Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 12 Nov 2012 (Monday) 01:35
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Show me some 5DII low ISO Banding examples

 
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
Avatar
13,463 posts
Likes: 191
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel
     
Nov 14, 2012 10:42 |  #31

smorter wrote in post #15243819 (external link)
The nightscape shot could be just sensor heat causing the noise, hard to tell

The fact that it was a 30 second exposure should certainly be taken into account

The portrait shot is unambiguous though

A lot of posters also seem to be talking about "prints". I think we need to appreciate this is the digital age, photos are photoshopped to death and used for various personal and commercial electronic output.

For many people:
It is of supreme relevance what photos look like SOOC and pushed.
It is of little relevance what photos look like in a print - I can't remember the last time I printed something, and the photos I have printed are just rolled up in my cupboard somewhere. Who has so much wall space to display all these prints?

And how many of the images that you post/share digitally are 100% crops? As a matter of fact, since digitally displayed images are lower res than what is needed for a good print and therefore down-sampled more, noise is even less relevant for them. It is the print makers, especially those making 12x18, 13x19, A3 or A3+ which are hand held and viewed close up, who need to worry most about noise.


Elie / אלי

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
paparios
Senior Member
500 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2007
     
Nov 14, 2012 10:57 as a reply to  @ post 15244187 |  #32

Here is my example. A friend took this picture with my 5D MKII. The shot was with the Samyang 14mm f2.8 wide open at ISO100 1/80 sec. First sample is the original LR4.2 output, without any correction. The second one is with the LR4.2 automatic correction (which required an exposure compensation of +4.3 stops). Normally I would have deleted this shot but I think LR did a very good job.

Miguel


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Canon 5D MKII, Sony A7, Canon EOS M, Canon 7D, Sony A6000, Canon 50d with grip, Canon 400D with grip, Bower 14 f2.8, Bower 35 f1.4, EF 40 f2.8, Tokina 12-24 f4, EFM-22 f2 STM, EFM 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS STM, EFS 18-55 f3.5-5.6, Tamron 28-75 f2.8, EF 85 f1.8, EF 100 f2.8L IS, EF 70-200 f4L IS, EF 75-300 f4-5.6, Sigma 150-500 f5-6.3, Sony E 16-50, Sony FE 28-70

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,755 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5125
Joined May 2002
Location: Cannelton
     
Nov 14, 2012 14:22 |  #33

You can clearly see the red/blue plaid patterns that you get by bringing the exposure so far up digitally after the fact, even in a resized web image. This is pretty common across many of the Canon bodies. You can see it in the guy's blue shirt and the dark wood at the top.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
19,400 posts
Likes: 1505
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Nov 14, 2012 14:27 |  #34

Pretty soon the sensors going to be so good that most pictures will look like that black frame in the above post and then fixed in pp. Just think no need for any of those stupid buttons to set your ss, aperture etc.:)


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
agedbriar
Goldmember
Avatar
2,611 posts
Likes: 338
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Slovenia
     
Nov 14, 2012 14:48 |  #35

I had to copy the dark image and process it myself to believe.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,969 posts
Likes: 2155
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Nov 14, 2012 14:50 |  #36

agedbriar wrote in post #15245797 (external link)
I had to copy the dark image and process it myself to believe.

To do a really good job, you need the original raw fine. A shrunk down for web jpeg is missing too much info.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
agedbriar
Goldmember
Avatar
2,611 posts
Likes: 338
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Slovenia
     
Nov 14, 2012 14:52 |  #37

gjl711 wrote in post #15245807 (external link)
To do a really good job, you need the original raw fine. A shrunk down for web jpeg is missing too much info.

Of course, I took that into account.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
paparios
Senior Member
500 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2007
     
Nov 14, 2012 16:37 |  #38

TeamSpeed wrote in post #15245671 (external link)
You can clearly see the red/blue plaid patterns that you get by bringing the exposure so far up digitally after the fact, even in a resized web image. This is pretty common across many of the Canon bodies. You can see it in the guy's blue shirt and the dark wood at the top.

For sure you see it!!!. The point is that the original image is clearly wrong, since the guy who took it just pressed the button, while the camera was in manual. I would have normally deleted that image right away, but LR gives as a result something that is not totally awful and shows the 5D KMII image is containing a lot of information in that black original frame.

Miguel


Canon 5D MKII, Sony A7, Canon EOS M, Canon 7D, Sony A6000, Canon 50d with grip, Canon 400D with grip, Bower 14 f2.8, Bower 35 f1.4, EF 40 f2.8, Tokina 12-24 f4, EFM-22 f2 STM, EFM 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS STM, EFS 18-55 f3.5-5.6, Tamron 28-75 f2.8, EF 85 f1.8, EF 100 f2.8L IS, EF 70-200 f4L IS, EF 75-300 f4-5.6, Sigma 150-500 f5-6.3, Sony E 16-50, Sony FE 28-70

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
paparios
Senior Member
500 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2007
     
Nov 14, 2012 16:41 |  #39

agedbriar wrote in post #15245797 (external link)
I had to copy the dark image and process it myself to believe.

