D70 ISO 200 Noise vs EOS 300D ISO 100

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Larry R Harrison Jr, Jul 17, 2005.

  1. I am most definitely NOT trying to start any flame wars, or any comments of
    "you D70 owners really are stuck with a sucky noise-filled camera" or ones
    like "you Digital Rebel owners think your images look better but they're
    overprocessed."

    You know, THAT type of stuff.

    I have the 300D and have been happy with its images. However I am more of a
    Nikonian at heart and have been wanting to get the D70 which I really wanted
    last year but ended up with the 300D due to its smaller price.

    No regrets, but I had meant to go with the D70 without even thinking about
    anything else.

    Thing is, I'm kind of obsessing over this ISO 100 thing. I am one of those
    that, in my film days, would shoot the slowest thing I could get--Fuji
    Velvia 50 was the most frequent, I'd shot with 25 if they had sold it.
    That's just how I am.

    So here I am, kind of preoccuped with the 300D's ISO 100 vs the D70's 200.
    But from all readings I've done over the range overall they do well--heck,
    the D70 is probably better in terms of being more "monochromatic." And you
    can remove it better later-on with Neat Image or whatever.

    Plus, according to Dpreview.Com's review, the D70 tends to resolve a bit
    more detail and have less sharpening "halos" than the 300D, and tends to be
    more neutral (some say "dull") with its colours--so when you add it all up,
    it's really about equal image quality-wise anyway.

    Features/performance wise, it's not even freaking close.

    So why am I so preoccupied with the ISO 100 thing? You D70 owners, how many
    of you have shot night-time or shadow-filled shots, how did you notice its
    noise to be especially at ISO 100? Is it common for D70 owners to use Neat
    Image even at ISO 200 to clean things up a bit?

    Tips? Sorry for the bothersome posts if they are that.

    LRH
     
    Larry R Harrison Jr, Jul 17, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Actually, I think it would do me good to take the equipment I have--which is
    nice, heck, how long ago did we wet ourselves over the prospect of owning a
    respectable D-SLR, I've got it in the bag--anyway, take it, and take some
    new shots for inspiration. Quit going back & forth about "do I want to do
    D70, do I want to stay, blah blah."

    LRH
     
    Larry R Harrison Jr, Jul 17, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Exactly. Like Frank Zappa said: "Shut up and shoot your camera"...

    (FWIW, the instant on, spot meter, screen grid, and faster CF card
    read/writes do make the D70 attractive, but those come at the expense of the
    amazing low-noise ISO 100 (even 5 stops underexposed, the 300D still holds
    quite a bit of shadow detail at ISO 100*) and less Moire.)

    *: http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/45495842/original

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Jul 17, 2005
    #3
  4. Larry R Harrison Jr

    Andy Dee Guest

    Its probably the same CCD device in each anyway.
    The extra noise in amplifiying 100-200 ISO is not going to be noticeable.

    A
     
    Andy Dee, Jul 17, 2005
    #4
  5. No. Canon makes their own CMOS sensors. Everyone else uses Sony CCDs.
    (Except the pro Nikons and the medium format digital cameras and backs. But
    we weren't talking about those.)
    The reviews show the noise at ISO 200 being a lot higher than the 300D at
    ISO 100. IMHO, it's real nice to have the five stops of shadow detail I show
    in that test. For most purposes, ISO 400 in either camera will make gorgeous
    A4 prints. But if you need to rescue shadows or handle extreme contrast
    ranges, you'll need the dynamic range.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Jul 17, 2005
    #5
  6. Larry R Harrison Jr

    Dimitris M Guest

    You D70 owners, how many
    No, never in a photo that is from the shoot well lighted with no extreme
    dark areas.

    I don't use noise reduction in the PS process, even in ISO 400 if the photo
    has balanced light. But even in ISO 200, if I have very dark underexposed
    areas that I equalise later with levels or shadow/highlight or curves, then
    if I lighten up those areas by more than 2 EV (aprox) then the noise may be
    visible in big prints. In that case I may use some noise reduction filter (I
    use the Kodak PS plug-in).

