XTI/400D Users Chat

No it was autofocus, but high ISO. the high ISO (which didnt realize was SO high) made the noise apparently.

My rabbits cage is in a corner of our kitchen, and i shut the lights out, and shined a mini maglite through the top of his cage, opened the door and snapped. But Should have lowered the ISO. on the camera i couldnt tell it was so noisy.

Yeah, I hate it when that happens. Pictures always look better smaller.

bitjockey --

LOVE the third (panning) shot! Too bad the car wasn't in a braking zone in order to catch the glowing rotors .

Even the labels on the tires add to the sense of speed!

Theo

PS - Did you use the Nifty Fifty for the shot or was it another 50mm lens?

I left my house and now I'm at my parents house. I shot a couple pictures of downtown. I cant check them out though cause i don't have a compact flash card reader here. They DO look good on the screen though. I've been waiting all week for a nice day to get outside. It's been raining so much lately.

DVan8504 wrote in post #5537124
Yeah, the XTi doesn't do so great with higher ISOs, but sometimes it's either have some noise or don't get the shot at all. With a moving object in what looks like low light, you may not have had a choice. Are you using full manual mode? Flash?

Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 EX with 430EX
ISO 1600
1/60
f/2.8

#1

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

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

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

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

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

And these were with your 400D? What exactly do you mean by exposure? Which setting are you referring to?

This were all with the 400D. Tis all in the EXIF. Exposure is what is called the amount of light entering the camera. This is where the little needle on the meter. I dont mind under/overexposing by 2/3 since it can be pulled back in processing later.

Lot of people are scared of higher ISO's because of noise but to be honest, as soon as you resize or run some sort of noise reduction, it can be reduced.

elysium wrote in post #5538019
This were all with the 400D. Tis all in the EXIF. Exposure is what is called the amount of light entering the camera. This is where the little needle on the meter. I dont mind under/overexposing by 2/3 since it can be pulled back in processing later.

Lot of people are scared of higher ISO's because of noise but to be honest, as soon as you resize or run some sort of noise reduction, it can be reduced.

I'll be honest. I haven't really taken the time to read up on how to properly use that meter. Nor have I used noise reduction software really. All I know is that higher ISO generally creates more noise. Those are really nice for ISO 1600 I must say.

Thanks, noise reduction was applied so you do lose a bit of sharpness but I have to say it is acceptable.

ISO is very handy in low light situations and would not hesitate to bump up if needs be. Yes its noisy the higher you go but I would rather get a shot with noise than no shot at all. Trust me, the 400D is VERY capable and can perform with the right bit of glass if you can find it.

WOW elysium Great shots with the xti. I really need to invest in a new lens

THIS is an interesting part of the Digital Photo Review tests of noise using the Canon 400D, Nikon D80 and the Sony DLSR-A100. Note that at higher ISO values, the 400D stays sharp, albeit with a bit of chroma noise. Noise reduction software can work wonders...but (IMHO) I want to start the noise reduction processing with an image that is as sharp (RAW) as I can get!

Theo

Thanks, there is a whole thread dedicated to the nightclub shooters.

To be honest, most of my portfolio was done with my kit lens when I started. It was a great little number and glad I had it. Moving to my Sigma 24-70 2.8 was even better BUT was a nightmare without a wide end to it. 18mm was nice to have on a crop body.

If I was to do it all again, I would have gone for the 17-55 2.8 IS.

elysium wrote in post #5538153
Thanks, noise reduction was applied so you do lose a bit of sharpness but I have to say it is acceptable.

ISO is very handy in low light situations and would not hesitate to bump up if needs be. Yes its noisy the higher you go but I would rather get a shot with noise than no shot at all. Trust me, the 400D is VERY capable and can perform with the right bit of glass if you can find it.

What program do you use?

twmatthias wrote in post #5538258
THIS is an interesting part of the Digital Photo Review tests of noise using the Canon 400D, Nikon D80 and the Sony DLSR-A100. Note that at higher ISO values, the 400D stays sharp, albeit with a bit of chroma noise. Noise reduction software can work wonders...but (IMHO) I want to start the noise reduction processing with an image that is as sharp (RAW) as I can get!

Theo

That article makes it sound like they are using an in camera noise reduction software. I didn't know that existed.