Next time you guys do a noise level comparision, may I suggest shooting the scene at ISO 100 and then shootthe samescene againat ISO 3200, 6400 and 12800
Next time you guys do a noise level comparision, may I suggest shooting the scene at ISO 100 and then shootthe samescene againat ISO 3200, 6400 and 12800
hey Baron, just out of curiosity....where are you located? I've only seen the MarkIV released in Australia, and Norway(DPReview users). The posts on there seem to correspond with what you're saying also. One gentleman posted several shots using AI Servo of his dogs running towards him, with several bursts, including a 32 shot burst!! He said only 2 out of that series were OOF, and blamed them on trying to maintain focus on the dogs head with center point, while the dog was running towards him. Here is the link to his photos...gallery.mac.com/panfinnse
I have the MarkIV on order through Amazon, and haven't heard a word yet??!! I preordered on Oct 19 at 10pm PST, so I am patiently anticipating its arrival!!
I'm up for a more controlled side by side sensor comparrison. It might be helpful to see real world sensor comparisons at the selected ISO settings. The images would just need to have comparable subjects, the same camera settings with similar light where tripods would need to be used of course. In the long run I would hope that a 5,000 dollar investment would return higher quality results then the 2,700 investment.
Regarding the different ISO tests: I'm also interested in seeing shots at different ISO's, since there seems to be a lot of emphasis placed on high ISO. I'm guilty of this now, of course, but I only posted them because I was so surprised. I can post some lower ISO stuff (not at 100, since nobody really wants to shoot a DSLR at that level) when I get the chance, since it's unfair to not show this.
To the above person: I'm in New Zealand, so like Australia, we're part of the Asia/Pacific region that would have gotten the camera first.
<meta http-equiv="CONTENT-TYPE" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="OpenOffice.org 3.1 (Win32)" />
<style type="text/css"]
<!--
@page { margin: 0.79in }
P { margin-bottom: 0.08in }
-->
</style>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"]Another issue that would have to be the
same would be the upload size and quality number. My sample images
where uploaded at 72dpi and where approx 1000 x 664 with a quality
setting of 9 was used. The original images uploaded by baronfizzy
where pretty slow to open so I can only assume that they where saved
at much higher quality settings. Images would need to be
uploaded to the digital picture website for review. I would say that
72dpi and 1000 px longest side with a save quality number for the web
at 70 percent using photoshop, DPP or Lightroom ect would be the
standard. Sample shots would need to be of something with high
detail but not in the direct sunlight. Something out of the direct
sunlight if possible. Maybe use 70-200mm at 100mm where the image
would have approx 2 foot x 3 foot rectangle. I'm thinking an outdoor
images in the early evening time would be the easiest. Aperture set
at f/8, ISO 800, 1600, 3200, 6400 and then 12800.
Lets also throw a 25600 ISO into to mix as well for comparison.
Originally Posted by Sinh Nhut Nguyen
hehehehehehehe,...I will have to 2nd that!!!!!!
<meta http-equiv="CONTENT-TYPE" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="OpenOffice.org 3.1 (Win32)" />
<style type="text/css"]
<!--
@page { margin: 0.79in }
P { margin-bottom: 0.08in }
-->
</style>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"]
<meta http-equiv="CONTENT-TYPE" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="OpenOffice.org 3.1 (Win32)" />
<style type="text/css"]
<!--
@page { margin: 0.79in }
P { margin-bottom: 0.08in }
-->
</style>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"]The real test when it comes to noise
production and noise control is when the sensor has to in a sense
create light by over-extending the exposure. A perfect example that I
can contest to is shooting an interior room for commercial use that's
not well lit. In this case you just simply can't put in brighter
bulbs in the lamps or use strobes as this will blow out certain areas
of a medium to large room plus cast blown out highlights on the walls
and ceiling and create shadows. Even if you shoot multiple exposures
and blend them together theres only so far that you can go. I
see images shot on a daily basis at ISO 200 that have huge amounts of
noise/loss of detail even with the full frame sensor on the 5D2. The
reason for the higher noise content even while shooting at ISO 200 is
because of the other settings that are required. ISO 200, f/11 to
f/16 which sometimes requires a 15 to 25 sec shutter speeds breeds
noise. This combination of settings with low light and long exposure
is the true test for any sensor. A Canon 40D, 50D, and even a
7D in this sense would have even more noise where it would just not
be at an acceptable level plus you'd have to use a 10-12mm lens where
you'd end up cropping more then half the image away after you done
correcting it's perspective to meet publication standards. I want to
see true, "no holds barred" noise test used on professional
equipment. The 1D series of camera is strictly a professional camera
with a professional price tag so it needs to see harsh conditions
which has nothing to do with weather sealing.
Image of my dog at ISO 25600, 35mm, Tv 1/100, Av 2.8, entire room lit by one 40 watt energy saver bulb in a small lamp in the living room. He had a food allergy reaction where he developed bumps all over his back today so that does not count as noise.
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.32.66/My_2D00_dog_2D00_ISO_2D00_25600.jpg[/img].
Could you post a 100% crop at 102400 iso?
By the way you'd be the firstperson to do that[]
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote