5DMKii & noise :help:

Button

Button

Suspended / Banned
Messages
140
Name
Yvonne
Edit My Images
No
I got a 5DMKii a few months ago and I'm getting very inconsistent results with it. I'm seeing a lot of noise sometimes on low ISOs
This was taken ISO 500, f4.0 1/200 70mm
5068944269_a857f6c04c.jpg

Crop
5069511264_84f49c9967.jpg


It definitely can be very sharp.
Here is one from day before
ISO 100, f2.8 1/160 70mm
5068899067_c6609cf6ab.jpg

Crop again
5068919369_e94a1a8f04.jpg


I am getting similar results with ISO as low as 100, when I take photos off camera I am frequently disappointed.:shrug: Could the problem be with the lens? The lens is canon 24-70. Any ideas where I am going wrong?

Edited to say No pp on either just exported in lightroom
 
Last edited:
Ooo This might be the camera that was being compared to the D700.
I don't think its your lens, lenses don't create noise, not that I know of anyway.

I heard on a review that a certain Canon had bad ISO even set low.
Might not be this one, might be. I forget :D
 
AdamPearcey said:
Ooo This might be the camera that was being compared to the D700.
I don't think its your lens, lenses don't create noise, not that I know of anyway.

I heard on a review that a certain Canon had bad ISO even set low.
Might not be this one, might be. I forget :D
Click to expand...

No, you're thinking of the 7D (a crop camera).

Is the OP shooting in RAW or JPG?
 
I nearly always shoot in raw. These 2 were in raw and exported using lightroom without touching any sliders
 
surprising noise for iso 500, but the kids face looks underexposed which makes noise works

what pp was applied?
 
AdamPearcey said:
Ooo This might be the camera that was being compared to the D700.
I don't think its your lens, lenses don't create noise, not that I know of anyway.

I heard on a review that a certain Canon had bad ISO even set low.
Might not be this one, might be. I forget :D
Click to expand...

petty point scoring at its lowest, wtg
 
No pp just exported in lightroom.

Here is another example
iso 100 f2.8 1/500 70mm

5069858908_ed2a061d61.jpg


5069258253_804c12325b.jpg
 
To avoid noise at higher ISO's you need to nail the exposure, wheather it's a Nykon D700 or a Canon 5d2. I expose to the right and shoot Raw much of the time just to be on the safe side. ;) :nuts:
 
AdamPearcey said:
Ooo This might be the camera that was being compared to the D700.
I don't think its your lens, lenses don't create noise, not that I know of anyway.

I heard on a review that a certain Canon had bad ISO even set low.
Might not be this one, might be. I forget :D
Click to expand...

wrong as usual adam, that was the 7d, but it was also on specific models - my old 7d for example had no such issue.
 
Why would you use ISO 500?
Try sticking to 100,200,400,800,1600,3200 etc. Probably wouldn't make a difference, but I've heard it can affect the dynamic range using 'in betweens'.

Basically, if 400 isn't enough, push it to 800.
The MKII shouldn't have an issue shooting at 800. My MKI certainly hasn't......
 
I get this on my mkII in the same sort of lighting as your first shot - High contrast/back-lit shots where I have underexposed the main point of interest (in this case the boy's face) and especially where there is a very bright area adjacent show lots of noise in the shadows. Expose for the face properly and recover the highlights (or just let them blow) is the best approach I've come up with.

I don't see much wrong with the girl's face to be honest, but that might be my poor screen.
 
This is deffinatley an exposure issue, the exposure on the kids face is under exposed therefor introducing noise in the shadow areas, any camera will do this!

remember to expose for your subject, this may result in a brighter background which you may or not want, otherwise just use fill flash to put some light on their faces, your noise issues will vanish ;)
 
I agree, the face in the first example is really underexposed, and the noise is made worse by trying to rescue a little blurry shot with strong sharpening. The exposure needs to be spot on and the shadows may need to be filled in with reflector or flash.

I would also disable all auto light optimizers, etc in custom functions. That certainly improved the results in 50D (still nowhere near 1Ds quality though)
 
The 5DII should be pretty good at those ISO settings.

You've got to remember that when you zoom to 100% you're looking at massive prints.

If it's on the web or printing anything below A2 size, you'll never need to view the files at 100%.

I have to say the crop of the girl at ISO 100 looks absolutely fine to me.
 
andy_fozzy said:
Why would you use ISO 500?
Try sticking to 100,200,400,800,1600,3200 etc. Probably wouldn't make a difference, but I've heard it can affect the dynamic range using 'in betweens'.
Click to expand...

Not sure why I used 500 just I was uping the iso to ensure that I could get shutter speed high enough. Its funny though I was doing some research since and the advice was to use the inbetween isos, which didn't make much sense to me really:shrug:

ianmarsh said:
I get this on my mkII in the same sort of lighting as your first shot - High contrast/back-lit shots where I have underexposed the main point of interest (in this case the boy's face) and especially where there is a very bright area adjacent show lots of noise in the shadows. Expose for the face properly and recover the highlights (or just let them blow) is the best approach I've come up with.

