#21  
Old 14-04-2007, 04:33 PM
Ingo
Registered User

Ingo is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 559
I dont see any noise, or bad noise performance by my D50 in any of the properly exposed areas. Maybe you need a monitor calibration. I calibrated mine the other day.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 14-04-2007, 05:21 PM
CometGuy's Avatar
CometGuy
Registered User

CometGuy is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 942
I am not making this up, here is why there is more noise in highlights:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_noise

What you haven't considered is in normal images are processed with gamma scaling that mimimicks human vision and compresses the brightness range of the image towards the brighter end. The result is that highlights are supressed making noise seem a lot less than it really is in those brighter regions. Even with gamma compression part of white band at the top of the image has higher noise than the dark background next to it as measured in software designed to measure that. To do noise measurements you have to use the most out of focus areas (to avoid texture) and areas that are midtone (to avoid large gamma compression and saturation).

Coming back to astronomy, if there were less noise in highlights, this would mean we would be able to detect fainter astronomical objects from the middle of cities than we could from the darkest mountaintops!

Terry
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 16-04-2007, 07:05 AM
CometGuy's Avatar
CometGuy
Registered User

CometGuy is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 942
If there is any interest I can talk to Mike and see if he will allow me to upload the 350D + D200 raw files (25 MB total) and let people make there own comparisions. Otherwise I won't bother.

Terry
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 16-04-2007, 07:58 AM
Ingo
Registered User

Ingo is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 559
Doesn't matter. I just got a job at a studio starting tomorrow and all they use is 5D's, so I'll be making the conversion to a 1D Mark III whenever it comes out, selling all my Nikon gear because I like Canon's high end DSLR's noise control at high ISO for my sports photography.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 16-04-2007, 01:46 PM
sejanus's Avatar
sejanus (Gavin)
Registered User

sejanus is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sydney, Southern suburbs
Posts: 683
bizarrely the d50 and d40 are actually better at high iso than their d200/d2x/d2hs cousins.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 16-04-2007, 06:09 PM
Muddy Diver's Avatar
Muddy Diver
Your Brain Drain

Muddy Diver is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Worrigee, NSW
Posts: 199
errr, don't really feel qulaified to join in this thread but am reading through because I just purchased my 400d based upon its apparent reduction of noise in low light situations over the D80. I actually found the comparison test carried out on the Dpreview website a very helpful and decisive test and you could see the difference, the Cmos sensor gave lower noise than the CCD Nikon FWIW
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 16-04-2007, 08:39 PM
Ingo
Registered User

Ingo is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 559
Quote:
Originally Posted by sejanus View Post
bizarrely the d50 and d40 are actually better at high iso than their d200/d2x/d2hs cousins.
The D50 is in my opinion, but doesn't have as sensitive as a sensor, but my friend has a D40 and i've seen nothing but horrible at ISO200. It's so noisy even when correctly exposed, maybe he has a broken one.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 01:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement