ISO 400 - why so grainy? - DPChallenge Forums

12/08/2006 06:20:40 PM · #1

Hi everyone!! I just came back from a trip to Las Vegas and I accidentally left my camera to ISO400. I just came back and was looking at my pictures in DPP and oh I am so dissapointed!!! All of my pictures have so much noise that it's almost unbearable. I've attached a day-time picture here and the night ones show the noise even more. Now I know that ISO 400 is not the same as 100 but is 400 really supposed to be this grainy? I know that this was a mistake on my part but should I simply have expected this much grain?

There is one bright side... if I convert it to jpeg and resize to a smaller size then the grain isn't that much visible.

Oh if only I could go back and retake some pictures... Oh well!

Daytime CR2 Image
Night CR2 Image

Please help!!

Thanks.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

12/08/2006 06:24:20 PM · #2

Can't load the images

OK, you're shooting in RAW? If so, how much are you moving the exposure compensation slider?

asimchoudhri

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

12/08/2006 06:28:40 PM · #3

my 30d has minimal grain at iso 400... maybe the grain is from the electromagnetic interference field put out by the vegas board of tourism to make sure that things that happen there really do stay in vegas without pristine dslr evidence...

edit: spelling

Message edited by author 2006-12-08 23:29:06.

12/08/2006 06:34:29 PM · #4

I think the EV for the night time was 0 and the daytime was -1/3. I like asim's theory but I've dealt with this issue in the past as well, unfortunately!

fotomann - were you not able to load these images in DPP? I'm not sure why that would be the case.

12/08/2006 06:36:36 PM · #5

Originally posted by codezion:

fotomann - were you not able to load these images in DPP? I'm not sure why that would be the case.

I can't download the files at all...

The connection has timed out

The server at //www.ankurshome.com is taking too long to respond.

Message edited by author 2006-12-08 23:37:09.

12/08/2006 06:48:32 PM · #6

Hmm... sorry about that. I must be having some issue with my server. I've uploaded jpeg versions of these two images in my workshop. Unfortunately it doesn't show all the grainy effect I am talking about but hopefully it would give you some idea.

12/08/2006 06:50:48 PM · #7

Can you upload 100% crops of the noisiest parts of the images to your workshop?

12/08/2006 07:06:57 PM · #8

Here are the images. Thanks for your response, BTW.

The background in both images really show the grainy or noise that I am talking about.

Message edited by author 2006-12-09 00:07:32.

jaxsond

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

12/08/2006 07:17:14 PM · #9

at 100% those don't look too bad to me

Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM

12/08/2006 07:20:49 PM · #10

Luminance noise in the skies is quite common, especiallu for longish exposure.

I don't see a lot of noise in the shadows which would indicate the camera isn't having trouble with high ISO.

How long were these exposures?

mist

Canon EOS-60D

12/09/2006 12:13:29 AM · #11

They look similar to my 20Ds noise levels, levels that I'm not particularly happy with.

I'm sure it never used to be this bad, either.

Here's a couple of 100% crops from mine.

The second is pushed +1 in the raw exposure thingy.

Both of these shots were ISO 100.

I posted a thread about this a while ago, but didn't get around to posting my 100% crops. The thing is I've got no real way of absolutely knowing if my camera is "noisy" or not.

soup

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

12/09/2006 03:54:19 AM · #12

the first image there mist - is likely noisey because it is under exposed.

RainMotorsports

Nikon D60

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR

12/09/2006 04:04:06 AM · #13

Its also blurred lol

RainMotorsports

Nikon D60

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR

12/09/2006 04:11:35 AM · #14

Originally posted by jaxsond:

at 100% those don't look too bad to me

Heh the tower sky is nothign Noise Ninja couldnt fix

cheekymunky

Canon EOS-40D

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

12/09/2006 04:11:58 AM · #15

When I do long exposure I always use the Noise Reduction custom feature, where it subractes a 'black' frame from the one you've just taken. It works realy well.

dwterry

Canon EOS-1D Mark III

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

12/09/2006 04:48:17 AM · #16

Your 100% crops don' look bad at all for ISO 400.

