50D iso 6400 snapshot

This is an average shot, taken in my average living room. No pixel peepeing. Its just a post to help those on the fence, decide weather or not the 50D can shoot images that they may want. Image was resized, and had the following adjustments applied.

Shot it RAW
Processed in DPP
NR used was 15 and 15
Sharpness 7

File Name IMG_1515.CR2
Camera Model Canon EOS 50D
Firmware Firmware Version 1.0.3
Shooting Date/Time 11/1/2008 8:41:23 PM
Owner's Name
Shooting Mode Manual Exposure
Tv( Shutter Speed ) 1/60
Av( Aperture Value ) 3.5
Metering Mode Evaluative Metering
ISO Speed 6400
Auto ISO Speed OFF
Lens EF70-200mm f/2.8L USM
Focal Length 70.0mm
Image Size 4752x3168
Image Quality RAW
Flash Off
FE lock OFF
White Balance Mode Auto
AF Mode One-Shot AF
Picture Style User Defined 1(Standard)
Sharpness 4
Contrast 1
Saturation 0
Color tone 0
Color Space sRGB
Long exposure noise reduction 0:Off
High ISO speed noise reduction 1:Low
Highlight tone priority 0isable
Auto Lighting Optimizer 3isable
Peripheral illumination correction Disable
File Size 25987KB
Dust Delete Data No
Drive Mode Single shooting
Live View Shooting OFF
Date/Time(UTC)
Latitude
Longitude
Altitude
Geographic coordinate system
Camera Body No. 032011xxxx

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

You may be hardly helping...

H8Monday wrote in post #6606435
No pixel peepeing. Its just a post to help those on the fence, decide weather or not the 50D can shoot images that they may want.

...By showing reduced/spatially compressed images, in an area where (already visible) deffects get soften out by the "integration" of pixels (banding in yours is pretty obvious, just as your very wise choice of a model is also obvious... )

Try to include a 100% insert, in some corner, to allow the viewer better form both the global and local picture of things. Some examples (with far less interesting models, though):

ISO3200-6400:

http://www.pbase.com …/image/10331387​8/original
http://www.pbase.com …/image/10331388​1/original
http://www.pbase.com …/image/10331388​2/original
http://www.pbase.com …/image/10365479​6/original (1D3 vs. 5D2)

As for me, I am truly interested in checking out what the 50D could do in the hands of a true talented and skilled "digital artisan".

PIX

Please forgive me for not seeing anything inherently impressive about it but I can safely say an ancient 20D can handle that better.
Both pics using ACR standard sharpening and noise reduction (25/1/25/0 and NR 0/25). Resized and ACR snapshot at 100%. ISO3200 pushed by 1 stop. 20D

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'

Dragos Jianu wrote in post #6607677
Please forgive me for not seeing anything inherently impressive about it but I can safely say an ancient 20D can handle that better.

A 20D shot at ISO3200 then pushed a stop in post? I believe you're mistaken.

look above

Small quote here from DPReview:

http://www.dpreview.co​m/reviews/canoneos50d/

"Just to make it clear, the 50D's image quality is (at identical viewing size) and by no means worse than the competition's but it's also not significantly better than the 40D's (Dynamic range and high ISO performance are even slightly worse) and that simply makes one wonder if the EOS 50D would have been an (even) better camera if its sensor had a slightly more moderate resolution."

The blue channel banding is very obvious in the 20D shot in the 100% crop just to the right of his chin. Did you ever play with selective NR on the Blue channel only?

I guess its true.... you Peepers will peep, no matter what. This isn't a 'My dad can beat up your dad' thread, its an example of a low contrast, unedited snapshot. The only adjustments made to the image were to attempt to combat the already obvious noise.

The point I was trying to make with my OP, is for those people that are wanting to go to a 50D, but have been convinced (erroneously) that the 50D is not capable of providing usable pics at extreme iso settings.

