| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 10/16/2006 5:54:23 PM | Does anyone here (who is an expert in Digital Photography) have any suggestions on how to compensate for the noise trade-off at higher ISO ratings (say above 400) in a Compact Digital Camera (not the SLRs)?? Would adjusting the shutter speed make a difference?? Thanks.  | |
|
late™
|
Joined: 1/9/2005
Msg: 2 | |
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 10/16/2006 8:12:18 PM | A slower shutter speed will let in more light allowing you to use slower (less grainy/noisy) ISO, but you will get more blur. If your subject isn't moving and you have a tripod, giv'er.
Or,
If you can, set it to a low f-stop instead and 400 IS0, | |
|
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 10/16/2006 8:52:36 PM | Raising the ISO settings increases the Sensitivity to Light.
The Camera is requested to render an Image permitting only one-quarter of the Light compared to the Setting of ISO 100. (The Standard for many Decades).
The higher ISO 400 allows either for the Closure of the Aperature by 2 "f-stops" or Reduction of the Film/Digital Sensor Exposure Time by four-fold compared to ISO 100.
The Grainyness is the Trade-off trying to do the same with less.
Also, different Cameras may digitally process the Image differenly, such as having the Capability to Capture in the RAW format, permitting greater editing Controls at the Software Level.
The Quality of your optical Lenses also play a major Part. | |
|
late™
|
Joined: 1/9/2005
Msg: 4 | |
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 10/16/2006 9:01:13 PM | Yup, ... I'm using a D100 right now, it only goes to 200 ISO on the slow end.
....Nikons!
(jk)
I should have a 20d in a few weeks, ....I'm more of a Canon guy.
OP, what kind of point n' shoot do you have? | |
|
| |
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 10/17/2006 12:48:45 AM | I'm using a D100 right now, it only goes to 200 ISO on the slow end.
The ISO Standard was a Replacement for the old ASA Standard of some 30 years ago, which was based on the the Sensitivity, Fineness, Chemistry Arrangement and Purity of the Silver Halide.
Twenty years ago I used to shoot 'Kodachrome 25' exclusively, as the Detail, sharpness & Color Rendition could not be touched by any higher ISO Level. The Tripod became my second best friend, never a problem really as I was doing mostly Nature, Studio Product & Portrait Photography.
With the Introduction of FUJI & Ekta Chromes, ISO 100 came became the Standard as ISO 25's no longer yielded such stark Image Differences. Nowadays, Film ISO 400's are making a serious Run for the Money, and unless enlargements are made, the differences will be subtle at best.
The Digital Medium works somewhat differently, but in Principle its pretty much the same; lesser required Exposure Times equals reduced Image Quality. I'm sure the ISO Standard will also be replaced in due Time, and is just the Standard carried over from Film Cameras. Perhaps we will see the Day where Technology moves forward to a Point where we can shoot in the Pitch-dark and not have to worry about Camera Shake, Under-exposures or Graininess.
My Digital Camera is a Nikon E8800 and captures in the RAW Format. Raising the ISO to 800, the Software has plenty of Latitude to push up and fix Exposure & Graininess Issues. Nevertheless, even in the current Digital Realm, ISO 100 produces the best Images, anything below that Setting makes very little Difference.
I used to Shoot with Canon Film Cameras Exclusively, but prefer the Nikons digitally. Since I also wanted to take Videos, I opted for a high Quality 'Point 'n Shoot', passing over the SLRs which have slightly better Optical Accessories. | |
|
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 10/17/2006 2:10:22 AM | I'm not a photography expert so please bear with me.
OP, what kind of point n' shoot do you have?
Late,
Some Technical Stuff ...
Sony Cybershot DSC-W100
8.1MP
Carl Zeiss Vario-Tessar Lens (3X Optical Zoom)
ISO Selection in Manual Mode: 80, 100, 200, 400, 800, 1250
Aperture Value Adjust (In Wide Angle F2.8 or F5.6; in TelePhoto F5.2 or F10)
Shutter Speed from 1/1000 to 30 seconds in Manual Mode
More specs at:
http://www.vistek.ca/details/details.aspx?t=specs&WebCode=225200&CategoryID=DigitalCameras
if you need the info.