Remember that as you raise your ISO, all you're really doing is "under exposing the photo sites" on your sensor and then letting the camera adjust the values upward as if they had received the full amount of light. So the less light they get, the less current they produce, and the noisier the image becomes.

But the 30D is an awesome camera with very low noise. Unless you print these really large (like 11x14 and larger) I don't think you'll see the grain. And if you do decide to print big, then Neat Image or Noise Ninja ought to help out. (i.e. don't let a 100% crop on screen fool you into think you're going to see the same thing in print)

strangeghost

Canon EOS-7D

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

12/09/2006 05:13:15 AM · #17

I've been wanting to do an ISO test with my 30D since I got it so you just gave me a reason to.

I shot a series of shots in relatively low light (daytime, interior room of my house. The only light is indirect sunlight from a nearby window). These were with my Tammy 28-75 at 75mm and f/5.6. I reduced the jpg quality to keep the file sizes reasonable, so you might see a little jpg artifacting, but this doesn't detract from the test - the level of noise present.

pBase Link

Open each image at full resolution (original size) in a new tab and compare. I think most viewers will agree that the difference between ISO 100 and 400 is pretty minimal. I think you could accidently leave your camera on ISO400 all the time and have it "ruin" very few shots. This camera is an exceptional performer at higher ISO levels.

Enjoy!

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

12/09/2006 05:54:03 AM · #18

I like the iso test. I think I will try to do something similar with my camera and post results for you to compare. I have to find a good place to host first though. Do you see more noise if your subject is at a greater distance than your bookshelf?

Anyways, one thing I want to mention to everyone is that I noticed that the noise goes away a bit when I convert to jpeg. The noise is much more visible in raw image. It is also very visible on people which would just take away the clean skin look. Maybe I am just being too critical. I'm just mad at myself for leaving it at 400 throughout my trip and not noticing until I came back! I am sure some noise reduction plugin can fix this but I was hoping that this wouldn't be a problem to begin with.

dwterry

Canon EOS-1D Mark III

12/09/2006 07:20:43 AM · #19

Originally posted by strangeghost:

I've been wanting to do an ISO test with my 30D since I got it so you just gave me a reason to.

Very nice test!

Even at the Original sizes, the noise doesn't look all that bad until you hit ISO 3200. I'd bet that you could print your ISO 100 and ISO 1600 images at 4x6" and not be able to tell the difference. At ISO 800, an 8x10 would probably look identical to your ISO 100 image.

Canon's sensors are amazingly noise free. Thanks for sharing your test results.

doctornick

Apple iPhone 13 Pro

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

12/09/2006 07:27:44 AM · #20

Uh...I wouldn't call those examples noisy...If you've ever shot ISO 400 Film the grain is at least 5 times more visible that your examples. Canon DSLR's produce amazingly noise-free photos, and the little grain there is can be very easily eliminated using Noise Ninja. I only need to use Noise Ninja from ISO 1600 upwards...

Message edited by author 2006-12-09 12:28:05.

pineapple

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

12/09/2006 07:51:30 AM · #21

The blue sky around the tower is noisy IMO. What was the shutter speed and aperture? Using Noise Ninja or, presumably, Neat Image requires some finesse to fix that problem. The sky needs special selection and treatment by itself without causing visual problems where the sky borders the tower. To really clean such an image takes care and time. The blues on a blue sky day do get noisy with the 350D too. I try to keep exposure as fast as possible and do not boost when processing the CR2 RAW file. That does help. The night time image is simply par for the course, I think.

12/09/2006 08:09:39 AM · #22

Originally posted by pineapple:

I try to keep exposure as fast as possible and do not boost when processing the CR2 RAW file. That does help.

Or over-expose (expose to the right) in-camera just a tad.

soup

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

12/09/2006 08:15:01 AM · #23

this is ideal in any situation. and the noise caused by under exposure has nothing to do with the camera quality really. it has more to do with a lack of data being recorded in the underexposed shot. ideally you'll push the exposure to the right just to point of avoiding clipping the right side of the histogram.

doing this will allow your camera to record the most amount of data, and therefore a more workable RAW file.

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Or over-expose (expose to the right) in-camera just a tad.

Message edited by author 2006-12-09 13:15:15.

rtrebolo