50D And High ISO

  • Thread starter Thread starter CT
  • Start date Start date
CT

CT

TPer Emeritus
Suspended / Banned
Messages
26,617
Edit My Images
Yes
I think I've finally managed to come to some conclusions about the high ISO capablity of the 50D. None of the shots in this post have had any NR applied.

Female House Sparrow.

3273530709_dfda5a103b_o.jpg


This was shot at the top (expanded) ISO of 6400 and produces a surprising good result. This is a full frame shot and therein lies the secret I think of this high setting - you don't want to be cropping into images at all, so if I can fill the frame with the subject I'll definitely be considering this setting when the light is dire.

Dunnock,

3274349658_c93b28345f_o.jpg


This was shot at 3200 ISO and is a typical situation where the subject doesn't fill the frame as much as I'd like. Again, you're going to get the best result by not cropping at this high ISO, but cropping to how I'd probably want to crop the shot gives a very usable result.

3274349820_69d3ca7370_o.jpg


s1RAW

I've been taking some shots at the s1RAW setting. Despite the reduced file size, this setting still puts out a 20mb TIFF file from RAW. It seems far more impressive at 3200 ISO than 6400 ISO, which I suppose is to be expected, but does give a significant reduction in noise.

Grey Squidger Full Frame s1RAW 3200 ISO

3274350092_f5a02cfed8_o.jpg


Same shot 1:1 crop.

3274349952_b8ec7e31ea_o.jpg


Canon claim s1RAW shots will print A4 to A3 size. I've not tried printing it, but don't discount s1RAW as another option when light is low, it seems to be very effective.
 
This makes an interesting read Cedric. Why are you shooting in s1RAW? What advantages do you get ? (Apart from a more manageable file size)
 
What lens, Cedric?..the 500?
 
I'm just trying s1RAW by way of experimentation Sara, which I've been meaning to do for a while. The thinking behind s1RAW is that it gives a significant reduction in noise from a smaller file size, so in extreme bad light, I think I'd use it where noise is going to be a big issue and I'm not looking to get a huge print or upload the file to an image library for instance.
 
Thank you! These have restored my faith in CANON after a period of doubt a few weeks ago when I went to a seminar held by Andy Rouse. A top pro wildlife tog, Andy swapped from CANON to NIKON, (a year or so ago I think), because of, amongst other things, no doubt, the superior high ISO performance of the NIKON sensor. We were told that the default ISO setting which Andy Rouse uses now is ISO 800. Not a chance with either of my CANON bodies I am afraid but having seen these CT, I feel that when it comes to upgrade time, I will not be disappointed - these shots are very good.

Of course, with Andy Rouse we are talking top of the range tackle but must admit that from my t'interweb research, NIKON do seem to have the edge in terms of high ISO performance across the range.

Alan
 
Interesting stuff Cedric. I think the other interesting comparison would be between sRAW and an image reduced in size from the full size file. In theory, the averaging of pixels in post process image reduction should also have an impact on noise levels.

I've certainly noticed a big difference between the 1Ds and 1D on this front. At 100% crop, the 1Ds is noisier than the 1D at ISO 1600 but if you reduce the file size, the issue appears to reverse. Also, the high pixel count of the 1Ds takes noise reduction via Noise Ninja better, before downsizing.

Paul
 
Interesting viewing CT, and some nice shots too.
 
Alzibiff said:
Thank you! These have restored my faith in CANON after a period of doubt a few weeks ago when I went to a seminar held by Andy Rouse. A top pro wildlife tog, Andy swapped from CANON to NIKON, (a year or so ago I think), because of, amongst other things, no doubt, the superior high ISO performance of the NIKON sensor. We were told that the default ISO setting which Andy Rouse uses now is ISO 800. Not a chance with either of my CANON bodies I am afraid but having seen these CT, I feel that when it comes to upgrade time, I will not be disappointed - these shots are very good.

Of course, with Andy Rouse we are talking top of the range tackle but must admit that from my t'interweb research, NIKON do seem to have the edge in terms of high ISO performance across the range.

Alan
Click to expand...

I shoot at 800 ISO most of the time at this time of year with the 50D and the 40D for that matter. I think we have to give Nikon the edge on noise at the moment, but it really is just that - an edge, and hardly justifies an expensive kit swap to my mind. What Canon bodies do you use?
 
grumpybadger said:
Interesting stuff Cedric. I think the other interesting comparison would be between sRAW and an image reduced in size from the full size file. In theory, the averaging of pixels in post process image reduction should also have an impact on noise levels.

Paul
Click to expand...
You mean reduce a full size RAW file to the size of a full size s1RAW file Paul?
 
Yes, I think that should give the same results as shooting in camera as the image reduction algorithm should average noise across the pixels as does the s1RAW mode in camera.

