ISO & Noise

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Ed Mullikin, Oct 26, 2004.

  1. Ed Mullikin

    Ed Mullikin Guest

    I have an 8 meg Sony DSC-F828 which has 5 ISO settings from a max of 800
    down to 64. I took identical shots, view wise, of fall scenes late this
    afternoon using a different ISO for each. I put them on the computer. I
    (obviously an amateur) can't really see any significant differences. I am
    going to India in a couple of weeks and want to get as familiar as possible
    with potential pitfalls before I screw up my photos. Would someone please
    enlighten me as to just what scenes are the most susceptible to this noise
    problem?
     
    Ed Mullikin, Oct 26, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Ed Mullikin

    David Hardin Guest

    Look in areas of uniform color, like a blue sky or a black or dark green
    background. Noise will show up as different colored pixels.


    "Ed Mullikin" <> wrote in message
    news:GThfd.119386$Lo6.94596@fed1read03...
    >I have an 8 meg Sony DSC-F828 which has 5 ISO settings from a max of 800
    > down to 64. I took identical shots, view wise, of fall scenes late this
    > afternoon using a different ISO for each. I put them on the computer. I
    > (obviously an amateur) can't really see any significant differences. I am
    > going to India in a couple of weeks and want to get as familiar as
    > possible
    > with potential pitfalls before I screw up my photos. Would someone please
    > enlighten me as to just what scenes are the most susceptible to this noise
    > problem?
    >
    >
     
    David Hardin, Oct 26, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Ed Mullikin

    Ed Mullikin Guest

    Thank you! For any action shots that I'll be taking I can use the higher
    ISO's without too much degradation.

    "David Hardin" <> wrote in message
    news:E3ifd.10967$...
    > Look in areas of uniform color, like a blue sky or a black or dark green
    > background. Noise will show up as different colored pixels.
    >
    >
    > "Ed Mullikin" <> wrote in message
    > news:GThfd.119386$Lo6.94596@fed1read03...
    > >I have an 8 meg Sony DSC-F828 which has 5 ISO settings from a max of 800
    > > down to 64. I took identical shots, view wise, of fall scenes late this
    > > afternoon using a different ISO for each. I put them on the computer.

    I
    > > (obviously an amateur) can't really see any significant differences. I

    am
    > > going to India in a couple of weeks and want to get as familiar as
    > > possible
    > > with potential pitfalls before I screw up my photos. Would someone

    please
    > > enlighten me as to just what scenes are the most susceptible to this

    noise
    > > problem?
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Ed Mullikin, Oct 26, 2004
    #3
  4. Ed Mullikin

    andre Guest

    Ed Mullikin wrote:
    > Thank you! For any action shots that I'll be taking I can use the higher
    > ISO's without too much degradation.
    >
    > "David Hardin" <> wrote in message
    > news:E3ifd.10967$...
    >
    >>Look in areas of uniform color, like a blue sky or a black or dark green
    >>background. Noise will show up as different colored pixels.
    >>
    >>
    >>"Ed Mullikin" <> wrote in message
    >>news:GThfd.119386$Lo6.94596@fed1read03...
    >>
    >>>I have an 8 meg Sony DSC-F828 which has 5 ISO settings from a max of 800
    >>>down to 64. I took identical shots, view wise, of fall scenes late this
    >>>afternoon using a different ISO for each. I put them on the computer.

    >
    > I
    >
    >>>(obviously an amateur) can't really see any significant differences. I

    >
    > am
    >
    >>>going to India in a couple of weeks and want to get as familiar as
    >>>possible
    >>>with potential pitfalls before I screw up my photos. Would someone

    >
    > please
    >
    >>>enlighten me as to just what scenes are the most susceptible to this

    >
    > noise
    >
    >>>problem?
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    >

    Always view the images at full resolution (100% zoom factor) to judge
    the quality. Look for the noise in uniform dark areas (road, shadows).


    Andre

    --
    ----------------------------------
    http://www.aguntherphotography.com
     
    andre, Oct 26, 2004
    #4
  5. Ed Mullikin

    Ed Ruf Guest

    On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:37:42 -0400, in rec.photo.digital "Ed Mullikin"
    <> wrote:

    >I have an 8 meg Sony DSC-F828 which has 5 ISO settings from a max of 800
    >down to 64. I took identical shots, view wise, of fall scenes late this
    >afternoon using a different ISO for each. I put them on the computer. I
    >(obviously an amateur) can't really see any significant differences. I am
    >going to India in a couple of weeks and want to get as familiar as possible
    >with potential pitfalls before I screw up my photos. Would someone please
    >enlighten me as to just what scenes are the most susceptible to this noise
    >problem?
    >


