7D users, noise question...

Started 8 months ago | Discussions thread
Jerry-astro
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,291Gear list
Like?
Re: Different eyeballs - different result
In reply to Dale Buhanan, 8 months ago

You are too kind, sir, thank you. I also had little doubt that others might see it a bit differently given how close the results were. Definitely some combination of light, tones, subtle sensor performance differences, and simple interpretation could all weigh in and change the outcome. I'm guessing no one would go wrong by using either set of ISO ranges.

J.

Dale Buhanan wrote:

Jerry-astro wrote:

Dale, I did test this myself a while back and got the opposite result, with the pulled ISOs being ever so subtly less noisy than their native counterparts. However, as you stated, the differences are so subtle that they are all but inconsequential and (obviously based on our different results) very open to interpretation. I'm typically used the "pulled" multiples these days based on the limited testing I did, but I don't see it as a game changer in any real way. BTW, all the test images I took were with the lens cap off. :-). Figured that this was slightly more typical of what I shoot in the real world -- at least intentionally.

Yeah... That was a good one. " At least intentionally. " Same goes for me..

And I agree... they were very close indeed -- and which is actually best may depend on how strong the light is, as well as vary a bit from camera to camera.

My test was in bright summer sunshine, and looking in the mid-tones in the shade of a patio on the house across the street. For me, 100 had a little less noise than 160. But I can certainly believe that you could get opposite results.

As I say, I am pretty sure it would depend on the intensity of the light, since the obliterating term is due to light induced shot noise. More light would thus mean more shot noise. But also, the electronics from one camera to another would certainly vary within some small range also -- and probably enough to change the outcome.

Anyway, good for you for testing. Now we are both comfortable we are getting the best settings for our respective cameras...

Good to see you again, Jerry! I always appreciate what you have to say.

You're also quite correct that the "native" ISOs are most certainly 100/200/400/etc. and I have never seen Canon refer to the 160/320 multiples using that terminology.

-- hide signature --

kind regards
Dale

 Jerry-astro's gear list:Jerry-astro's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Carl Zeiss Touit 2.8/12
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow