Reading mode: Light Dark

30D definately has more noise than 20D

Go to last post
A

AerialCuriosity

Member
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Location
TX, US
I take a lot of pictures of buildings, I sold my 20D and went for the 30D and now after lots of testing I have come to the conclusion that the 30D has definately a lot more noise at ISO400 than the 20D, especially in the areas that have shadows, it's strange you can have a picture that has no noise in the lighted areas but considerable noise in the shadows.

Also the display on the 30D will not display properly colors since all have a yellowish tint to them.

I fly with a lot of newspaper photographers and used their 30D's and 20D's and it's the same problem with all the 30D's.

I'm dissapointed with the 30D

 
wow thats lame, how is it with lower ISO settings? I was thinking of replacing my D80 with the 30D for the 5fps, maybe i'll wait for the 40D
 
I set my 30D on 400 to take some indoor shots and forgot . . . . I left it there all weekend, shot about 200 pictures of my granddaughter - indoors and out - and they were all great!
 
30D has a very acceptable noise level. I recently took a shot in a restaurant at ISO 3200 and the picture was usable all the way through.

As for Nikon D80, it has very unpleasant noise at ISO 3200. That's what I know for sure as I own both of them.

Canon 30D shot
F/5.6, 1/80, ISO 3200 at 50mm (EF-S 17-75mm IS USM)
PP: Resizing + some sharpening



Crop 100% (out of the camera)



--
Olga Nikon D50, D80, Canon 30D / Nathalie Canon 350 D
 
serisous responce.

you are clearly a newbie in this forum, and if you are seriously trying to tel us that a camera with the SAME sensor has MORE noise??? ur kidding.

mabye you got a bad coppy...but the camera actually has the same noise levels...

if your shots are underexposed, keep in mind that it is going to skyrocket the noise levels...
--
-Machu

Yes, I realize speling is a chalunge for sum of us...I am inkluded in that grup, so pleze foregiv me.

The Beauty of IR

 
--
-Machu

Yes, I realize speling is a chalunge for sum of us...I am inkluded in that grup, so pleze foregiv me.

The Beauty of IR

 
AerialCuriosity said:
I take a lot of pictures of buildings, I sold my 20D and went for
the 30D and now after lots of testing I have come to the conclusion
that the 30D has definately a lot more noise at ISO400 than the
20D, especially in the areas that have shadows, it's strange you
can have a picture that has no noise in the lighted areas but
considerable noise in the shadows.
Click to expand...
Achieving low noise is all about allowing as much light to reach the sensor as possible. This is why it's not only not strange for shadows to have more noise than highlights ... it's the norm. You may wish to check if your 30D is underexposing compared with your former 20D. Best thing is actually to ignore the past and do your best to expose the 30D properly from this point forward. You'll achieve your best results shooting in RAW and then increasing exposure via EC until you're just shy of the highlights clipping. If you don't know how to use the histogram, learn. It's your best tool for proper exposure.

You may also want to seek out John Sheehy's postings on the non-round-number ISO values (the in-between 1/3 and 2/3 stop values) and how they are implemented. The 30D has a true analog ISO amp only for the round ISO values and achieves the others by manipulating the data digitally prior to writing out the RAW file. Learn which ones are noisy and which are clean but with some highlight loss before using.

David
 
When its clear and u can get a fast shutter and a good F stop???

It bugs me how people shoot with iso 400 in daylight!!! thats only adding noise, just like in this pic...

if it were me i would swhoot iso 64 if it had the option...

the only reason i ever rasie the iso is when theres not enuf light...
isnt that what its for ??

--
Rami.H

http://img51.photobucket.com/albums/v156/rhazer/Canon%2030D/

---Sony F-828---

-----EOS 30D -----

Canon 18-55 (kit lens) Canon 50 1.8 MKII
Sigma 70-300 F4-5.6 APO DG MACRO
 
--
-Machu

Yes, I realize speling is a chalunge for sum of us...I am inkluded in that grup, so pleze foregiv me.

The Beauty of IR

 
Having used many of both bodies, I can say you are wrong. The noise is almost identical between the two cameras. Looking at the example you provide several questions come to mind.

First, how do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you provide an image and give no specifics as to how it was shot, what size crop is that, metering...etc. Perhaps show the same shot with both a 20D and a 30D. That might carry some weight.

Second, a prior poster asked why you were shooting at such an ISO in those circumstances. I agree with them.

Third, how can you justify your statement when it appears that you cannot even present tests to the contrary?

Perhaps you got a bad body (unlikely), or perhaps you do not know how to maximize the use of the body you have (more likely).

Give more details and provide control shots, and you might find a more receptive audience for your outlandish claim.
--
Member PPA, NAPP, WPPI
 
If you see significant noise, at ISO400, without doing post-processing to bring up the shadow areas, then you have a below-average sensor, and should either 1) take it back to the retailer and trade for another new copy if you can, or 2) send it to canon and have them replace the sensor.

