Help, pictures are NOISY!!!

[buffalopc7]

I need help, not sure what i'm doing wrong but i'm getting really great pictures (see example) with my 20D set at ISO 1600. Nearly all my shots were clear, sharp, but alas, noisy and although Neat Image is a great program, it can't clean out all the noise. I'd much rather take a picture that is less noisy but when I step down the ISO to even 800, its so dark its nearly unusable (even with flash). What am I doing wrong??? BTW, the photos are all taken indoors, at the local botanical gardens, which is pretty much a big greenhouse, so the lighting is mostly natural.
65175

[Hellashot]

Dark shots may require a tripod for a long exposure to be able to use low iso. Please post your EXIF data and if a tripod was used.

[buffalopc7]

In the example shot, I did indeed use a tripod. It was taken with a 100mm Canon macro lens, 1/250sec, ISO 800, F32. As you can see, even at ISO 800, i'm getting a lot of noise and at 1600, its absolutely awful. I appreciate your help!

[zacker]

yes... tripod, looong exposuer. try opening up the aperture a bit, are shooting in manual mode and watching your meter? that would help you see what needs to be done. Flash doesnt help?
-zacker-

[buffalopc7]

I will definitely try your suggestions. Hoping to go out again to shoot this Sunday. I do use flash, but I get one of two results, blown out pics or too much backlighting. I'm still trying to get used to this camera, lotsa practice needed.
Looked at your albums Zacker, very impressive! I look forward to taking high quality photos like yours soon! Thank you!!!

[zacker]

Thank You too!
another thing is an off shoe flash cord and an external flash.

An external flash is the way to go.. you can bounce it up or diffuse it. for now you can diffuse your on board flash by taping a small piece of white paper to the front or a pice of cut plastic off something like a milk jug.
good luck
-zacker-

[lostdoggy]

I'm not much into macro but 1/250 sec and f32. Wouldn't 1/125 sec and f13 would suffice???

[VFTT]

buffalopc7 - first question, if you are using a tripod then why are you shooting at ISO 1600 or 800??? Why don't you set the ISO down to 100 and take a nice clean shot? You said you changed the ISO down to 800 and the shot came out dark. That means that you are setting the exposure wrong. If you are in manual mode and leave the aperature alone, then when you shift the ISO you have to shift the shutter speed. A lower ISO requires a slower shutter speed if you keep the aperture the same. Also, if you really want to shoot at ISO 1600 and your shutter speed is 1/250 of a second, then why bother with a tripod? You can handhold a 100mm lens at 1/250 of a second with no problem. Lack of a tripod should be the only reason you are shooting flowers at ISO 1600. You said you are in a greenhouse, so wind is not a problem so why do you need a fast shutter speed (high ISO)? BTW, I have that lens and it is TACK sharp. That photo looks really soft. If you focused right and you had f32, that entire shot should be tack sharp. I mean TACK sharp.

lostdoggy - you got it backwards. If he goes from f32 to f13 then the shutter speed would get faster, not slower.

- d

[KevC]

You may start to be hitting the diffration limit on your sensors shooting such narrow aperature. Open the aperature up to f/11 to f/16, use a faster shutter speed, and floor the ISO to 100 since you're using the tripod. Hell, put it on timed delay and use MLU for a sharp sharp SHARP image =)

[Robert_Lay]

The EXIF data says that you shot this scene at 1/250" at f/32 and ISO 800.
You could have dropped the ISO by 3 stops to 100 and shot with a tripod at f/16 and 1/60" for the exact same exposure without any noise at all. Actually there is a myriad of combinations that would give you the same exposure with no noticeable noise.

All of those comments assumed that you were using the ambient light. However, you used forced flash (compulsory mode), and I don't know how to evaluate what that does in this case, because I am no expert on the use of flash in a situation like this. My guess is that with flash being used, that you could reduce the ISO to 100 and the flash would simply pump out 3 stops more light - again giving you the same exposure.

Lacking any better analysis of the problem, that would be my suggestion.

Now, turning to the noise question. The picture is 800 x 533 pixels. At that low resolution, I can magnify it to about 500% and see absolutely no evidence of noise - in fact, no artifacts whatsoever other than pixellation - which is exactly what one would expect. Just so we are not getting confused here, why don't you post a portion of the image as a full detail 100% crop, and then we can make our own assessments as to whether there is really any noise or whether it's just a mis-diagnosis of the problem. Frankly, that is the only way anyone can make any judgement whatsoever relating to the sharpness or noise level of any image.

[lostdoggy]

lostdoggy - you got it backwards. If he goes from f32 to f13 then the shutter speed would get faster, not slower.

- d

Yes you are correct, but my point was to lower isoas you've point out. Since I'm no much into macro thought there was a reason him to have at such hih shutter speed and slow aperature. I just can understand is point in trying to shoot at such high ISO. When I was in film and looking fo the most detail in a non moving subject we try to use the slowest film possible and ake up for it the slowst shutter speed.

And usually the sweet spot on most lens are locate in mid section of the aperature range. Not at the extremes.

[jj1987]

and FYI most lens aren't nearly as sharp at F/32 as at F/8-F/16.

[buffalopc7]

OK, I am heading out today, gonna try out your suggestions, determined to get great shots!! Thank you!!!!!!

[Inspired Photography]

and FYI most lens aren't nearly as sharp at F/32 as at F/8-F/16.

Correct, but I think the OP would be more concerned with DOF than a little variance in sharpness because of aperture.

While agree that f32 is a little extreme, i think even f16 would be a little shallow.

Rob