The 50D has some VERY nice new features, ie vga lcd, micro focus etc, AND you CAN shoot it at iso above 1600 and get great images. And at settings unheard of on previous cameras (iso 6400) you can reach for that setting and get usable, workable pics.

Everyone seems so determined to shoot down this camera because it doesn't do what they EXPECT it to do.

Use it for its great new features, and realize that it WILL have noise, like every other camera, at extreme iso settings. But that noise does not render the images as junk. It makes them images that were shot at extreme settings, and will require extra tlc. But once you realize tht you GOT the shot, it becomes worth it.

Cute girl!

H8Monday wrote in post #6608881
I guess its true.... you Peepers will peep, no matter what. This isn't a 'My dad can beat up your dad' thread, its an example of a low contrast, unedited snapshot. The only adjustments made to the image were to attempt to combat the already obvious noise.

The point I was trying to make with my OP, is for those people that are wanting to go to a 50D, but have been convinced (erroneously) that the 50D is not capable of providing usable pics at extreme iso settings.

The 50D has some VERY nice new features, ie vga lcd, micro focus etc, AND you CAN shoot it at iso above 1600 and get great images. And at settings unheard of on previous cameras (iso 6400) you can reach for that setting and get usable, workable pics.

Everyone seems so determined to shoot down this camera because it doesn't do what they EXPECT it to do.

Use it for its great new features, and realize that it WILL have noise, like every other camera, at extreme iso settings. But that noise does not render the images as junk. It makes them images that were shot at extreme settings, and will require extra tlc. But once you realize tht you GOT the shot, it becomes worth it.

You've left me scratching my head a bit then.

The image you posted is a full image which I am thus viewing at full size on my monitor. The only conclusion I can draw from such an image is to understand how the image would look exclusively on the web. But since the average 3MP point and shoot is perfectly adequate for web images this doesn't make for much of a challenge.

Then I also notice visible noise in the OOF region of this tiny web image. If I can see noise in a full image that is being displayed at 700x1050 or whatever, then I will certainly see the noise in any medium sized print.

For the most part I don't think the 50D is a bad camera, mainly because I don't think the 20D, 30D and 40D are bad cameras. I think from what I have seen of the testing online that the 50D IQ is very similar to the 40D, which doesn't surprise me much. I guess you could say this means the 6400 ISO setting is OK for web use, but so is a pushed 3200 from the 40D.

Pixel peeping is more likely to occur when:

The "upgrade" does not, by reviews or personal experience, seem to be a step up in some important factor such as image quality, noise performance, etc.

The price difference is much higher than the performance difference, especially in the important factors.

I know I did it when I bought a Canon 24-70 to replace a Tamron 28-75, and I would be doing it with a 50D over my 40D because I NEED the higher ISO settings to have as low noise as possible for my line of work.

ThomGascoigne wrote in post #6608946
Cute girl!

I agree.

And in terms of noise, I'd say both the camera and the user did a great job.

Well the fact that it's barely usable with lots of noise reduction doesn't mean it's any better then the XXDs before it. Except for the fact that it can take JPGs at 6400-12800 while the others had to use underexposed and correct RAWs. It's funny how people feel mad on dpreview for not praising their new toys to heaven instead of being mad on canon for lieing.

I'll just throw my 2 pennies in- from a marketing standpoint, the 50D is going to do just fine. It was made to combat the "other guys" camera until they can release true redesign. But coming from MY POINT OF VIEW, the 50D is fantastic, and will do exactly what it is needed to do. I am coming from a digital Rebel, so I am simply amazed at the performance of either the 40 or 50D. I can't even use 1600 on my camera. To see these photos at 3200 and 6400 and have them worth looking at (for me, or anyone I think) is something else. The 50D is such an improvement over the XTI that I don't care about the 40D MAYBE being better in pure pixel peeping image quality. I'll buy it and the images will be amazing!

Oh, also the advantage to Canon of the very few 40D people that will just want to upgrade because it's the newest and greatest! Forgot that part of the marketing...