Little help with new 30D required

ShadowWraith · 28th April 2006, 1:47 AM

Hey people,

For a long time I've been after a DSLR for quite some time, but kept holding out. When the 30D came out the other month, I decided to sell my Sony F717 and buy the 30D. The 30D seems miles ahead over the F717 that I had, except for one thing. I was expecting much better iso100 performance than the F717, based on all the 20D samples floating around on the web. Admittedly it is not ideal to do such a comparison nor is it really credible.

Anyway I've had doubts about my camera based on long exposure photos I’ve taken of a night time at iso100, I was expecting better performance in the shadows, however I put it down to me using the kit lens and not exposing the photo enough despite the desire to have a dark kind of mood to the photos.

While I am waiting on a canon lens I have ordered, I decided to pick up the 50 f/1.4 the other day. When I took a test photo in the office at iso100, I was a bit surprised at the image quality when I got it home to view it on my monitor. The image was nice and sharp and seemed well focus considering it was a quick test photo with absolutely no thought at all, but the background blur seemed very noisy for an iso100 shot, I was expecting a smooth blur.

If there is someone who has plenty of experience with canon DSLR's could offer to have a look at a few of my RAW files for me and let me know what you think, it would be much appreciative. I often wonder if my expectations of iso100 for a DSLR were way too high when I bought the camera, but I just don't really know what to think at this point in time.

Thanks,

Craig

Ronza · 28th April 2006, 2:02 AM

Shoot the same scene in JPEG or process the RAW File with a slight level of noise reduction, the in-camera noise-reduction (not to mention the long exposure noise-reduction) won't affect the RAW Files.

stergiopilus · 28th April 2006, 2:03 AM

Some of the earlier 30D's had noise problems. Have a read here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=18092922

Is the noise the same in JPEG?

Amfibius · 28th April 2006, 7:27 AM

That's a bit odd. Send me your RAW file - wongkk at iinet dot net dot au.

Amfibius · 29th April 2006, 8:22 AM

Thanks for sending me the RAW files. Hm, I see what you mean - you are quite right. I don't understand it, my camera does not behave like this.

sir_bazz · 29th April 2006, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amfibius

Thanks for sending me the RAW files. Hm, I see what you mean - you are quite right. I don't understand it, my camera does not behave like this.

Any chance you can post the image so others can see it as well ? It may help other new 30D owners confirm if they have the same problem or not.

cheers,
bazz.

Amfibius · 29th April 2006, 10:43 AM

I hope the OP won't mind, but here it is. His image was shot at ISO100:

And a 100% crop of the top left corner:

I don't have a 30D, I have a 20D. I suppose the noise might be a bit comparable. Here is a not very succesful image which I have on my HDD. Shot at ISO 100:

And a 100% crop of the top left corner:

Both images were processed with Bibble Pro with the noise filtering turned OFF.

ShadowWraith · 29th April 2006, 11:57 AM

Thanks for having a look for me, the night exposures don't seem that much different but it is hard to tell with the sky colours, even though I do constantly notice allot of chrominance noise in allot of my photos, especially when I boost up the ISO. What did you think of the first picture I sent you? Is it what you would have expected for an ISO100 shot with the 50f/1.4 lens?

Amfibius · 29th April 2006, 3:44 PM

Shadow, subjectively your shot seems a little bit noisier than mine. You really shouldn't bother examining your pictures at this magnification though. Once you print your image the noise just seems to disappear.

BTW did you have long exposure noise reduction turned on or off?

ShadowWraith · 29th April 2006, 5:37 PM

On the long exposure shot, it was set to Auto, so in theory the camera should use long exposure noise reduction if the exposure is 1 second or longer. Even though I doubt it really does that as it still gets a hot pixel at iso100.

You are right the noise is subjective, my aim is to do large prints though, A3 and bigger if possible, I'm just wondering what impact large prints will have on the noise characteristics?

