I forgot to say that noisy problems comes more with zoom or telephoto lenses, but primes always great, but it is not a reason.
Tareq "I am very lazy, a normal consumer" More info | I forgot to say that noisy problems comes more with zoom or telephoto lenses, but primes always great, but it is not a reason. Galleries:
LOG IN TO REPLY |
StewartR "your nose is too big" 4,269 posts Joined Jun 2006 Location: Maidenhead, UK More info | It's nice to see that the OP has it sorted now, but I'm confused... www.LensesForHire.co.uk
LOG IN TO REPLY |
RenéDamkot Cream of the Crop 39,856 posts Likes: 8 Joined Feb 2005 Location: enschede, netherlands More info | StewartR wrote: So was the noise purely an artefact of inappropriate conversion from RAW to JPEG? In other words, if the OP had shot a JPEG to start with, would it have looked OK? Yes, and yes. "I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
LOG IN TO REPLY |
RenéDamkot Cream of the Crop 39,856 posts Likes: 8 Joined Feb 2005 Location: enschede, netherlands More info | Tareq wrote: I forgot to say that noisy problems comes more with zoom or telephoto lenses, but primes always great, but it is not a reason. Well then, it obviously isn't the camera then, right "I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Tareq "I am very lazy, a normal consumer" More info | in fact i am not aware of most processing softwares as PS but i try to do everything manually rather than Auto'ing things. but i think i have problems to adjust setting of my camera everytime i shoot. Galleries:
LOG IN TO REPLY |
RenéDamkot Cream of the Crop 39,856 posts Likes: 8 Joined Feb 2005 Location: enschede, netherlands More info | Jul 05, 2006 11:42 | #21 The OP's problem wasn't with the camera, but with the conversion from CR2 file to tiff file. So my comments have nothing to do with camera settings, but with software settings. "I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
LOG IN TO REPLY |
braduardo Goldmember 2,630 posts Likes: 1 Joined Jun 2006 Location: Minneapolis, MN More info | Jul 05, 2006 13:16 | #22 I have found that in lower-light and night shots the "auto" settings try to make the scene look like daylight. When I'm converting I normally try to put things pretty close to my shot settings then work from there.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
StewartR wrote: It's nice to see that the OP has it sorted now, but I'm confused... I looked at the EXIF data from the "extreme noise" photo. It all seems pretty innocuous: focal length 42mm, manual exposure, 4secs at f/11, no exposure compensation. I'd expect that to work fine. So was the noise purely an artefact of inappropriate conversion from RAW to JPEG? In other words, if the OP had shot a JPEG to start with, would it have looked OK? The noise was due to ACR adjusting the exposure automatically and giving it +1.25 or more causing the noise pattern to become extremely visible. When I double checked and saw that ACR was adjusting my exposure I went and reset all my photos to 0 and the noise went away.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
René Damkot wrote: Well then, it obviously isn't the camera then, right ![]() Try and disable any 'auto' settings on converting, or try Canons EOS Viewer Utility or DPP, since they use the camera settings as 'default' for conversion. I've never understood why ACR uses 'auto-everything' as default. One of the first things I disabled. About as usefull as 'auto-levels': Crap. How did you disable ACR from applying "auto" settings on the RAW files?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
RenéDamkot Cream of the Crop 39,856 posts Likes: 8 Joined Feb 2005 Location: enschede, netherlands More info | Jul 06, 2006 05:33 | #25 In ACR; next to the drop down menu 'Camera RAW defaults' there is an 'arrow'. Click it and select save settings. (Untick all 'auto' fields first) "I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
LOG IN TO REPLY |
StewartR "your nose is too big" 4,269 posts Joined Jun 2006 Location: Maidenhead, UK More info | René Damkot wrote: ='René Damkot'] StewartR wrote: So was the noise purely an artefact of inappropriate conversion from RAW to JPEG? In other words, if the OP had shot a JPEG to start with, would it have looked OK? Yes and yes. Thanks. That's very helpful. www.LensesForHire.co.uk
LOG IN TO REPLY |
harryb49 Senior Member 319 posts Joined Jan 2006 Location: Quincy WA More info | Jul 06, 2006 11:38 | #27 What ISO do you use with your XT? I have informally checked mine and find that I start running into too much noise above the 400 ISO setting. 5D Mark III, 70-200is 2.8L. 16-35 2.8L II, Canon 24-70 2.8L. Canon 50 1.8. 580EX II
LOG IN TO REPLY |
braduardo Goldmember 2,630 posts Likes: 1 Joined Jun 2006 Location: Minneapolis, MN More info | Jul 06, 2006 13:04 | #28 I use the 300D, but I try to leave it in ISO 100 as often as possible. If I don't have much light, up to ISO 200, or MAYBE 400. I rarely use 400 or above just because of the noise issue. That is one reason I would really like to upgrade. I am nowhere close to being able to afford it, but would love to get crisp pictures at ISO 1600-3200.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
harryb49 Senior Member 319 posts Joined Jan 2006 Location: Quincy WA More info | Jul 06, 2006 13:18 | #29 I agree completely. Too much noise at the higher ISO levels is a bummer. 5D Mark III, 70-200is 2.8L. 16-35 2.8L II, Canon 24-70 2.8L. Canon 50 1.8. 580EX II
LOG IN TO REPLY |
RenéDamkot Cream of the Crop 39,856 posts Likes: 8 Joined Feb 2005 Location: enschede, netherlands More info | Jul 06, 2006 13:24 | #30 You should try film sometimes "I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is ANebinger 1193 guests, 144 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||