I was taking pictures in a low-light environment (subject not moving). No tripod though. Too much public traffic to set up a tripod. Took most shots at 5.0MP in ISO 400 at 1/60 second Shutter and Aperture F2.8. Noticed noise in some pictures (not severe, but noticeable; especially when printed as 8 x 10 at Wally World).
The camera has a Histogram display to indicate Darker/Brighter during adjustments, though I admit I didn't use the Histogram during those shots. When Shutter Speed is 1 second or slower, the camera applies some sort of Noise Reduction algorithm, though, I never had the Shutter Speed that slow for the NR to kick in (and 30 seconds would be an eternity in camera Exposure Time).
I set the F-Stop to the lowest possible (F2.8) for my camera (just don't have the more desirable F-Stop 1.0 or less found in SLR cameras  ) but I noticed that the value changes during zoom (to a less desirable higher F-Stop value).
I know picture noise is inevitable at higher ISO. I'm just looking for ways to reduce that noice (if possible) within the adjustment range of the camera. That is, could I tweak more than just the Shutter Speed, F-Stop Value, and ISO Rating to achieve my goal??
A slower shutter speed will let in more light allowing you to use slower (less grainy/noisy) ISO, but you will get more blur. If your subject isn't moving and you have a tripod, giv'er.
Or,
If you can, set it to a low f-stop instead and 400 IS0,
If I set the Shutter Speed slower, wouldn't the Flash Duration need to be longer?? Not sure if duration is adjustable in my camera, just Flash Level.
The Camera is requested to render an Image permitting only one-quarter of the Light compared to the Setting of ISO 100. (The Standard for many Decades).
The higher ISO 400 allows either for the Closure of the Aperature by 2 "f-stops" or Reduction of the Film/Digital Sensor Exposure Time by four-fold compared to ISO 100.
Ticket, I'm trying to digest what you're saying here. Do you mean the higher ISO settings are somehow referenced to ISO 100 in the camera??? That Aperture Closure of F5.6 (2 F-Stops from F2.8) at 400 ISO would yield the same result as F2.8 at 100 ISO??? Confused.   I noticed that F-Stop values are not constant, but increases when zooming in. Hence, F-Stop will reach the maximum value of F10 (my camera) ... a very small Aperture Opening and not enough to allow light to pass, right??
Also, different Cameras may digitally process the Image differenly, such as having the Capability to Capture in the RAW format, permitting greater editing Controls at the Software Level.
Don't have RAW format, just JPEG.
FWIW, I got Paint Shop Pro a few months ago, and I've been impressed w/its noise reduction filter.
dlambert, I would prefer to reduce picture noise at the camera before attempting a software remedy. I will keep your suggestion in mind, though. Thanks. | |
|
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 10/17/2006 8:30:23 AM | I know picture noise is inevitable at higher ISO. I'm just looking for ways to reduce that noice (if possible) within the adjustment range of the camera. That is, could I tweak more than just the Shutter Speed, F-Stop Value, and ISO Rating to achieve my goal??
If your shot contains Motion, you may not have any other Options other than to crank your ISO level up, to shorten the Exposure Times, but at the expense of Image Quality.
Generally, the (2) two lowest "f-stops" produce the worst overall Image quality, as the outer Edges of the Lens require larger and more costly optical Element Configurations and Arrangements, as well as expensive aspherical Corrections at the manufacturing Level.
In most cases, this is the Reason a Lens, which has an Aperature that can open up down 1 more "f-stop" (doubling the effective Light Capture) is twice as expensive.
