12MP DSLRs - Noise at ISO1600 Comparision

[dolphin]

The cameras in the comparison:

just five cameras for now ...
Canon EOS 5D
Nikon D3
Nikon D300
Nikon D2Xs
Sony A700


The reference image at ISO 100:
http://69.93.231.164/PRODS/E5D/THUMBS300/E5DhSLCON01.JPG (http://69.93.231.164/PRODS/E5D/FULLRES/E5DhSLCON01.JPG)

For the comparative image are used 100% crops of the originals !
The Nikons are with NR OFF !

http://img219.imagevenue.com/loc522/th_00184_Noise_AT_ISO1600_122_522lo.jpg (http://img219.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=00184_Noise_AT_ISO1600_122_522lo.jpg )

imho the two full farme cameras are without competition . The detail/noise level of the 5D is just amazing !

[cdifoto]

Oh no not another one! :eek:

[VTEC_EATER]

What are we looking at here. All I see is a shot at ISO100. No comparison shots, and definitely not at ISO1600.

[DonSchap]

Well, if the Full Frame SONY (24.8MP) delivers anything close to this Full Frame performance ... we are in for a treat. It would have been nice to include the Canon 1Ds MkIII, in the future. Battle of the >20MP sensors.

Without a doubt, considering the Nikon D3, you are getting a good ISO-1600 image for your $5000! Guess I'll just thave to run out and buy one. Hey, wait a second ... I don't usually shoot ISO-1600. That's for rare occasions (Putting wallet back in rear pocket and lowering down the large bag of Minolta/SONY glass that was about to be traded in, based on this one image).

Sorry ... false alarm! :rolleyes:

That's funny (strange, not humorous), though ... I don't recall my SONY α700 shooting ISO-1600 (violet) that badly. Your example is rather tragic looking, to be sure. :eek: Guess I had better check, again! I'll post under various lighting conditions. The example lighting looks like a two strobe-diffused. That is a mini-color checker card (3x5) ... I have the standard size (8x10) ... so I'll have to use the 17-50mm at 17mm to try and get the same proportions in the viewfinder. Honestly, that's kind of small, but we've got pixels to spare, right?

[Nickcanada]

What are we looking at here. All I see is a shot at ISO100. No comparison shots, and definitely not at ISO1600.

Below the ISO 100 shot there is another picture of colour splotches. Click on it. ;)

[Nickcanada]

Oh no not another one! :eek:

What's wrong with a little ISO shoot off?

[VTEC_EATER]

That's funny (strange, not humorous), though ... I don't recall my SONY α700 shooting ISO-1600 (violet) that badly. Your example is rather tragic looking, to be sure. :eek: Guess I had better check, again! I'll post under various lighting conditions. The example lighting looks like a two strobe-diffused. That is a mini-color checker card (3x5) ... I have the standard size (8x10) ... so I'll have to use the 17-50mm at 17mm to try and get the same proportions in the viewfinder. Honestly, that's kind of small, but we've got pixels to spare, right?

What concerns me more is the funky noise reduction blotching. Was that A700 shot with noise reduction turned on? It looks a bit like a water color painting.

Don, can you show us some of your own samples with the noise reduction turned off?

Im still very impressed with the new Nikon cameras, even the D2XS performs pretty admirably in this test. Its not amazing, but certainly not as bad as I thought it was going to look.

[DonSchap]

Yeah ... I'll do a small series of tests, because that demonstration is substantive, if true. The thing of it is, SONY's Noise Reduction is no where as noticable as Nikon's is. It's very subtle, across the board, because they use a less generalized version. Nikon "paints with a broad brush", you might say, and SONY's is more ... granular? Just a completely different technique.

Once again, ISO-1600 is not my ISO of choice ... and things have to get pretty extreme for me to wind up using it. Others, with tighter aperture lenses (f/4+) may fall prey to this level of shooting, though. One other aspect, that was not addressed. Was this image taken at "Fine" or "Super-Fine" JPG resolution or even RAW? There are also other exposure aspects to consider that are not part of the average digital camera's repetroire and may cause distortions or improvements of the captured image. The α700 is not as simple as a P&S ... it offers the photographer an enormous amount of latitude with imaging. This additional level of image control can be a double-edged sword, to be sure. :cool:

Image parameter adjustments
Creative Style: Standard, Vivid, Neutral, Adobe RGB, User def. 1 - 3
User def. modes: Standard, Vivid, Neutral, Adobe RGB, Clear, Deep, Light, Portrait, Landscape,
Sunset, Night, Autumn, B/W, Sepia
Image parameter adjustments
Contrast: -3 to +3
Saturation: -3 to +3
Sharpness: -3 to +3
Brightness: -3 to +3 (User def. only)
Zone: -1 to +2 (User def. only)

[fionndruinne]

Noise in this range of DSLRs is one of the least important factors. They're all good enough to be irrelevant. If you're going to drop that much cash on a DSLR, look harder at the feature range (and you'd better have some pretty specific things in mind - if you don't, you should be looking at a more entry-level, reasonably priced series).

[Vich]

Noise in this range of DSLRs is one of the least important factors. They're all good enough to be irrelevant. If you're going to drop that much cash on a DSLR, look harder at the feature range (and you'd better have some pretty specific things in mind - if you don't, you should be looking at a more entry-level, reasonably priced series).

Humbly disagree. Low Noise (along with other IQ factors), to me, is about the MOST important difference. As long as it doesn't really stumble, all the other fancy camera features seem to be manageable.

But then; that's why I'm a Canon guy.

[Rooz]

But then; that's why I'm a Canon guy.

lol good one. i got a good laugh outta that. :D