EOS 5D mkIII noise

I seem to be getting a noticeable amount of noise in my indoor shots, at ISO levels where I would have thought it wouldn't be an issue. I have no issues at all in day light, superb in fact, but I'm getting frustrated at the indoor results when I don't use any flash. So, I won't say at what level I'm starting to see an issue as I don't want to lead any replies, but at what ISO level do you guys start to notice noise on a 5D mkIII, what would you consider to be the usable range?

welshwizard1971 wrote in post #17969660
I seem to be getting a noticeable amount of noise in my indoor shots, at ISO levels where I would have thought it wouldn't be an issue. I have no issues at all in day light, superb in fact, but I'm getting frustrated at the indoor results when I don't use any flash. So, I won't say at what level I'm starting to see an issue as I don't want to lead any replies, but at what ISO level do you guys start to notice noise on a 5D mkIII, what would you consider to be the usable range?

Unfortunately, to give an answer you sort of have to give some details on your settings. Whether noise is apparent and detrimental to an image depends entirely on the settings used, the exposure and whether or not you are pushing your exposures in post processing. There isn't going to be a single, specific level that we can point you to to say "don't go above here". For every post that tries to tell you a concrete value to use, there will be 5 posters that can show you an instance (or more) where that number is wrong.

So, if you have a couple of examples, I'm sure we could give you some pointers for what to do or what to try to avoid doing in the future; but not a set number.

Heya,

You can't equate noise in your image to be soley due to ISO use.

There are different kinds of "noise." A lot of what you're seeing is between luminance & color noise. I'm willing to bet your indoor shots are largely lit by tungesten (orange) colored light, and it's very dim to the camera. Everything will be dingy, washed out, not very detailed or crisp, even at low ISO levels, let alone high ISO levels (in fact, you probably won't see a difference in your indoor light from ISO 100 to ISO 1600 I'm willing to bet). Some light is very limited and poor for a source for the camera. Tungsten indoor lights are one of them. Even a low level flash produces happier pixels even if underexposed (which I'm sure you've seen and thought... man, even underexposed the skins look better than without!).

So if you plan to stick to this ambient light approach, I would go ahead and push ISO to whatever you wish to keep the shutter speed you want. And then in post, figure out how much luminance/color noise is effecting what, and make noise reduction actions that are associated with that environment.

Very best,

Snydremark wrote in post #17969690
Unfortunately, to give an answer you sort of have to give some details on your settings. Whether noise is apparent and detrimental to an image depends entirely on the settings used, the exposure and whether or not you are pushing your exposures in post processing. There isn't going to be a single, specific level that we can point you to to say "don't go above here". For every post that tries to tell you a concrete value to use, there will be 5 posters that can show you an instance (or more) where that number is wrong.

So, if you have a couple of examples, I'm sure we could give you some pointers for what to do or what to try to avoid doing in the future; but not a set number.

Exposures aren't pushed in any way PP....

MalVeauX wrote in post #17969701
Heya,

You can't equate noise in your image to be soley due to ISO use.

There are different kinds of "noise." A lot of what you're seeing is between luminance & color noise. I'm willing to bet your indoor shots are largely lit by tungesten (orange) colored light, and it's very dim to the camera. Everything will be dingy, washed out, not very detailed or crisp, even at low ISO levels, let alone high ISO levels (in fact, you probably won't see a difference in your indoor light from ISO 100 to ISO 1600 I'm willing to bet). Some light is very limited and poor for a source for the camera. Tungsten indoor lights are one of them. Even a low level flash produces happier pixels even if underexposed (which I'm sure you've seen and thought... man, even underexposed the skins look better than without!).

So if you plan to stick to this ambient light approach, I would go ahead and push ISO to whatever you wish to keep the shutter speed you want. And then in post, figure out how much luminance/color noise is effecting what, and make noise reduction actions that are associated with that environment.

Very best,

No lights were turned on, all natural light from the window.....

Again, you're going to have to give up some details. Vague references can only generate vague answers; and noise results are entirely dependent on the situation. What sort of settings are you seeing issues with?