Seriously the 30d and 20d sensors are very very similar, BUT the manufacturing processes of sensors has a range (ie, they're not all identical, just like all chips made of any kind). So if the problem is as bad as you say, you should be able to get it replaced without trouble.
AerialCuriosity said:
I take a lot of pictures of buildings, I sold my 20D and went for
the 30D and now after lots of testing I have come to the conclusion
that the 30D has definately a lot more noise at ISO400 than the
20D, especially in the areas that have shadows, it's strange you
can have a picture that has no noise in the lighted areas but
considerable noise in the shadows.

Also the display on the 30D will not display properly colors since
all have a yellowish tint to them.

I fly with a lot of newspaper photographers and used their 30D's
and 20D's and it's the same problem with all the 30D's.

I'm dissapointed with the 30D

Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/stevegrillo , Equipment on profile page
 
mpeman said:
Having used many of both bodies, I can say you are wrong. The
noise is almost identical between the two cameras. Looking at the
example you provide several questions come to mind.

First, how do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you
provide an image and give no specifics as to how it was shot, what
size crop is that, metering...etc. Perhaps show the same shot with
both a 20D and a 30D. That might carry some weight.

Second, a prior poster asked why you were shooting at such an ISO
in those circumstances. I agree with them.

Third, how can you justify your statement when it appears that you
cannot even present tests to the contrary?

Perhaps you got a bad body (unlikely), or perhaps you do not know
how to maximize the use of the body you have (more likely).

Give more details and provide control shots, and you might find a
more receptive audience for your outlandish claim.
--
Click to expand...
to find a more receptive audience it seems he would have to go to different form. it seems here you are either welcomed or stoned.

http://www.pbase.com/llukee/inbox&page=52
hurtsme said:
M
Click to expand...
ember PPA, NAPP, WPPI
 
Luke Kukovica said:
to find a more receptive audience it seems he would have to go to
different form. it seems here you are either welcomed or stoned.
Click to expand...
Umm... I think my response was appropriate.

I'm more inclined to welcome just about anyone or any topic, and I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt. Many other posters here do the same (juli comes to mind).

I understand your comment, but that's a broad brush stroke to hit us all with.

--
http://www.pbase.com/stevegrillo , Equipment on profile page
 
I'm on my 3rd 30D body right now and in the process of getting it boxed up to send back for a 4th copy, I'll keep sending this camera back until I get a good one.

I agree with you that your 30D may have more noise than your 20D did, I have found this to be true at 400and above iso also.

I find that my biggest issue with my 30D is with white or very light birds against dark backgrounds, when I expose for the bird the shaddows show excessive noise, some to the point where the shot is useless.

I did not experience this with the 20D, I feel very strongly if you look at my site you'll see that I know what I'm doing with a camera.

I feel very strongly that there are lot of bad sensors out there floating around, I also feel that it's fine to be an advacate of a company and to support it's products but don't be fooled into thinking that there are not quality escapes in this industry as well.

Send you camera back to Canon, they will make it right if there is indeed a problem.

Just my opinion and .02 cents worth, Flame on.

Steve
--
If you would like to view my gallery http://froggy.smugmug.com/
 
yes it is a broad stroke ...but my experience is still the same ...love the poster and post or hate them.

the responses too often tip the scale with just one or two words which are personal and do not form part of any argument.

if someone disagrees with a post ....that is fine, no need for adjectives or demeaning phrases (I am not referring to your post) in this instance. (in this case I was just stating that he probably wouldn't get a receptive response here)

http://www.pbase.com/llukee/inbox&page=52
SteveDude said:
SteveDude said:
to find a more receptive audience it seems he would have to go to
different form. it seems here you are either welcomed or stoned.
Click to expand...
Umm... I think my response was appropriate.

I'm more inclined to welcome just about anyone or any topic, and I
tend to give people the benefit of the doubt. Many other posters
here do the same (juli comes to mind).

I understand your comment, but that's a broad brush stroke to hit
us all with.

--
http://www.pbase.com/stevegrillo , Equipment on profile page
Click to expand...
 
It's not a question of negatives responses. The OP made a blanket statement of fact (with a compelling subject title!), and expected that one lone example with no information would back it up.

If there were a comparison shot between the two cameras he mentioned, then that might go a long way to backing up what is a rather broad statement based on feeling rather than fact.
--
Member PPA, NAPP, WPPI
 
ok ...my mistake ...stone away.

BUT DON'T forget to visit my pbase site.

http://www.pbase.com/llukee/inbox&page=52
mpeman said:
It's not a question of negatives responses. The OP made a blanket
statement of fact (with a compelling subject title!), and expected
that one lone example with no information would back it up.

If there were a comparison shot between the two cameras he
mentioned, then that might go a long way to backing up what is a
rather broad statement based on feeling rather than fact.
--
Member PPA, NAPP, WPPI
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top