40D iso 1600

Too much noise there, understandable that 40d got 18 months old sensor from 400d so we can't expect any noise or DR advantage.

That's an amazing pictures at iso 1600. really showcases the 40d.

farrukh wrote in post #4028891
Too much noise there, understandable that 40d got 18 months old sensor from 400d so we can't expect any noise or DR advantage.

too much noise? maybe i'm not understanding what you meant or if you were saying that the 40d uses the same sensor as the 400d???

i don't take noise to be a bad thing if it's done properly. a bit like grain on the old film cameras. i remember when even iso 400 on film used to be pretty grainy. can turn out rather nice in urban shots. give it a gritty, urban look. having said that, i don't find that shot too noisy at all, unless you pixel peep.

cricketboy75 wrote in post #4029904
i don't take noise to be a bad thing if it's done properly. a bit like grain on the old film cameras. i remember when even iso 400 on film used to be pretty grainy. can turn out rather nice in urban shots. give it a gritty, urban look. having said that, i don't find that shot too noisy at all, unless you pixel peep.

that photo has clearly not been run through denoising at all. i suggest some chroma noise reduction, but that's it. chroma noise has no reason to exist... luma noise is fine most of the time though

farrukh wrote in post #4028891
Too much noise there, understandable that 40d got 18 months old sensor from 400d so we can't expect any noise or DR advantage.

You think the 40d is the same sensor from the 400d with upgraded parts around it?

I think that is very impressive performance for 1600 ISO. It is my understanding that the senor in the 40D is not the same one in the 400D, given that it's 14bit.

That was one of the reasons why I decided to upgrade to the 40D instead of the 400D. Although, I must admit that my 40D's sensor cleaning function doesn't do much and now it has ER99'd on me about ten times today.

I was thinking that I should not buy one of the first batches of 40Ds, that I should wait until next year. I don't think I'll make that mistake again. I hope my replacement 40D is a winner, otherwise, I'll not have another.

Congrats on some very fine performance. Your image is certainly usable, and IMHO, better than usable. Back in the days when I only shot film, I happily presented shots like that when I had low light or just plain needed the speed to give me some elbow room.

Best,

Michael

It pretty much is...

farrukh wrote in post #4028891
Too much noise there, understandable that 40d got 18 months old sensor from 400d so we can't expect any noise or DR advantage.

Farrukh, you do know that you're completely wrong there, don't you?

farrukh wrote in post #4028891
Too much noise there, understandable that 40d got 18 months old sensor from 400d so we can't expect any noise or DR advantage.

I’m also very much interested to see some reliable source of that information..

Yeah, there may be noise at a 100% crop, but here's the thing: I don;t print or post photos at a 100% crop. I post and print the photos. In that light, the picture of Fido, posted above, looks absolutely fine to me...

According to page 5 on the 40D white paper:

Although the EOS 40D’s single-piece CMOS sensor is based on the Canon EOS Digital
Rebel XTi’s sensor design and manufacturing technology, new processes were incorporated
in the CMOS semiconductor fabrication and microlens-forming process. By improving
light-collecting efficiency, the same ISO range and low noise (S/N ratio) as that of the
EOS 30D were attained even though the pixels on the 30D are larger.

Its the same sensor with diffrent microlenses. but TBH I don't see any noticeable improvement in noise performance with those different microlenses.

The samples images from users and review websites I've seen so far are not better then 350d or 30d. The above sample is even worst then what I have seen from ex-350d and 30d and those are over 3 year old tech cameras. I was expecting a 2007 release camera to be noticeable improvement in terms of noise and DR especially after seeing 1DMK3 impressive ISO performance.

Offtopic: Soon (probably at the next PMA show in jan-feb) Nikon d90 will come with nice features and probably improved new Nikon sensor with EXPEED so Canon will have to put effort in 450d sensor and leaving 40d as an underdog. It seems 40d successor will come sooner then the normal cycle unless Canon forcefully persist with their 18 month cycle.

farrukh wrote in post #4030639
According to page 5 on the 40D white paper:

Although the EOS 40D’s single-piece CMOS sensor is based on the Canon EOS Digital
Rebel XTi’s sensor design and manufacturing technology, new processes were incorporated
in the CMOS semiconductor fabrication and microlens-forming process. By improving
light-collecting efficiency, the same ISO range and low noise (S/N ratio) as that of the
EOS 30D were attained even though the pixels on the 30D are larger.

Its the same sensor with diffrent microlenses. but TBH I don't see any noticeable improvement in noise performance with those different microlenses.

The samples images from users and review websites I've seen so far are not better then 350d or 30d. The above sample is even worst then what I have seen from ex-350d and 30d and those are over 3 year old tech cameras. I was expecting a 2007 release camera to be noticeable improvement in terms of noise and DR especially after seeing 1DMK3 impressive ISO performance.

It says "based on" and "design and manufacturing technology". It does not say that it's the same sensor, so clense eyes and read more carefully the next time.

Another thing. Notice the exposure graph. Wth the graph more to the right, there would have been less noise.

pwm2 wrote in post #4030679
Another thing. Notice the exposure graph. Wth the graph more to the right, there would have been less noise.

Lol, n00b (got it from your title) enjoy your 40d