Gave the G1-X a low-level light test

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by philo , May 4, 2013.

  1. philo 

    philo  Guest

    1. Advertising

  2. philo 

    Tim Conway Guest

    Tim Conway, May 4, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. philo 

    philo  Guest

    On 05/04/2013 07:07 AM, Tim Conway wrote:
    > "philo " <philo@privcy.not> wrote in message
    > news:km20ur$jk1$...
    >> https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/181446_617963561564350_777229938_n.jpg
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Taken this evening as Horror-O-Rama

    >
    > Looks good to me.
    > What ISO?
    >
    >




    I had it cranked up to maximum 12,800 ISO


    exposure time: 0.0125
    F-number : 5


    I also did some minor cropping (don't usually crop).


    BTW: I've noticed that the G1-X seems to perform more compression that
    my 50D (without affecting the quality)

    I bought a 32gig card for it, which shows something like 8400 images
    remaining. Guess I'll need to buy 30 more batteries :)
    philo , May 4, 2013
    #3
  4. philo 

    Tim Conway Guest

    "philo " <philo@privcy.not> wrote in message
    news:km2u16$4nl$...
    > On 05/04/2013 07:07 AM, Tim Conway wrote:
    >> "philo " <philo@privcy.not> wrote in message
    >> news:km20ur$jk1$...
    >>> https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/181446_617963561564350_777229938_n.jpg
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Taken this evening as Horror-O-Rama

    >>
    >> Looks good to me.
    >> What ISO?
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    >
    > I had it cranked up to maximum 12,800 ISO
    >
    >
    > exposure time: 0.0125
    > F-number : 5
    >
    >
    > I also did some minor cropping (don't usually crop).
    >
    >
    > BTW: I've noticed that the G1-X seems to perform more compression that my
    > 50D (without affecting the quality)
    >
    > I bought a 32gig card for it, which shows something like 8400 images
    > remaining. Guess I'll need to buy 30 more batteries :)


    That's pretty impressive for a compact like that. I'm getting one if I ever
    get the money together. lol
    Tim Conway, May 4, 2013
    #4
  5. philo 

    philo  Guest

    On 05/04/2013 09:59 AM, Tim Conway wrote:
    >

    X
    >> I also did some minor cropping (don't usually crop).
    >>
    >>
    >> BTW: I've noticed that the G1-X seems to perform more compression that my
    >> 50D (without affecting the quality)
    >>
    >> I bought a 32gig card for it, which shows something like 8400 images
    >> remaining. Guess I'll need to buy 30 more batteries :)

    >
    > That's pretty impressive for a compact like that. I'm getting one if I ever
    > get the money together. lol
    >
    >


    I combed eBay pretty extensively and purchased my camera *new* but at
    about $100 less than the price commonly found at most dealers.

    I saw a few used and refurbished for even less
    philo , May 4, 2013
    #5
  6. philo 

    RichA Guest

    RichA, May 4, 2013
    #6
  7. philo 

    philo  Guest

    On 05/04/2013 11:11 AM, RichA wrote:
    > On May 4, 12:00 am, philo <philo@priv cy.not> wrote:
    >> https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/181446_6179635...
    >>
    >> Taken this evening as Horror-O-Rama

    >
    > How much NR was dialed-in for the JPEG?
    >





    Hi ISO noise reduction was set to "high".


    When I magnified the shot it still looked pretty good.


    Of course of the 70 or so shots I took that night, I posted the best one...
    but even one one or two really decent shots out of 70 is not bad...
    on a normal photo shoot I usually take 400 or more photos...but at the
    Horror-O-Rama I was mainly there just to have a good time.
    philo , May 4, 2013
    #7
  8. philo 

    Tim Conway Guest

    "philo " <philo@privcy.not> wrote in message
    news:km3esl$7c3$...
    > On 05/04/2013 11:11 AM, RichA wrote:
    >> On May 4, 12:00 am, philo <philo@priv cy.not> wrote:
    >>> https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/181446_6179635...
    >>>
    >>> Taken this evening as Horror-O-Rama

    >>
    >> How much NR was dialed-in for the JPEG?
    >>

    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Hi ISO noise reduction was set to "high".
    >
    >
    > When I magnified the shot it still looked pretty good.
    >
    >
    > Of course of the 70 or so shots I took that night, I posted the best
    > one...
    > but even one one or two really decent shots out of 70 is not bad...
    > on a normal photo shoot I usually take 400 or more photos...but at the
    > Horror-O-Rama I was mainly there just to have a good time.
    >
    >

    That's still pretty good. I think it is very sharp for having a lot of
    noise reduction. I know it beats what I used to get out of my D200. ;-)
    Tim Conway, May 4, 2013
    #8
  9. philo 

