How imporrtant is high ISO noise?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Freedom55, Apr 12, 2006.

  1. Freedom55

    Freedom55 Guest

    I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than
    other amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.

    Should that be a factor in my decision to buy? I know that the answer is
    it depends. For example I am not interested in action photography.

    Ron
    --
    And it really doesn't matter if
    I'm wrong I'm right
    Where I belong I'm right
    Where I belong.

    Lennon & McCartney
    Freedom55, Apr 12, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Freedom55

    Dan Guest

    Question is , are you going to shot in ISO 1600? And if you are is it
    going to the the type of photography that a little noise would make a
    difference. Plus there is only an option to use noise reduction
    software. Otherwise the E-500 looks like a top notch cam for it's price
    range and lenses it comes with. Plus looking into the future, the four
    thirds system is going to have a lot of lenses coming out for it with so
    many manufactures adopting it. So more lenses, more competition, lower
    prices.. :) It's all good.



    Freedom55 wrote:
    > I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    > particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    > reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than
    > other amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.
    >
    > Should that be a factor in my decision to buy? I know that the answer is
    > it depends. For example I am not interested in action photography.
    >
    > Ron
    Dan, Apr 12, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Freedom55

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    "Freedom55" <"joinertake this out"@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
    news:vd4%f.58718$...
    >I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    >particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    >reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than other
    >amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.
    >
    > Should that be a factor in my decision to buy? I know that the answer is
    > it depends. For example I am not interested in action photography.


    Do not underestimate the importance of low noise at high speeds! Nobody ever
    believed it was important until they had the chance to use it. Once you see
    the results, you're addicted. I was converted to a true believer after I
    shot a hockey game at 3200 and got better results than another shooter was
    getting at 800.

    Go for the lower noise option, you won't regret it. Also, it's not like
    there's a big downside to choosing the lower noise camera, is there?

    >
    > Ron
    > --
    > And it really doesn't matter if
    > I'm wrong I'm right
    > Where I belong I'm right
    > Where I belong.
    >
    > Lennon & McCartney
    Kinon O'Cann, Apr 12, 2006
    #3
  4. Freedom55

    Jem Raid Guest

    "Freedom55" <"joinertake this out"@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
    news:vd4%f.58718$...
    >I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    >particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    >reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than other
    >amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.
    >
    > Should that be a factor in my decision to buy? I know that the answer is
    > it depends. For example I am not interested in action photography.
    >
    > Ron
    > --
    > And it really doesn't matter if
    > I'm wrong I'm right
    > Where I belong I'm right
    > Where I belong.
    >
    > Lennon & McCartney


    Gritty prints are fine;

    I've just written an article for AlternativePhotography.com
    The proof version is here;
    http://www.jrbham.btinternet.co.uk/malin/index.html

    Jem



    -------------------------------------
    Birmingham Independent Photographers
    http://bip.wikispaces.com/
    Jem Raid, Apr 12, 2006
    #4
  5. Freedom55

    ant Guest

    Freedom55" <"joinertake this out wrote:
    > I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    > particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    > reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than
    > other amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.


    My new Panasonic FZ30's second name is "noise", apparently!
    For low light/low ISO.
    It did struggle in late afternoon during winter, taking action shots of a
    dog on snow; the snow was blue and the dog was dark and there was noise in
    its fur.... I'll have to fiddle and see if I can come up with better
    settings to fix that, but feel that much can be done with manual settings to
    help with the issue.


    --
    ant
    ant, Apr 12, 2006
    #5
  6. Freedom55

    remove Guest

    On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 10:00:59 GMT, Freedom55 <"joinertake this
    out"@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:

    >I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    >particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    >reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than
    >other amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.
    >
    >Should that be a factor in my decision to buy? I know that the answer is
    >it depends. For example I am not interested in action photography.
    >
    >Ron



    Ron,

    After looking and comparing photos for over 6 months, I chose to buy a
    Canon 30D. I've only shot about 100 "test" photos so far, but I'm
    blown away by the low noise levels at ISO 1600 and 3200. (the shots
    at 3200 look much better than the shots at 400 with a Minolts S404).

    One of my main concerns was being able to shoot indoors without flash,
    so if you want to use a camera under low light conditions without
    flash (see thread above about flash use), noise is a major issue.

    That being said, from what I have seen, the Rebel XT is almost as
    good as the 20D/30D if you can't stretch your budget that far.