    Anyway, even if I had a Canon, I believe that I will prefer to set (if
    possible) the lowest ISO to 200. The gain in versatility is big. From that I
    have read, I have the impression that there may be not any significant gain
    in shadow depth detail. I had a Canon 20D for a day from a friend and in jpg
    I have not seen any visible improvement from the photos takes with ISO 100
    over those with 200. But of course it was a thoughtless "test".
     
    Dimitris M, Jul 17, 2005
    #6
  7. Larry R Harrison Jr

    JPS Guest

    In message <[email protected]>,
    The 300D and the D70 have basically the same relative color channel
    sensitivities, so if there is any major difference in the saturation of
    noise, it is probably due to firmware or converter software. They both
    record white light as a cyan-ish green, and need significant color
    balancing, even for white light. I've heard that D70 RAW files use a
    lossy compression; perhaps it loses some pixel-to-pixel color in the
    process; may be done intentionally to combat color moire.
    The D70 is known to have a weak AA filter, and is subject to moire
    moreso than the 300D. Aliased images sharpen with less sharpening
    power, and therefore do not halo as much. Aliased images tend to look
    less natural, though, and have a snap-to grid effect for contrasty
    detail.
    I'd say stop focusing on the stated ISO numbers, and find out what the
    cameras are *really* doing. The stated ISOs can be total nonsense.
    Take both cameras, set them to ISO 200, and put the same lens on both
    cameras, and take manual exposures of a white wall with the same
    settings. Then, look directly at the RAW data. How much headroom is in
    each channel? *That* is how you really compare cameras. That is also
    how you compare them for noise, and shadow quality. Same manual ISO,
    f-stop, and shutter speed.

    --
     
    JPS, Jul 17, 2005
    #7
  8. Larry R Harrison Jr

    JPS Guest

    In message <[email protected]>,
    I haven't gotten around to explicitly test this, but my impression is
    that ISO 200 definitely has more noise than ISO 100 on both my 10D and
    20D, but it is a "good" level of noise that breaks up (dithers)
    posterization. By the time you get to ISO 800, however, the shadow
    details are definitely suffering more than benefiting from noise.

    Of course, if the sensor were digitized at more than 12 bits, 100 would
    have much better shadows.

    Also, at ISO 200, you also are a stop further away from the blooming
    point for specular highlights.

    I only use ISO 100 in test situations, or where I want longer shutter
    speeds or wider apertures than ISO 200 can provide.

    Why don't I just get it over with and test the shadows now ...

    This is ISO 100 through 800 on the 20D, in the following order:

    100 200
    400 800

    http://www.pbase.com/jps_photo/image/46313779

    All are under-exposed and pushed 4 stops in ACR, so they are pushed to
    Eis of 1600, 3200, 6400, and 12,800 with a nominal 8 bits of linear
    capture.

    The 100 and 200 each have things about them I like, 400 and 800 show
    their limitations more clearly; 800 is much more drastic.

    --
     
    JPS, Jul 17, 2005
    #8
  9. Larry R Harrison Jr

    GTO Guest

    Don't you want to look at the 350D? Why bother with the 300D? If you do not
    "need" to buy Nikon, the Canon 350D seems to be the best choice for a
    smaller budget. Especially since you can do real macro with the 350D at 1/60
    to 1/2, which you can't with the D70(s) (no MLU!).

    Nikon is under tremendous pressure to show its next model soon!

    To get back to your question: If noise is an issue, the Canon CMOS seems to
    perform better. The 100 ISO vs. 200 ISO is irrelevant since it's just a gain
    control on the DSLR anyway. However, I use the D70 without any problems at
    ISO 200 and have never "missed" the advantage of the Canon regarding noise
    behavior at smaller gains. But I miss the MLU on the D70(s)!!!

    Gregor
     
    GTO, Jul 18, 2005
    #9
  10. Larry R Harrison Jr

    Ryan Guest

    You D70 owners, how many of you have shot night-time or

    95% of my shots are at the minimum ISO, 200.

    I've used neat image only with ISO 1600. Hasn't seem warranted
    otherwise. The results in my experience look respectable, but are
    soft.

    Please post your blasted email address and I can send you some examples
    of night time photography with a D70 as well as discuss this further.
     
    Ryan, Jul 20, 2005
    #10
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.