ISO 1000 on a 1Ds Mk. I

So I'm finishing a shoot, sorta unhappy with my lighting but thought hey, I'll experiment a bit here for the greater good.

Cranked it up to ISO 1000, set my 17-40 wide open and snapped my last shot of the day.

If anyone tells you high iso on a 1Ds Mk. I sucks then fine, I was happy with this shot. Nothing is done to it other than a bicubic (not bicubic sharper) resize and one little booger cloned out.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Doesn't really prove/show anythign without a 100% crop.

Shows a lot in my books. It proves you can get a usable image if you expose to avoid noise. It does prove the 17-40 is a tad soft at 38mm.

I also posted this in the wrong forum. I'm sure a mod will catch it and move accordingly.

...for you pixel peepers that think %100 crop is the defacto:

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Certainly looks alright to me

Fill flash?

funny this surfaces today. CJM had a question about noise and this camera. Luminous
Landscape says this camera does very well with noise. I say almost any camera does well with noise when the exposure is correct. Nice job here!

That is impressive.

The way the image looks though looks like it was shot in a fake studio rather then on a actual dock but great color and everything. Now if only I can find a seller to sell me this camera

Yeah, customers all the time remark that they look like they were pasted into a stock image. Not so!

Fill flash yes. Essential when shooting into a sunset in my books.

cjm, there are lots of these floating around. If it weren't for the extreme conditions I shoot in I'd trade you for the 20D and a lens. I need the weathersealing!

Yeah, as I see it, I am a little guilty of some iso fear. I don't NEED 1000 and rarely shoot above 400, still if you expose properly you'll get results on literally any camera.

I have a 1Ds and a 20D and have been shocked by the difference in noise between the two.
At ISO 100, all is quite equal. At 200, the 20D gets a head start. At 800 (I rarely need to go to this or above) it is a shocking difference. The 20D wins hands down in my opinion.
I've played with 'exposing to the right' as per this and other threads, but it made little difference.
I love the feel of the 1Ds, but if it can't compete with the quality of the 20D then it will have to go...
Anyone else got any other opinions on this?

Looks good to me.

Adding more fuel to the fire.

ISO 1250 during some backstage playtime:

%100 crop with fluro backlight and no flash.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Now thats sweet.

cosworth wrote in post #2256860
Adding more fuel to the fire.

ISO 1250 during some backstage playtime:

%100 crop with fluro backlight and no flash.

Color version? B&W can often make noisey shots look a lot better.

Not in this case.

This camera was the cat's meow when it came out. Then the Mk. II hit and the 5d and all of a sudden it was garbage at high ISO. I beg to differ.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Hellashot wrote in post #2258251
Color version? B&W can often make noisey shots look a lot better.

Actually I think the total opposite. I find many of my shots, when converted to B&W, reveal noise that the colour space hides.