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 18 Mar 2010 (Thursday) 20:35
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7d noise problem? help!

 
Ziffle
Goldmember
Avatar
1,896 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Big "D" - Texas
     
Mar 18, 2010 22:37 |  #16

actually slightly over expose probably won't cut it here.
I would forget the sky and expose for the car and then bring back in post.

Actually Sdiver2489 - you do not mention anything about hamsttr.
In raw - you can recover quite a bit. JPEG too.
if you look at the cars reflection, there are building light on.... so at dusk; with the lens used at an f-stop of 4 to 5.6 it appears about right.

The reason why you over expose is to take advantage of the available bits in the upper range.

yep .... a tripod would be sweet teamed with a lower ISO.

Later,
_Mark


_______________
Wedding Photog's rule ........... just not sure what???
--
Gear List ~ VIAweddingPhoto(DOT)co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Transfer
Senior Member
Avatar
323 posts
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
     
Mar 18, 2010 22:41 |  #17

I think the bigger problem is all that chrome. Hmmm.
Noise looks fine.


EOS 40D | EF-S 17-55 f/2.8
My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
e02937
Goldmember
2,714 posts
Joined Dec 2008
     
Mar 18, 2010 22:43 |  #18

Looks fine to me as well both the full image and the 100% crop. If insistent, a tool like topaz denoise or noise ninja would make easy work out of that.


Canon 7d
[15-85 IS] [70-200
f/4L IS] [I'm a PC]
[Full gear list and feedback]

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dwarfcow
Senior Member
Avatar
640 posts
Joined Feb 2010
Location: South Central, Alaska
     
Mar 18, 2010 22:44 as a reply to  @ Transfer's post |  #19

does anyone else wonder why the OP was shooting at iso 1600 outside in what appears to be daylight?

what shutter speed were you using? do you think you could have taken the same shot ay iso 200?


"Evidently the photo shop at the college I go to is one of the best in the country. They actually have a handful of digital medium format cameras for students to use; Haliburtons, or hasslehoffs, or something like that."
-name withheld to protect dignity.
Toys

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sdiver2489
Goldmember
2,845 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 112
Joined Sep 2009
     
Mar 18, 2010 22:59 |  #20

Ziffle wrote in post #9825956 (external link)
actually slightly over expose probably won't cut it here.
I would forget the sky and expose for the car and then bring back in post.

Actually Sdiver2489 - you do not mention anything about hamsttr.
In raw - you can recover quite a bit. JPEG too.
if you look at the cars reflection, there are building light on.... so at dusk; with the lens used at an f-stop of 4 to 5.6 it appears about right.

The reason why you over expose is to take advantage of the available bits in the upper range.

yep .... a tripod would be sweet teamed with a lower ISO.

Later,
_Mark

Read more carefully?

Sure he could have overexposed and then reduced it in post...but that would defeat the purpose of using a higher ISO. Might as well just use the next step lower.

This is the exact concept...just without the useless acronym. Point is, with this light by the time you slow the shutter speed to overexpose the picture to reduce noise, the difference between doing that and just using ISO 800 is probably not significant.


Please visit my Flickr (external link) and leave a comment!

Gear:
Canon 5D III, Canon 24-70L F4 IS, Canon 70-300L F4-F5.6 IS, Canon 100mm F2.8L IS Macro, Canon 35mm F2.0 IS, Canon 430EX II-RT, Canon 600EX II-RT

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gs300tx
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
77 posts
Joined Nov 2007
     
Mar 18, 2010 23:46 |  #21

dwarfcow wrote in post #9825996 (external link)
does anyone else wonder why the OP was shooting at iso 1600 outside in what appears to be daylight?

what shutter speed were you using? do you think you could have taken the same shot ay iso 200?

I started taking these pictures 10 minutes after sun set. In order for me to get the proper exposure and shutter speed I had to bump the iso to 1600. ISO 200 the pics would have come out real dark




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dwarfcow
Senior Member
Avatar
640 posts
Joined Feb 2010
Location: South Central, Alaska
     
Mar 18, 2010 23:53 |  #22

gs300tx wrote in post #9826321 (external link)
I started taking these pictures 10 minutes after sun set. In order for me to get the proper exposure and shutter speed I had to bump the iso to 1600. ISO 200 the pics would have come out real dark

lower you're shutter speed... brace yourself, you can take pictures down to 1/10 second if you hold the camera securely.


"Evidently the photo shop at the college I go to is one of the best in the country. They actually have a handful of digital medium format cameras for students to use; Haliburtons, or hasslehoffs, or something like that."
-name withheld to protect dignity.
Toys

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pyrojim
Goldmember
1,882 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jan 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Mar 18, 2010 23:56 as a reply to  @ gs300tx's post |  #23

The picture looks pretty good. I do not think noise is out of the range of normal for this shot, When I first started using the 7D I was shooing with ISO really to high...took me a few days to get comfortable with slower shutter speeds.


