iso noise and L glass

J

joescrivens

Suspended / Banned
Messages
15,052
Name
Joe
Edit My Images
Yes
Over the weekend we went to the Lakes and popped in to a zoo where they had some birds of prey, the light was poor inside during the show so I upped my ISO to 5000.

This was the first time out with the 70-200 on a holiday and I was really impressed with how well the noise was handled on the 7d with this glass. I've used it at this level before with my old 70-300 and I was very impressed with how much better the results are when you use the best glass. I totally expect image quality to be better of course but it was a surprise to me how much better noise results are.

Small amount of noise reduction and sharpening

4814361635_20d712f712_b.jpg


100% crop
4814984558_621f79c192.jpg
 
perhaps it's to do with needing more sharpening on the 70-300. Sharpening inherently increases noise.
 
trencheel303 said:
perhaps it's to do with needing more sharpening on the 70-300. Sharpening inherently increases noise.
Click to expand...

no its not that, the noise on the standard raw before any sharpening is worse when using the 70-300 or an other non l glass i have
 
give us photos to compare.
 
I seriously doubt the level of noise is anything to do with quality of glass.
Also i am not convinced that Owl shot is 5K Iso.
I have seen a few 3k + Iso shots on here with the 7D and they havent looked good.
 
CraigF said:
I seriously doubt the level of noise is anything to do with quality of glass.
Also i am not convinced that Owl shot is 5K Iso.
I have seen a few 3k + Iso shots on here with the 7D and they havent looked good.
Click to expand...

So you're calling Joe a liar? Nice!
 
That's good performance for such high iso... I'm a bit lost in the rest of the thread though, are you saying there is less noise with your L glass?
 
What could ISO noise possibly have to do with the glass in front of it? Don't believe it personally but I am open to hearing from someone who wants to explain the physics if it is indeed true.

I suspect it's just a case of less sharpening needed on the better glass...?
 
There is definitely noise there, it's just well hidden with the exposure being correct. Perhaps that's what is different, maybe Joe's technique was insta-boosted when he bought an L glass? :shrug:

Bad technique can seriously show up ISO performance though. When I got my first SLR, a 450D, I'd get noisy shots even at ISO 800. It wasn't long until I was getting effectively noiseless shots at 1600 ISO once I'd learned how to expose properly.

EDIT: I have no doubt that this is ISO 5,000. I do think the perceived noise decrease is a placebo though, likely combined with improved technique.
 
CraigF said:
I seriously doubt the level of noise is anything to do with quality of glass.
Also i am not convinced that Owl shot is 5K Iso.
I have seen a few 3k + Iso shots on here with the 7D and they havent looked good.
Click to expand...

erm... can you explain then. What are you saying? That I'm saying this is iso 5000 when in fact it is something else?

How about checking the exif and you can see for yourself, heres a screencap in Camera Raw, the info is on the right hand side.

Not sure why I am having to prove this though :shrug: Why on earth would I post something and just flat out lie about it?
 
I very much doubt Joe is lying, it is quite easily proved by providing the file data. To be fair the exposure on the owl shot looks pretty bang on which will reduce any noise. I dont see why the 7D gets such a bad rep if thats how it handles noise at 5000.
 
mid_gen said:
What could ISO noise possibly have to do with the glass in front of it? Don't believe it personally but I am open to hearing from someone who wants to explain the physics if it is indeed true.

I suspect it's just a case of less sharpening needed on the better glass...?
Click to expand...

well i have to say i agree with you which is why i posted this actually to see if someone can clarify one way or another, i've seen better performance on noise when using my l glass, and i wondered if that is just because the glass is higher quality.

Its not the sharpening, as i said before I see better results pre sharpening. I have an 85 1.8 non L thats the only one in the same focal range as my 70-200 L that I could do a test with, I'll post some results when I get some time
 
From personal experience noise has got a lot to do with exposure and whats in a image, a under exposed image will have loads of noise , and darker area's in a image show-up noise more than lighter areas.
 
The23rdman said:
So you're calling Joe a liar? Nice!
Click to expand...

No i was saying there is no Exif and it does not look like iso 5k on a 7D and i doubt the glass had anything to do with noise levels. It was actually in the post if you bothered to read it.

Staff edit: comment removed
 
Yeah, the glass isn't going to have a direct effect on the noise levels. However, if it's helping the camera to expose correctly or even slightly overexpose, then you may see a bit less noise. But not because the lens is doing anything to the light or the sensor, it's just behaving nicely with the system.
 
joescrivens said:
erm... can you explain then. What are you saying? That I'm saying this is iso 5000 when in fact it is something else?

How about checking the exif and you can see for yourself, heres a screencap in Camera Raw, the info is on the right hand side.

Not sure why I am having to prove this though :shrug: Why on earth would I post something and just flat out lie about it?
Click to expand...


Posting the original file somewhere would be better, i can alter almost everything before i even put a file to ACR so that proves nothing.
Im not entirely sure why you have gone all defensive over the comment i made.
I merely stated i doubted the glass was the reason and other 3k+ iso shots i saw were very poor on the 7D.
 