Also note the long exposure shot of the children’s play area was recently, it was about 12c degrees outside at the time of the photo, so I wouldn’t have expected hardly any noise at all, especially the short exposure indoor shot I sent you that was using the flash. Also I do use DPP, and when I turn off all the noise reduction and transfer it to Photoshop, I see a lot of chrominance noise at iso100 (splotchy colour), which I would have expected at high ISO’s only.

nukiez · 30th April 2006, 1:59 AM

Hi, I have the 30D and I am in Melbourne too, I wouldn't mind coming out one day for a test. I used to have a 20D but I sold it. I have done some extensive tests, the images are very close.

CD · 30th April 2006, 9:30 AM

that kind of noise looks pretty normal to me. iso100 still has grains @ 100%

100% crop, ISO100, 1/250s, f/4. taken with EF 100 f/2.8 macro on a 30D (serial 5x)

Click to view full-sized image!
Hosted by UGBox Image Store

ShadowWraith · 30th April 2006, 1:43 PM

I just viewed your sample shot CD, that seems good even though its hard to tell through all the jpg compression artifacts that UGBox does.

This is a sample crop of what had me concerned:

http://users.bigpond.net.au/craigthomson/_MG_0724.TIF

iso100, 50mm f/1.4, internal flashed used, converted using DPP and 100% cropped to the background of the photo, no sharpening, (serial 3x)

Note the photo was actually well exposed for the centre of the face, just the background being underexposed is where I notice the type of splotchy noise. and the weird red green colour noise in the more grey areas.

CD · 30th April 2006, 4:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShadowWraith

I just viewed your sample shot CD, that seems good even though its hard to tell through all the jpg compression artifacts that UGBox does.

This is a sample crop of what had me concerned:

http://users.bigpond.net.au/craigthomson/_MG_0724.TIF

iso100, 50mm f/1.4, internal flashed used, converted using DPP and 100% cropped to the background of the photo, no sharpening, (serial 3x)

Note the photo was actually well exposed for the centre of the face, just the background being underexposed is where I notice the type of splotchy noise. and the weird red green colour noise in the more grey areas.

so did you up the exposure a bit to bring up the background? that would increase noise levels.

ShadowWraith · 30th April 2006, 5:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CD

so did you up the exposure a bit to bring up the background? that would increase noise levels.

Nope, no exposure increase, that’s the photo’s default. If I were to increase the exposure in DPP, I'm sure it wouldn't be very pleasant results.

Right now the way my photos come out of the camera, especially in the night time long exposure shots, I wouldn't dare change the exposure.

28th April 2006, 1:47 AM	#1
ShadowWraith Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Australia/Melbourne Posts: 62	Little help with new 30D required Hey people, For a long time I've been after a DSLR for quite some time, but kept holding out. When the 30D came out the other month, I decided to sell my Sony F717 and buy the 30D. The 30D seems miles ahead over the F717 that I had, except for one thing. I was expecting much better iso100 performance than the F717, based on all the 20D samples floating around on the web. Admittedly it is not ideal to do such a comparison nor is it really credible. Anyway I've had doubts about my camera based on long exposure photos I’ve taken of a night time at iso100, I was expecting better performance in the shadows, however I put it down to me using the kit lens and not exposing the photo enough despite the desire to have a dark kind of mood to the photos. While I am waiting on a canon lens I have ordered, I decided to pick up the 50 f/1.4 the other day. When I took a test photo in the office at iso100, I was a bit surprised at the image quality when I got it home to view it on my monitor. The image was nice and sharp and seemed well focus considering it was a quick test photo with absolutely no thought at all, but the background blur seemed very noisy for an iso100 shot, I was expecting a smooth blur. If there is someone who has plenty of experience with canon DSLR's could offer to have a look at a few of my RAW files for me and let me know what you think, it would be much appreciative. I often wonder if my expectations of iso100 for a DSLR were way too high when I bought the camera, but I just don't really know what to think at this point in time. Thanks, Craig

28th April 2006, 7:27 AM	#4
Amfibius Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Posts: 6,653	That's a bit odd. Send me your RAW file - wongkk at iinet dot net dot au. __________________ -Amfibius

