1D Mark II ISO Shots (bored)

well Adam I really don't appreciate being called a liar. I have stated many times the process I used, if you don't believe me that is fine, but don't come in here and call me a liar.

I hope this thread does help people though as that was my intent. Don't be afraid to use high iso, just make sure you expose right or even over expose a touch and the noise will be minimal.

Im not calling anyone a liar. Im just saying that your pictures bear a startlingly close resemblance to other pictures that have had NR done to them and that if I were to take a 3200ISO shot from a MkIII, it wouldnt look nearly as noise-free as yours.

AdamLewis wrote in post #4879575
Well these pics look like all the pics you post and they always look like they have NR done.
If they dont, then youve got the best performing MkII ever made. Better than any MkIII ive ever laid hands on.

Definitely NR being done somewhere. 3200 shot has no detail and no noise.

I agree with what this gentleman says. NR is pretty obvious on these as is the problem with red that the MK II had. Still cool to see what it can do though!

You two just don't get it lol there is ZERO NR DONE TO THESE IMAGES!

I am done responding to these claims, I really don't know what more I can do to hammer it through.

Thanks for looking, hope you had as much fun as I did with these shots.

(PS: You can say what you want Adam, but you are telling me that i am a Liar, there is no fancy talk that will make it not that lol)

You have an awesome MK II then. congrats haha.

I get similar results out of my Mark II.

LOL Thick headed alright!

To finish the thread off....His 1d before I sold it to him @ ISO3200-----properly exposed for subjects face....(surprise shot! LOL )

1. Full photo---NO NR DONE----STRAIGHT FROM CAMERA!!!

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

R_Metzel wrote in post #4881701
LOL Thick headed alright!

To finish the thread off....His 1d before I sold it to him @ ISO3200-----properly exposed for subjects face....(surprise shot! LOL )

1. Full photo---NO NR DONE----STRAIGHT FROM CAMERA!!!


2. 100% crop of same photo......NO NR DONE---STRAIGHT FROM CAMERA!!!

If you have a problem with noise....learn to expose properly!

Haha I actually see noise in that one. It seems in your and Matts case though the secret it to use NR . I expose properly (as do many other people with better cameras than the MkII) and cant get the noise-free results you all seem to.

The noise AdamLewis is talking about is chroma noise. That type of noise appears to be notably absent from most, but not all, of the properly exposed shots (i.e., the ones that were not overexposed and then pulled back).

The ones in which it appears to be absent are:

1. http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com …49947124_0f3644​e750_o.jpg
   
2. http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com …49964790_3d3a75​faaf_o.jpg
   
3. http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com …50837318_142cdc​f829_o.jpg

1. http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com …50015791_570b39​6e7b_o.jpg

• Absent (ISO 3200): http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com …50837318_142cdc​f829_o.jpg
  
• Present (ISO 1600): http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com …50015791_570b39​6e7b_o.jpg

Yeah like I said, the picture of the girl is the only time I see any noise. Whatever is going on, THERE IS NR being done. Maybe youre not aware of it, but it definitely is happening.

EDIT: Oh I didnt even see the pictures of that little girl. Ah well. More of the same. Good night everyone!

LR does apply some chrominance NR by default unless you change that in your import preferences (which you can do on a camera by camera basis) or override it on a shot-by-shot basis. At least it did when I first downloaded it. Since the 1D II kind of falls on its ass when it comes to chrominance noise at high ISO, I decided to leave it on.

cdifoto wrote in post #4881835
LR does apply some chrominance NR by default unless you change that in your import preferences (which you can do on a camera by camera basis) or override it on a shot-by-shot basis. At least it did when I first downloaded it. I liked it enough to leave it alone.

To each their own. Im not saying its good or bad but it is noticeable and if youre going to do a test like this, its not really valid when youve got NR going on.

AdamLewis wrote in post #4881840
To each their own. Im not saying its good or bad but it is noticeable and if youre going to do a test like this, its not really valid when youve got NR going on.

I can't speak for OP's methods but I don't think he ever intended this to be a dpreview-style measurebate-me all-things-final test anyway. Based on the thread title it's more of a "hey I'm bored, check this out & take it or leave it" thread.

Either way, I find that the minimal chrominance noise reduction that's done by default when I import makes it a very good contender for a long life of usage, physical accidents notwithstanding.

cdifoto wrote in post #4881861
I can't speak for OP's methods but I don't think he ever intended this to be a dpreview-style measurebate-me all-things-final test anyway. Based on the thread title it's more of a "hey I'm bored, check this out & take it or leave it" thread.

I found the illustration of just how much noise reduction you get by overexposing and pulling back in post very informative, actually. And that was really the point of the thread to begin with (well, that and how much worse it gets when you have to pull up after underexposing. Lesson learned: don't underexpose). I expect the difference in noise would be just as dramatic regardless of any chroma noise reduction that may be happening.

AthleticsPhotog wrote in post #4881633
You two just don't get it lol there is ZERO NR DONE TO THESE IMAGES!

Well, you don't have to convince me. Your post motivated me to do a quick and dirty high ISO test at 3200 with 40D and 17-40L. The snaps were taken handheld in RAW, and converted to jpeg from in Lightroom.

After importing the raw files, I zeroed all settings then set the white balance the same for all pics, adjusted black point very slightly photo by photo, set all files to medium contrast tone curve. I didn't make any other adjustments after setting all settings to zero, therefore zero sharpening, zero noise reduction etc.

Proper exposure or slight underexposure makes all the difference at high ISO, that's for sure. I don't take that many pics at 3200, but I'll make doubly sure to watch the exposure when I do. Thanks for the reminder.

This was overexposed and adjusted down 0.5 stop

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

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

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

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

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