FYI: Canon 300D at 1600 ISO

[mwfanelli]

My first shot ever at 1600 ISO using the original Canon digital Rebel. Handheld at a very slow shutter speed in a poorly lit theatre. Not that bad, considring. She loved it but hey... she's a musician not a photographer!

[Photo-John]

You should post some of your Canon stuff in the Canon forum. It would be good to have it there.

The photo looks good, if a little soft. But concert photography is an art in and of itself, with a different set of standards. I think this looks great. What lens and aperture were you using? Do you have any noise reduction software? I don't use it much, but I have some. When I do use it, it's awesome!

[mwfanelli]

You should post some of your Canon stuff in the Canon forum. It would be good to have it there.

The photo looks good, if a little soft. But concert photography is an art in and of itself, with a different set of standards. I think this looks great. What lens and aperture were you using? Do you have any noise reduction software? I don't use it much, but I have some. When I do use it, it's awesome!

I was using the kit lens. I tried Neat Image but, even at small settings, the image went super soft. This is straight out of the camera other than cropping. Any changes, including minor sharpening, raised the noise to very high levels. I feel bad for those people who brought small P&S cameras!

[mjs1973]

This looks pretty ok at web size. I'm still shooting with the original DRebel, and I dread turning it up past ISO 400... 400 is even a little too noisie for me, but manageable. I can't wait to upgrade to something that will give me much cleaner files at the higher ISO settings.

[espressotalk]

Very nice! Acceptable amount of noise considering the conditions and high iso. Excellent job:thumbsup:

[Sebastian]

I shoot my 10Ds at 1600 all the time. Even 3200 at times. With my 20D I no longer worry about it, 1600 looks like the 10D's 800, and 3200 like the old 1600.

[Photo-John]

I was using the kit lens. I tried Neat Image but, even at small settings, the image went super soft. This is straight out of the camera other than cropping. Any changes, including minor sharpening, raised the noise to very high levels. I feel bad for those people who brought small P&S cameras!

One of the things I really disliked about my 10D was the noise at ISO settings above 400. I didn't even like ISO 400. One of my biggest motivations for getting a new camera was better high ISO performance. But you have to make the best of what you've got. I know all about that.

I haven't used Neat Image. I have Imagenomic's Noiseware software and I think it works great. It's got all kinds of controls that I have no clue what they do. But the default settings seem to work really well, without softening up my images.

I asked about your lens, not because of image quality, but because I was curious about the aperture. If you're going to be doing more of this you might be a prime candidate (there's a photo nerd pun for you) for the 50mm f/1.8, if you don't have it already. You could have shot at ISO 800 or 400 with that lens.

[another view]

From here, it looks just fine but as mentioned a little soft. One thing I've noticed about my Fuji is that at 1600, jpegs are noisy but RAW isn't so bad. The dark areas (curtain) don't look like 1600 from what I'm used to, but I know Canon is very good at the high ISO's.

The higher the ISO setting, the more you have to nail exposure or noise can show up - and in high contrast situations like a lot of musical photography, it's almost a roll of the dice sometimes. Proper exposure for the subject but all the dark areas are noisy... Fast primes are great but that short DOF makes focusing absolutely critical - and of course AF doesn't always work well in low light and your subject is moving... Yeah, it's a challenge but very rewarding when it all works out. Haven't done any of it in awhile but it is one thing that I really enjoyed.

[mwfanelli]

I asked about your lens, not because of image quality, but because I was curious about the aperture. If you're going to be doing more of this you might be a prime candidate (there's a photo nerd pun for you) for the 50mm f/1.8, if you don't have it already. You could have shot at ISO 800 or 400 with that lens.

I have a 50mm/1.8 but didn't bring it! I was invited to the concert by one of my students and had no idea what the theatre looked like or where I would be able to sit. So, I brought two zooms: the kit lens and my 70-300 in case I was further away. As it turned out, the 50mm would have been close to ideal.

I have been happy with 800 ISO on the DRebel. I've used it for several insect and small frog photos that have come out great. Of course, I am thinking back to my days of 800 ISO color print film which was only good in a severe pinch! We get used to low noise levels and get pickier!

[Photo-John]

I have been happy with 800 ISO on the DRebel. I've used it for several insect and small frog photos that have come out great. Of course, I am thinking back to my days of 800 ISO color print film which was only good in a severe pinch! We get used to low noise levels and get pickier!

Yes!!!

One of the arguments that people used to use against digital was noise at high ISO. They said that high ISO film performance was better. That is not even close to the case now - at least not with digital SLRs. High ISO performance with my XTi is wonderful! I still try to avoid going over ISO 200. But I'm not afraid to use ISO 800 if I feel it's necessary.

[Loupey]

I think it looks good for a 300D/1600 ISO.

I'm still using my 10D and I too consider ISO 400 to be my absolute top end. ISO 200 to be my usable top end.

Sebastian, I don't know how you do it but to use 1600/3200 regularly with the 10D is quite an achievement. I haven't been able to find a situation where I can use the noise to my advantage.

[Sebastian]

It's not about using the noise to yoru advantage, it's knowing how to minimize it as Another View mentioned.

The two shots below are without running Noise Ninja, only the default noise reduction in Aperture. These did have sharpening turned on though, so it's not as controlled as it can be.

[Photo-John]

Excellent quality photos! They're good enough that I can tell those fake cowboys got on jeans that no self-respectin working man would be caught dead in

Hollywood country - ptooey!

[Sebastian]

Thanks PJ. For comparison, here's one at 800.

[Loupey]

Nice examples, Sebastian!

Can you post another one of the first "cowboy" but WITH Noise Ninja for comparision?

[Sebastian]

Loupey,

I'll do that tonight.