40D to 60D for ISO performance?

Is it worth the upgrade from the 40D to 60D for better high ISO performance? With my 40D, the noise becomes too much at above 1000. Will my images be usable at ISO 1600 with the 60D?

eaglefan wrote in post #11666878
Is it worth the upgrade from the 40D to 60D for better high ISO performance? With my 40D, the noise becomes too much at above 1000. Will my images be usable at ISO 1600 with the 60D?

ISO 1600 on the T2i/60D/7D is almost silk-like*

* always assuming a well exposed shot.

Provided you don't have to really crop much at all - ISO 6400 exposed well is quite usable on these 3 models.

add to this the exceptional NR performance found in Adobe Lightroom 3 (using Adobe Camera Raw 6.3) and you have a stellar partnership.

There's no standard answer for that. You would hope that with each generation of camera and better software & sensors, than noise levels would improve, but all the conditions at the exact second you press the shutter play a big part.

Personally, I could never say that noise levels are too much at any fixed level. ISO 3200 outside in daylight might look better than ISO 800 inside by candle light. ISO 1600 in a dark theater will look different when the spotlights are on than when they are off.

When I go back and look at my pictures, I can pick out a few ISO 3200 shots from my 20D that are better than ISO 1600 shots from my 50D. All depends on the environment and technique when shooting.

Generally speaking, I am pretty happy using auto ISO (100-1600) on my 50D and I frequently use 1250. The images look fine to me, but I don't go out of my way to look for noise. I either print them anywhere from 5x7 to 16x20, or I look at them in "fit to screen" mode on a 24" monitor.

ISO performance wasn't really a consideration for me when upgrading from a 20D to 50D, and it probably shouldn't be when going from a 40D to 60D. I think the major differences lie elsewhere and you will be able to find faults at pixel level if you really go looking for them.

for what its worth - here is an ISO 5000, processed in Lr3 with 'Fill Light" pushed to 61, with RN for anyone familiar with Lr. I assume this surpasses ISO6400 but not sure.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

From what I've seen the T2i / 60D / 7D are the first significant step forward in 1.6X sensor noise control since the 20D. They do indeed seem to be quite a bit better.

People who liked the older 1.6X bodies to ISO 800 will probably be happy to ISO 1600.

my 7d is much better at higher iso's than my old camera (40D)

this was taken at iso 3200

eaglefan wrote in post #11666878
Is it worth the upgrade from the 40D to 60D for better high ISO performance? With my 40D, the noise becomes too much at above 1000. Will my images be usable at ISO 1600 with the 60D?

you can compare ISO performance among different DSLR models here
http://www.dxomark.com …ra-Sensor/Compare-sensors
or here:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/CO​MPS01.HTM

JeffreyG wrote in post #11667988
From what I've seen the T2i / 60D / 7D are the first significant step forward in 1.6X sensor noise control since the 20D. They do indeed seem to be quite a bit better.

People who liked the older 1.6X bodies to ISO 800 will probably be happy to ISO 1600.

I concur - that's exactly how I see the situation.

Mark-B wrote in post #11667166
There's no standard answer for that. You would hope that with each generation of camera and better software & sensors, than noise levels would improve, but all the conditions at the exact second you press the shutter play a big part.

Personally, I could never say that noise levels are too much at any fixed level. ISO 3200 outside in daylight might look better than ISO 800 inside by candle light. ISO 1600 in a dark theater will look different when the spotlights are on than when they are off.

When I go back and look at my pictures, I can pick out a few ISO 3200 shots from my 20D that are better than ISO 1600 shots from my 50D. All depends on the environment and technique when shooting.

Generally speaking, I am pretty happy using auto ISO (100-1600) on my 50D and I frequently use 1250. The images look fine to me, but I don't go out of my way to look for noise. I either print them anywhere from 5x7 to 16x20, or I look at them in "fit to screen" mode on a 24" monitor.

ISO performance wasn't really a consideration for me when upgrading from a 20D to 50D, and it probably shouldn't be when going from a 40D to 60D. I think the major differences lie elsewhere and you will be able to find faults at pixel level if you really go looking for them.

Words of wisdom...
Here is an ISO3200 shot with the much maligned 50D in less than ideal conditions, other conditions can produce different results.

Here is the 60d at 3200iso and the crop. It is much cleaner the my T1i up there.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

there are so many factors its almost impossible to get clear picture of what will work better.

The first important one is do you shoot RAW or JPEG.

JPEG shooters will see the biggest improvements because not only does the sensor get better but so does in camera processing.

RAW shooters take the incamera processing out the equation (and its possible to get better results)

Other things include light, exposure and your processing techniques.

My 500D is fine up until 3200 and il use 6400 if i need to. I even got ok results from 12800.

There are a lot of things you can do to reduce noise other than buy a new camera.

Saying all that the new generation (7D, 60D, 550D) do have better control of colour noise at high ISO's. Mainly noticeable from about ISO 3200.

With practise on what actually helps eliminate noise (exposure plays a massive part in this) im betting you can get perfectly decent results from your 40D

But just for kicks heres some high ISO stuff I did with a 500D (T1i)

ISO 3200

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

Thanks for your replies and examples everyone. To answer Genome's question, I do shoot in RAW. I'm wondering if I would see less noise in the 60D RAW files than the 40D ones, assuming the settings are the same.
This begs another question - does the better in-camera noise reduction on the 60D / 7D / T2i warrant a switch from shooting exclusively in RAW to exclusively in JPG? LR3 sure does offer some good noise reduction, but is it better than the in-camera reduction on the 60D?

no because the noise reduction in programs is better than any in camera noise reduction because you have complete control. Not to mention things like photoshop allow you to apply noise reduction selectively to areas that need it only.

Yes the 60D sensor does handle noise better. How much???? hard to say. You will see the difference with pixel peeping but at normal sizes (i class that at screen size on a 22" monitor............ why not lol) you will be hard pressed to see a difference.

Saying all that i think the 40D caps out at 1600 ISO so if you are shooting higher than that then yes you possibly will see a difference at normal sizes as well.

With the jpeg and raw thing, it depends. The in camera NR has gotten allot better. And NR programs work great on JPEGS also. So it depends on what you want to do. I shoot mostly jpegs, Raw files are huge, and the modern editing programs like photoshop and aperture 3 does a very good job on them. Even with WB.

Now I do shot raw at times when it is really really hard to get correct exposure. So if you want more creative control and have good editing skills shoot RAW, If you shoot action and high burst rate. Jpegs.

It's all about nailing the exposure. With a 60D, you'll be able to use those higher ISO without an issue if you get the exposure right. ISO 1600 will be a piece of cake on a 60D. By utilizing HAMSTTR and exposing to the right, you'll be able to mitigate noise... Here are some examples on my 7D (similar to the 60D) at 6400 and 12800:

ISO 6400

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

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