40D - Noise reduction - very impressed

Hi, I have noticed a few disgruntled 40D users and decided to test the camera. I enabled high-ISO noise reduction and zipped out to take a photo of one of my resident frogs. With firmware version 1.1.1, it seemed that the low light focus capability is also better. The results show that the RAW file has acceptable levels of noise and with a little tweaking; it is possible to remove this and maintain sharpness.

Luminance was a bit more than chrominance noise and in DPP setting both RAW reduction values to 2, and one pass in Noise Ninja 2 with the resulting JPEG, gave an impressive result, see headshot\100% crop below.

The picture below is an attempt to show the RAW as is (no corrections), but obviously the JPG conversion and size reduction will alter the results. It is however a good example of what the RAW looked like. The JPEG files were more gritty/noisy when DPP converted it into JPEG without trying the RAW options first.

The headshot is a 100 crop with me trying a few things to clear the noise. Shot taken ISO 1600, built-in flash, F3.5 at 1/60. As close as possible to frog which waited patiently outside below a floresant light.

At least, I am impressed and improving my noise reduction techniques will yield better results.

Is the in camera noise reduction even applied when you shoot raw? I thought it was a post-processing procedure done in camera.

I'm not sure I understand your exercise. Is this just a test? Because if not, it's not necessary to shoot at iso1600 when using the flash.

^noise reduction is applied by the image processor in the camera. Your raw file is the data saved after your image processor since it attempts to "understands" the information from the sensor. This is my understanding though.

And who say's you don't need to use flash with high ISO? I do it all the time to balance my flash with ambient and still maintain a high shutter speed so the ambient doesn't get lost with camera shake in certain incidents.

mrkgoo wrote in post #7243268
Is the in camera noise reduction even applied when you shoot raw? I thought it was a post-processing procedure done in camera.

I'm not sure I understand your exercise. Is this just a test? Because if not, it's not necessary to shoot at iso1600 when using the flash.

Yes, I do understand that a flash negates the requirement to use ISO 1600, I just wanted to see the noise caused by 1600. Hence the bumping of the ISO rating. The idea was to see the noise as a result of ISO and ahve sufficient light. The light available was just too little, but I will do some testing without the flash as well.

People complain about the 40D's noise at 1600 and I jsut wanted to see this for myself.

JBaz wrote in post #7243374
^noise reduction is applied by the image processor in the camera. Your raw file is the data saved after your image processor since it attempts to "understands" the information from the sensor. This is my understanding though.

And who say's you don't need to use flash with high ISO? I do it all the time to balance my flash with ambient and still maintain a high shutter speed so the ambient doesn't get lost with camera shake in certain incidents.

I read the manual before enabling the noise reduction and it warns about a reduction in speed, due to the processing requirement. There is a marked reduction in loading the shot to the flash disk, and the camera says "busy". I only shoot in RAW, but still noticed this reduction in speed.

In situations where I need to capture the ambient light and maintain high shutter speeds, example 1/125, I also use flash. I normally stay at or below 400, but for this I shot up all the way to 1600 - wanted to see the noise.

JBaz wrote in post #7243374
^noise reduction is applied by the image processor in the camera. Your raw file is the data saved after your image processor since it attempts to "understands" the information from the sensor. This is my understanding though.

And who say's you don't need to use flash with high ISO? I do it all the time to balance my flash with ambient and still maintain a high shutter speed so the ambient doesn't get lost with camera shake in certain incidents.

MY understanding was that RAW data was just that - the data BEFORE the image processor got hold of it. Noise reduction in camera reduces chroma noise before anything else - something that isn't such an issue in RAW, since it's the data before processing from the bayer filter. Well, to MY understanding anyway.

I realise the uses of a high shutter in flash photography, my point was why it was necessary in this particular shot. It's not like the background is all that flattering.

I see. I never had a problem shooting at 1600. When I first started out in all of this nonsense, I insisted on using iso100 to keep noise down. I would sacrifice everything, only bumping it when needed. But I realised that I rarely ever do anything with my images apart from share online. I could probably get away with shooting 2MP the whole time. And in this case, iso1600 is very useable, because noone ever sees the 100% crop.

Actually, come to think about it, I shoot JPEG, maybe I should switch to sRAW?

Personally, I would rather do the noise reduction myself, via software & PP. Gives me the opportunity to choose how aggressive a treatment I want.

One thing I did notice and maybe it is a tip, is the reduced amount of visible noise in the RAW format. Even at 200% it looked as if one could remove it without too much effort.

The JPEG format produced by DPP, without any size reduction, had a noticeable increase in noise levels. To the extent, that I reduced the levels in RAW first. Converting the result to JPEG yielded good results. The alternative is to do the RAW conversion and then go into something like Noise Ninja.

Don’t know which will be better as a rule. Maybe someone out there can suggest a good approach.

jwcdds wrote in post #7243420
Personally, I would rather do the noise reduction myself, via software & PP. Gives me the opportunity to choose how aggressive a treatment I want.

That is what I normally do and possibly will go back to that approach in the future. Just had a bee under the bonnet and wanted to see what all the Ho-Ha was about.

The camera is fine, but the speed reduction is a bit of a nuisance. It is very easy to wait for the processing before you continue.

David Ransley wrote in post #7243405
I read the manual before enabling the noise reduction and it warns about a reduction in speed, due to the processing requirement. There is a marked reduction in loading the shot to the flash disk, and the camera says "busy". I only shoot in RAW, but still noticed this reduction in speed.

In situations where I need to capture the ambient light and maintain high shutter speeds, example 1/125, I also use flash. I normally stay at or below 400, but for this I shot up all the way to 1600 - wanted to see the noise.

Really? I only shoot JPEG, so I never see a 'busy', even with noise reduction on. The 6.5 fps for the 40D IS reduced, however.

Good point about sRAW. I still shoot JPEG for the convenience, and because I'm indecisive without having to worry about post-processing decisions.

Here is my iso1600 shot from 40D:

(straight out of camera no post, can't remember if I used noise reduction or not)

^ looks like NR was used. But looks great to me.

I'm sorry David but your ISO 1600 looks really smeared, yet also noisy in the background. Keep on experimenting, you'll see the 40D can do even better

Impressive results for -

Shooting Date/Time, 2008/03/27 21:11:36
Tv(Shutter Speed), 1/80Sec.
Av(Aperture Value), F1.8
Metering Modes, Split metering
ISO Speed, 1600
Focal Length, 50.0 mm

No reason to compain

jwcdds wrote in post #7243499
^ looks like NR was used. But looks great to me.

Here're some images I just took:

Iso1600, Noise reduction off (100% crop):

smorter wrote in post #7243520
I'm sorry David but your ISO 1600 looks really smeared, yet also noisy in the background. Keep on experimenting, you'll see the 40D can do even better

Yes, the noise levels increase when shooting in dark environments. As you have noticed the background is noisy. The smeared effect pops in as soon as you try to remove the little T-bars (luminance) and at 200% view they are clearly visible in the RAW file. Are you referring to the 100%-crop view?

Before jumping, I had to go to that level of magnification to see them clearly, at 100% the chromanince noise is the one that shows up more.