50D - 640 ISO not acceptable at all (sample images provided)

Also remember, photography is about capturing light. So if you have crap light, don't expect the best results, even "pro" cameras cant turn crap into gold. The 50D is very capable but you have to feed it good light, like any camera...

Ive also heard that the 50d does better at full iso's and that you should turn off the increment iso settings. Might be a good idea just in case this accidentally happens again.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #15579371
I've shot alongside some of the world's best wildlife photographers, and they have said that they've tried Canon's 1.6 crop bodies, but just could not accept the noise grain. If these bodies are not good enough for them, and they are who I am competing against for image sales, can you at least understand my frustration with the ISO issue?

Absolutely I can understand. I would still give it a shot with HAMSTTR to see if that can help you. Practice with some local critters in low light.

Might you look at moving to a 1D2n? Honestly, I have seen very few photos that I would consider very sharp from the 1.6 crops. The wildlife shots in perfect light still have a level of softness to them, and I can usually tell when a wildlife shot was shot on something with a larger sensor. There are a couple folks here on POTN who have figured out how to have retina-cutting sharp images out of the 7D, but it's pretty rare.

1D2n seems capable at 800ISO on fur: http://www.robertmcrae​photography.com …78488&k=Z6r2SdT​&lb=1&s=X2

Tom Reichner wrote in post #15579330
Many publisher's submission guidelines clearly state that they will only accept unedited files. That means no photoshop, no exposure adjustments, no noise reduction . . . no fixing. It's got to be excellent right out of the camera

What's next, are they going to ask for the Raw files? That's why I don't deal with anyone who limits what I can do before I have my say.

waterrockets wrote in post #15579428
Might you look at moving to a 1D2n? Honestly, I have seen very few photos that I would consider very sharp from the 1.6 crops. The wildlife shots in perfect light still have a level of softness to them, and I can usually tell when a wildlife shot was shot on something with a larger sensor. There are a couple folks here on POTN who have figured out how to have retina-cutting sharp images out of the 7D, but it's pretty rare.

1D2n seems capable at 800ISO on fur: http://www.robertmcrae​photography.com …78488&k=Z6r2SdT​&lb=1&s=X2

I had a 1D2n. In fact, it was my first DSLR!
Unfortunately, I found the noise to be EVEN WORSE than with my 50D. Plus, the 8 mp is too small - when they state that submitted images must be at least 4,000 pixels on the long side (no upsizing allowed) that rules the 1D2 out. I just wish I could have some kind of breakthrough in images sales so that I could finally get a 1D4 and compete on a level playing field.

Allan.L wrote in post #15579381
Also remember, photography is about capturing light. So if you have crap light, don't expect the best results, even "pro" cameras cant turn crap into gold. The 50D is very capable but you have to feed it good light, like any camera...

good point. shooting a dark object under an overcast sky will never be very easy to get right. Maybe you could use a flash and just make sure you get it right cause after the flash im sure there will be no deer left anywhere close heh heh. or a partner could use a reflector and gently fill the animal with light as you get close?

I do agree tho that with our crop sensors its not as easy as those with $3k+ bodies.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #15579515
I had a 1D2n. In fact, it was my first DSLR!
Unfortunately, I found the noise to be EVEN WORSE than with my 50D. Plus, the 8 mp is too small - when they state that submitted images must be at least 4,000 pixels on the long side (no upsizing allowed) that rules the 1D2 out. I just wish I could have some kind of breakthrough in images sales so that I could finally get a 1D4 and compete on a level playing field.

Doesn't it make sense that the iso performance on the 1dIIn would be worse than the 50d?

Equivalent pixel sensitivity over less pixels means that the "noise grain" is bigger to begin with. And that is neglecting any development work that Canon may have done in the 3+ years between the 1DII and the 50D. Seems completely logical to me.

Ive just been looking at the 6d and i thought of this thread! that little camera seems to handle high iso really good! even better than the 5d mkIII or on par at least. but for sure better than the 5d mkII. and its not nearly as expensive as the mkIII. maybe something to save your pennies for..no doubt it would change your photographic life!

I think with budget limitations, a technique adjustment is going to offer the only help. Looking at the original image, is that the out of camera exposure? With that sky, you could have gotten away with some overexposing without completely blowing it, then pull everything back in post.

I realize ISO 640 was inadvertent, but I think you can go much higher when you need to. Experiment with it.

waterrockets wrote in post #15582479
Looking at the original image, is that the out of camera exposure? With that sky, you could have gotten away with some overexposing without completely blowing it, then pull everything back in post.

Yes, that's the OOC exposure.

How would I overexpose further without suffering a loss of shutter speed? Keep in mind, I am shooting at 896 millimeters. ANY camera shake whatsoever and the results will be trash. Plus, the deer was in motion, walking toward me. Any slower shutter speed and I would not have been able to get the hair detail real sharp. And I was already "maxed out" at f4.

Sometimes, it's acceptable to say, "There's really nothing you could have done in that exact situation with the gear you had. A different body would have given you better, more acceptable results, but your 50D just wasn't up to the task". In some situations, that is the simple truth.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #15582796
Yes, that's the OOC exposure.

How would I overexpose further without suffering a loss of shutter speed? Keep in mind, I am shooting at 896 millimeters. ANY camera shake whatsoever and the results will be trash. Plus, the deer was in motion, walking toward me. Any slower shutter speed and I would not have been able to get the hair detail real sharp. And I was already "maxed out" at f4.

Sometimes, it's acceptable to say, "There's really nothing you could have done in that exact situation with the gear you had. A different body would have given you better, more acceptable results, but your 50D just wasn't up to the task". In some situations, that is the simple truth.

I'm not grasping at straws here though. Push ISO higher to overexpose. Seriously. You should go experiment with this and see if it will help in your situation. Maybe it won't, but my bet is that ISO 800 shot HAMSTTR and pulled back will look better than properly exposed ISO 640 SOOC.

I have done this in the past, not for stuff that mattered, but just to experiment with. And you are absolutely right - that does look better than 640 ISO. Unfortunately, in low, dull light, it doesn't look as good as 400 ISO shot HAMSTTR

Yeah, there are times where I just put my camera away and watch the soccer game as the sun sets

I have the perfect solution for you: Buy my Nikon D800 and sell your canon gear, and get the best telephoto lens you can afford to put on it...and your fine detail will run away from most of the other photographers.

The 50D was not noted for good noise handling. Probably 2 stops worse than the 5d2, which probably about the same as 1div and 2/3 stops worse than 5d3, which is probably 2/3 stops worse than 1dx?

If you are really making a living off the photos, I would suggest getting better equipment that can help you continue to make that living...it's a matter of survival.

Nikon D800 is hardly the best camera out there for wildlife, as Tom wrote:

36mp is going to make that easier? On a camera who's resolution advantage would go away when shooting at high ISO?

I think a 1D4 would be a good upgrade and not much loss of reach with the 1.3x crop.