I'm a big fan of capturing as much information as possible at the capture phase as you can't get it back and reckon you should be able to "recreate" s1RAW performance in post.
 
Alzibiff said:
Thank you! These have restored my faith in CANON after a period of doubt a few weeks ago when I went to a seminar held by Andy Rouse. A top pro wildlife tog, Andy swapped from CANON to NIKON, (a year or so ago I think), because of, amongst other things, no doubt, the superior high ISO performance of the NIKON sensor.
Click to expand...

You need to remember that Andy was the biggest defender of the 1DMK3 against all comers, claiming it was producing some of the best images he'd ever got, ecstatic about the AF system, and casting doubts on the sanity of anyone who thought there was anything wrong with it. Virtually overnight, he changed to rubbishing the 1DMK3, and briefly gave the 1DS MK3 a bashing too on his way out to pick up the Nikon. ;)
 
CT said:
You need to remember that Andy was the biggest defender of the 1DMK3 against all comers, claiming it was producing some of the best images he'd ever got, ecstatic about the AF system, and casting doubts on the sanity of anyone who thought there was anything wrong with it. Virtually overnight, he changed to rubbishing the 1DMK3, and briefly gave the 1DS MK3 a bashing too on his way out to pick up the Nikon. ;)
Click to expand...

He obviously doesnt know anything about photography then, moving to Nikon :lol:
 
MJ Stebbings said:
He obviously doesnt know anything about photography then, moving to Nikon :lol:
Click to expand...

LOL. Well I think he knows his onions, but I do think that slagging off Canon the way he has was uncalled for, if he wanted to change horses, did he really have to justify it in that manner?

There's a load of old rubbish talked about noise. No matter how good any camera is it will show noise at the full file size, but as soon as you significantly reduce the file size, the noise largely disappears. Of late noise seems to have become the Holy Grail with reviewers.
 
CT said:
LOL. Well I think he knows his onions, but I do think that slagging off Canon the way he has was uncalled for, if he wanted to change horses, did he really have to justify it in that manner?

There's a load of old rubbish talked about noise. No matter how good any camera is it will show noise at the full file size, but as soon as you significantly reduce the file size, the noise largely disappears. Of late noise seems to have become the Holy Grail with reviewers.
Click to expand...

Brown bags full of cash I expect.....
 
Grant said:
High ISO in Low Light with the 50D, however, was not brilliant for me.
Click to expand...

Well, these are low light shots by birding standards, but obviously low light shots indoors would show more noise in the darker tones and shadow areas, aggravated by any increase in exposure time.
 
If you are planning to print, then I don't really understand why you want to do this, as printing is "free" NR anyway.
 
CT said:
Well, these are low light shots by birding standards, but obviously low light shots indoors would show more noise in the darker tones and shadow areas, aggravated by any increase in exposure time.
Click to expand...

I have found the differences in the histogram from Nikon and Canon interesting. Canon can and needs to be worked to the right as we look at it, but if you can sort it, nice clean images.
 
CT said:
LOL. Well I think he knows his onions, but I do think that slagging off Canon the way he has was uncalled for, if he wanted to change horses, did he really have to justify it in that manner?
Click to expand...

Haha, oh, i'm sure he does, it was just a little bit of banter there with those strange people who own Nikons :D

I think its fair that if he said "I'm moving to Nikon because their ISO handling is better then any other brand out there" then people would agree, but to take a swipe at Canon, i think he should take his 70-200"vr" and stick it where the sun doesnt shine ;) :lol:
 
puddleduck said:
If you are planning to print, then I don't really understand why you want to do this, as printing is "free" NR anyway.
Click to expand...

Good point - depending of course on how big you print. If you were to print at full 1:1 file size then you'd see the noise in all it's full glory, but how many of us are likely to print at those enormous file sizes?
 
CT said:
Good point - depending of course on how big you print. If you were to print at full 1:1 file size then you'd see the noise in all it's full glory, but how many of us are likely to print at those enormous file sizes?
Click to expand...

I think you are working on a false premise.

Assuming you will print at a typical 240-320 dpi the full size RAW will allow a larger print and better print than the sRAW however you cut it, and whatever print size.
 
puddleduck said:
I think you are working on a false premise.

Assuming you will print at a typical 240-320 dpi the full size RAW will allow a larger print and better print than the sRAW however you cut it, and whatever print size.
Click to expand...

Erm...of course it will, I don't recall claiming otherwise?
 
Cedric, how much better is the 50 than the 40 after having used both? I can see the better res in theory with the higher pixel count, but autofocus is (I believe) the same, is the s/n at higher iso really a lot better?..do you think people should consider a switch? I'd be interested to hear your opinion as a user of both.
George
 
CT said:
Erm...of course it will, I don't recall claiming otherwise?
Click to expand...

So.. what are you trying to show here?

