Camera Technology
- This topic has 27 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated Nov 12, 2009 at 3:24 pm by
.
-
Posts
-
Kurt thanks for the reply,
In all honesty I never shoot in high ISO’s. The highest I tend to go is 800. Anything past 800 ISO is going to have some grain (although I see very little noise up to 1200). I guess I could go in and noise ninja some of that stuff out later but most of my shooting does not require anything past 800. 😉
Just to clarify on Nikons Noise Reduction….it is an option that can be enabled or disabled. I have mine turned off. It also has low, medium and high options 😉
The 700 has ISO up to 6400. It is not likely it will ever get used.
It really isn’t anything more than an automated algorithm for exposure blending. It amazes me how many different names they will come up with, for this process, as it was first used back in 1952. HDR hit the map as soon as the digital darkroom made it easy for “everybody” to start doing it. The difference is, HDR was then taken to a different level of tone mapping while exposure blending stayed on the premise of blending exposures. This in camera algorithm is nothing more than an automated exposure blend that pumps up the shadow density and stops down the specular. I can see applications, such as midday sun but I wouldn’t rely on it for all other application’s. Perhaps I am just an old school sort but I prefer to have complete control over my equipment and the finals that I create from my acquired knowledge.
The Nikon bodies actually function better with the noise reduction disabled, even at high ISO’s. If the triangle is set correctly and the angle of deflection, as well as framing of subject, is set to a good relative bearing and range, some descent high ISO’s shots can be captured, with very little noise, if any. I wouldn’t dream of doing this on a big assignment but did decide to test out the D200 during this one. These were all shot with the D200 @ISO 1600, (David Anderson is the concert pro photographer, I just pretended to be one on this shoot 🙂 ) with no noise reduction in camera or in post, they are test shots and outtakes so…
This last one was also shot with the D200 @ ISO 1600 and then later converted to B&W but again, no noise reduction software was used.
A fun shot of a friend on full frame @ ISO 3200. Again, no on board noise reduction or post, both samples are from Nikon bodies.
I would never shoot this high for finals on an assignment, or on set- but then again- if I needed to or if it was for artistic flare, it is nice to know ones equipment well enough that they can take it into the perceived forbidden zone. The D700 can go up to ISO 25,600 so, there is a lot of room to play and experiment.
I really think that enabling the D lighting (no onboard in the D200) would of ruined these shots and made it even more difficult to recover in post. Like I said though, this is just my opinion, not one that I force on others, and one that I will admit to being more of an old school approach.
Canon has had highlight tone priority for a few years.
New since the 50D bodies is something they call auto lighting optimiserBoth are available in all Canon bodies now so shooters can choose either setting (if desired, I personally dont like leaving things to the camera if at all possible) and work similiar to Nikons D lighting.
New with the Canon 7D and forthcoming 1DmkIV is a new metering system. Back lit subjects shots from the 7D that I’ve seen are *very* good. No in camera blending, or exposure adj’s… just different metering..Mind you Im not fully up to speed on how they meter differently.
This is a back lit Gold finch in fairly strong light. Typically you would need fill flash to expose the birds breast w/o completely blowing the back ground.
A friends early test image with the 7D
Canon claims that the gapless microlens first introduced with the 50D has allowed them to increase the MP, yet maintain same noise levels without increasing the strength of the AA filter. (see 50D to 40D and now 7D to 50D).
In reading some notes/specs/press releases about the 1DMKIV I noticed Canon is *claiming* that the same gapless microlens tech is resulting in increased dynamic range…Typical manufactorer propaganda??? I dont know…remains to be seen
Either way it’s about time the big boys atleast *look* at and try to come with ways to improve digitals next holy grail (previously noise).
Hell of a shot Ben….love it
Not overly surprising, note Royce’s comments ( Royce is also one of a very view whose opinions I “trust”).
For a long time both Canon and Nikon increased the strength of the AA filters to combat the increase in pixel counts. With the 40>50>7D its got be one of the strongest AA filters out there.
Thats why no matter what body you use, everyone needs to do a little “capture sharpening” to their raw files. The stronger the AA filter, the flatter/softer your images are going to look. Comparing 2 Raw files *is* comparing apples to oranges if the strength of the AA filter is different.
I know quite a few people who use the 7D now and their files are extremely good especially for an 18mp on a 1.6 crop. That said over all IQ is very similiar to the 50D, which is very similiar to the 40D. So ultimately Canon *was* as they claim able to retain IQ while drastically upping the MP. No crop camera will ever compare to the files produced by Pro bodies and the better “semi Pro” (5DmkII etc), again its comparing apples/oranges
John, check this review by Darwin Wiggett on the 7D. It’s very interesting.
http://darwinwiggett.wordpress.com/I read this yesterday, considering the jump to the 7D. He claims to get better files from his XSi (what I currently use) than from the numerous 7D bodies he tested. Thanks for bringing this up, Kurt. I am anxious to see what is said re. this new body.
Dusty
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.