Normal noise for 40D at ISO 400 and no NR?

Ok so I just got the 40D about two weeks ago and have been crossing my fingers hoping that I got a good copy because lets admit there are definitely a few rotten apples out there and after my Err99 scare I guess I'm just looking for anything before my trip to the Grand Canyon at the end of October. After doing some work on a set from a biplane ride the other day I just thought that the noise for ISO400 seemed a little high but maybe I'm just looking to deep here so decide for yourself and let me know what you think.

Straight from the camera, not PP done with NR turned off. Shot may also be about 1/3-2/3 under exposed.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Eric,

I may be way out to lunch, but in my experience ISO 400 will tend to produce noise. This will show up if you enlarge the image or crank up the exposure in PP.

I have seen some significant NR in Canon's jpeg renditions, though.

Does anyone have a comment about the 40D's NR in regards to RAW files?

Tony

Tony Long Photos on PBase

tonylong wrote in post #4023024
Eric,

I may be way out to lunch, but in my experience ISO 400 will tend to produce noise. This will show up if you enlarge the image or crank up the exposure in PP.

I have seen some significant NR in Canon's jpeg renditions, though.

Does anyone have a comment about the 40D's NR in regards to RAW files?

Tony

I didn't think the camera did any processing on RAWs. Has something changed on the 40D?

DDan wrote in post #4023046
I didn't think the camera did any processing on RAWs. Has something changed on the 40D?

Honestly I guess I never thought about that but I was shooting in RAW and had NR turned off so either way no NR was used on the image. Only processing done was conversion from RAW to JPEG. If this is what I can expect from ISO 400 I'm fine with it but I had just noticed on a few ISO sample shots from various 40D reviews that the noise seemed more prominent but then again I don't know if the samples were shot in JPEG format with NR or in RAW mode.

You can have noise at 100 ISO with a 5d if there isn't any light to work with. If someone underexposes a shot it will start to show noise. IMO, higher ISOs are used when there isn't enough light to work with and it gets blamed for noise when the real problem could be under exposure. Look for noise in highlights. That is real noise.

Good point Dan, like I said I'm probably just looking into this way to much because of my Err99 scare but I'm thinking that was just a bad format on a CF card now more than anything. Thanks for the input.

I saw ISO 400 shot of my friends 40d and I felt it was nosier then my ex-350d

DDan wrote in post #4023111
You can have noise at 100 ISO with a 5d if there isn't any light to work with. If someone underexposes a shot it will start to show noise. IMO, higher ISOs are used when there isn't enough light to work with and it gets blamed for noise when the real problem could be under exposure. Look for noise in highlights. That is real noise.

Well put Dan -

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

i think you are right ... how noisy is this iso 400 :

http://img515.imagesha​ck.us/img515/2584/unti​tled3hj6.jpg

do you have highlight tone priority on ? ... that might be the issue.

i didnt test the camera without it so i can't really judge here.

it looks like iso 800 or more to meh.