Camera Noise -- Are my expectations too high!?

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

07/29/2017 11:39:12 AM · #1

Originally posted by Neil:

Originally posted by vawendy:
So the 6500 is interesting. The electronic viewfinder is cool. It's really hard to shoot wrong eyed - I can't hold the other eye closed very well...

I missed focus on many shots. Many times it's picking the wrong focus, so I need to read the manual and figure out how to set a focus area. But some of the shots seemed to denoise really easily and still keep a lot of detail.

Can it autofocus with your Canon lenses like the A7II series can?

It can do it's autofocus, but sometimes it has no clue what to focus on, and I can't end up forcing it. I assume I need to set a focus zone so that I can force the issue. But then I assume you're losing a lot of predictive focusing stuff.

It focused beautifully on the moving water, but I couldn't get it to find the pigeon.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

07/29/2017 01:39:05 AM · #2

Originally posted by vawendy:

It's really hard to shoot wrong eyed - I can't hold the other eye closed very well..

Most of the time, especially in "action situations" (e.g. sports), I try to shoot with both eyes open, one looking at the overall scene and the other keeping the subject framed in the viewfinder.

GeorgesBogaert

Canon RP

Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS Macro

07/29/2017 01:09:09 AM · #3

I think they are very noisy pictures for being shot at ISO 800. I have shot before at higher ISO's but don't have that grainy mess.

Neil

Fujifilm X-T30

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

07/28/2017 07:33:26 PM · #4

Originally posted by vawendy:

So the 6500 is interesting. The electronic viewfinder is cool. It's really hard to shoot wrong eyed - I can't hold the other eye closed very well...

I missed focus on many shots. Many times it's picking the wrong focus, so I need to read the manual and figure out how to set a focus area. But some of the shots seemed to denoise really easily and still keep a lot of detail.

Can it autofocus with your Canon lenses like the A7II series can?

07/28/2017 07:24:22 PM · #5

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

07/28/2017 07:20:43 PM · #6

For wildlife photography, there's just many times where you just don't have the light and need more ISO. When I was shooting the house wrens, it was on the North side of the house, and didn't get direct light. The little birds are just so fast, you need the speed to stop the motion. So I kicked up the iso, and had a lot of shots that could have been so good, but we're just too noisy.

For almost any other shot, the noise was ok. But it was really frustrating to spend hours, get the shot, but not have it be usable.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

07/28/2017 03:54:42 PM · #7

Originally posted by RamblinR:

Noise, grain, high ISO's .... we need to stop this. Most all cameras are amazing these days ... really. Photographers are the worst for picking at photos we need to stop this.

Originally posted by GeneralE:

I try to prioritize making a quality image over maintaining image quality ...

I agree.

There are actually some shots where I like various "bad" things. I have quite a few images with blown highlights, lens flare, image grain, and other issues that actually enhance the beauty of the image. And I'd sure has heck rather have an image with some flaws than nothing at all in some cases.

Sometimes I think this site makes us too critical.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

07/28/2017 02:54:44 PM · #8

Originally posted by RamblinR:

Noise, grain, high ISO's .... we need to stop this. Most all cameras are amazing these days ... really.

If you are viewing your images at 1:1 how about stepping it back to 1:2 and consider what application this image is for - web, small prints, medium prints, large prints, billboard.
Will it really be seen in the end product? Will the people purchasing it even be seeing it or looking for it? Prints don't tend to show the grain like a screen zoomed right in does.

Photographers are the worst for picking at photos we need to stop this.

I try to prioritize making a quality image over maintaining image quality ...

Neil

Fujifilm X-T30

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

07/28/2017 02:53:40 PM · #9

Originally posted by vawendy:

It's distracting seeing the shot in the viewfinder. This seems extremely nice for street photography, portraits, or still wildlife. I missed shots having it come up during actions, though. But I assume you can turn this off.

I also miss the double click of the shutter. I didn't realize how much I used that to simply "hear" when I was using too slow of a shutter speed.

You can adjust all of these things (I presume) as I can on the Fuji.

E.g., If you turn off eshutter, you should definitely hear a shutter click which is time dependent.

Here's a comparison of your 7D with the 6500 at ISO 1600 for noise at DPReview. You can also download full shots there.

