NOISE on 5D

I have heard alot about how great the noise control is on the 5D so have to ask whether these pics are representative of what most people would expect from the 5D, doesn't look that amazing to me

Set @ISO 400

Full size pic
http://digital-finger.smugmug.com/gal​lery/1411050/1/7331181​4

100% crop - unsharpened
http://digital-finger.smugmug.com/gal​lery/1411050/1/7331107​7

100% crop - sharpened
http://digital-finger.smugmug.com/gal​lery/1411050/1/7331110​0

I have other pics where the noise at ISO 3200 is not bad I guess for that high an ISO but I had expected better from 400 above (even 800)
http://digital-finger.smugmug.com/gal​lery/1497614

[PS - how do I get the linked images to LOAD rather than just linking?]

I'm suprised myself. I have a 30D and pushed the ISO to high the other day at a Houston Astros game and was pleasantly surprised on the quality. There was some noise but the images were usable.

So do you agree those pics are noisy?

I am slightly concerned because one reviewer did get a duff first 5D with dodgy noise characteristics

This looks noisier than I am used to on my 5d.

The 3200 shots look about right though.

Here is a 400iso shot that I have over at my website. It is a 100% crop and I never remember seeing any noise on it. It is sharpened which tends to increase noise as I see it.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

I think it looks just fine.

Underexposure always increases noise representation.

im guessing you've never used a p&s camera at iso 400 then the canon line slrs are good with noise when you compare it with other cameras in the entire market of slrs and p&s. nikon 70 @iso 800 looks like a 20d @ 1600. by a function of pixel density to noise, 5d should have less noise than 20d, after all, you're adding 1.4x the pixels in 1.6x the space, and larger pixels=less noise. those pictures you have don't look noisy in the least bit, at least not when unsharped.

edit: take that back for last one. but i'de guess you had heavy sharpening in that thing, that noise pattern doesn't match what normally comes out of a camera.

first shot i made when i got my 5d was at iso3200. i didn't believed my eyes.
i didnt use noise reduction in pp really since i got 5d.

Sure thing, but surely that pics exposed OK? It's just the shadows non?

I had the impression from web reviews that show noise was better than that?

Certainly at 400 - it seemed to me that that was more like 800 ought to be, noise-wise

The important point here is , I believe, that the area in question is IN SHADOW, weheas your beautiful examples are not in shadow (as far as I can ascertain)

Do you ( or anyone else) have examples of 400 ISO shadow noise?

THAT is exactly what worries me, as it was one of the observations made by a reviwer with his first copy of a 5D, that there was a peroblem that he only noticed due to the odd noise pattern

Nothing on-line. Its 3am and I have to go to bed but I will try to look for something in the morning.

I agree that those are poor examples of shadow noise. Lets see what I can find.

Ok well I had the Camera exchaned for a new one!

- not because of the noise specifically but it was locking up with the shutter open and refusing to AE lock

my 5d is about the same as the examples shown, at first i wondered if i had a bad copy, but as i used it more, i found that your eyes have to adjust to it. The files size is alot larger, and the grain actually looks alot more natural and usable than it would from say an xt, which can sometimes just look too colourful grainy blochy. Thank God were not using nikon jkjk.

Gald to hear that noise level isn't too bad.

when you sharpen any picture, you will get noise. The unsharpened shot looks pretty noiseless in my view.
The original shot looks way too soft. I'd recommend redoing the shot with a different lens perhaps and confirm the AF. If the image is sharp, then you will not need any sharpening or very little, hence little noise will be introduced.

Generally, it was theorized that the less dense pixel pitch seen with the 1Dmark II's and the 5D's would result in less noise, especially in high ISO's. But according to the tests at dpreview of the 5D, it doesn't seem like it.

What I've seen with the N (which has the same pixel pitch as the 5D, with just a smaller sized sensor) is that if you are in a really dark place with wide dynamics (e.g. band concerts, etc) the shot is clipped on the left and/or the right. If you bring the detail from underexposed area in RAW, I think I get less noise than with a higer pixel pitch sensor like my XT.