ISO Performance FF vs. Cropped?

While on the road, I was called at the last minute by one of my bosses to do an engagement dinner last night. Long story but I only had a 50D + a nifty 50/1.8 coming from a museum and didn't have time to drive 50 miles to get any gear.

Suffice it to say, photons were pretty scarce. There's nothing worse then shooting a bunch of untanned white people in the dead of winter surrounded by orange-beige colored walls under 5 watt bulbs.

I'm sifting through photos now. 3200 ISO is unusable even after noise ninja. 1000-1600 is pretty bad to because I was underexposed most of the time even at f/1.8 and some ungodly slow SS.

I had a 580ex with me and those are keepers but you can only disrupt people so many times in a small room. After 100+ shots I can probably salvage 35 or so which is fine.

My question is... how much of a difference would a FF camera have made? (Even something like the 5D classic)

Probably would have given you more keepers.

IMO, the noise control is just better on a FF camera, even on the 5d classic. The grain is smaller and less noticeable to me as compared even with my 7d.

There are smarter people than I who can throw in all the technical jargon, but a FF camera would have given you very usable images for your purposes at ISO 1600, and even a few at 3200

Your definition of unusable might be far from what others see as unusable.

Most of us obsess WAY WAY WAYY too much over noise, when really, it's not such a terrible thing.

I find ISO3200 usable on the 40D, and ISO12,800 usable on the 7D, so I doubt what you call unusable is really that if you exposed well.

Full frame cameras typically have better noise characteristics, but if you have to stop down to get enough DOF you might not get enough shutter speed.

picturecrazy wrote in post #9233591
Most of us obsess WAY WAY WAYY too much over noise, when really, it's not such a terrible thing.

Heh, No kidding Lloyd. And I know stuff looks better on print as well. But I can't recall having such a tough time in the f/1.8 - 2.8 range. Granted, it was only a $100 piece of glass.

I was never thrilled about shooting candids. Now I know why.

Try printing them on a 6x4 print or resizing down and see if there's noise.

If you had a 580EX then surely that would've provided enough light or were you not able to ceiling bounce? I would've just gone bare harsh if I couldn't bounce.

This is ISO 1600 on a 5D handheld.

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

RT McAllister wrote in post #9234518
Heh, No kidding Lloyd. And I know stuff looks better on print as well. But I can't recall having such a tough time in the f/1.8 - 2.8 range. Granted, it was only a $100 piece of glass.

What does the lens aperture have to do with noise?

tim wrote in post #9234650
What does the lens aperture have to do with noise?

EVERYTHING! Don't you kiwi's know anything?
(kidding mate).

tim wrote in post #9234650
What does the lens aperture have to do with noise?

Nothing. I was merely saying how hard a time I was having even at these apertures. The conditions were so bad even a fast lens can't capture photons that aren't there to begin with.

ed. wrote in post #9234531
If you had a 580EX then surely that would've provided enough light or were you not able to ceiling bounce? I would've just gone bare harsh if I couldn't bounce.

Got plenty of shots with the 580ex. Just very few candids.

And that sample you provided... looks like freaking, "high noon" on the Sahara compared to where I was.

In that situation, just use a flash. If you're afraid of annoying people, then raise the ISO so the flash just uses weak bursts.

In low light I tend to use high iso and wide apertures, with flash as fill or even as main but down a stop, bounced of course. You get nice light with some ambient. At my wedding this past weekend I was using two AB800 strobes on 1/4 power in a huge room, bounced, ISO1600 F4.5 1/50th. I got sharp images with some ambient for effect.

tim wrote in post #9234826
In low light I tend to use high iso and wide apertures, with flash as fill or even as main but down a stop, bounced of course. You get nice light with some ambient. At my wedding this past weekend I was using two AB800 strobes on 1/4 power in a huge room, bounced, ISO1600 F4.5 1/50th. I got sharp images with some ambient for effect.

My worry about using AB's is someone pushing it over or tripping on the cord. Especially in small tight receptions. Have you had any problems with this Tim?

toxic wrote in post #9234747
In that situation, just use a flash. If you're afraid of annoying people, then raise the ISO so the flash just uses weak bursts.

In hindsight... this is a really good idea.

ed. wrote in post #9234864
My worry about using AB's is someone pushing it over or tripping on the cord. Especially in small tight receptions. Have you had any problems with this Tim?

I only use the ABs in huge venues when I can put the big strobes out of the way. I keep a roll of tape in my light stand bag to tape cords down, but use a weak tape, duct tape is REALLY hard to get off polished floors. The ABs are great, at 1/4 or even 1/2 power they're constantly ready, they put out lot of light, and you don't have to worry about them overheating. I'll probably try and use them a little more.

For most venues I use Speedlites with battery packs on either the 8' stands or the big 13' stands. Details here.