How grainy are T3 or T1i at the high ISO settings?

I recently upgraded to an XSi/450D and it serves my purpose pretty well. There are times, however, when I could really use a higher ISO speed than 800 (1600 on the XSi is just too grainy for my taste). How grainy are the high ISO speeds on some of the the later models (T3, T1i for example)? I could really use the faster speed if the images are of approximately equal quality to what I'm getting on the XSi at 800 ISO and might consider another upgrade.

thanks

There are samples on dpreview.com and imaging-resource.com

Although, if you find ISO 1600 unusable on the XSi, you probably need a full frame camera to be satisfied.

tkbslc wrote in post #14950682
There are samples on dpreview.com and imaging-resource.com

Although, if you find ISO 1600 unusable on the XSi, you probably need a full frame camera to be satisfied.

I didn't mean that I felt the graininess at 1600 on the XSi was 'unusable', maybe 'undesirable' is a better word.

Anyway, thanks for the links, I just finished reading the review on DPreview and it's very well done.

Usable for what?

And how...

groundloop wrote in post #14950656
I recently upgraded to an XSi/450D and it serves my purpose pretty well. There are times, however, when I could really use a higher ISO speed than 800 (1600 on the XSi is just too grainy for my taste). How grainy are the high ISO speeds on some of the the later models (T3, T1i for example)? I could really use the faster speed if the images are of approximately equal quality to what I'm getting on the XSi at 800 ISO and might consider another upgrade.

thanks

I was in your boat a few yrs ago with th 450D. I hated going over 800, but could get away with 1600 with some post processing noise reduction. Went to the 7D and hated going over 1600 but could get away with 3200 with PPing.

There is a great write up on this forum that shows how you can intentionally over expose during the capture, then reduce noise AND exposure in PPing to give less grain vs an image taken at any given ISO and properly exposed at time of capture.

My advice is to learn to ignore the grain that others aren't going to notice.

I have a T3, and personally I don't really notice much noise that bothers me till around 800, but only in select subjects. Really not at all a fan of the noise, especially in skin tones, at 1600.

If you want some specific test shots I would be happy to try and get some for you in the next few days. I know it can be hard to judge things with just random test shots from other people when you have no real solid idea on the conditions and their methods.

tkbslc wrote in post #14951107
My advice is to learn to ignore the grain that others aren't going to notice.

Very true. Most people are so used to seeing noise from point and shoot and camera phones, therefore, their tolerance is much higher. However, underexpoaed shots that need to be fixed in PP, and cropping and/or large prints can be a bit problematic with excess noise.

I'm constantly amazed at how well the noise of my T1i's 6400 photos cleans up in Lightroom. I'm not expecting my shots to win awards to be blown up to billboard size, so I'm quite content.

Over the weekend I took some shots of a group of people around a campfire, with a lot of black. Out of the camera the blacks were pretty "snowy" but once NR was applied the snow vanished very nicely. Bottom line for me is that the quality of high ISO RAW images out of my T1i is certainly adequate with a little help from LR. I like to play around with nighttime photography and see no reason to upgrade (at least as far as high ISO performance goes). The newer bodies are better, though DPReview's charts suggest that the difference is marginal, at least to me.

I have a Flickr set for ISO 1600+ shots from my T1i.

Here's a sample (ISO 1600). Be advised that I use Topaz DeNoise on them.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

groundloop wrote in post #14950656
I recently upgraded to an XSi/450D and it serves my purpose pretty well. There are times, however, when I could really use a higher ISO speed than 800 (1600 on the XSi is just too grainy for my taste). How grainy are the high ISO speeds on some of the the later models (T3, T1i for example)? I could really use the faster speed if the images are of approximately equal quality to what I'm getting on the XSi at 800 ISO and might consider another upgrade.

groundloop wrote in post #14950853
I didn't mean that I felt the graininess at 1600 on the XSi was 'unusable', maybe 'undesirable' is a better word.

I agree with the others, you will probably require full frame for your refined "taste'

is this ISO 1600 "undesirable graininess" ?

XSi (450D)
ISO 1600

The T3(basically a Rebel XS/1000D) won't give you any better ISO performance. The T1i might give you a "bit" better, but not worth upgrading to. You're better to get one of Canon's 18MP bodies (T2i/T3i/T4i/60D/7D) or save for full frame. I would say that my 18MP bodies gave me between 1 and 2.. closer to 1-1/2 stop improvement over my XS(the XS and XSi are virtually the same in ISO).

Have you tried ETTR( exposing to the right)? That can improve your high ISO performance surprisingly well.

I have had a 60D, a 30D and an XS. Two stop improvement is a huge stretch. 1 at best and probably 1/2 stop in reality. The biggest improvement is just having access to ISO 3200 and 6400 vs only 1600. And being able to shoot a well exposed ISO 6400 vs an underexposed ISO 1600 because you were at the limit, makes a big difference.

Here's ISO 1600 on the T1i, T3, T2i and XS (they don't have XSi, but noise should be the same). Not a ton of difference.

Click the link below and scroll down to the ISO comparisons.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …al-SLR-Camera-Review.aspx

I went from an XSi to a T1i. The XSi was better at 1600 than the T1i, when shooting jpg. If you want decent high-ISO performance, you have to learn some PP noise reduction skills, or buy a 5D3/1DX. I regularly push my 60D and 500D to 3200. If I have to go that far, I shoot raw. Raw just has a lot more information to work with. Any jpg setting, and I mean ALL OF THEM, will apply some noise reduction, even if you have NONE selected. That will cause you to lose detail that is still available in raw. When shooting 3200 you need all the data you can get. I use 6400 if I have to; the 60D is noticeably cleaner at 6400. 12,800 is pointless on either if you want more than a 4x6 style web shot.