Fair enough, this would be one example, natural light, there's a window right in front of them, and it had loads of noise, this was after it was cleaned up, I've seen shots from other 5D MkIII's that didn't have any noise whatsoever at ISO 6400.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/FDio​QH

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/FRAm​1o

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/APqg​ew

For the first one, I would be curious to know what "clean up" was done over the base image. You say that there is only natural light coming from a window in front of them, but the highlights on both people and the shadows on the wall would indicate you also had some form of overhead light coming from above and slightly to the rear of the frame.

For the second one, I'm not sure what might have happened there. I have a suspicion that you may have applied too aggressive a sharpening setting without applying any NR first; on both shots...but that is *pure* conjecture here.

Having had a "good copy" of a 5D3, I hate to say it, but indoors at 6,400 ISO I think your expectations are well ....
A little optimistic.

I also think for folks to help you ... Well I personally would want to know ss, aperture, iso and the lens you used.

For the kind of quality I Wanted - ISO 800 max, or at a push ISO 1600. But then I am picky but also very realistic.

I generally tried to stick at ISO 160, if it demanded more light then went the flash route. Or at least stuck between 160 and 400.

Yes, I Realise thats awfully restrictive, just saying it as I found it.
If you want to go over that, and still get those ... what I call wonderful transparency like, glossy black and whites then you will have to get awfully good at post processing.

Look at posts from a guy called Teamspeed, he seems to extract magic out of these Canon cameras.

My friend has a Nikon D810 .... And again I hate to say it, but that Sony sensor seems more in line with what you are wanting.

I am sure loads of folks will disagree with me. My response would be ... OK post some utterly stunning ISO 6400 images and tell me how you did it!

welshwizard1971 wrote in post #17969793
....

My guess is simply exposure then. If you're using natural light and getting noise every where, it's due to underexposure. And it's also likely due to you simply being extremely picky and pixel-peepy in shadow areas where you are under-exposed. The reason you saw now noise in another photo at higher ISO and had noise in other photos with equal or less ISO, just shows the difference in exposure--when exposure is dead on or to the right, less noise; when exposure is under, noise pops up.

To make it more frustrating, here's ISO 3200 (maximum extended value) of a 10 year old 5d classic:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/yvv2​Lv

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/zq5v​yu

Is this useable?

IMAGE LINK: http://s37.photobucket​.com …w_01_zps176aa5a​0.jpg.html

IMAGE LINK: http://s37.photobucket​.com …w_02_zpsf92792f​7.jpg.html

It's a gallery kitchen so it was a small skylight, no sharpening on that one.

Submariner wrote in post #17970225
Having had a "good copy" of a 5D3, I hate to say it, but indoors at 6,400 ISO I think your expectations are well ....
A little optimistic.

I also think for folks to help you ... Well I personally would want to know ss, aperture, iso and the lens you used.

For the kind of quality I Wanted - ISO 800 max, or at a push ISO 1600. But then I am picky but also very realistic.

I generally tried to stick at ISO 160, if it demanded more light then went the flash route. Or at least stuck between 160 and 400.

Yes, I Realise thats awfully restrictive, just saying it as I found it.
If you want to go over that, and still get those ... what I call wonderful transparency like, glossy black and whites then you will have to get awfully good at post processing.

Look at posts from a guy called Teamspeed, he seems to extract magic out of these Canon cameras.

My friend has a Nikon D810 .... And again I hate to say it, but that Sony sensor seems more in line with what you are wanting.

I am sure loads of folks will disagree with me. My response would be ... OK post some utterly stunning ISO 6400 images and tell me how you did it!

Ah, but that's my point, I have no expectations, I'm just trying to determine where my expectations should be, it's an awesome camera, I'm very happy with it, I just seem to be getting inconsistent results with noise at middling ISO settings. The camera settings are all on the flickr links if reqd. I did look at the D810, but, too used to Canon kit, it felt too wierd

MalVeauX wrote in post #17970233
My guess is simply exposure then. If you're using natural light and getting noise every where, it's due to underexposure. And it's also likely due to you simply being extremely picky and pixel-peepy in shadow areas where you are under-exposed. The reason you saw now noise in another photo at higher ISO and had noise in other photos with equal or less ISO, just shows the difference in exposure--when exposure is dead on or to the right, less noise; when exposure is under, noise pops up.

Hmmm, maybe.....

For me it's too noisy, I just love high IQ, but if it's that or nothing, then it's as good as you're going to get so there's no point stressing about the noise.