I just can't see a real world benefit in sRAW, unless you are desperately short of CF card space?
 
Good post it does look like the very high ISO of the 50 is pretty good
I very rarely go above 800 mostly use 400 and 800 on my 40D
I'm really happy with the 40D but have considered up grading but dont crop very often so probaly dont need the bigger file size
 
George said:
Cedric, how much better is the 50 than the 40 after having used both? I can see the better res in theory with the higher pixel count, but autofocus is (I believe) the same, is the s/n at higher iso really a lot better?..do you think people should consider a switch? I'd be interested to hear your opinion as a user of both.
George
Click to expand...
The 40D was the most camera Canon ever produced for the money.

I don't see any difference in AF and don't think Canon actually claim any?

I'd say noise performance is about the same from both cameras, which is pretty incredible given the number of pixels on the 50D sensor.

The higher pixel count is a real advantage for me, as it's significantly increased my shooting range with birds while still showing a decent quality image with good feather detail. If you're a shooter who more regularly fills the frame with his subjects - people, landscapes or even larger critters, the pixel density is less important.

It's pretty well the ideal camera for me given the current state of play, but I think a 40D owner would need to think about the type of shots he takes before 'upgrading' to the 50D.
 
CT said:
The 40D was the most camera Canon ever produced for the money.

I don't see any difference in AF and don't think Canon actually claim any?

I'd say noise performance is about the same from both cameras, which is pretty incredible given the number of pixels on the 50D sensor.

The higher pixel count is a real advantage for me, as it's significantly increased my shooting range with birds while still showing a decent quality image with good feather detail. If you're a shooter who more regularly fills the frame with his subjects - people, landscapes or even larger critters, the pixel density is less important.

It's pretty well the ideal camera for me given the current state of play, but I think a 40D owner would need to think about the type of shots he takes before 'upgrading' to the 50D.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Cedric, no I was certain the AF is the same (as is the AF in the new 5 compared to the old one). I have a 1Ds3 for full frame stuff, and use the 40 for BIF and wildlife in general, and am considering moving to a 1d mk2n but also considering a 50 instead of the 40, but I'd really like better af than the 40D gives. Ah well, just have to wait and see, perhaps try one if I can.
Thanks again.
 
MJ Stebbings said:
Haha, oh, i'm sure he does, it was just a little bit of banter there with those strange people who own Nikons :D

I think its fair that if he said "I'm moving to Nikon because their ISO handling is better then any other brand out there" then people would agree, but to take a swipe at Canon, i think he should take his 70-200"vr" and stick it where the sun doesnt shine ;) :lol:
Click to expand...

shame the barrel doesnt extend!
 
George said:
Thanks, Cedric, no I was certain the AF is the same (as is the AF in the new 5 compared to the old one). I have a 1Ds3 for full frame stuff, and use the 40 for BIF and wildlife in general, and am considering moving to a 1d mk2n but also considering a 50 instead of the 40, but I'd really like better af than the 40D gives. Ah well, just have to wait and see, perhaps try one if I can.
Thanks again.
Click to expand...
Hi George,

I have a 50D :whistling:

Mike.
 
Cedric is that the latest firmware version you are running?

As for Rouse, who knows.
 
George said:
Thanks, Cedric, no I was certain the AF is the same (as is the AF in the new 5 compared to the old one). I have a 1Ds3 for full frame stuff, and use the 40 for BIF and wildlife in general, and am considering moving to a 1d mk2n but also considering a 50 instead of the 40, but I'd really like better af than the 40D gives. Ah well, just have to wait and see, perhaps try one if I can.
Thanks again.
Click to expand...
Well, your 1DS3 should really give almost identical cropping resolution to the 40D with the added advantage of 45 AF points and the faster AF system, so it's as good an 'all rounder' as you can get. (For the next fortnight anyway :D)

I hadn't ruled out a 1DS3 for that reason, but the current price rises have scuppered that idea. :gag:

I just need Canon to stick a 50D sensor into a 1 series body. ;)
 
i havent upgraded mine yet(need to remember where i left the camera first)but early shots i took were much noisier than those, so the update does seem to cure the early issues well
 
CT said:
Well, your 1DS3 should really give almost identical cropping resolution to the 40D with the added advantage of 45 AF points and the faster AF system, so it's as good an 'all rounder' as you can get. (For the next fortnight anyway :D)

I hadn't ruled out a 1DS3 for that reason, but the current price rises have scuppered that idea. :gag:

I just need Canon to stick a 50D sensor into a 1 series body. ;)
Click to expand...

Funnily enough, I was doing some trials yesterday and came to the same conclusion re the 1Ds and 40D (the former when cropped). Yup, I agree, the 50 sensor with the 1series AF would be just fine!!....but I suppose that will be the basis of a 1Dmk4??:thinking::thinking:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top