Yes another what did I do wrong thread

first one is slightly cropped to show the darker area (I think it's cropped to 33%) I exposed more for the river and sky (which the lighter part of the sky is what was cropped out) It is darker then the other images in the series, but has the same noise as the others. I just didn't keep any of them.

#2 is only cropped to 25%, something I may normally do, so I need to see how it can handles being cropped.

The last one from the 30D is only sharped in photoshop, nothing else has been done to it, not cropped at all. And it was taken by my very inexperienced husband who knows nothing about exposure and lighting.

gardengirl13 wrote in post #10548669
first one is slightly cropped to show the darker area (I think it's cropped to 33%) I exposed more for the river and sky (which the lighter part of the sky is what was cropped out) It is darker then the other images in the series, but has the same noise as the others. I just didn't keep any of them.

#2 is only cropped to 25%, something I may normally do, so I need to see how it can handles being cropped.

The last one from the 30D is only sharped in photoshop, nothing else has been done to it, not cropped at all. And it was taken by my very inexperienced husband who knows nothing about exposure and lighting.

Now how does the noise from 5D Mark II look if you compress the pics as you did in your last pic from 30D?

In the last pic I think you have enough light because the pic is not cropped at all and there is nothing that is really dark.

What I'd suggest is to get the 5D Mark II again and try it. I am not sure if you are really comparing the right pictures. When I bought 5D and compared it with my 30D it completely blew it away. And 5D Mark II is only better.

The 5DII will show more shadow noise, that much we know. The pictures look underexposed so noise will be more evident. If you sharpen using USM or Smart Sharpen in Photoshop, you're going to make the noise even more evident.

The 30D pic also doesn't appear to be a crop so we're not apples to apples here. I may also look better since the camera did the metering whereas the water picture you did the metering.

I admit the water shot stinks. It's not good any way you look at it, but it was all I have on this computer. The others were metered better, with everything being brighter, but I don't have them with me. But they all have the same noise in the shadows. I'm not looking to boost the shadows. I normally make my images darker any way, not lighter since it brings out the noise too much for my liking.

You can't really see it in the compressed image, but in photoshop looking at the full image even the sky which was metered better has noise. Yes it's a longer exposure, but when I meter that way with my 30D I don't get that kind of noise. I have 30 second exposures with not so great metering with my 30D that have better noise. I expect noise, all cameras have them, it's just I didn't expect it to look this way, and be so hard to avoid.

It's also not just the noise, it's the saturation of the images I don't like either. I think I can make it more neutral, but I only had it for the weekend and didn't test that out. But one image I remember was very saturated and sharpened weird. I'm not sure what the noise control and in camera sharpening is, I was just looked and thought the camera was set to factory pre-sets. I only looked through the manual quickly and tried not to mess around too much with what it was set to.

I know I should have given it more time, but I got so frustrated so fast I figured it's just too complicated for me, compared to the more simple 30D.

I should have messed around with settings more, but I really just want it set up like an old film camera, set the ISO, the AV/TV mode and expose and shoot.

I totally understand what you're saying.

Turn your picture style to nuetral for starters and try that. Secondly, the shadows with the 5DII will have much more noticeable noise than I think you're used to. The noise has a pattern to it, evident in the flower pic, so it's more visable and much less natural.

Go out, take your time, find out for sure if this is the camera for you! I loved mine, but I rarely shot dark scenes.

I thought I read there was a comparison...do you have the same shot taken on both cameras? That to me would be the BEST comparison. The images provided are all different. If I was going to compare two cameras, I would take the exact same picture on both using the exact same settings on both, and then compare. But, to take an underexposed picture from one and compare it to a properly exposed picture on another.....how does one make a comparison from that?

Can you post the same picture taken from both cameras at the same settings?

My experience is that the 5D Mk II has less noise in the shadow areas than the 30D.

There is a lot of guessing going on and comparing apples with other kind of fruit.... The only way to compare camera's is to shoot exactly the same subject under the same conditions (and with exactly the same camera settings and the same lens and filters) in RAW and compare these shots. Anything else is speculative.

It looks like the exif for the flower photo says that it was shot with ISO 25600. Noise in shadows should be expected at that setting.

kwb wrote in post #10550815
It looks like the exif for the flower photo says that it was shot with ISO 25600. Noise in shadows should be expected at that setting.

Yep - the Dunkin Donuts cup shot shows 6400 ISO, the flower shows 25600...and the 30D shot (the tat) was shot at 800 ISO. Hardly an apples to apples comparison.

I'm going with user error

Edit: I say that based on the EXIF data on the "test" shots. They are not consistent to be able to fairly compare

suggest that if you can get a 5d mkii again do a more accurate test. Set both cameras to manual and use identical settings on the same subject it the same light. If you dont want to use manual them use Av and set the ISO to be identical on both.