    Low light situations and dark uniform areas are most susceptible/noticable.
    View at 100%. It's there and is obvious, unless you are using the in camera
    Noise Reduction feature, which will take another dark frame at the same
    settings and subtract it front the first before storing. Look for
    speckling. I prefer using software based solutions such as Neat Image or
    Noise Ninja where you the user can control the noise reduction process and
    you are not saddled with the extra time required to take the second shot
    and combine.
    ________________________________________________________
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    http://EdwardGRuf.com
     
    Ed Ruf, Oct 26, 2004
    #5
  6. Ed Mullikin

    Gadgets Guest

    Try lifting the levels on the shots - high ISO won't be so forgiving and the
    noise in the shadows will be more evident. ie mung a few exposures at high
    ISO and you'll get noise. The lighter areas will be clean though. You might
    also find that contrast and colour saturation drops off a bit at the higher
    speeds too...

    Cheers, Jason (remove ... to reply)
    Video & Gaming: http://gadgetaus.com
     
    Gadgets, Oct 26, 2004
    #6
  7. Ed Mullikin

    bmoag Guest

    I have done this experiment with the 828 using a variety of subjects,
    because after reading some of the (utterly misguided) reviews of the camera
    I thought I was missing something.
    If you shoot a subject in modest to low available light at various ISO
    settings you cannot help but see the noise artifacts at higher ISO. They can
    be awful. This however has been my experience with every digital sensor
    pushed to the max.
    However if you are outdoors in bright and contrasty light with a busy
    subject the noise is not so obvious and may not be an issue at all. High
    speed film is no different in this regard.
    Clearly if you want the best image quality stay with ISO 200 or below: the
    camera always tries to default to a lower ISO in automatic modes for this
    reason. As do all digital cameras.
    If you are anticipating trying to capture fast action you must use the
    camera in manual or shutter pref and manual focus in order to minimize
    shutter lag.
    I would suggest you practice focusing manually using the evf in bright sun.
    The LCD panel image always looks sharp and you cannot trust it to check
    focus accuracy of a picture you have taken. For me the limits of the EVF and
    LCD for focusing are the biggest problem in this class of cameras. They are
    just not as accurate as an SLR or dSLR using a mirror/focusing screen/prism.
    It can be difficult to track an object in bright sunlight through the EVF.
    I would suggest also you understand how to use the burst mode: it is not
    intuitive (nor is anything really on digital cameras).
    I have taken this camera into unusual places and my only regret was not
    having enough storage cards. The image results are outstanding and the
    battery life seems phenomenal.
    You may want to consider getting a Sony flash (if you do stick to using it
    with program modes at first)because the built in flash may be too anemic for
    larger spaces.
    Enjoy your trip.
     
    bmoag, Oct 26, 2004
    #7
  8. > I am
    >going to India in a couple of weeks and want to get as familiar as possible
    >with potential pitfalls before I screw up my photos.


    simple:
    stay far away from funeral fires,
    but do make sure to get upclose shots of men who burn their wifes 'cause the
    dinner aint cooked,
    bring back some shots of people defecating on the streets, killing their female
    babies, and making $2/hr doing IT while their American counterparts collect
    unemployment.

    PS: India is the only nation in the world which still has the bubonic plague.
     
    Developwebsites, Oct 26, 2004
    #8
  9. "Ed Mullikin" <> wrote in message
    news:GThfd.119386$Lo6.94596@fed1read03...
    >I have an 8 meg Sony DSC-F828 which has 5 ISO settings from a max of 800
    > down to 64. I took identical shots, view wise, of fall scenes late this
    > afternoon using a different ISO for each. I put them on the computer. I
    > (obviously an amateur) can't really see any significant differences. I am
    > going to India in a couple of weeks and want to get as familiar as
    > possible
    > with potential pitfalls before I screw up my photos. Would someone please
    > enlighten me as to just what scenes are the most susceptible to this noise
    > problem?
    >

    The problem will show up in dim light, when a camera set to a low ISO has to
    use a long exposure.
     
    Marvin Margoshes, Oct 26, 2004
    #9
  10. ATSPAM (Developwebsites) writes:

    > PS: India is the only nation in the world which still has the
    > bubonic plague.


    Not true, it exists in much of the western US desert. Transmission to
    humans is relatively rare, but a dozen cases a year are reported. The
    last human epidemic in the US was in Los Angeles in 1924, hardly
    ancient history.