Cuchulainn said:
Yeah, the glass isn't going to have a direct effect on the noise levels. However, if it's helping the camera to expose correctly or even slightly overexpose, then you may see a bit less noise. But not because the lens is doing anything to the light or the sensor, it's just behaving nicely with the system.
Click to expand...

gotcha, that makes total sense to me.
 
That does look like a nice shot.

Just a quick word on 7D noise...the high ISO shots very often look good to me and that side of 7D performance wouldn't worry me. If I was going to question any aspect of 7D performance it would be lower ISO performance where some shots seem to display more noise than expected. This may be subject dependant, I don't know, but as a potential buyer I'll have to look into it.

Cracking owl shot though.
 
CraigF said:
No i was saying there is no Exif and it does not look like iso 5k on a 7D and i doubt the glass had anything to do with noise levels. It was actually in the post if you bothered to read it.

Staff edit: comment removed
Click to expand...

You said you seriously doubt the shot was at 5k iso. I read it. If you're not calling Joe a liar I take it back, but it read that way to me.

Oh, and was the removed insult ( I didn't see) aimed at me?
 
CraigF said:
Posting the original file somewhere would be better, i can alter almost everything before i even put a file to ACR so that proves nothing.
Im not entirely sure why you have gone all defensive over the comment i made.
I merely stated i doubted the glass was the reason and other 3k+ iso shots i saw were very poor on the 7D.
Click to expand...

Why have I gone defensive over the comment you made. Well, to explain.

I stated that here was a shot taken at iso 5000

you tell me that you are "not convinced that Owl shot is 5K Iso."

Pretty good grounds for a defensive response if you ask me. :shrug:

ok, heres the original raw file if you are convinced that i am lying. I'll take the apology with a slice of cake thanks :thumbs:
 
Here you go sigma 150mm, ISO25600 jpg straight from the camera crop is 100% from full 21mp image - you can see the noise in the dark area a lot more than the light areas.

iso25600.jpg
iso25600_crop.jpg
 
woof woof said:
That does look like a nice shot.

Just a quick word on 7D noise...the high ISO shots very often look good to me and that side of 7D performance wouldn't worry me. If I was going to question any aspect of 7D performance it would be lower ISO performance where some shots seem to display more noise than expected. This may be subject dependant, I don't know, but as a potential buyer I'll have to look into it.

Cracking owl shot though.
Click to expand...

I think the low iso performance people have complained about is specific to particular 7ds and is a manufacturer error, personally I see no problem at low ISO.

Here is another shot I was impressed with the noise on L glass, but again like you guys say, it must just be the exposure, this is at ISO 2000.

CraigF - are you going to make me post the raw file to prove this one too, or will you be just accepting that I'm not lying?

4814438971_d227fc19ab_b.jpg
 
Mentalblock said:
Thats the second cost comment I've got for the same question I raised on another thread.

What does the 'L' do that a none L cannot, apart from make me skint and divorced!
Click to expand...

it's basically just the premium product for canon, in simple terms it means they use higher quality glass in the lenses and better build quality, hence why they are more expensive. Thats the layman's term way to put it.

the wiki posted above explains more.
 
joescrivens said:
I think the low iso performance people have complained about is specific to particular 7ds and is a manufacturer error, personally I see no problem at low ISO.

Here is another shot I was impressed with the noise on L glass, but again like you guys say, it must just be the exposure, this is at ISO 2000.

CraigF - are you going to make me post the raw file to prove this one too, or will you be just accepting that I'm not lying?

4814438971_d227fc19ab_b.jpg
Click to expand...

Wow thats a great shot,what a wee cracker.:)
 
Mentalblock said:
Thats the second cost comment I've got for the same question I raised on another thread.

What does the 'L' do that a none L cannot, apart from make me skint and divorced!
Click to expand...

Better build quality and supposedly better IQ -
 
You sure its not Ludicrous, as in Ludicrously good :)

Joe, can you please stop pasting up shots you have taken on your 7D and L glass, not all of us have the luxury of works paid for kit and as such you have a distinct advantage (you jammy so and so, any vacancies :) )

Nice shots though, both the owl and the kiddy, he looks a bundle of fun
Matt
 
I think the L was for Luxury but basically it's the top glass, usually better f stop, weatherproofing, sharper, crisper image and better colours.
 
Joe, I too think that the low ISO problems were probably just an early batch issue and probably subject dependant too which all gives me a problem deciding what to buy, 7D or 5DII.
 
The L glass should let the colours through better too, with better shadow detail. This may help disguise the effect of the noise. Certainly noticeable on my 50D with 70-200 2.8 IS compared to my 17-55 IS kit job... Actually quite noticeable on the big lens comparing f2.8 to f4
 
woof woof said:
Joe, I too think that the low ISO problems were probably just an early batch issue and probably subject dependant too which all gives me a problem deciding what to buy, 7D or 5DII.
Click to expand...

as much as i love my 7d, if i had the money i'd buy a 5d. But I think I'll wait for the mark 3 before I upgrade
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top