I don't see much wrong with the girl's face to be honest, but that might be my poor screen.
Click to expand...

At least I am not going mad someone else is seeing the same. If I know whats causing it I may be able to stop it happening.


mh photography said:
This is deffinatley an exposure issue, the exposure on the kids face is under exposed therefor introducing noise in the shadow areas, any camera will do this!

remember to expose for your subject, this may result in a brighter background which you may or not want, otherwise just use fill flash to put some light on their faces, your noise issues will vanish ;)
Click to expand...


Thanks good to know why it was happening


daugirdas said:
I agree, the face in the first example is really underexposed, and the noise is made worse by trying to rescue a little blurry shot with strong sharpening. The exposure needs to be spot on and the shadows may need to be filled in with reflector or flash.

I would also disable all auto light optimizers, etc in custom functions. That certainly improved the results in 50D (still nowhere near 1Ds quality though)
Click to expand...


Do you mean the camera rescuing or in PP. No pp done on this. I would have expected the noise with trying to rescue it in PP but didn't really expect it like that straight out of the camera
I think all auto light optimizers disabled but I'll double check.

Thanks for your help I guess I will have to watch my exposure and hopefully that will improve the photos. What would the best metering mode for the likes of the first image
 
Maybe not.

Perhaps those ISO's are not 'true' ISO settings?

Perhaps it sets the camera to 200, then underexposes and brightens for iso 250, but sets it to 400 and over exposes for 320?
In which case it's sort of plausible that 320 could have less noise, if 320 is reduced brightness 400 and 250 is upped brightness 200 (am I making any sense here?)
 
I have a 7D and the other weekend some of my ISO100 shots I was rather disappointed with the level of noise. Whereas the higher ISO ones where great. Why is all I have to say :thinking:
 
I think the first pic is just underexposed, the others look fine to me. As said, unless you are making huuuge prints you are never going to see that level of detail anyway.
 
A bit off topic but... all this madness with higher ISO's looking better than lower ones really puts me off the later Canons.

I'm off into town tomorrow and might take a look at the 60D (the articulated screen and the built in flash beats the 5DII for me.)

Things seemed much easier in the olden days when low ISO meant the highest quality.
 
Yeah, but at the mo I can shoot at 100-400 with my 20D with no problem at all so the (possibly groundless) fear of buying a new camera and being disappointed at 100 doesn't appeal and is one reason why I'll definitely try and analyse on my own pc before I think about buying.

We live in interesting times.
 
firstly you are comparing an ISO 500 with an ISO 100 shot - the higher the ISO the more noise and less sharp the image is going to be.

personally I see nothing wrong with the image


Button said:
I got a 5DMKii a few months ago and I'm getting very inconsistent results with it. I'm seeing a lot of noise sometimes on low ISOs
This was taken ISO 500, f4.0 1/200 70mm

I definitely can be very sharp.
Here is one from day before

ISO 100, f2.8 1/160 70mm
Click to expand...
 
That's because they are not proper ISO's on the 5DMK2.
ISO 160 for example is actually a ISO 200 picture that is then underesposed by the camera.
The same is true of the other 1/3 stop ISO setting.ISO 125 suffers really badly from noise.That's because the camera is taking a picture at ISO 100 and then increasing the exposure in camera.
Hope I've made sense .

Basically if you are moving from the 1 stop ISO's always use the ISO below the required setting.
Use 50, 160, 320, 640, 1250, 2500 ISO(would avoid ISO 50 unless you need to slow the shutter speed down-The DR takes abig hit at ISO 50)

Avoid 125 250 500 1000 2000 etc

Cheers
Gary
 
Its all very confusing I guess it is something that I will get used to.

Poah the 2nd photo was given more as an example that I don't think there is anything wrong with the camera because I know it can be sharp under and well over 500. The first photo is what I would have expected from my 400d at around 400.

Some interesting tests I might try run some test myself to see the effects
 
Is it possible to configure the menu so that only the good ISO options are shown? That'd help.
 
vulcan2912 said:
ISO 160 for example is actually a ISO 200 picture that is then underesposed by the camera.
Click to expand...
Huh? All ISO is in a digital camera is gain on the sensor as it comes out before it is converted to a digital signal. The chip itself doesn't have any concept of ISO like film does...
 
andy_fozzy said:
Well that buggers my theory up then :D

Very interesting.........
Click to expand...

Andy,

I have that snippet lodged in the back of my brain too, I can't for the hell of it remember where I got it from...I quoted it only last week to someone else too...
 
Tugster said:
Andy,

I have that snippet lodged in the back of my brain too, I can't for the hell of it remember where I got it from...I quoted it only last week to someone else too...
Click to expand...

Neither can I :lol:
Been trying to think where I got this info from (probably TP TBH!!!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top