DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Nikon vs Canon high ISO
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 53, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 05/14/2006 10:13:19 AM · #1
Ok so I shot a wedding last night, everything turned out great until the reception. I shot at iso 800-1000 at 2.8 1/30, everything came out pretty noisy. Its really making me want to switch over to canon.

I need something I can work in low light with. Will canon do a better job of this than nikon? If so you guys are gonna have to fill me in on the canon stuff, (lens, flash, cables). Well if anyone has any images shot with a canon at high iso let me see them so I can compare to the nikon.

Thanks so much, and Happy mothers day to the mothers.

Travis
 05/14/2006 10:31:58 AM · #2
did you use a flash ?
 05/14/2006 10:33:20 AM · #3
yes I used a flash. sb-600


Message edited by author 2006-05-14 10:33:40.
 05/14/2006 10:41:32 AM · #4
if your using a flash why do you use such a high ISO I shot a party last week and used ISO 200 worked great
 05/14/2006 10:41:43 AM · #5
Can you post some examples?

Noise Ninja can help a lot, IMHO works much better and is more natural than Neatimage.
 05/14/2006 10:45:03 AM · #6
ISO 1600

ISO 3200

Message edited by author 2006-05-14 10:46:22.
 05/14/2006 10:46:08 AM · #7
05/14/2006 10:49:40 AM · #8
doctornick, are those right out of the camera or did you run noise ninja on them?
 05/14/2006 10:50:16 AM · #9
Okay, you both just posted off of full fram sensors. The 20D or 30D have not much different noise characteristics than the D200.

So yeah, travis, if you want to buy a $3500 camera (at the least) then you'll get lower noise.
 05/14/2006 10:52:11 AM · #10
I will often use a flash at ISO 800 without any trouble. I expect to get noise when I boost the ISO to 1000 and above even the best combo of equip.. You can gain about 1/2 stop (or increase your speed) by removing the UV lens in the low light. One thing you can do here to help yourself out; is to turn up the lights in the room a little.
 05/14/2006 10:52:49 AM · #11
Originally posted by dcano:
doctornick, are those right out of the camera or did you run noise ninja on them?


Both had noise Ninja applied to them. The ISO 1600 imgae was not much different before Noise Ninja, the ISO 3200 image was noisier.
 05/14/2006 10:53:32 AM · #12
This is at ISO 800. I was shooting at 800 because I don't have a flash yet, and because I wanted a faster shutter speed because the kids weren't being overly cooperative about being photographed. There's virtually no noise in these pictures. I have been getting noise at 1600 ISO.



Message edited by author 2006-05-14 10:53:53.
 05/14/2006 10:54:27 AM · #13
Originally posted by wavelength:
Okay, you both just posted off of full fram sensors. The 20D or 30D have not much different noise characteristics than the D200.

So yeah, travis, if you want to buy a $3500 camera (at the least) then you'll get lower noise.


The 1D II has a 1.3x crop sensor.
 05/14/2006 10:59:22 AM · #14
doctornick, based on the reviews I've read, the 30D actually kicks the D200's butt in the noise dept.
 05/14/2006 10:59:48 AM · #15
Originally posted by doctornick:
Originally posted by wavelength:
Okay, you both just posted off of full fram sensors. The 20D or 30D have not much different noise characteristics than the D200.

So yeah, travis, if you want to buy a $3500 camera (at the least) then you'll get lower noise.


The 1D II has a 1.3x crop sensor.


oops, thanks. But the D200 has a 1.5x plus 1.5 million more pixels, there's probably the difference I guess. Same with the D200 actually having lower noise levels than the D2x, same size sensor, less pixels = lower noise.
 05/14/2006 11:07:11 AM · #16
The more I look at them, the more I think I was using just to slow of a shutter speed. When the flash went off the noise wasnt that bad, not as bad as I thought anyway. I will be buying a sb800 today so maybe that will help me out.
 05/14/2006 11:09:43 AM · #17
I still get amazed by just how good the 20D is at high-ISO.