Furthermore, the lower your "f-stop", the less your "Depth of Field", that is to say, the Range in sharp Focus is very limited, unless the Focus is set to "Infinity". Such a Shot would have the first 15 - 25 ft. out of Focus, to some Degree or other. Shooting a Model focused on the eyes, at approx. only 6 ft. away, perhaps only the tip of the nose and the back of the Ears will remain in sharp Focus. The rest ... out of Focus.
The "f-stops" that create the very best images are usually between f5.6 - f11
If I set the Shutter Speed slower, wouldn't the Flash Duration need to be longer?? Not sure if duration is adjustable in my camera, just Flash Level.
Depending on the Camera you have, a Flash will completely discharge in 1/30 of a Second.
Unless you are also doing a long-time Exposure in Conjunction with capturing other Details of the Scene, going below 1/30 of a Second will serve no Purpose.
Do you mean the higher ISO settings are somehow referenced to ISO 100 in the camera???
Virtually all SLR Film Cameras, as well as many digital Cameras allow you to set your ISO.
Their Increments are usually 25, 50, 64, 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200.
ISO is an equivalancy Reference carried over from Film Cameras, dealing with Specifications of Film Light Sensitivities. These Sensitivities (Light Exposures) is what the ISO Setting on your digital Camera are based on. Currently, The higher your ISO Values, ie. 400, 800, 1600, the more Grainy/Noisy your image will be. ISO settings of 25, 50, 64, 100 will produce the very best quality images, the very lowest Value, the very best Image Quality.
Mind you, there are also other Factors at play which substantially affect the Quality of your Image, but the ISO setting is probably in Spot #1.
That Aperture Closure of F5.6 (2 F-Stops from F2.8) at 400 ISO would yield the same result as F2.8 at 100 ISO??? Confused.
Correct. They are the same Light Exposure Values for each ISO Setting, the higher ISO 400 setting generally rendering a more inferior Image. If however, an "f-stop" of 2.8 would render too many Objects in your Image out-of-focus, then you may have to settle for the grainier/noisier Image taken at f5.6 at ISO 400. Its a Trade-off, one of those things every Pro Photographer has to wrestle with to get the very best Image Quality possible.
Each higher ISO value, ie. ISO 100 to ISO 200 is like gaining 1 "f-stop" of Light, or reducing the required Exposure Time in half. An ISO of 25 is like loosing 2 "f-stops" or Increase of the required Exposure Time by 4-fold.
I noticed that F-Stop values are not constant, but increases when zooming in. Hence, F-Stop will reach the maximum value of F10 (my camera) ... a very small Aperture Opening and not enough to allow light to pass, right??
That is entirely with the Design of the Lens. Higher Zoom Ranges require more Light, in turn require larger Glass Elements to capture that Light, in order to make use of lower Aperature Values.
Don't have RAW format, just JPEG.
Most are. Some of the better Cameras will do uncompressed TIF, upper end ones do RAW, NEF, etc.
The extremely shitty Cameras usually have cheap Plastic Lenses and use extremely high and degraded compression Schemes, limiting way too much in the way for any decent Software Edits. | |
|
late™
|
Joined: 1/9/2005
Msg: 9 | |
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 10/17/2006 6:50:45 PM | What he said.
There are so many trade-trade offs, it's all about getting light to the CCD/Film, relative motion, and composition.
If you don't have a tripod, you can try bracing the camera on something solid (parking meter, tree, bench, fence, etc.) and using a remote to trigger the shutter, or at least try to keep the camera very still with one hand and just use your right index finger to gently trigger the shutter.
One thing to note with most entry-level DSLRs, they most often come with a crap kit-lens, ...usually only worth < $100. If you want to get into DSLRs, spend your money on good lenses, they can stay with you as you upgrade to mid-level and/or pro DSLR cameras, Nikon and Canon have the best selection of lenses and probably the best image processors, camera bodies (that's a huge and boistrous debate on it's own, like Mac vs Windows, Fender vs Marshall, BMW vs Porche....).
It's worth it to buy a used trailing edge Canon or Nikon body, and get a good quality lens, upgrade the body when needed, keep the lens(es).