(Edit: looking at it again, the 6500 looks slightly more noisy to me. But it's also a bit darker, and that may accentuate). I've also included the D750 (full frame) and D500 (APS-C)

For comparison, here it is against the Fuji X-T20 (my newest cam) and two M43 cameras:

Message edited by author 2017-07-28 14:59:17.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

07/28/2017 02:52:37 PM · #10

Yes, you can turn the automatic preview off from menu.

07/28/2017 02:47:57 PM · #11

07/28/2017 02:19:03 PM · #12

Sitting on the ferry having taken photos of some birds. Can't see the screen on the 6500 at all during the day. Luckily everything including playback can be done through the viewfinder.

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

07/28/2017 02:17:26 PM · #13

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by vawendy:

Originally posted by Alexkc:
Looking at yours again, the noise in the background dark areas I guess is not that much. And above all Sony files is very easy to be cleaned.

In any case this is a 100% file at ISO800 (A6300):

This seems very noisy...

Sheesh, Wendy; that 100% file, as viewed on your screen, is at LEAST a 300% view, larger than life-size of what's actually captured by the sensor on the APS-C camera. I'm not sure what you're expecting, but in practical terms this means not much at all. ANY image looks like heck if you get that close to it.

Hey -I'm just starting to move around after being sick for two days, and I can't see much out of my left eye. I was thinking I was viewing 100% not 300%.

That makes more sense because I couldn't understand why anyone would think that was acceptable noise!!

GinaRothfels

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

07/28/2017 02:09:51 PM · #14

Originally posted by vawendy:

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
Canon 80D - ISO 800

Really doesn't bother me too much in the full (unedited) photo

Hmmm... it bothers me in the background of this one. It's a great photo, but the background seems distracting with the noise.

Yes, but how often are you going to use ISO 6400? (Your quote has the ISO from the first photo.)

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

07/28/2017 01:33:32 PM · #15

For what it's worth, here's a 100% crop off a properly-exposed wide-angle show with the FF a7r at ISO 1250, followed by the same thing on the 1-stop-under side of the bracket:

Alex_Petrini

Sony Alpha a7R III

Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM

07/28/2017 01:25:27 PM · #16

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

I was about to say the same. A6500 is probably the best APSC camera when dealing with low light capabilities. No doubt extremely better than 7DII. One close friend of mine, awarded with a top 5 at last BBC Wildlife photographer of the year is switching from 7DII to A6500 right now.

K3Master

Pentax K-3

Pentax D-FA* 70-200mm f/2.8 ED DC AW

07/28/2017 01:24:14 PM · #17

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

I fear the mighty DPC and possibly things like hyper-processed magazine images and the like have sullied her view of the real world ;)

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

07/28/2017 01:17:04 PM · #18

Originally posted by vawendy:

Originally posted by Alexkc:
Looking at yours again, the noise in the background dark areas I guess is not that much. And above all Sony files is very easy to be cleaned.

In any case this is a 100% file at ISO800 (A6300):

This seems very noisy...

Sheesh, Wendy; that 100% file, as viewed on your screen, is at LEAST a 300% view, larger than life-size of what's actually captured by the sensor on the APS-C camera. I'm not sure what you're expecting, but in practical terms this means not much at all. ANY image looks like heck if you get that close to it.

07/28/2017 12:58:55 PM · #19

Originally posted by Alexkc:

Looking at yours again, the noise in the background dark areas I guess is not that much. And above all Sony files is very easy to be cleaned.

In any case this is a 100% file at ISO800 (A6300):

This seems very noisy...

07/28/2017 12:58:26 PM · #20

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:

Canon 80D - ISO 800

Really doesn't bother me too much in the full (unedited) photo

Hmmm... it bothers me in the background of this one. It's a great photo, but the background seems distracting with the noise.

07/28/2017 12:56:21 PM · #21

Originally posted by Neil:

Regarding your shots--are they using the kit lens? I had a 6000 for a month (I ended up returning it and buying the Fuji for handling reasons) and the kit lens was very soft. The 16-70 Zeiss was much better, as was the 10-20 Sony. (I had all three.)

Bear was right. I'm using the metabones with canon lenses. That was with the 24-105 f4L