« on: October 24, 2012, 03:04:33 PM »
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
ISO 51k bw. +1
I'm shooting handheld indoors without flash with my 5D3 all the time these days, it seems. Shame on me, I know, but these are often social / performance events where the flash would not be welcomed.
In these situations, I leave the zooms at home and shoot either my trusty 50/1.4 or the surprisingly good new 28/2.8 IS. To avoid wide open softness, I am pushing ISO into 3200-6400 levels to allow either lens to be stopped down a bit. I won't lie that I push ISO even beyond 6400 periodically.
I am shooting RAW in these situations with the High ISO NR turned off as it seems to do nothing to RAW files (I presume it's a JPG-only feature?).
I generally prefer capturing sharpness + detail with noise than softening up the image by cranking up the noise reduction. That said, if I can chase the noise intelligently without much detail being sacrificed, I'd love to hear how.
Can folks on this fine forum please give advice on:
1) Best RAW processing parameters to managing noise in Camera RAW. I get lost on the five noise reduction sliders (Luminance, L Detail, L Contrast, Color and Color Detail) -- so pointers on which to use and when would be terrific.
2) Are there other settings in camera that are recommended for shooting in these indoor/handheld/low-light situations?
3) Is Camera RAW is the best tool for noise reduction work? Should I use another RAW handler? Does saving noise work for Photoshop to manage a better path to take? Advice appreciated!
Thanks for your help!
I can comfortably shoot ISO 12,800 Color Images and 25,600 B&W's on my 5D3. 51,200 B&W's if needed.
I use LR4 and its Noise Reduction software. I generally apply color NR until its gone, and enough Luminance NR to lower the grain, Not to remove it. (which can be done to smooth-en portraits if needed.)
You can Use the Median Distort tool in Photoshop and selectively remove noise from an image. Its usually not needed.
The best thing for noise is to nail your exposure. I've gotten Usable ISO 3200 Files from a 5Dc because I nailed the exposure.
I was at the WFX 2012 Trade Show and our booth was immediately next to Canon's large booth. I spent a fair amount of time chatting with their camera representatives. They stated for normal situations the 1DX and 5D Mark III perform equally well. For low light/high ISO situations the 1DX performs better.
+1 Chuck AlaimoNikon and Sony have completely out foxed Canon.
Canon's first big mistake was putting only 22MP in the 5D3 with a sensor that performs about the same as the 5D2.
Having learnt from the lesson of the 1Ds3/5D2, Canon did not want to introduce a "lesser camera" (6D) than the 5D3 with the same sensor because lots of would-be purchasers of the 5D3 would simply buy the 6D instead. So the 6D will have 20MP to stop it stealing sales from those who want more MP (22) from the 5D3.
Where Nikon has outfoxed Canon is that their camera at about the same price ($2099 is close enough to $1999) but with 20% more pixels. Nikon were able to deliver a 24MP FF camera at $2099 because their next model up camera has substantially more megapixels - 36.
Canon's product lineup below the 1DX is screwed. They really need to throw it out and start over.
And why does Canon need to do that?
Because the number of megapixels in their sensors is now too low. And if megapixels didn't matter then why wouldn't the 6D have the same, if not more, than the 5D3?
You must have gotten the MP kool-aid. MP's aren't everything! If the rumored specs said 24 MP, would that and that alone make this on par? No. Where the d800 differentiates itself from the mk3 isn't in mp's, but in IQ and DR at ISO 100-800, and above ISO 800 Canon takes the lead in both IQ and DR.
Back to why these specs suck. It isn't MP's --- if it said 40 MP's it would still suck due to only having 11 AF points with 1 cross type at the center, and sd card only memory (unless this new sensor fixed the DR issues - but if it did, then the 6d would be closer to $2800). Those are really the biggest issues. It's 2012, we shouldn't have to center point recompose on a brand new $2000 camera. I could even deal with SD only if the AF was actually modern - it doesn't need to be the 61 point of the mk3, but dang it use the 21 point from 7d or the 45 point from the 1d4. If it had at least that then it would be a worthy purchase and sit on my left side as backup to my mk3 (if the ISO performance is close to that of the mk3). As it stands, the throwback to 2008 AF is useless, and SD only would prevent any kind of burst shooting due because SD wouldn't be able to handle writing at higher speeds. So sorry, while I agree these specs are a big fail --- it isn't because of MP's...
Anyone out there having the same problems while doing night sky?Yes, I happened to take a night shot with stars using a 5D3 yesterday, and I see this precise phenomenom for saturated stars when the default sharpening is used (just tested). When I turn sharpening off, the black halos disappear. I just tried it but am to lazy to produce screenshots for you... just try it yourself. Using unsharp mask as a "sharpening" filter is particularly good at producing black halos.
I took a look at your link and can only suggest the points look a bit like hot pixels (assuming not all hot pixels would go red). I'm only speculating but maybe a combination of higher ISO and long exposure has caused them to get a bit hot.
Were you taking a number of long exposure shots in quick succession? This could produce hot pixels. Perhaps our resident guru Neuro might know.