Photo Noise with Teleconverter and Wide Converter Lenses

[joyjoy]

I have a Canon PowerShot A520 (4 Mega Pixels, 4x optical zoom, 12x digital zoom) and the corresponding teleconverter (1.75x), wide converter (0.7x) and close up (52mm) lenses. I am noticing significant noise (fuzziness) when I use them, and none when I don't. I admit I am learning this through trial and error, and have been able to resolve most of my mistakes with the exception of this one. The lenses are clean and I am having difficulty figuring out what the problem could be, other then the lenses are crap. Does anyone have any suggestions I can try? Thanks.

[Greg McCary]

Any time you add glass in front of glass your picture quality will suffer some. There is really nothing I know you can do. If it's camera shake, use a tripod. Maybe use a noise reducing program like Neat Image or Noise Ninja.

[SmartWombat]

On my Konica Minolta A2 there are settings for which lens accessory you have fitted.
Does the Canon work in the same way?
Are there menu options to tell the camera what you've got on the front of the lens?

Posting a couple of images would help.

[joyjoy]

On my Konica Minolta A2 there are settings for which lens accessory you have fitted.
Does the Canon work in the same way?
Are there menu options to tell the camera what you've got on the front of the lens?

Posting a couple of images would help.

Nope, my canon doesn't have a setting like that, at least not one I can find. I am going to try to use the software to fix the problem.

[another view]

Some of the aftermarket adapters really aren't very good, optically. Can you post an example? Noise is a problem that usually happens with high ISO and/or underexposure and I'm wondering if it's really noise or just a lack of sharpness. Two different things would cause these problems.

[Medley]

It's most likely noise. I have an A520. It's a great snapshot camera, and is small and lightweight enough to carry all the time. However, it does have problems with noise at high ISOs and does not easily lend itself to aftermarket items. Exposure, especially in Program mode, does not tend to be a problem unless the lighting is outside the parameters of the camera's capabilites.

Basically speaking, the A520 was designed as an entry-level p&s, and does very well in that capacity.

- Joe U.

[joyjoy]

Some of the aftermarket adapters really aren't very good, optically. Can you post an example? Noise is a problem that usually happens with high ISO and/or underexposure and I'm wondering if it's really noise or just a lack of sharpness. Two different things would cause these problems.

Two of the photos I took in HI are in my user gallery. if you can't see them I can post them here. Thanks for trying to help.

[joyjoy]

It's most likely noise. I have an A520. It's a great snapshot camera, and is small and lightweight enough to carry all the time. However, it does have problems with noise at high ISOs and does not easily lend itself to aftermarket items. Exposure, especially in Program mode, does not tend to be a problem unless the lighting is outside the parameters of the camera's capabilites.

Basically speaking, the A520 was designed as an entry-level p&s, and does very well in that capacity.

- Joe U.

I don't normally shoot at an ISO over 200, because the photos are horrific. I have been thinking about this, and I realized some of it may be my fault, in the fact that I am still learning when it is appropriate to use the lenses. Are there guidelines/things I should be aware of?

[another view]

Two of the photos I took in HI are in my user gallery. if you can't see them I can post them here. Thanks for trying to help.

I see three images there - the two with a lot of noise are the ones taken at sunset. I think it's a case of the camera regardless of whether or not a lens converter was used, because of the low light level. Some of the noise reduction programs might be a big help with this.

[joyjoy]

I went through my notes and figured out some of the mistakes I made:

1. shutter speed wasn't slow enough and the aperture was too small
2. no tripod - i didn't feel like checking my bag so I couldn't take my tripod

I still need to learn the limits of my camera, but I know it is capable of taking a good photo if I make the right choices.

[Medley]

A tripod definately helps. I went to HI last month with a little collapsable aluminum tripod- not the best in the world, but it collapsed small enough to get into my carry-on bag.

For landscape shots, you generally want a small aperature, to make the whole frame in focus. However, this slows the shutter speed, and makes the tripod that much more neccessary.

as another view pointed out, your shots could be improved with some post-processing. I don't believe they're necessarily bad shots, they just need some work. Mind if I take a crack at removing the noise?

- Joe U.

[joyjoy]

Mind if I take a crack at removing the noise?

- Joe U.

I don't mind at all. Once you are done, would you be willing to tell me what you did? Some days I don't know if I should chuck the camera or myself out the window

[another view]

1. shutter speed wasn't slow enough and the aperture was too small
2. no tripod - i didn't feel like checking my bag so I couldn't take my tripod

Underexposure (not long enough of a shutter speed and/or not a wide enough aperture for proper exposure) will really increase the amount of noise in an image; especially in the darker shadow parts of an image. I mainly saw this in the shadow side of the buildings. Some smaller cameras can also have a lot of noise with longer shutter speeds (my older Coolpix 5000 at speeds of 1/4 or slower, for example) and this is where noise reduction software can help.

A tripod would help with sharpness but not with noise. They can be a pain to deal with but it's usually worth it in the end - especially later when you're at home looking at images that would have benefited from the use of a tripod (ask me how I know this!). If you can't bring one, sometimes you can set the camera on a railing or table or anything else solid to help keep the camera steady.

It's important to note here that the noise issue in this case really may have been caused by setting the camera incorrectly, not the fault of the camera itself (to some extent). Sorry to be blunt, and I hope that noise reduction software can help you - but I think a lot of us (not excluding myself) are quick to blame equipment. Just something to be aware of.

[joyjoy]

Underexposure (not long enough of a shutter speed and/or not a wide enough aperture for proper exposure) will really increase the amount of noise in an image; especially in the darker shadow parts of an image. I mainly saw this in the shadow side of the buildings. Some smaller cameras can also have a lot of noise with longer shutter speeds (my older Coolpix 5000 at speeds of 1/4 or slower, for example) and this is where noise reduction software can help.

A tripod would help with sharpness but not with noise. They can be a pain to deal with but it's usually worth it in the end - especially later when you're at home looking at images that would have benefited from the use of a tripod (ask me how I know this!). If you can't bring one, sometimes you can set the camera on a railing or table or anything else solid to help keep the camera steady.

It's important to note here that the noise issue in this case really may have been caused by setting the camera incorrectly, not the fault of the camera itself (to some extent). Sorry to be blunt, and I hope that noise reduction software can help you - but I think a lot of us (not excluding myself) are quick to blame equipment. Just something to be aware of.

Thank you for being blunt, I am new at this so all the information I have gotten has really helped. I have been going over the photos I have and that I think are great and making note of the settings. The hardest part is accepting that fact that if I had a "better" camera, the pic probably wouldn't be much better. All is not lost because I got a great lesson on being prepared (don't be lazy, pack the tripod), checking my settings more carefully, and hopefully from Joe, on using software to help correct my mistakes. So in the end I guess the "bad" photos have allowed me to learn so much.

[another view]

So in the end I guess the "bad" photos have allowed me to learn so much.

That's the learning process! A DSLR's bigger sensor may have kept the noise lower but that doesn't mean that a DSLR should be shot carelessly. It's always best to start with the best digital file (or slide or negative) that you can possibly get. Keep at it!

[Medley]

OK, been a crazy few days, sorry this is late. Here's my rendition:

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...oiselessW1.jpg

There's still SOME noise present, but I don't think it would affect a print. The trick with noise reduction is to strike a balance between smoothing noise and keeping detail. I also lightened the buildings as much as the noise would allow, which in this case is just slightly. I used a third party plug-in for this particular image, but if you'd like to e-mail me at tandemduo280@comcast.net, I'll be happy to discuss "regular" Photoshop methods for dealing with noise.

Hope this works for you.

- Joe U.

[freygr]

Form the look your are pushing the envelop of your's camera's capabilities. Most PS have fairly small sensors and with low light this a design problem when you are talking about lowlight photography (The noise comes from the small size of the sensor and the high amplification needed to boost output of the sensor, High amplification = more noise)

That is why the older 3 mega pixel cameras seem to take better looking photos, as the sensors are much larger to begin with and the sensor cell size is a lot larger so they had much better noise performance (and less amplification needed). They just don't have the detail of the newer cameras.

[joyjoy]

OK, been a crazy few days, sorry this is late. Here's my rendition:

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...oiselessW1.jpg

There's still SOME noise present, but I don't think it would affect a print. The trick with noise reduction is to strike a balance between smoothing noise and keeping detail. I also lightened the buildings as much as the noise would allow, which in this case is just slightly. I used a third party plug-in for this particular image, but if you'd like to e-mail me at tandemduo280@comcast.net, I'll be happy to discuss "regular" Photoshop methods for dealing with noise.

Hope this works for you.

- Joe U.

Oh my goodness, that is amazing. Thanks so much for taking the time to do it. I will email you so you can explain what you did.

I also purchased a new camera, the Fuji FinePix S700, which should be a bit better than the camera I have. I plan on using both for the time being.