    HTH
    Bill
    remove, Apr 12, 2006
    #6
  7. Freedom55

    Freedom55 Guest

    remove wrote:
    > On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 10:00:59 GMT, Freedom55 <"joinertake this
    > out"@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
    >
    >> I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    >> particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    >> reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than
    >> other amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.
    >>
    >> Should that be a factor in my decision to buy? I know that the answer is
    >> it depends. For example I am not interested in action photography.
    >>
    >> Ron

    >
    >
    > Ron,
    >
    > After looking and comparing photos for over 6 months, I chose to buy a
    > Canon 30D. I've only shot about 100 "test" photos so far, but I'm
    > blown away by the low noise levels at ISO 1600 and 3200. (the shots
    > at 3200 look much better than the shots at 400 with a Minolts S404).
    >
    > One of my main concerns was being able to shoot indoors without flash,
    > so if you want to use a camera under low light conditions without
    > flash (see thread above about flash use), noise is a major issue.
    >
    > That being said, from what I have seen, the Rebel XT is almost as
    > good as the 20D/30D if you can't stretch your budget that far.
    >
    > HTH
    > Bill

    Yes, I have seen the difference between the Rebel and the E-500 at 1600
    ISO (Steve's Digicams), and I'll be honest, I don't see a huge
    difference and 4X6 prints at 1600 ISO look acceptable to me.

    Ron

    --
    And it really doesn't matter if
    I'm wrong I'm right
    Where I belong I'm right
    Where I belong.

    Lennon & McCartney
    Freedom55, Apr 12, 2006
    #7
  8. Jem Raid bedacht in news::

    > "Freedom55" <"joinertake this out"@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
    > news:vd4%f.58718$...
    >>I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    >>particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    >>reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than
    >>other amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.
    >>
    >> Should that be a factor in my decision to buy? I know that the answer
    >> is it depends. For example I am not interested in action photography.
    >>
    >> Ron
    >> --
    >> And it really doesn't matter if
    >> I'm wrong I'm right
    >> Where I belong I'm right
    >> Where I belong.
    >>
    >> Lennon & McCartney

    >
    > Gritty prints are fine;
    >
    > I've just written an article for AlternativePhotography.com
    > The proof version is here;
    > http://www.jrbham.btinternet.co.uk/malin/index.html
    >
    > Jem
    >
    >
    >
    > -------------------------------------
    > Birmingham Independent Photographers
    > http://bip.wikispaces.com/
    >
    >


    But high ISO noise isn't about gritty prints. It's about losing detail in
    critical areas. And that's very annoying.

    JL
    Justus Lipsius, Apr 12, 2006
    #8
  9. Freedom55

    Shawn Hirn Guest

    In article <vd4%f.58718$>,
    Freedom55 <"joinertake this out"@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:

    > I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    > particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    > reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than
    > other amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.
    >
    > Should that be a factor in my decision to buy? I know that the answer is
    > it depends. For example I am not interested in action photography.


    This depends on you. What type of lighting do you expect to shoot in? If
    you expect to shoot photos in very low light without a flash on a
    regular basis, that issue is probably relevant. If your interest is
    shooting outdoor photos in daylight, then you're unlikely to ever need
    to shoot photos at 1600 ISO.
    Shawn Hirn, Apr 13, 2006
    #9
  10. Freedom55

    Rich Guest

    On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 10:00:59 GMT, Freedom55 <"joinertake this
    out"@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:

    >I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    >particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    >reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than
    >other amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.
    >
    >Should that be a factor in my decision to buy? I know that the answer is
    >it depends. For example I am not interested in action photography.
    >
    >Ron


    It is SO important that it is impossible to take a photo with a camera
    with any noise without suffering extreme mental anguish. Also, NO
    picture is EVER taken below 1600 ISO so you MUST have an absolutely
    noise-free camera!
    Rich, Apr 13, 2006
    #10
  11. Freedom55

    Dave Cohen Guest

    "Rich" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 10:00:59 GMT, Freedom55 <"joinertake this
    > out"@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
    >
    >>I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    >>particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    >>reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than
    >>other amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.
    >>
    >>Should that be a factor in my decision to buy? I know that the answer is
    >>it depends. For example I am not interested in action photography.
    >>
    >>Ron

    >
    > It is SO important that it is impossible to take a photo with a camera
    > with any noise without suffering extreme mental anguish. Also, NO
    > picture is EVER taken below 1600 ISO so you MUST have an absolutely
    > noise-free camera!


    I assume Rich is adding a little humor. This is not meant to be the same,
    but I've looked at pics which are supposedly showing noise and to me they
    look fine. Of course I can see it when extreme, but I guess I'm just not
    that critical.
    Dave Cohen
    Dave Cohen, Apr 13, 2006
    #11
  12. "Dave Cohen" <> wrote:
    > "Rich" <> wrote:
    >> "joinertake this out"@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
    >>
    >>>I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    >>>particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    >>>reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than
    >>>other amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.
    >>>
    >>>Should that be a factor in my decision to buy? I know that the answer is
    >>>it depends. For example I am not interested in action photography.

    >>
    >> It is SO important that it is impossible to take a photo with a camera
    >> with any noise without suffering extreme mental anguish. Also, NO
    >> picture is EVER taken below 1600 ISO so you MUST have an absolutely
    >> noise-free camera!

    >
    > I assume Rich is adding a little humor. This is not meant to be the same,
    > but I've looked at pics which are supposedly showing noise and to me they
    > look fine. Of course I can see it when extreme, but I guess I'm just not
    > that critical.


    If you are printing at 8x10, the noise levels in most P&S dcams at higher
    ISOs will be problematic; at least in the sense that the same shot with a
    D50 or 350D would look a lot better.

    Since just having an image is often more important than how it looks
    (especially if all you are printing is 4x6), one could argue that it doesn't
    matter. But a D50 + 50/1.4 at ISO 1600 will make a nice 8x10 from situations
    you wouldn't even get an image with a P&S.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Apr 13, 2006
    #12
  13. Freedom55

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Kinon O'Cann wrote:
    > "Freedom55" <"joinertake this out"@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
    > news:vd4%f.58718$...
    >> I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    >> particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    >> reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than other
    >> amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.
    >>
    >> Should that be a factor in my decision to buy? I know that the answer is
    >> it depends. For example I am not interested in action photography.

    >
    > Do not underestimate the importance of low noise at high speeds! Nobody ever
    > believed it was important until they had the chance to use it. Once you see
    > the results, you're addicted. I was converted to a true believer after I
    > shot a hockey game at 3200 and got better results than another shooter was
    > getting at 800.
    >
    > Go for the lower noise option, you won't regret it. Also, it's not like
    > there's a big downside to choosing the lower noise camera, is there?
    >
    >> Ron
    >> --
    >> And it really doesn't matter if
    >> I'm wrong I'm right
    >> Where I belong I'm right
    >> Where I belong.
    >>
    >> Lennon & McCartney

    >
    >

    Of course there is. COST. A camera that can shoot at 1600 or faster
    and still have low noise is quite a bit more expensive than one that
    shoots at only 200 with low noise. And, certainly, low noise at higher
    ISO is a desirable feature, if a costly one.
    Ron Hunter, Apr 13, 2006
    #13
  14. Freedom55

    Ron Hunter Guest

    ant wrote:
    > Freedom55" <"joinertake this out wrote:
    >> I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    >> particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    >> reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than
    >> other amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.

    >
    > My new Panasonic FZ30's second name is "noise", apparently!
    > For low light/low ISO.
    > It did struggle in late afternoon during winter, taking action shots of a
    > dog on snow; the snow was blue and the dog was dark and there was noise in
    > its fur.... I'll have to fiddle and see if I can come up with better
    > settings to fix that, but feel that much can be done with manual settings to
    > help with the issue.
    >
    >

    Snow causes some real problems for auto settings, since the bright snow
    blasts the sensor making the settings challenging for the firmware. On
    the other hand, even with manual settings, to get the dog exposed
    correctly, you will probably find that the snow is 'blown out'. There
    are some things that technology isn't able to overcome, yet.
    Ron Hunter, Apr 13, 2006
    #14
  15. "Ron Hunter" <> wrote:
    > ant wrote:
    >> Freedom55" <"joinertake this out wrote:
    >>> I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    >>> particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    >>> reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than
    >>> other amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.

