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 21 Mar 2013 (Thursday) 13:05
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Whats the best ISO setting for less noise and DR

 
Pagman
THREAD ­ STARTER
I just hold the thing :-)
Avatar
8,045 posts
Gallery: 1562 photos
Likes: 5567
Joined Dec 2011
     
Mar 22, 2013 09:15 |  #16

Mark II wrote in post #15742836 (external link)
Why are we talking about noise with ISO settings below 800 again?
Is this anything like pixel peeping?

Its Important to me as I shoot alot of distant subjects that require getting the cleanest sharpest Images out of my 30d/ nifty 250, thats why I am serching for the best generic iso setting for normal daylight shooting, and so far I think I have established that Its either 160 without any exposure Increasements, and 100 with some + exp comp dialed In, to keep the exposure ETTR at all times, getting the best out of the sensor, does this sound about right?

P.


Some stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Mark ­ II
Goldmember
Avatar
2,153 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Texas
     
Mar 22, 2013 09:27 as a reply to  @ Pagman's post |  #17

Yes, I'd shoot 160 ISO if the available light allowed for it.
I'd also use a tripod and the fastest SS possible @ f8-f11.... since we're trying to reach pefection at a distance.

I'm no guru but I've allways heard that 160 is an EOS native ISO and would allow for cleanest images with multiples of the same afterwards.

... but to quote "Bodank" ... "I could be wrong & probably am".


1DX7D - 40D IR converted Sony RX100,
Canon 85 L II, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, EF 24-105L, 16-35mm f/2.8 II L, 100L & 60mm Macro , Fisheye EF 15mm f2.8, Tokina 10-17

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
7,852 posts
Gallery: 542 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1558
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Mar 22, 2013 11:40 |  #18

The "cleanest" ISO for Canon DSLR's will depend on how you are shooting. Shoot in camera JPEG files and you want to use ISO 160 and it's multiples. This is because as has been said by others the camera actually exposes at 200 and pulls the image back 1/3rd of a stop.

If you are shooting RAW, which will give you more image data to play with later, then you should shoot at the "base" ISO 100.This is because if you shoot RAW you can also ETTR, and what is more you can ETTR by an amount that suits the subject that you are shooting. If you are shooting a high contrast scene with lots of really bright highlight detail as well as lots of shadows then you would not be able to push ETTR as far as you might with a relatively low contrast scene. For aviation I will often push the image anywhere between 1 and 2 stops above the exposure indicated by a grey card/incident lightmeter. This is where knowing your camera, as well as the RAW conversion software comes in. The above works for me with both my cameras (300D and 20D) but only if I am processing in LR4/ACR7 PV2012, anything else and it would be about a stop less of ETTR. I usually run the camera at +2/3 stop EC when I am just shooting general stuff, Canon also seem to have most of the DSLR's set up to run a bit dark anyway, so lots of folk seem to like to run at +1/3 even for SOOC JPEG's to avoid having to brighten them.

Brighting any part of an image, even at ISO 100 will quickly show noise, especially on the cameras that I own, anything above about 1/3 stop is very noticable. I would rather shoot at ISO 1600 and pull a stop than shoot at 400 and push a stop.

Using expanded ISO's is another matter. RAW ETTR (or not at the highest) and expanded ISO's should not in theory give you and advantage over using the top native ISO and pushing, but I think that I prefer the results of ISO 3200 and ETTR (or not) are better than pushing ISO 1600. Others amy disagree with my expanded ISO results/preference, the theory would suggest that I am wrong though.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Audionut11
Member
112 posts
Joined Aug 2010
     
Mar 24, 2013 11:22 |  #19

BigAl007 wrote in post #15743334 (external link)
but I think that I prefer the results of ISO 3200 and ETTR (or not) are better than pushing ISO 1600. Others amy disagree with my expanded ISO results/preference, the theory would suggest that I am wrong though.

ETTR is pushing more of the data into the brighter pixels where there is less noise (actually, it's the same noise, just harder to see because the SNR is higher). You are then reducing the exposure of the entire data in post, which just happens to include the noise also. Win!

ISO 3200 @ 0EV

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


ISO 3200 ETTR 1.6EV and reduced in post
IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


ISO 1600 @ 0EV
IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


You be the judge!