What was your shutter speed for the shot?


PhaseOne H25
Camera agnostic

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tfd888
Goldmember
Avatar
1,816 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2009
Location: CA, USA
     
Mar 18, 2010 23:59 as a reply to  @ pyrojim's post |  #24

OP's shot looks just fine. Noise doesn't look bad at all.


Alexander R.O.
1D-Mark III ~1D-Mark II ~ 60D ~ 20D (Gripped)
(70-200mm L 2.8 IS) ~ (17-40mm L 4.0) (Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 EX DG Macro RIP) ~ (50mm 1.8 MKII) ~ (Alpex 35mm f/2.8 M42 mount) ~ (430EX II) ~ (Yongnuo YN-560 III)
My Website (external link) - My Blog (external link)
- My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gs300tx
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
77 posts
Joined Nov 2007
     
Mar 19, 2010 01:38 |  #25

Thanks for the input guys,

I think it may have been the color of the car and the fact that I had sharpness turned up all the way in the camera settings. I need to stop being so critical of my pics




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gs300tx
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
77 posts
Joined Nov 2007
     
Mar 19, 2010 02:25 |  #26

dwarfcow wrote in post #9825996 (external link)
does anyone else wonder why the OP was shooting at iso 1600 outside in what appears to be daylight?

what shutter speed were you using? do you think you could have taken the same shot ay iso 200?

Shutter speed was 1/80




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ckckevin
Goldmember
Avatar
1,439 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Bay Area
     
Mar 19, 2010 02:32 |  #27

Just another note is that since 7D has higher pixel density, so 100% of the picture will give you more noise than an exact same camera that has lower pixel density (but only if such a camera exist....). And if you do 100% crop from a brighter location, you'll find noise to be not as apparent.


Kevin life= learning
500D, Canon 10-22mm, Tamron 17-50mm 2.8, Canon 60 macro, Canon 85mm 1.8, Sigma 8mm 3.5, Sigma 30mm 1.4, Sigma 50-150mm 2.8, Kenko SP300 1.4x, efs extension tubes, 580EX, and lens that i don't like

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ckckevin
Goldmember
Avatar
1,439 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Bay Area
     
Mar 19, 2010 02:34 |  #28

Since 28-135 has IS, you can probably take the Shutter speed down to 1/25 or 1/20 and can get away with iso 400.

Cheers!


Kevin life= learning
500D, Canon 10-22mm, Tamron 17-50mm 2.8, Canon 60 macro, Canon 85mm 1.8, Sigma 8mm 3.5, Sigma 30mm 1.4, Sigma 50-150mm 2.8, Kenko SP300 1.4x, efs extension tubes, 580EX, and lens that i don't like

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
39,212 posts
Gallery: 116 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 7690
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Mar 19, 2010 05:38 |  #29

Sdiver2489 wrote in post #9826080 (external link)
Read more carefully?

This is the exact concept...just without the useless acronym. Point is, with this light by the time you slow the shutter speed to overexpose the picture to reduce noise, the difference between doing that and just using ISO 800 is probably not significant.


Just simply overexposing is not what HAMSTTR is, from what I understand (but I could be wrong, there was alot of thoughts in that thread to muddle through). HAMSTTR is to set up your shot as you really would like using something like ISO 1600 (with a bit of ETTR), then move to ISO 3200 (for the ITTR), take the shot, then bring that down to 1600 in post to get less noise than just doing a normal exposure at 1600 (equals HAMSTTR).

It is not shooting at ISO 1600 with EC+1 or +2/3 and bring the exposure down in Raw, which is merely ETTR. Also, with raw, there is enough detail in the digital range at the high end to generate 2-3 different JPGs to get a better range overall doing some merging. (Of course many mentions are made that ISO 1600 might be as high as you can go with this concept anyways, so maybe it would not apply here.)

=========

I expect that the conditions were actually quite dark due to the sun below the horizon, and the shutter speed + ISO shows that a bit. I actually think this shot is pretty decent and you would just use noise removal during post to clean it up. With a shot like this, doing a bracketed shot at +1, -1 and 0 might have been the best option, then do a photoshop HDR merge.

Of course what do I know? It isn't like I shoot often at high ISOs... ;)


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
oldvultureface
Goldmember
Avatar
4,273 posts
Gallery: 83 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 348
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Northwest Indiana USA
     
Mar 19, 2010 06:26 |  #30

TeamSpeed wrote in post #9827279 (external link)
Of course what do I know? It isn't like I shoot often at high ISOs... ;)

LOL.




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

4,638 views & 0 likes for this thread
7d noise problem? help!
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 ibflyin
829 guests, 191 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.