Do you lose detail at high ISO?

[tim]

Is it just my imagination, or do you start to lose fine detail at high ISO? I'm not sure if it's just the limit of resolution of the 20D or if ISO 1600/3200's starting to obscure fine detail like hairs when the person doesn't fill the frame. It could be that my photos today just weren't focused correctly, I guess, I did discover a front focus problem with my 50mm F1.8.

Does anyone find they lose detail at high iso, or am I imagining it?

[GyRob]

i would think it works like film grain the faster the film the less detail.

[Jesper]

You do loose some detail because of the noise at high ISO settings. The finest details just drown in the noise.

[Big_B]

I'd agree with Jesper. I haven't ever noticed any problems other then the noise degredation

[KevC]

If you're using a high ISO, chances are it's low light. It might be not enough light that's causing your 50/1.8 to hunt for a focus.

And yes, I don't see any loss in deatil except noise of course.

However, since you *are* shooting at high ISO, you may be shooting wide open to keep the ISO as low as possible... to handhold. In that case, loss of detail may happen due to softness.

[RodneyCyr]

You may lose some color quality at higher ISO. I once tried to photograph a rainbow with my D-Rebel, forgetting that the ISO was set to 1600. The rainbow was not visible in the photograph. Then I noticed the ISO setting and changed it to 100. The rainbow came out fine.

[Citizensmith]

You may lose some color quality at higher ISO. I once tried to photograph a rainbow with my D-Rebel, forgetting that the ISO was set to 1600. The rainbow was not visible in the photograph. Then I noticed the ISO setting and changed it to 100. The rainbow came out fine.

You may find thats more to do with Rainbows not being very bright. The lower ISO made you set a slower shutter speed, which captured more of the ambient details.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Absolutely :(

[thomasrhee]

You lose detail as well as color fidelity due to the noise.

[robertwgross]

You can also get odd results on the rainbow if you leave your polarizer on the lens.

---Bob Gross---

[RJSorensen]

I think it goes without saying that high ISO is not as sharp as 100 ISO, but often any shot is better than no shot . . . we all have to choose when and where to engage this option.

Nice Avatar Bob.

[Huckaback Photo]

Just thought of this I posted on here about the 200mm f2.8 and extender.
Check the images to see if you think you lose detail at higher ISO.
now if you shoot stage lighting or low light shots , its often the quallity of light that makes your images suffer.
Martin (Huckaback Photo)

Re: Images taken with 200/2.8L + EF 2X Extender

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Oculus

Just took these pics for you to see how good an image can be produced with the Canon extenders, this is the 1.4 x and fitted to 200 mm f 2.8 L
On my 1D mk 2 .
just to push things a bit further than needed i did one at 1600 iso and also at 100 iso.

http://www.pbase.com/huckaback_phot.../41827986/large

by all means click the original. (But i did reduce my full file by 50% as it was 23mb)

second image is just the 200mm at f8 and 100 ISO

http://www.pbase.com/image/41827955

Cheers
Martin (Huckaback Photo)

[tim]

Martin, that first link doesn't work.

[Andy_T]

I'd say you get a lot of additional detail at high ISO :confused:

But then, you might not want to have that additional detail, after all :wink:

Best regards,
Andy

[tim]

Andy, are you pointing out that high iso = higher shutter speed = better photo? If so that's a good point. If not, it's still a good point ;)

[Wazza]

That's why I don't like shooting his ISO. Even the "noiseless" 20D isn't so great really. I only like using up to ISO400. 800 upwards just doesn't look good in images. I like to be able to handhold shots down to about 1/6th of a second.

[Huckaback Photo]

Tim
Thanks for saying about my link above not working,
hope this one is ok.
it does show a tremendous amount of detail

http://www.pbase.com/huckaback_photo/image/41827986/large

Cheers
Martin

[Pekka]

High ISO stores same amount of detail than low ISO (varies by camera model, I'm talking about 1D Mark II here). How much of fine detail is covered by noise is very dependent on exposure and luminance/contrast of detail. Fear of noise (Pavoris Clamosum) will often eat best obtainable image quality because of blur: high shutter speeds will make images sharper.

[drisley]

That's why I don't like shooting his ISO. Even the "noiseless" 20D isn't so great really. I only like using up to ISO400. 800 upwards just doesn't look good in images. I like to be able to handhold shots down to about 1/6th of a second.
Just look at how the noise ruined this ISO1600 hockey picture (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/20d/iso1600_hockey.jpg)(100% crop).
Horrible, aint it? ;)

[Moments]

Just look at how the noise ruined this ISO1600 hockey picture (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/20d/iso1600_hockey.jpg)(100% crop).
Horrible, aint it? ;)

What was the shutter and F Stop on this shot?

My 20D is better than my old 10D, but I find that like this image here in low light which was exposed 1/80 at F2.8 ISO 1600, the image has a lot of noise in it when viewing it at 100% at 300dpi. As a 4x6 proof print it is not that noticable, but I usually convert the image to B&W so as not to run into problems later with the clients when printing 8x10 and larger prints. I go between ISO 100 - 400 for all my formals and sometimes I might go to 800 depending upon the image. Any time I shoot at 1600 I know it will turn into B&W. Just for the record I use L glass and this was with my 70 - 200 2.8is with the is on.

[drisley]

The shutter speed and aperture won't matter.
But, your image looks slightly underexposed, which will bring out the noise quite a bit.

[Nabil-A]

That's why I don't like shooting his ISO. Even the "noiseless" 20D isn't so great really. I only like using up to ISO400. 800 upwards just doesn't look good in images. I like to be able to handhold shots down to about 1/6th of a second.

I find Iso 800 and use of good noise reduction post processing extremely satisfying:cool:

[tim]

I find 800 find too, though not perfect, it's 1600 up that it becomes more noticable. 100-400 are near perfect IMO.

[drisley]

I print 8x10's of ISO1600 shots that look smoov as butta! No problems at all :)