I can provide a link to the RAW file if you are interested.

Miguel


Canon 5D MKII, Sony A7, Canon EOS M, Canon 7D, Sony A6000, Canon 50d with grip, Canon 400D with grip, Bower 14 f2.8, Bower 35 f1.4, EF 40 f2.8, Tokina 12-24 f4, EFM-22 f2 STM, EFM 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS STM, EFS 18-55 f3.5-5.6, Tamron 28-75 f2.8, EF 85 f1.8, EF 100 f2.8L IS, EF 70-200 f4L IS, EF 75-300 f4-5.6, Sigma 150-500 f5-6.3, Sony E 16-50, Sony FE 28-70

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,755 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5125
Joined May 2002
Location: Cannelton
     
Nov 14, 2012 16:43 |  #40

paparios wrote in post #15246230 (external link)
For sure you see it!!!. The point is that the original image is clearly wrong, since the guy who took it just pressed the button, while the camera was in manual. I would have normally deleted that image right away, but LR gives as a result something that is not totally awful and shows the 5D KMII image is containing a lot of information in that black original frame.

Miguel

Not necessarily a LR thing, but a raw file / DR thing. The point we have made through the years is that no matter what Canon advertises as its # of stops for DR, it matters little if you end up with lots of banding when you are done. So in your example, it's great that you can take a dark picture and bring it up digitally, whether at the raw level or the JPG level (raw will provide a better result), but with Canon, you end up with some very poor artifacts that require quite a bit of work.

Also with that example, it may work as a wallet-sized web image, but if you would not like to print it. If you watch the buzz over the Sony sensors, there is clearly an advantage to be had with their tech today in this area. But like anything else, the grass isn't always greener... :)


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rapurimanka
Member
140 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Moscow
     
Nov 15, 2012 00:28 |  #41

Guys, you maybe pros and use tripod, hdr, light reflectors... But i'm just an ordinary guy, and in some cases i shoot with sun back on person, so i have to highlight shadows. Canon fails with it.

http://fotkidepo.ru …egn/lFPg7yGEgI/​793825.jpg (external link)

After correction:

http://fotkidepo.ru …egn/lFPg7yGEgI/​793826.jpg (external link)

Oversized images changed to links. POTN max. is 1024 pixels in any direction.

Jon


6D | Canon 85 1.8 | Canon 24-105 4 | Lightroom 4
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/27393138@N08/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rapurimanka
Member
140 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Moscow
     
Nov 15, 2012 00:34 |  #42

Best example of todays nikon supremacy:

photo frop dprevew, 5dmk2 and nikon d600, iso 100 ev+3

https://dl.dropbox.com​/u/5020311/456346345.p​ng (external link)


6D | Canon 85 1.8 | Canon 24-105 4 | Lightroom 4
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/27393138@N08/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rx7speed
Goldmember
1,204 posts
Joined Jun 2008
     
Nov 15, 2012 01:13 |  #43

gjl711 wrote in post #15235917 (external link)
All Canon sensors have this issue. Most times it is buried and not visible but at times it can be easily seen in images that you would expect to be clean. Bumping the shadows just makes it more visible but it's always there. There are techniques you can use to minimize the problem.

one of the weirdest ones is shoot at higher ISO.

I know with my 7d its actually a bit weird. The lower the iso the harder time I have pushing my shadows without banding. Iso 400 seems to be about the best if I need to do any push of the shadows iso 100 on the other hand doesn't do so as hot without running into the banding. What is also weird is I have had the banding issue come into play not only with trying to recover shadows but also with trying to bring the shadow level down though there not so often.

Though to be honest I don't run into the issue often, though when I do it's a PITA.


digital: 7d 70-200L 2.8 IS MKII, 17-55 2.8 IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Numenorean
Cream of the Crop
5,013 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Feb 2011
     
Nov 15, 2012 01:15 |  #44

rapurimanka wrote in post #15247540 (external link)
Guys, you maybe pros and use tripod, hdr, light reflectors... But i'm just an ordinary guy, and in some cases i shoot with sun back on person, so i have to highlight shadows. Canon fails with it.

The only thing that failed here is the photographer failing to expose correctly.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Nov 15, 2012 03:23 |  #45

rx7speed wrote in post #15247648 (external link)
I know with my 7d its actually a bit weird. The lower the iso the harder time I have pushing my shadows without banding. Iso 400 seems to be about the best if I need to do any push of the shadows iso 100 on the other hand doesn't do so as hot without running into the banding.

I try to stay at 100 ISO and would be going lower if Canon offered it. The problems you have experienced seem very odd behavior when "normal" common sense would suggest the opposite, that the lower the ISO the better.

Canon have been far too fixated on gimmicks of late and these excessive ISO ratings are just one example. They have been going in entirely the wrong direction for a few years for me, but hopefully Sony and Nikon have made them wake up.


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

8,444 views & 0 likes for this thread
Show me some 5DII low ISO Banding examples
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is juans613
758 guests, 323 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.