    The Centers for Disease Control has a map of animal and human
    occurrences on their page at
    <http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/plague/>. It shows occurrences in
    much of Asia, the US, South America, and Africa.
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
    Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Oct 26, 2004
    #10
  11. Ed Mullikin

    Ken Tough Guest

    Apparently Developwebsites <> wrote:
    >> I am
    >>going to India in a couple of weeks and want to get as familiar as possible
    >>with potential pitfalls before I screw up my photos.

    >
    >simple:
    >stay far away from funeral fires,
    >but do make sure to get upclose shots of men who burn their wifes 'cause the
    >dinner aint cooked,
    >bring back some shots of people defecating on the streets, killing their female
    >babies, and making $2/hr doing IT while their American counterparts collect
    >unemployment.
    >
    >PS: India is the only nation in the world which still has the bubonic plague.


    Bullshit.

    http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/plague/trainingmodule/1/09.asp
    Plague Lesson 1
    Incidence in the United States

    - Since 1900, plague has been endemic in the U.S.
    - Between 1970 and 2003, 2% of plague has been pneumonic, 83% has been
    bubonic and 15% has been septicemic.
    - Approximately 5 to 15 cases occur each year in the U.S. The greatest
    concentration occurs in Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico. But human
    cases have occurred in rural areas from the Pacific coastal region
    eastward to the Great Plains states.
    - Between 1970 and 2003, case numbers have ranged between 1 and 40
    cases each year in the U.S. Peak occurrence is between April and
    November.

    And we should believe anything else you wrote, why exactly?

    --
    Ken Tough
     
    Ken Tough, Oct 26, 2004
    #11
  12. Ed Mullikin

    Sabineellen Guest

    >
    >>PS: India is the only nation in the world which still has the bubonic

    >plague.
    >
    >Bullshit.



    It doesn't really count that a disease is endemic in the US or other parts of
    the world. Endemic is no big deal; all it takes is a case or two a year for a
    disease to be considered endemic. He probably means that India is the only
    nation in the world that still gets *epidemics* of bubonic plague, the last
    massive one being in the mid-nineties as an example. Well, it makes sense; they
    worship *rats* in some areas of India, seriously.

    "Twenty thousand rats inhabit and are woshipped in northwestern India's Karni
    Mata Temple... Thousands of rats dine with people and scamper over their feet."
    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/06/0628_040628_tvrats.html

    It is also a nation where tens of millions - 30 million in 2001 for example -
    converge in a religious ceremony to communally bathe an unbelievably filthy
    waters, the Ganges, to which innumerable amounts of "untreated sewage" had been
    pumped. They do this apparently because they believe "this river is life,
    purity, and a goddess to the people of India", and in rememberance of a certain
    mythical story. A BBC reporter said about his visit to the Ganges: "as I walk
    towards the river bank I am hit by the smell. It is a rotten sour stink coming
    up from the water - water that is just black in colour", and that's even
    without the 30 million shedding off their dirt at once.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2860565.stm

    India is a human catastrophy. More catastrophic even is the attitude of many
    who would prefer to indulge in the fashionable vogue of being
    "culturally-sensitive" and label the others who'd point to a real thing as
    ignorant. That, I believe, is original ignorance.
     
    Sabineellen, Oct 26, 2004
    #12
  13. Ed Mullikin

    Ross Guest

    If you cannot see the difference between the five photos try zooming in on
    the same area and at the same magnification.

    I suggest you try an area of blue sky first and then experiment with
    different combinations of coloured areas.

    If you still cannot see the difference then we'll have to call you lucky
    Eddy. You got a "perfect" camera.

    Ross

    "Ed Mullikin" <> wrote in message
    news:GThfd.119386$Lo6.94596@fed1read03...
    >I have an 8 meg Sony DSC-F828 which has 5 ISO settings from a max of 800
    > down to 64. I took identical shots, view wise, of fall scenes late this
    > afternoon using a different ISO for each. I put them on the computer. I
    > (obviously an amateur) can't really see any significant differences. I am
    > going to India in a couple of weeks and want to get as familiar as
    > possible
    > with potential pitfalls before I screw up my photos. Would someone please
    > enlighten me as to just what scenes are the most susceptible to this noise
    > problem?
    >
    >
     
    Ross, Oct 27, 2004
    #13
    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. Brian C. Baird

    Canon 1Ds Mark II - Noise? What noise?

    Brian C. Baird, Sep 21, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    520
    Brian C. Baird
    Sep 21, 2004
  2. Jason Sommers
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    525
    Jason Sommers
    Jan 19, 2005
  3. Stacey

    Noise about noise...

    Stacey, Feb 16, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    395
    Stacey
    Feb 18, 2005
  4. 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:
    433
  5. Cynicor

    ISO noise vs. long exposure noise

    Cynicor, Aug 27, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    537
    Dirty Harry
    Aug 27, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page