ISO 100 noise has settled?

[adas]

We see a lot of improvements on high ISOs with every new camera, but the ISO 100 noise haven't dropped a bit. Now that I bought a high contrasty TFT (500:1) that noise become even more visible than before. If one want to make some saturation or some S-curve, I think he will end with a nice powershot picture. The only way out to get rid of that noise is the resizing :(((((

[roanjohn]

WOW.......you've got to be really nit-picky to complain about noise at ISO 100. An image without noise would look plastic don't you think?? Oh wait, that's Canon's trademark look!!! JK!!! In any case, once printed, noise shouldn't be much of an issue.

Ro1

[DocFrankenstein]

I think he's talking about the dynamic range though. There is still a long way to go, even for Canon.

[Nightcrawler]

Here are some interesting tests regarding dynamic range. ssim posted these links in another thread.

http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/dynamicrange2/
http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film.vs.digital.summary1.html

[DocFrankenstein]

Here are some interesting tests regarding dynamic range. ssim posted these links in another thread.

http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/dynamicrange2/
http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film.vs.digital.summary1.html
The test is invalid. Pure nonsense. His scanner will cut off all the shadow details in the films he's scanning.

[BigRed450]

None the less Doc, he still proved that the capable dynamic range of digital is greater then film. I haven't seen a film yet that could manage 11 stops latitude...

Originally Posted by DocFrankenstein
The test is invalid. Pure nonsense. His scanner will cut off all the shadow details in the films he's scanning.

If this is true then no commercial film processor could ever match digital since the negs are scanned and chemical prints processed from that. Maybe the traditional darkroom process will yeild better results, but will it give even 10 stops latitude?

[DocFrankenstein]

None the less Doc, he still proved that the capable dynamic range of digital is greater then film. I haven't seen a film yet that could manage 11 stops latitude...
From Photo.net
Dmax of typical slide films can reach maybe 3.5 and Velvia is said to be able to hit 4.0 in the deepest blacks. This would tax even the best scanners.
That would be 12+ stops.
Source:
http://www.photo.net/learn/drange/

If this is true then no commercial film processor could ever match digital since the negs are scanned and chemical prints processed from that. Maybe the traditional darkroom process will yeild better results, but will it give even 10 stops latitude?
I think that's the reason drum scanners with active cooling exist.

[ron chappel]

I'm sure adas is not talking about dynamic range.

The reason they have done little or nothing recently in improving ISO 100 noise is that they are focussing all their energy at improving high ISO noise.
ISO 100/200 is judged easily good enough for now while allmost everyone wants better high ISO performance

[drisley]

ISO noise on the new digital cameras is fantastic!
ISO1600 on the 20D is as good as older ISO200 film.
The noise you mention is on your LCD monitor, but does not show up on CRT's or on print. This is VERY common with LCDs. Therefore, your misdirecting your disappointment.
Improvements do not need to be made to the ISO100 on digicams, but rather to the quality of LCD's Monitors! You mention that your LCD has only a contrast ratio of 500:1. That is not very good, and is the main reason you see this "noise". I would not touch an LCD with a contrast of any less than 700:1 (1000:1 would be ideal). Also, the pixel size on LCD's is still relatively huge compared to a good CRT.
Again, the problem is not the camera, but your monitor (and LCD monitors in general).

[DocFrankenstein]

I'm sure adas is not talking about dynamic range.
Well... with dynamic range inversely proportional to the noise levels, you can't talk about one without talking about the other. ;)

[BigRed450]

That would be 12+ stops.
Source:
http://www.photo.net/learn/drange/


That would be 12 n bits by this article, not +12 stops.
I will not disagree with the article you have chosen. A scanner may not be able to produce what film is capable of however, Slide film is still only capable of a latitude of 3-5 stops and print film of a latitude of only 5-7 stops.
I will search for a chart tomorrow that specifies Latitudes/dynamic range for different films..

[Jesper]

ISO noise on the new digital cameras is fantastic!
ISO1600 on the 20D is as good as older ISO200 film.
The noise you mention is on your LCD monitor, but does not show up on CRT's or on print. This is VERY common with LCDs. Therefore, your misdirecting your disappointment.
Improvements do not need to be made to the ISO100 on digicams, but rather to the quality of LCD's Monitors! You mention that your LCD has only a contrast ratio of 500:1. That is not very good, and is the main reason you see this "noise". I would not touch an LCD with a contrast of any less than 700:1 (1000:1 would be ideal). Also, the pixel size on LCD's is still relatively huge compared to a good CRT.
Again, the problem is not the camera, but your monitor (and LCD monitors in general).I agree! Especially if you have a cheaper LCD screen with 18 bits per pixel (262,144 colours, using dithering to simulate 16,2 million colours) instead of a real 24 bits per pixel LCD, you will notice noise and banding. This is due to your LCD screen, and not the camera.

[DocFrankenstein]

That would be 12 n bits by this article, not +12 stops.
Well... it'll be minimum of 12 bits to express the dynamic range.

Therefore with the darkest regions of value 0 and the lightest regions of 2^12 (2 to the exponent of 12)

Thus making the difference of 12-13 stops. But that's according to that article. I've never handled film in my life. :p

But for the sake of the argument, he might as well could've scanned the negatives on a cheap 8 bit flatbed and claim superiority of digital.