    PeterN Guest

    On 5/4/2013 3:49 PM, Tim Conway wrote:
    > "philo " <philo@privcy.not> wrote in message
    > news:km3esl$7c3$...
    >> On 05/04/2013 11:11 AM, RichA wrote:
    >>> On May 4, 12:00 am, philo <philo@priv cy.not> wrote:
    >>>> https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/181446_6179635...
    >>>>
    >>>> Taken this evening as Horror-O-Rama
    >>>
    >>> How much NR was dialed-in for the JPEG?
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Hi ISO noise reduction was set to "high".
    >>
    >>
    >> When I magnified the shot it still looked pretty good.
    >>
    >>
    >> Of course of the 70 or so shots I took that night, I posted the best
    >> one...
    >> but even one one or two really decent shots out of 70 is not bad...
    >> on a normal photo shoot I usually take 400 or more photos...but at the
    >> Horror-O-Rama I was mainly there just to have a good time.
    >>
    >>

    > That's still pretty good. I think it is very sharp for having a lot of
    > noise reduction. I know it beats what I used to get out of my D200. ;-)
    >
    >


    Yup! Even the D300.

    --
    PeterN
    PeterN, May 4, 2013
    #9
  10. philo 

    philo  Guest

    On 05/04/2013 03:15 PM, PeterN wrote:
    > OX
    >>>
    >>> When I magnified the shot it still looked pretty good.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Of course of the 70 or so shots I took that night, I posted the best
    >>> one...
    >>> but even one one or two really decent shots out of 70 is not bad...
    >>> on a normal photo shoot I usually take 400 or more photos...but at the
    >>> Horror-O-Rama I was mainly there just to have a good time.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> That's still pretty good. I think it is very sharp for having a lot of
    >> noise reduction. I know it beats what I used to get out of my D200. ;-)
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Yup! Even the D300.
    >



    The G1-X is sure nice...but I am not going to be selling off my 50D
    philo , May 4, 2013
    #10
  11. philo 

    Tim Conway Guest

    "philo " <philo@privcy.not> wrote in message
    news:km3qq5$hsp$...
    > On 05/04/2013 03:15 PM, PeterN wrote:
    >> OX
    >>>>
    >>>> When I magnified the shot it still looked pretty good.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Of course of the 70 or so shots I took that night, I posted the best
    >>>> one...
    >>>> but even one one or two really decent shots out of 70 is not bad...
    >>>> on a normal photo shoot I usually take 400 or more photos...but at the
    >>>> Horror-O-Rama I was mainly there just to have a good time.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> That's still pretty good. I think it is very sharp for having a lot of
    >>> noise reduction. I know it beats what I used to get out of my D200.
    >>> ;-)
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Yup! Even the D300.
    >>

    >
    >
    > The G1-X is sure nice...but I am not going to be selling off my 50D
    >
    >

    One thing I would miss is the lack of telephoto lens capability. There
    isn't much add on capacity and for things like wildlife/birds it falls
    short. \

    But for street photography and an all around camera to take with me, I'm
    sold on it.

    Thanks for your input on it.

    Tim
    Tim Conway, May 4, 2013
    #11
  12. philo 

    RichA Guest

    On May 4, 1:04 pm, philo  <philo@priv cy.not> wrote:
    > On 05/04/2013 11:11 AM, RichA wrote:
    >
    > > On May 4, 12:00 am, philo  <philo@priv  cy.not> wrote:
    > >>https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/181446_6179635....

    >
    > >> Taken this evening as Horror-O-Rama

    >
    > > How much NR was dialed-in for the JPEG?

    >
    > Hi ISO noise reduction was set to "high".
    >
    > When I magnified the shot it still looked pretty good.
    >
    > Of course of the 70 or so shots I took that night, I posted the best one....
    > but even one one or two really decent shots out of 70 is not bad...
    > on a normal photo shoot I usually take 400 or more photos...but at the
    > Horror-O-Rama I was mainly there just to have a good time.


    The detail is fairly well-preserved considering. Lack of detail in
    the hair, etc., didn't really detract from the quality of the shot.
    Usually, the look of the NR is as important as whether or not it cuts
    down on detail. Early NR was pretty awful.
    RichA, May 4, 2013
    #12
  13. philo 

    philo  Guest

    On 05/04/2013 03:51 PM, Tim Conway wrote:
    > X
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Yup! Even the D300.
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >> The G1-X is sure nice...but I am not going to be selling off my 50D
    >>
    >>

    > One thing I would miss is the lack of telephoto lens capability. There
    > isn't much add on capacity and for things like wildlife/birds it falls
    > short. \
    >
    > But for street photography and an all around camera to take with me, I'm
    > sold on it.
    >
    > Thanks for your input on it.
    >
    > Tim
    >
    >





    Thanks for pointing it out to me.
    I found the lens is quite good at "zooming in".

    OTOH: Some day I'd like to get a telephoto lens for my 50D, but it will
    be a while before I'll be purchasing any more equipment.
    philo , May 4, 2013
    #13
  14. philo 

    philo  Guest

    On 05/04/2013 04:59 PM, RichA wrote:
    > On May 4, 1:04 pm, philo <philo@priv cy.not> wrote:
    >> On 05/04/2013 11:11 AM, RichA wrote:
    >>
    >>> On May 4, 12:00 am, philo <philo@priv cy.not> wrote:
    >>>> https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/181446_6179635...

    >>
    >>>> Taken this evening as Horror-O-Rama

    >>
    >>> How much NR was dialed-in for the JPEG?

    >>
    >> Hi ISO noise reduction was set to "high".
    >>
    >> When I magnified the shot it still looked pretty good.
    >>
    >> Of course of the 70 or so shots I took that night, I posted the best one...
    >> but even one one or two really decent shots out of 70 is not bad...
    >> on a normal photo shoot I usually take 400 or more photos...but at the
    >> Horror-O-Rama I was mainly there just to have a good time.

    >
    > The detail is fairly well-preserved considering. Lack of detail in
    > the hair, etc., didn't really detract from the quality of the shot.
    > Usually, the look of the NR is as important as whether or not it cuts
    > down on detail. Early NR was pretty awful.
    >




    This camera may actually do a better job than my 50D,
    OTOH: The low-level light photos I took with it , which I converted to
    B&W , printed and displayed, had very much the look of 35mm
    tri-X...which I really liked.

    One of my friends who has a well trained eye was surprised when I told
    him my prints were *not* 35mm!
    philo , May 4, 2013
    #14
  15. philo 

    PeterN Guest

    On 5/4/2013 4:28 PM, philo wrote:
    > On 05/04/2013 03:15 PM, PeterN wrote:
    >> OX
    >>>>
    >>>> When I magnified the shot it still looked pretty good.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Of course of the 70 or so shots I took that night, I posted the best
    >>>> one...
    >>>> but even one one or two really decent shots out of 70 is not bad...
    >>>> on a normal photo shoot I usually take 400 or more photos...but at the
    >>>> Horror-O-Rama I was mainly there just to have a good time.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> That's still pretty good. I think it is very sharp for having a lot of
    >>> noise reduction. I know it beats what I used to get out of my D200.
    >>> ;-)
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Yup! Even the D300.
    >>

    >
    >
    > The G1-X is sure nice...but I am not going to be selling off my 50D
    >


    I constantly use my D800 at 1600 ISO. I had am image in the SI at 25,600
    with no NR applied.
    <http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/148229151>


    --
    PeterN
    PeterN, May 5, 2013
    #15
  16. philo 

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 04 May 2013 15:28:06 -0500, philo  <philo@privcy.not> wrote:
    : On 05/04/2013 03:15 PM, PeterN wrote:
    : > OX
    : >>>
    : >>> When I magnified the shot it still looked pretty good.
    : >>>
    : >>>
    : >>> Of course of the 70 or so shots I took that night, I posted the best
    : >>> one...
    : >>> but even one one or two really decent shots out of 70 is not bad...
    : >>> on a normal photo shoot I usually take 400 or more photos...but at the
    : >>> Horror-O-Rama I was mainly there just to have a good time.
    : >>>
    : >>>
    : >> That's still pretty good. I think it is very sharp for having a lot of
    : >> noise reduction. I know it beats what I used to get out of my D200. ;-)
    : >>
    : >>
    : >
    : > Yup! Even the D300.
    : >
    :
    :
    : The G1-X is sure nice...but I am not going to be selling off my 50D

    Me neither. I got many fine pictures with my 50D. Its only significant
    drawback is its rather primitive (by today's standards) autofocus system. Now
    that I have a couple of 7D's, I don't use it much, but it's still the camera I
    leave at work in case something unexpected comes up.

    The 50D has autofocus microadjustment. The 60D doesn't. :^|

    Bob
    Robert Coe, May 5, 2013
    #16
  17. philo 

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 04 May 2013 20:18:52 -0400, PeterN <>
    wrote:
    : On 5/4/2013 4:28 PM, philo wrote:
    : > On 05/04/2013 03:15 PM, PeterN wrote:
    : >> OX
    : >>>>
    : >>>> When I magnified the shot it still looked pretty good.
    : >>>>
    : >>>>
    : >>>> Of course of the 70 or so shots I took that night, I posted the best
    : >>>> one...
    : >>>> but even one one or two really decent shots out of 70 is not bad...
    : >>>> on a normal photo shoot I usually take 400 or more photos...but at the
    : >>>> Horror-O-Rama I was mainly there just to have a good time.
    : >>>>
    : >>>>
    : >>> That's still pretty good. I think it is very sharp for having a lot of
    : >>> noise reduction. I know it beats what I used to get out of my D200.
    : >>> ;-)
    : >>>
    : >>>
    : >>
    : >> Yup! Even the D300.
    : >>
    : >
    : >
    : > The G1-X is sure nice...but I am not going to be selling off my 50D
    : >
    :
    : I constantly use my D800 at 1600 ISO. I had am image in the SI at 25,600
    : with no NR applied.
    : <http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/148229151>

    My wife is unafraid to use her T2i at 1600. Most current Canon DSLR sensors
    (like Nikon's) seem to have excellent low-light performance.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, May 5, 2013
    #17
  18. philo 

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Sat, 04 May 2013 20:18:52 -0400, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    >On 5/4/2013 4:28 PM, philo wrote:
    >> On 05/04/2013 03:15 PM, PeterN wrote:
    >>> OX
    >>>>>
    >>>>> When I magnified the shot it still looked pretty good.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Of course of the 70 or so shots I took that night, I posted the best
    >>>>> one...
    >>>>> but even one one or two really decent shots out of 70 is not bad...
    >>>>> on a normal photo shoot I usually take 400 or more photos...but at the
    >>>>> Horror-O-Rama I was mainly there just to have a good time.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> That's still pretty good. I think it is very sharp for having a lot of
    >>>> noise reduction. I know it beats what I used to get out of my D200.
    >>>> ;-)
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Yup! Even the D300.
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >> The G1-X is sure nice...but I am not going to be selling off my 50D
    >>

    >
    >I constantly use my D800 at 1600 ISO. I had am image in the SI at 25,600
    >with no NR applied.
    ><http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/148229151>


    That's a good shot, and good composition and subject matter. Other
    people have to use a "film grain" filter to get that look.

    It's just like HDR, though. You have to know when it looks good as it
    does here, and when it doesn't as it has in other images.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
    Tony Cooper, May 5, 2013
    #18
  19. philo 

    PeterN Guest

    On 5/4/2013 9:23 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2013-05-04 17:18:52 -0700, PeterN <> said:
    >
    >> On 5/4/2013 4:28 PM, philo wrote:
    >>> On 05/04/2013 03:15 PM, PeterN wrote:
    >>>> OX
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> When I magnified the shot it still looked pretty good.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Of course of the 70 or so shots I took that night, I posted the best
    >>>>>> one...
    >>>>>> but even one one or two really decent shots out of 70 is not bad...
    >>>>>> on a normal photo shoot I usually take 400 or more photos...but at
    >>>>>> the
    >>>>>> Horror-O-Rama I was mainly there just to have a good time.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> That's still pretty good. I think it is very sharp for having a
    >>>>> lot of
    >>>>> noise reduction. I know it beats what I used to get out of my D200.
    >>>>> ;-)
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Yup! Even the D300.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> The G1-X is sure nice...but I am not going to be selling off my 50D
    >>>

    >>
    >> I constantly use my D800 at 1600 ISO. I had am image in the SI at
    >> 25,600 with no NR applied.
    >> <http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/148229151>

    >
    > I remember that shot and another taken at the same time. I suspected
    > then as I do now, that shot is not a true representation of the
    > capability of the D800 at ISO 1600. Tell me if I am wrong, but I believe
    > that what we see as noise in your SI submission is a result of one of
    > your many sharpening techniques and the resulting artifacts.
    > I feel that my D300S would have been cleaner.
    > I have no objection to grain, but what I see is over cooked sharpening,
    > not high ISO noise or grain.
    >
    > This is another of those times I might enjoy seeing the NEF to see where
    > it leads.
    >


    ISO was 25,600, not 1500. I am not certain how much sharpening I did on
    that image. However, I will look for it as you requested. Right now I am
    reading this during commercials while watching the Hanoi Hilton

    --
    PeterN
    PeterN, May 5, 2013
    #19
  20. philo 

    philo  Guest

    On 05/04/2013 07:18 PM, PeterN wrote:
    >
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >> The G1-X is sure nice...but I am not going to be selling off my 50D
    >>

    >
    > I constantly use my D800 at 1600 ISO. I had am image in the SI at 25,600
    > with no NR applied.
    > <http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/148229151>
    >
    >




    That's the kind of shot I like!
    philo , May 5, 2013
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Guest

    test test test test test test test

    Guest, Jul 2, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    897
    halfalifer
    Jul 2, 2003
  2. Matt Arnold

    Simple Low Level Light Autofocus Assist (Fuji et al)

    Matt Arnold, Sep 23, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    386
    Ed Wurster
    Sep 24, 2003
  3. Mike O.

    How low is "low light"?

    Mike O., Jan 3, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    583
    Michael Meissner
    Jan 4, 2004
  4. ishtarbgl
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    516
    ishtarbgl
    Apr 1, 2004
  5. Brian
    Replies:
    31
    Views:
    1,102
    Bob Larter
    Jun 14, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page