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pagman
THREAD ­ STARTER
I just hold the thing :-)
Avatar
8,045 posts
Gallery: 1562 photos
Likes: 5567
Joined Dec 2011
     
Mar 24, 2013 11:49 |  #20

Would there be any dvantage when shooting In raw, If when using 160,320 Iso etc If ETTR was used aswel say 1/3-1/2 a stop Exp Comp, or would there be no difference even when viewing at 100% ?


P.


Some stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Audionut11
Member
112 posts
Joined Aug 2010
     
Mar 24, 2013 11:56 |  #21

Pagman wrote in post #15749786 (external link)
Would there be any dvantage when shooting In raw, If when using 160,320 Iso etc If ETTR was used aswel say 1/3-1/2 a stop Exp Comp, or would there be no difference even when viewing at 100% ?

I found that I can't ETTR as much with ISO's 160, 320 etc as I can with the base ISO's. Never thought to just ETTR as much as possible with ISO's 160 etc and compare the noise results though.

Missus has lots of plans for me tomorrow. Wonder if I can squeeze in some more test results. :lol:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pagman
THREAD ­ STARTER
I just hold the thing :-)
Avatar
8,045 posts
Gallery: 1562 photos
Likes: 5567
Joined Dec 2011
     
Mar 24, 2013 11:59 |  #22

Im basicaly thinking about aircarft photography where a large expanse of clear sky Is Involved, this area I am trying for the least noise v sharpest Image possible with my set up.


Some stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
Avatar
7,574 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 1011
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Toledo, OH
     
Mar 24, 2013 12:31 |  #23

Audionut11 wrote in post #15749687 (external link)
ETTR is pushing more of the data into the brighter pixels where there is less noise (actually, it's the same noise, just harder to see because the SNR is higher). You are then reducing the exposure of the entire data in post, which just happens to include the noise also. Win!

ISO 3200 @ 0EV
IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


ISO 3200 ETTR 1.6EV and reduced in post
IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


ISO 1600 @ 0EV
IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


You be the judge!

That's a good demonstration, if you have extra headroom in terms of shutter speed and you can get away with a slower shutter speed for the ISO 3200 +1.6EV shot.

My opinion on ETTR is that generally the reason we go to a higher ISO is that we need to achieve a minimum shutter speed necessary for a given shot, or to stop down to have a thicker DoF, while still ensuring that minimum shutter speed we need for the shot, right?

So taking your sample photos as an example, let's say hypothetically that I need minimum shutter speed of 1/500 and f/10 for a particular shot. (like your third sample image)

If I select ISO 1600 I will get that exact shutter speed at EV 0. I get medium amount of noise like you did in your third sample image. Not too bad but not great either.

However, I cannot ETTR at ISO 1600 because I will NOT get that desired minimum shutter speed at that f/10 aperture that I also need for my shot, therefore my photo quality will suffer due to the lack of sufficient shutter speed for my shot--> motion blur for example.

So, I could bump the ISO up to 3200 and overexpose by +1 EV to get the same desired shutter speed of 1/500 at the desired f/10 (then reduce in post). But in this latter case I am giving exactly as much light to the pixels as I did before at ISO 1600 (1/500 at f/10). My image won't be better or worse significantly (except I'm running a higher risk of some blown highlights).
I could go even beyond that and overexpose by 1.67 EV in ISO 3200 then reduce in post. HOWEVER, now my shutter speed drops to 1/320 which is not fast enough for my hypothetical shot. It may be cleaner, right, but it's not an option for me due to the slow shutter speed for my shot.

ETTR is most useful when I have extra shutter speed to sacrifice, like you did in your second sample image: 1/320s

But then I ask the question, if I have that extra shutter speed to spare and can go slower on the shutter and still safely get a good shot, then why select a higher ISO? I might as well just lower my ISO and get to the a slower but still safe shutter speed at EV 0 that will give me a good shot.

I don't know if anybody's following my logic.


5DIV | 5DIII | 80D | A7RII | Canon 24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II | 24-105 f/4L IS | 16-35 f/4L IS | 135 f/2L | 85 1.8 | 50 1.8 STM | 18-135 IS STM | SONY FE 28-70 OSS | Tamron 17-50 2.8 | Tamron 150-600 | Ʃ 35 1.4 ART | Rokinon 14 2.8 | Sigma 1.4x | Metabones IV | 2x Canon 600EX-RT
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PHughes
Senior Member
361 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Likes: 66
Joined Nov 2009
     
Mar 24, 2013 12:39 |  #24

Pagman wrote in post #15742862 (external link)
Its Important to me as I shoot alot of distant subjects that require getting the cleanest sharpest Images out of my 30d/ nifty 250, thats why I am serching for the best generic iso setting for normal daylight shooting, and so far I think I have established that Its either 160 without any exposure Increasements, and 100 with some + exp comp dialed In, to keep the exposure ETTR at all times, getting the best out of the sensor, does this sound about right?