    >>
    >> My new Panasonic FZ30's second name is "noise", apparently!
    >> For low light/low ISO.
    >> It did struggle in late afternoon during winter, taking action shots of a
    >> dog on snow; the snow was blue and the dog was dark and there was noise
    >> in its fur.... I'll have to fiddle and see if I can come up with better
    >> settings to fix that, but feel that much can be done with manual settings
    >> to help with the issue.
    >>

    > Snow causes some real problems for auto settings, since the bright snow
    > blasts the sensor making the settings challenging for the firmware. On
    > the other hand, even with manual settings, to get the dog exposed
    > correctly, you will probably find that the snow is 'blown out'. There are
    > some things that technology isn't able to overcome, yet.


    This is one problem that technology can overcome. The better dSLRs have much
    lower shadow noise at lowest ISO than the consumer dcams, so if you need to
    "rescue the shadows" using curves (or a "fill light" slider), you do a lot
    better with a dSLR. The Fuji S3 is the best here (it uses two sensors at
    every pixel), with the Canon 1Dmk2 and 5D coming in second. The Sony-sensor
    dSLRs are a tad behind the other Canons in this areas, but still way ahead
    of the consumer dcams.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Apr 13, 2006
    #15
  16. Freedom55

    Guest

    Justus Lipsius wrote:
    > But high ISO noise isn't about gritty prints. It's about losing detail in
    > critical areas. And that's very annoying.


    Imho, there are two issues apart in this topic :
    1 Gritty appearance of noisy images : some can like it (the pathology
    might be related to past unrestrained use of pushed TriXPan or HP5?),
    and the others can use a de-noising software (Noise Ninja, Neat Image,
    etc.).
    2 Loss of information due to noise : with high levels of noise, the
    sharpness can be "diluted" in noise (to be more exact, it decreases the
    MTF value at mid and high frequencies, but without making it null).
    That problem is much less resolved by de-noising software : once detail
    is diluted enough, it is very hard to bring it back (ie to distinguish
    good detail from evil noise).

    Of course these two problems appear mainly in big prints, where detail
    at pixel level is needed!
    The former problem is not a big issue in 10x15cm (oh, sorry, 4x6" if
    you count on your fingers ;o) prints, and the latter is definitely not
    until A4 (8x12") prints.
    , Apr 13, 2006
    #16
  17. David J. Littleboy wrote:

    > This is one problem that technology can overcome. The better dSLRs have much
    > lower shadow noise at lowest ISO than the consumer dcams, so if you need to
    > "rescue the shadows" using curves (or a "fill light" slider), you do a lot
    > better with a dSLR. The Fuji S3 is the best here (it uses two sensors at
    > every pixel), with the Canon 1Dmk2 and 5D coming in second. The Sony-sensor
    > dSLRs are a tad behind the other Canons in this areas, but still way ahead
    > of the consumer dcams.


    David,
    do you know of some actual evidence of the dynamic range
    and noise floor of the S3?

    The problem of noise comparisons between cameras, is that
    unless the analysis is done on the raw data (before raw
    conversion), the noise statistics are biased. Raw converters
    average pixels (the RGB pixels) and sacrifice spatial
    resolution to reduce noise. The is very obvious in
    some side-by-side comparisons on dpreview. For example,
    look at the Nikon DSLRs versus the canon DSLRs as iso
    is increased. The Nikons appear to do more smoothing
    than the Canons at high iso. The Canons do this too,
    and analysis of the true raw data shows that to be the case.

    We need to know the full well and read noise of the
    S3 to really know its performance. Here is the data for
    the 1D Mark II (see table 1):
    http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/evaluation-1d2

    Then, this page has summaries of corresponding data
    for many cameras (see tables 1-4):
    http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.signal.to.noise

    (I'll add Nikon D50 data soon; I just did an analysis
    of a D50 camera. The best read noise is 7.5 electrons
    at ISO 800 and the full well at ISO 200 is 30,500
    electrons).

    Roger
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Apr 13, 2006
    #17
  18. Freedom55

    J. Clarke Guest

    David J. Littleboy wrote:

    >
    > "Ron Hunter" <> wrote:
    >> ant wrote:
    >>> Freedom55" <"joinertake this out wrote:
    >>>> I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    >>>> particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    >>>> reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than
    >>>> other amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.
    >>>
    >>> My new Panasonic FZ30's second name is "noise", apparently!
    >>> For low light/low ISO.
    >>> It did struggle in late afternoon during winter, taking action shots of
    >>> a dog on snow; the snow was blue and the dog was dark and there was
    >>> noise in its fur.... I'll have to fiddle and see if I can come up with
    >>> better settings to fix that, but feel that much can be done with manual
    >>> settings to help with the issue.
    >>>

    >> Snow causes some real problems for auto settings, since the bright snow
    >> blasts the sensor making the settings challenging for the firmware. On
    >> the other hand, even with manual settings, to get the dog exposed
    >> correctly, you will probably find that the snow is 'blown out'. There
    >> are some things that technology isn't able to overcome, yet.

    >
    > This is one problem that technology can overcome. The better dSLRs have
    > much lower shadow noise at lowest ISO than the consumer dcams, so if you
    > need to "rescue the shadows" using curves (or a "fill light" slider), you
    > do a lot better with a dSLR. The Fuji S3 is the best here (it uses two
    > sensors at every pixel), with the Canon 1Dmk2 and 5D coming in second. The
    > Sony-sensor dSLRs are a tad behind the other Canons in this areas, but
    > still way ahead of the consumer dcams.


    The big problem with snow is that the exposure meter tries to make it gray.
    Use the spot meter if the camera has one and meter on the suject, not the
    background, and snow images generally work out better, but some adjustment
    of the EV or the use of manual settings and experimentation may still be
    needed.

    Anybody who has to deal with snow would do well IMO to read a good book on
    the zone system--Ansel Adams' original books appear to be out of print but
    there are others available--haven't read any but Adams so can't comment on
    how good any of them are.

    Even if you don't use the full zone system knowing how it works can help
    deal with such situations.

    The only "technological" solution to snow would be to extend the latitude
    range far beyond what it is now or create a _really_ smart meter that
    understands that it is looking at a snow scene.

    Some "point and shoots" have a "snow mode" preset available that can be
    helfpul if one doesn't want to take the time to really understand the
    problem.

    > David J. Littleboy
    > Tokyo, Japan


    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
    J. Clarke, Apr 13, 2006
    #18
  19. Freedom55

    SMS Guest

    Freedom55 wrote:
    > I am looking at a couple of amateur DSLRs (Rebel XT, D70, D50) and
    > particularly like the Olympus E-500, especially the 2 lens kit. Every
    > reviewer I read comments that noise is evident (or somewhat more than
    > other amateur DSLRs) at 1600 ISO with the E-500.
    >
    > Should that be a factor in my decision to buy? I know that the answer is
    > it depends. For example I am not interested in action photography.


    Noise will generally be higher in small sensor cameras. You need to
    decide if you care about using higher ISO settings, or if you can deal
    with the noisier results.

    The E-500 with the two lens kit is a very good deal. As long as you know
    the drawbacks of the E-500, including, but not limited to noise, and can
    live with them, go for it.
    SMS, Apr 13, 2006
    #19
  20. "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <> wrote:
    >
    > David,
    > do you know of some actual evidence of the dynamic range
    > and noise floor of the S3?


    No, but I've seen a couple of examples that had my jaw on the floor. (I
    wonder, however, if there are problems combining the two values. For
    example, are there any "holes" in the range???)

    > The problem of noise comparisons between cameras, is that
    > unless the analysis is done on the raw data (before raw
    > conversion), the noise statistics are biased. Raw converters
    > average pixels (the RGB pixels) and sacrifice spatial
    > resolution to reduce noise. The is very obvious in
    > some side-by-side comparisons on dpreview. For example,
    > look at the Nikon DSLRs versus the canon DSLRs as iso
    > is increased. The Nikons appear to do more smoothing
    > than the Canons at high iso. The Canons do this too,
    > and analysis of the true raw data shows that to be the case.


    Yep. It's hard. But if you read between the lines, you can figure out what's
    going on.

    It would be nice if someone figured out how to test this, but even Imatest
    seems to be getting it wrong. Sigh.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Apr 13, 2006
    #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. just44

    kodak 14n noise at high iso

    just44, Mar 5, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    294
  2. Winston

    Canon 20D noise reduction at high ISO's

    Winston, Feb 17, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    528
    Kevin McMurtrie
    Feb 22, 2005
  3. Larry R Harrison Jr

    D70 ISO 200 Noise vs EOS 300D ISO 100

    Larry R Harrison Jr, Jul 17, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    410
  4. Cynicor

    ISO noise vs. long exposure noise

    Cynicor, Aug 27, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    503
    Dirty Harry
    Aug 27, 2005
  5. David Harper

    High ISO noise

    David Harper, Oct 17, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    59
    Views:
    1,556
    Eric Stevens
    Sep 5, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page