I've had Sonys, while they often have very good lenses, I've never been happy with their low-light performance.
non-DSL Digital cameras I've had since '97:
Apple
Sony FD91
Kodak x 4
Olympus
Fuji
Minolta Dimage 7
Canon G5 (stolen a few weeks ago, will be missed, I will probably buy a used one soon, you can get them on eBay cheap))
I'm using one of the Algonquin College School of Photojournalism - Nikon D100 DSLRs with a kit lens, but we do have access to Nikkor lenses worth over $2000, very nice. But I don't like the control layout, it's hard to use the camera in manual mode because the placement of the aperture and shutter speed controls makes it almost impossible to hold the camera steady and focus at the same time.
I'm in the process of purchasing one of these (w/ battery grip):
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS20D/Images/batterygrip04.jpg
With this len:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-70mm-f-2.8-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
3 X 1 gig flash cards
580EX Speedlite Flash
Manfrotto tripod
Lowepro bag
http://focuscamera.com/camera-store/lowepro-stealth-reporter-500-aw-2045010.html
For $2000 CDN.
Should have it next month, if everybody pays me like they're s'posed to. | |
|
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 10/18/2006 9:05:21 AM | If you don't have a tripod, you can try bracing the camera on something solid (parking meter, tree, bench, fence, etc.) and using a remote to trigger the shutter, or at least try to keep the camera very still with one hand and just use your right index finger to gently trigger the shutter.
Just to add some Info here.
Many Digital Cameras also have a "Timer".
You can set the Camera down in any Location, engage the 10 Second Timer, if you don't need to worry about capturing any Motion at any specific Point, or expect anything to run across the Field of View such as a "U-Haul" Truck ... lol
One of those: "I don't recall taking a Picture of the Truck, but where is my ... ?"
if everybody pays me like they're s'posed to.
Our monthly Prayers ... | |
|
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 10/20/2006 9:43:20 AM | | hint I got from a pro: Usually, most of the noise is produced by one of the three color channels. If you only apply the noise reduction filter to that one, your picture doesn't lose as much detail. | |
|
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 10/21/2006 8:36:53 PM | ^^^^^^Since the hint is from a pro, he's probably talking about an SLR camera. I have a compact digital camera and it doesn't provide the mechanism to apply noise reduction to one color channel. As I've read and understood, in order to achieve the sensitivity required for low-light or fast-action scenes, Image Sensor gain is applied and the noise is a trade-off of that gain, much like in an audio amplifier.
Late,
There are so many trade-trade offs, it's all about getting light to the CCD/Film, relative motion, and composition.
If you don't have a tripod, you can try bracing the camera on something solid (parking meter, tree, bench, fence, etc.) and using a remote to trigger the shutter, or at least try to keep the camera very still with one hand and just use your right index finger to gently trigger the shutter.
The shots I want aren't at eye-level so the camera needs to be tilted upwards. There is no connection on my camera for a remote shutter trigger. Is it still possible to attach one somehow??
One thing to note with most entry-level DSLRs, they most often come with a crap kit-lens, ...usually only worth < $100. If you want to get into DSLRs, spend your money on good lenses, they can stay with you as you upgrade to mid-level and/or pro DSLR cameras get a good quality lens, upgrade the body when needed, keep the lens(es).
I not an avid photographer so an SLR (Film or Digital) would be few years away if I got one. From what you said, I take it that the lens attachment are all standardized in the industry so you could attach any SLR lens to any SLR body??
Canon G5 (stolen a few weeks ago, will be missed, I will probably buy a used one soon, you can get them on eBay cheap)
Having your camera stolen does suck.
Ticket,
If your shot contains Motion, you may not have any other Options other than to crank your ISO level up, to shorten the Exposure Times, but at the expense of Image Quality.
Lucky for me, the shots I want are not motion shots, just low-light, so I'll take some of the advice here: decrease the ISO, slow down the Shutter Speed, adjust the F-Stop and select from the preset Focus Distances that would yield the best possible result given all the limitations and trade-offs.