29th April 2006, 8:22 AM	#5
Amfibius Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Posts: 6,653	Thanks for sending me the RAW files. Hm, I see what you mean - you are quite right. I don't understand it, my camera does not behave like this. __________________ -Amfibius

29th April 2006, 10:43 AM	#7
Amfibius Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Posts: 6,653	I hope the OP won't mind, but here it is. His image was shot at ISO100: And a 100% crop of the top left corner: I don't have a 30D, I have a 20D. I suppose the noise might be a bit comparable. Here is a not very succesful image which I have on my HDD. Shot at ISO 100: And a 100% crop of the top left corner: Both images were processed with Bibble Pro with the noise filtering turned OFF. __________________ -Amfibius

29th April 2006, 3:44 PM	#9
Amfibius Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Posts: 6,653	Shadow, subjectively your shot seems a little bit noisier than mine. You really shouldn't bother examining your pictures at this magnification though. Once you print your image the noise just seems to disappear. BTW did you have long exposure noise reduction turned on or off? __________________ -Amfibius

28th April 2006, 2:02 AM	#2
Ronza Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 3,159	Shoot the same scene in JPEG or process the RAW File with a slight level of noise reduction, the in-camera noise-reduction (not to mention the long exposure noise-reduction) won't affect the RAW Files.

28th April 2006, 2:03 AM	#3
stergiopilus Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Brisbane Posts: 1,957	Some of the earlier 30D's had noise problems. Have a read here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=18092922 Is the noise the same in JPEG?

29th April 2006, 11:57 AM	#8
ShadowWraith Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Australia/Melbourne Posts: 62	Thanks for having a look for me, the night exposures don't seem that much different but it is hard to tell with the sky colours, even though I do constantly notice allot of chrominance noise in allot of my photos, especially when I boost up the ISO. What did you think of the first picture I sent you? Is it what you would have expected for an ISO100 shot with the 50f/1.4 lens?

29th April 2006, 5:37 PM	#10
ShadowWraith Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Australia/Melbourne Posts: 62	On the long exposure shot, it was set to Auto, so in theory the camera should use long exposure noise reduction if the exposure is 1 second or longer. Even though I doubt it really does that as it still gets a hot pixel at iso100. You are right the noise is subjective, my aim is to do large prints though, A3 and bigger if possible, I'm just wondering what impact large prints will have on the noise characteristics? Also note the long exposure shot of the children’s play area was recently, it was about 12c degrees outside at the time of the photo, so I wouldn’t have expected hardly any noise at all, especially the short exposure indoor shot I sent you that was using the flash. Also I do use DPP, and when I turn off all the noise reduction and transfer it to Photoshop, I see a lot of chrominance noise at iso100 (splotchy colour), which I would have expected at high ISO’s only.

30th April 2006, 1:59 AM	#11
nukiez Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Melbourne Posts: 274	Hi, I have the 30D and I am in Melbourne too, I wouldn't mind coming out one day for a test. I used to have a 20D but I sold it. I have done some extensive tests, the images are very close.

30th April 2006, 9:30 AM	#12
CD Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Clayfield, Brisbane Posts: 1,968	that kind of noise looks pretty normal to me. iso100 still has grains @ 100% 100% crop, ISO100, 1/250s, f/4. taken with EF 100 f/2.8 macro on a 30D (serial 5x) Click to view full-sized image! Hosted by UGBox Image Store __________________ Bimblebox - turning Australian nature refuges into open cut coal mines?! Find out more! Huego Studio Celebration Photography Last edited by CD; 30th April 2006 at 11:24 AM.

30th April 2006, 1:43 PM	#13
ShadowWraith Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Australia/Melbourne Posts: 62	I just viewed your sample shot CD, that seems good even though its hard to tell through all the jpg compression artifacts that UGBox does. This is a sample crop of what had me concerned: http://users.bigpond.net.au/craigthomson/_MG_0724.TIF iso100, 50mm f/1.4, internal flashed used, converted using DPP and 100% cropped to the background of the photo, no sharpening, (serial 3x) Note the photo was actually well exposed for the centre of the face, just the background being underexposed is where I notice the type of splotchy noise. and the weird red green colour noise in the more grey areas.