under the exact same lighting with the exact same settings. Then, print you photos to the same size. Then, compare the prints. I think you'll be reassured that the Mark IV is working well.
> I'm not a newbie just because I'm new here. All the glass I own is L series (12 to be exact
I know one on dpreview (bulbmogul) he own any possible/most expensive L lens you could wish as well as bodies, lights, video etc. He also don't understand why he need to learn exposure since he is not newbie ...
So don't take me wrong but statements like this causing more troubles than respect! Shots are best proof in this case not number of lenses.
Breitling65 wrote:
> I'm not a newbie just because I'm new here. All the glass I own is L series (12 to be exact
I know one on dpreview (bulbmogul) he own any possible/most expensive L lens you could wish as well as bodies, lights, video etc. He also don't understand why he need to learn exposure since he is not newbie ...
So don't take me wrong but statements like this causing more troubles than respect! Shots are best proof in this case not number of lenses.
So very true. My statement made me seem like quite the idiot and I'm sorry for that. I needed to think before I wrote and I'm truly sorry for that, I really am. After that stupid comment though, I did get some of the answers I was hoping to hear
h_2_o wrote:
please do not take this as a negative but if you are shooting fashion why did you go with a crop factor frame over a full frame?
Gotta laugh at nonsense like this...
As for the samples, they look fine for in camera processed jpegs. There is no need to expect noiseless images at ISO 2500. Shoot RAW and enjoy your camera--judging by what you've posted there seems to be nothing wrong with it.
IMO these images look fine. They look they were taken in very overcast conditions.
I poor light it is very difficult to get high IQ unless you are using some kind of lighting. I don't know if I missed it or not but shoot in Raw.
Don't take some of these comments the wrong way.
Welcome to FM!
Michael
IMO these images look fine. They look they were taken in very overcast conditions.
I poor light it is very difficult to get high IQ unless you are using some kind of lighting. I don't know if I missed it or not but shoot in Raw.
Don't take some these comments the wrong way.
Welcome to FM!
Michael
That was my first thought as well, the lighting in those examples does not lend itself to real clean high ISO files.
The ISO 1000 and below shots look essentially noiseless. You'd be hard pressed to find another camera with noiseless ISO 1000. Even the ISO 4000 shot, which has visible noise, looks good to me. If you printed that ISO 4000 image at 12x18 inches, I doubt you'd even SEE the noise. People get so uptight about noise nowadays and it's baffling. An ISO 1600 shot from my old 30D, which has plenty of noise at the pixel level, made BEAUTIFUL prints at 10x15 inches, such that you couldn't even seen any noise upon close inspection. My 1Ds II is even better, and the 1D IV is a good stop or two better than my 1Ds II. I.E, I'd feel fine printing at ISO 6400 at pretty much any size, and ISO 12,800 for small prints.
You do realize that the ISO 4,000 shot you posted has less noise than pretty much any ISO 400 film and absolutely less than any ISO 800 film.
BrianO wrote:
To set your mind at ease before your shoot, take photos with each of your cameras of the exact same scene under the exact same lighting with the exact same settings. Then, print you photos to the same size. Then, compare the prints. I think you'll be reassured that the Mark IV is working well.
...or if you don't have time, just check these files against others of similar iso by using bicubic image size to interpolate the file to the same dimensions as your 1D4 files, and then compare at 100% on screen. That should set your mind at rest that your 1D4 is doing very well.
There is nothing wrong with these files. If you don't know how to cope with the colour blotching and think you can get better results with your previous cameras, then use those on Thursday instead, until you have mastered 1D4 processing to your own satisfaction. Or did your old cameras stop working when you bought your 1D4?
In my experience the easiest ignorant way to mitigate the colour blotching is to use NeatImage with very low frequency chroma reduction, or maybe Dfine. The same results can be achieved using Photoshop's filters and blending modes with a little knowledge.
I have to admit, I was a little disappointed in the noise performance from my 1DIV compared to my original 5D, but with that said, I would gladly use color shots up to 6400 or 8000 ISO, or even up to 25,600 in B&W. I have not even installed DPP, but DNG files run through LR3beta are outstanding with default NR applied. One thing I have noticed is an unusual softness in on screen previews at high ISO, but I suspect it's because I've been looking at those embedded JPEGs. I'll try changing my in camera NR settings.
Whenever I get a new Pro camera I spend at least 3 days reading and re-reading the manual, tweaking, testing and getting accustomed to the settings and controls. The Mk IV is very, VERY complicated. Example: Did you know that you can set the AF single point so that it automatically changes as you rotate the camera?
After the Mk III focus problems the Mk IV focus system options have been (even more) expanded so that each user can customize the focus for their own needs. I have been doing this for 5+ years through 4 generations of cameras. I still feel a bit humbled and know that somewhere in there there is a magic setting combo just right for me-waiting.
The Mk IV has a good reputation with hi ISO noise (although the D3 and D3s are better) and may be Canon's best hi ISO camera-although by not much more than 1/2 a stop. This means you should expect fine results with ISO 3200/6400 files when Properly Exposed.
If you must shoot JPEG why not set your camera to JPEG + RAW so you will have some RAW files for reference.
You really can't complain about results until you have set up the many values in the menu system. I would suggest you set internal Noise Reduction to low or off. That's because even RAW files are affected and most any good NR computer program will be much better.
Basic performance will vary greatly with these settings. None of us here can help you until you understand your camera.
You have bought the Top of the Heap camera which the Pro need to do their best work. That doesn't make you a Pro or even an adequate photographer. But it does imply that you have mastered other Prosumer and Pro cameras and have an understanding of computer post processing and a some experience in at least one type of photography.
So as to sporting your new, latest, greatest MK IV you would be better off to black tape over the MK IV IDs because the Fashion show is in front of the cameras.
Daveyboy3 wrote:
I have Fashion Week to shoot in less than a week and I have no clue what to do.
This is the worst ISO performing camera I own(40D,50D and 5D II).
Maybe I just have a bad copy. It's not like I can goto the store and return it this week because no one has it in stock.
Auto light optimizer and peripheral illumination were turned on. Perhaps experiment some more at high ISO with those on and off because those settings generally lighten dark areas and may enhance the appearance of noise.
As others suggest, RAW is one option, but what others may not take into account is your workflow, which might require the speed of JPEG output & delivery. I personally think the ISO 4000 shot looks good for what it is. If you want to mitigate the noise somewhat, turn down the in-camera sharpening in your custom picture style from 5 to maybe 2-3. Or turn off sharpening, but again, it depends on what your clients need...
I also noticed the auto ISO feature was on. It's nice but one concern is that it could run your ISO up pretty high without you noticing it. The default setting for this mode is to automatically choose any ISO between 100-12,800. The only way you can limit it is to set a range limit for upper ISO, as described in the Mark IV white paper:
With all C.Fns at their default settings,ISO Auto for still photography with the 1D Mark IV
is always automatically set within the range of ISO 100–12,800.Even if the upper ISO speed
limit is set to H1,H2 or H3 and/or the lower ISO speed limit to L with C.Fn I-3,the ISO
Auto speed range for still photos will be ISO 100–12,800.However,if the lower and higher
ISO speed limits have been set to a narrower range via C.Fn I-3, ISO speed will be auto-
matically set within that range.
rscheffler,
You make some very good points! This is a New High Octane camera that has many changes that will take some time to figure out.
Daveyboy,
Keep shooting (in good light) and adjusting the CFs to suit your needs. You are on the right track because your images look fine.
I think were all getting spun up expecting the Mark IV to perform like the camera that we came from. If you have one, we all need to spend some time looking over the "larger" white manual that came with the camera. Shoot, shoot and then shoot some more. Adjust, tweek, and read as much as you can from pros that have this camera and have mastered it.
rscheffler wrote:
I also noticed the auto ISO feature was on. It's nice but one concern is that it could run your ISO up pretty high without you noticing it. The default setting for this mode is to automatically choose any ISO between 100-12,800. The only way you can limit it is to set a range limit for upper ISO, as described in the Mark IV white paper:
Ron
I have been experimenting with auto ISO and it seems to meter a bit on the low side most of the time on my MKIV. My work around is to shoot in AV mode and enable cfn 1-12 setting the shutter high/low at the same speed (or within a small range of speeds). That gives you exposure compensation to go with auto ISO.