Generally, the (2) two lowest "f-stops" produce the worst overall Image quality, as the outer Edges of the Lens require larger and more costly optical Element Configurations and Arrangements, as well as expensive aspherical Corrections at the manufacturing Level.
In most cases, this is the Reason a Lens, which has an Aperature that can open up down 1 more "f-stop" (doubling the effective Light Capture) is twice as expensive.
I always understood that the lower the F-Stop value, the wider the Aperture Size and the greater the amount of light getting to Film/CCD thus producing a better picture. I also read that lower F-Stop lens tend to be much heavier and I'm guessing the costly Element Configuration/Arrangements and Aspherical Corrections (your're speaking of) as the contributing factors. But with all else being equal, a lower F-Stop is more desirable, right??
Furthermore, the lower your "f-stop", the less your "Depth of Field", that is to say, the Range in sharp Focus is very limited, unless the Focus is set to "Infinity". The "f-stops" that create the very best images are usually between f5.6 - f11
The shots I want are about 7 to 50 feet away, depending on where I'm standing, since I want shots at varying distances and angles. The Focus Presets allowed by my camera are: 0.5, 1.0, 3.0, 7.0 (in Meters) plus Infinity. Do you suppose a setting of 3.0m, 7.0m or Infinity will give me the required focus at F2.8?? For example, if I'm standing about 40 feet from the subject, would a setting of Infinity and an Aperture of F2.8 still yield an in-focus picture??
Depending on the Camera you have, a Flash will completely discharge in 1/30 of a Second.
I find it odd that a flash will discharge so quickly and yet cameras offer low Shutter Speeds down to 30 seconds. If the flash discharges in 1/30 of a second, having the shutter open for 30 seconds is useless, would it not?? | |
|
late™
|
Joined: 1/9/2005
Msg: 13 | |
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 10/22/2006 6:14:34 AM |
I not an avid photographer so an SLR (Film or Digital) would be few years away if I got one. From what you said, I take it that the lens attachment are all standardized in the industry so you could attach any SLR lens to any SLR body??
Nope, SLRs are proprietary.
Though there are third party vendors like Sigma and Tamron.
Canon/Nikon, ....only way to go because of lens availability.
I find it odd that a flash will discharge so quickly and yet cameras offer low Shutter Speeds down to 30 seconds. If the flash discharges in 1/30 of a second, having the shutter open for 30 seconds is useless, would it not??
No, actually you can have "first curtain" and "second curtain" settings to acheive different photo effects.
The shots I want are about 7 to 50 feet away, depending on where I'm standing, since I want shots at varying distances and angles. The Focus Presets allowed by my camera are: 0.5, 1.0, 3.0, 7.0 (in Meters) plus Infinity. Do you suppose a setting of 3.0m, 7.0m or Infinity will give me the required focus at F2.8?? For example, if I'm standing about 40 feet from the subject, would a setting of Infinity and an Aperture of F2.8 still yield an in-focus picture??
Lower f-stop will limit depth of field, - so what IS in focus is determined by the aperture. The subject will be "in focus" but the foreground and background will be blurred to some extent. | |
|
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 10/22/2006 7:44:39 AM | I have a compact digital camera and it doesn't provide the mechanism to apply noise reduction to one color channel.
That's done at the Software Level, and the Results are at best ... subjective.
There is no connection on my camera for a remote shutter trigger. Is it still possible to attach one somehow??
If your Shutter Button has a Threaded Hole in the Center, you could buy Accessories to do that.
Check your Manual and see what it says.
Lucky for me, the shots I want are not motion shots, just low-light, so I'll take some of the advice here: decrease the ISO, slow down the Shutter Speed, adjust the F-Stop and select from the preset Focus Distances that would yield the best possible result given all the limitations and trade-offs.