First is the full photo and the second is a 100% crop.
//www.kolumbus.fi/uusilehto/img/temp/IMG_0735f.jpg
//www.kolumbus.fi/uusilehto/img/temp/IMG_0735c.jpg
20D, f/2.8, 1/250, ISO 1600+1.5, 180mm with Sigma 70-210/2.8

Note: The photo is ISO 1600 pushed 1.50 stops in RawShooter Premium 2006. Kind of like a simulated ISO 4800. This method is used to achieve ISO 3200 in the 350D/10D/20D/30D/5D when JPEG is selected as the output file type.

Colour noise has been removed with RSP2006. The same can be done in photoshop by duplicating the channel, applying median to it (radius varies by image) and setting the layer on "color". There's nothing done to the luminance data of the image.

Message edited by author 2006-05-14 11:44:16.
 05/14/2006 11:14:58 AM · #18
Originally posted by Travis99:
The more I look at them, the more I think I was using just to slow of a shutter speed. When the flash went off the noise wasnt that bad, not as bad as I thought anyway. I will be buying a sb800 today so maybe that will help me out.


Slow shutter speed has NOTHING to do with the noise level of your photo until you get in the minutes range...
 05/14/2006 11:15:57 AM · #19


Shot just now, in a darkened room, with a year old 20D. Settings were; exp - 1/30th, ap - 2.8, ISO 3200.

There is a bit of noise, but this is pretty much wide open, and it was dark enough the lens wouldn't auto-focus, and I had a hard time seeing to focus.

edit to add that I only converted from RAW, and saved for the web.

Message edited by author 2006-05-14 11:16:43.
 05/14/2006 11:35:32 AM · #20
I can guarantee you that the d200 isn't your problem. You need to expose properly and there shouldn't be much noise at all. Exposed properly, a d70 will outperform a 1dsmkII at ISO 1600 if the 1dsmkII was not properly exposed for using high ISO.

Heck, look at all the guys with a 30d trying to say their cameras are defective because they're getting too much noise at ISO 400 lol...clearly, you just gotta fiddle with the beast a bit more ... expose to the right, bring it back in post if you have to.
 05/14/2006 11:42:40 AM · #21
Originally posted by deapee:
I can guarantee you that the d200 isn't your problem. You need to expose properly and there shouldn't be much noise at all. Exposed properly, a d70 will outperform a 1dsmkII at ISO 1600 if the 1dsmkII was not properly exposed for using high ISO.

Heck, look at all the guys with a 30d trying to say their cameras are defective because they're getting too much noise at ISO 400 lol...clearly, you just gotta fiddle with the beast a bit more ... expose to the right, bring it back in post if you have to.


Sometimes you just don't have the luxury to expose to the right. For example, in the photo I posted 4 posts before this one
 05/14/2006 12:00:24 PM · #22
Travis, did you have the high ISO noise reduction turned on? it's not necessarily any better than NI or NN, but it's more efficient.

Deapee is right though - the D200 performs on par with the others in its class when exposed properly (with the exception of the 5D, but that's a half class above the D200 in price). if you have a flash there's no reason not to have decent exposure. Underexposing tends to cause more noise and 'muddier' looking images.

I shot an indoor wedding with no flash last weekend. I kept the ISO near 800, and even went up to 1600 at times using the noise reduction in camera, and a VR lens to let me use lower shutter speeds without visible shake. I got LOTS of usable images that you'd be hard-pressed to tell were high-ISO once processed.

it's not a perfect noise-free camera or anything, but I think you'd find a 30D would perform just about the same...and the migration to another system will cost you lots of money.

P
 05/14/2006 12:06:49 PM · #23
If you want to compare, DC Resource includes photos with various ISO settings in their reviews.
05/14/2006 12:17:35 PM · #24
Originally posted by Uusilehto:


Sometimes you just don't have the luxury to expose to the right. For example, in the photo I posted 4 posts before this one


uhm...it looks like you did expose to the right. Otherwise you would have horrible noise all over the place. Do you understand what expose to the right means? It means to have your histogram hugging the right side...but nothing blown out...so the brightest value you have, you want as close to the right as possible.
 05/14/2006 12:20:30 PM · #25
How do your reception prints look? Probably a lot better than on your monitor right?
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/06/2025 05:47:08 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/06/2025 05:47:08 AM EDT.