P.

If you are printing, you won't see any noise in your image at such low ISO unless blown up to huge proportions. I routinely printed 16x20 prints from my old XT and continue to do so with my 50D with no noise seen. I generally have mine initially set to 200 when I go out so I am ready to shoot a larger range of conditions than just setting it at 100. I adjust once I see what the conditions are. I also shoot a lot at 3200 and print. yes, there is some noise in a print, but not as much as you would think if you were to pixel peek. Pick the ISO you need to expose the image properly with the aperture and shutter speed you need to get a sharp image.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Audionut11
Member
112 posts
Joined Aug 2010
     
Mar 24, 2013 13:29 |  #25

gabebalazs wrote in post #15749935 (external link)
I don't know if anybody's following my logic.

Shutter speed certainly plays a large part in the success of EC. However, given the choice of over-exposing ISO 1600 by +.6EV and hitting my minimum shutter speed (lets say 1/40th), and over-exposing ISO 3200 but +1.6EV with the same shutter speed, I personally would take the ISO 3200 option all day.

Being able to over expose by +1.6EV, means that the scene has 1.6EV of headroom over and above what the camera determines to be correct exposure. By choosing ISO 1600 @ +0.6EV, means we still wasted 1EV of data (dynamic range)

The shadows are the key here. The further down the exposure (the further left of the histogram) we go, the lower the signal to noise ratio (the higher the noise). If the camera didn't nail the exposure (under-exposed), and/or, you decide in post process to raise the shadow areas, you will have more noise to contend with (@ ISO 1600 +0.6EV). If the ratio of noise at lower light levels (EV) was 1:1 with the ratio of noise from a 1 stop ISO bump, it would be a tie. Unfortunately for us, the ratio of noise in EV is a logarithmic scale (halving of the EV = more then double the noise)

Take a look at the logarithmic Signal to Noise Ratio at DXO.
http://www.dxomark.com …ase/Canon/EOS-5D-Mark-III (external link)

@ ISO 100, from 100% on the brightness scale to 10%, we went from 45dB to 38dB (approx), a 7dB reduction in Signal to Noise for a 90% drop in brightness.
Now look at 10% brightness (38dB) to 1% brightness (24dB). Only 9% brightness difference for a 14dB reduction in Signal to Noise. And that sucker just keeps getting worse the darker it gets! A further measly 0.9% reduction in brightness results in a whooping 18dB loss of Signal to Noise.
Conversely, looking at the SNR 18% results for ISO, we see that we only lose 3dB for an ISO bump of 1600 to 3200.

It's very late here. So apologies in advance if I messed something up above, or it's incomprehensible.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
7,852 posts
Gallery: 542 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1558
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Mar 24, 2013 17:46 |  #26

My earlier examples of choosing ISO 3200 over ISO 1600 was based on using cameras for which ISO 1600 is the maximum non-expanded ISO value. When we move to the expanded ISO levels the boost is done in the camera, but it is done digitally. As such it seems logical that in the same way that the last 7 years have seen vast improvements in RAW processing techniques that can be applied to the RAW but are of course not avilable to be used by the in camera JPEG processor, it would be better to do any sort of digital push in post processing.

Below the non expanded ISO values you will always find that the best result comes from shooting ETTR and PP. So you simply UP the ISO when necessary to achive the required level of exposure. If I were using an incident lightmeter I would simply be exposing as if the sensor was one or 1 1/3rd stops less sensitive than it actually is.

Once you hit the maximum ISO level available to you, be that native or expanded depending on your choice then you have no option but to push the image in post, so use whatever settings you need to get the image. If you cannot process it to get acceptable results then you know what? IT WAS TOO DARK TO SHOOT!

I am using my smart phone, so looking at all of those test shots is a bit hard I am afraid.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

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

3,827 views & 0 likes for this thread
Whats the best ISO setting for less noise and DR
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 Alexjames_life
801 guests, 295 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.