Bingorama. If your Camera is supported, then you don't care about the Limitations of Time Exposures, set your ISO down to the very best settings between 25 - 100, and if you want the very best Shot for both Color and aspherical Correctness, and nothing comes within 5 feet or so on a 35mm or wider Wide Angle Lens, set her to "f 5.6 - 11".
I always understood that the lower the F-Stop value, the wider the Aperture Size and the greater the amount of light getting to Film/CCD thus producing a better picture.
Greater Amount of Light entering the Lens does not equate to a better Picture.
Apples and Oranges.
The Edges of your Lens, as well as all the other Glass Elements are curved, yet the Focal Plane of your Film is flat. The Design, Cut and Arrangement of the curved Glass Elements in a Lens attempt to "aspherically" convert that Aberation, creating a perfect Focus and actual Replication onto a flat Film Plane, the same as that which you can see with the bare Eye. Hence, if possible, unless you absolutely need low Aperatures to create focal Effects, go 2 - 4 f-stops higher from the very lowest Aperature Setting.
But with all else being equal, a lower F-Stop is more desirable, right??
Depends what you do. A far more costly Lens capable of taking Pictures at lower F-Stops does not necessarily mean that Lens takes better overall Pictures. Unless, you need lower Aperature Values, such as Sports Photographers, the same Lens from the same Vendor for half the Price at 1 f-stop higher should pretty well create the same if not better Quality Results. The Lower the Aperature Values, the higher the Complexities & Corrections at the Design and manufacturing Level. Lower Aperatures means the Lens has a more extreme Task attempting to bend the Light straight again for the Film Plane.
And that's just "Focus" ... now lets get to Color Corrections, since the Light of the Color Spectrum has different Wavelengths, in addition to having been "bent" by the Lens ... which has to arrive at the Film Plane at the same Time ... search 'Google' for more ... lol ...
(Glad I'm just shovelling Shit for a Living ... lol ... j/k)
Usually for the very best Pics, keep it between f5.6 - f11.
Do you suppose a setting of 3.0m, 7.0m or Infinity will give me the required focus at F2.8??
Studying the Settings of the 'Range of Focus' on your Lens' Focusing Dial is the best Advice I can give, as a Wide Angle Lens will have a different 'Focal Range' than a Zoom Lens.
For example, if I'm standing about 40 feet from the subject, would a setting of Infinity and an Aperture of F2.8 still yield an in-focus picture??
If the Lens you are using is 70mm or less, very likely. If you have your Zoom set to 210mm, most definitely not.
Search 'Google' for "Lens Focal Ranges". There should be much Data out there, far too involved for posting here.
I find it odd that a flash will discharge so quickly and yet cameras offer low Shutter Speeds down to 30 seconds. If the flash discharges in 1/30 of a second, having the shutter open for 30 seconds is useless, would it not??
The Flash is discharged by its electronic "Capacitor", the max. is pretty well 1/30 of a Second.
Beyond this Duration, the Camera has little Say in it.
As late™ mentioned above, you could do Double, Triple, etc, or "Half Halfs" Exposures.
There is all sorts of Jazz out there such as Star Filters, Half-Moon Filters, etc. In such Cases, the Light Capture is often cumulative. You must have an SLR/D-SLR of 1 Type of the other to do it. 'Point & Shoot' Cameras do not have such Features.
Unless you are also doing a long-time Exposure in Conjunction with capturing other Details of the Scene, going below 1/30 of a Second will serve no Purpose.
Example, you are taking a Picture of a Person closeby, but would also like to include the Star-filled Night-Sky Horizon. The Flash captures the Person (get them to run out of the scene ASAP after Flash Discharge ... lol), in under 1/30th of a Second, but you may keep the Shutter open for another 8 Seconds to Capture the Nightline. In this Fashion, the Person as well as the Nightsky has been properly illuminated and light-exposed for their respective Camera Settings.
... but all that is almost completely passe' unless you are still doing Film Work. Nowadays, take 2 seperate Pictures, let the Software do the Rest for you ...
One another Note, if you use 3rd. Party Lenses and you want top quality, use TAMRONS.
Although SIGMA is an up and coming Runner, I don't think they are really up there yet.
Nikon a Decade back had contracted TAMRON to make specialty Optics for them.
But definitely no VIVITARs ...  | |
|
| |
late™
|
Joined: 1/9/2005
Msg: 16 | |
| |
| |
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 11/16/2006 9:32:48 PM | ^^^^^Zero picture noise at high ISO??? Kinda doubt that.  Try prints at the maximum size for low-light condition pictures and check again. | |
|
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 11/17/2006 11:31:35 AM | ? You calling me a liar?
I shoot in raw...which is max size.....and have enlarged them 200%.
D50 has a newer gen. ccd than say D70/D70s. I got D50 for that very reason. I shoot low light, Infrared, special effects.
Comeon now, if you dont own one, nor used one, then you cant really doubt it.
Im sure after a minute some noise would start in and sensor arc maybe. Big maybe on the sensor arc...i dont see that happening though. Thats at 1600....lemme put it 200 and i can leave the shutter open till the end of time without worry. | |
|
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 11/17/2006 11:39:59 AM | Oh....youre talking little compact cameras. Missed that part. I used to have a Nikon CP4300. It was ok, never went to 400 iso which was its highest.....too much noise.
I had a e8700 tickettoride....bad, bad noise and sensor arc above 100 iso. Dont know if 8800 addressed that problem.
Sold it to friend and used money to add to other moneys i had saved for new lenses. Was using my lenses that went to my Nikon N2000 slr. Still use my old 50mm 1.8 in addition to the newer ones. Killer glass. | |
|
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 11/17/2006 9:05:13 PM | ? You calling me a liar?
I shoot in raw...which is max size.....and have enlarged them 200%.
Comeon now, if you dont own one, nor used one, then you cant really doubt it.
Not calling you anything, but in the real world, you don't get something for nothing. That is, upping the ISO (which is Image Sensor Gain) and still have ZERO noise. All digital cameras has a baseline ISO (usually their lowest) and any increase in ISO is derived from that baseline. What make is this D50 and what's the price ... $100 grand or something??? Shooting in RAW is not the maximum size. Max size is the largest PRINT size associated with a given Megapixel count. RAW is simply storing the picture in uncompressed format to allow for more editing options later. You can store in RAW at any Megapixel setting. Trying taking a shot at your highest Megapixel and ISO setting in low-light conditions with lots of shadows. Make a print at the largest size for that Megapixel setting and then check for graininess in the print.
may have to settle for the grainier/noisier Image taken at f5.6 at ISO 400. Its a Trade-off, one of those things every Pro Photographer has to wrestle with to get the very best Image Quality possible.
According to Ticket, every Pro Photographer has to wrestle with trade-offs to get the best possible image. So you're telling me you're the only photographer who has found the Holy Grail of cameras??? | |
|
| Digital Camera Picture Noise at High ISO
Posted: 1/17/2007 7:28:48 PM | D50 has a newer gen. ccd than say D70/D70s. I got D50 for that very reason. I shoot low light, Infrared, special effects.
Comeon now, if you dont own one, nor used one, then you cant really doubt it.
Well Eternal, just out of curiosity, I checked out the Nikon D50's noise rating at:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/nikon/d50-review/index.shtml
Although, the low noise characteristic of the D50 is impressive even at ISO 1600. I do notice some graininess at 1600 (graininess that is not evident at ISO 800) for the night shot (the skyline behind the buildings) and also in the comparison shot between the D50 and D70 (also at ISO 1600). You're right the D50 performed better than the D70 as shown in the comparison. Since DSLRs image sensors are much larger than the ones found in compact digital cameras, I would expect it to have extremely low noise, but not ZERO.
I didn't have the $$$ to buy a D50 for checking it's noise level so I had to rely on a review. | |
|
|
Home
login 
