-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
D60: amaizingly low noise @ ISO 1,000!!!
- Thread starter Igor R.
- Start date
Paul F Caldwell
Leading Member
- Messages
- 871
- Reaction score
- 0
The page you pointed to, has ISO 1000 but with flash. The old D1 took a great ISO 800 with flash also. However without flash and using ambient light, another story.
Paul
Paul
Actually I see quite a bit of noise, here's a crop from the 1000 iso D60 photo:
--Dennis D
Timo Autiokari
Leading Member
By looking at the JPEG images (unedited as they come out from the camera) you can not evaluate the noise level correctly.
The noise is highest in the dark end and when the camera applies such an incorrect tonal curve over the image data that makes a large portion of the dark end to appear as pure black then naturally you do not see any noise there either.
Meaningful estimation/evaluation of noise level can only be made after the image is converted so that it is shown colorimetricly accurately (after an accurate ICC profile is assigned to it).
Timo Autiokari http://www.aim-dtp.net
Yawn
Jim K53618
Veteran Member
I will admit, these samples look a little better then Phil's, but not much. I'm still not impressed with what I'm seeing. The images look pale, lack contrast, color, and appear soft. As for the ISO 1000 shot with flash, of course there won't be much noise. Let's see a natrual light at 1000. Even with flas the image look way too soft. Over all the D30 images are better from any thing I've seen so far from the D60. I sure hope it's just a preproduction thing because with samples like these I don't see the D60 flying off the shelves.
That's completely true, but on the other hand you can't expect people to shoot RAW only. If the camera can't generate a clean JPEG image, it's still the camera not doing a good job.
Bart
Bart
Timo Autiokari
Leading Member
Bart, what I tried to say was that because the cameras apply (by the firmware) a tonal curve (that is different from product to another) over the image data, visual assessment of the noise level from unprofiled images is not accurate, or is not even meaningful.
Say if we had two identical D60 cameras and also the ability to alter the tonal curve (transfer function) that the firmware applies and we'd give camera n
1 a gamma curve of 1/1.72 and to camera n 2 a gamma curve of 1/2.50.
Then we'd shoot exactly the same scene with them, using the same camera settings (less that the tonal curve is different).
Then when we view those shots on a PC system someone could declare that camera n 1 has VERY low noise compared to the camera n 2.
But large portion of the dark end of the tonal range of camera 1 appears to be way incorrect, way too dark or appears as pure black, so naturally the noise there appears to be much less also.
So, the image has to be reproduced naturally (accurately), only then visual assesment of noise level is valid. When we view directly with the un-aided eye an outdoors scene we very rarely notice surfaces that appear as pure black and everything in our field of vision has detail. When a photograph that is reproduced on the CRT shows large areas that either appear as pure black or have no detail this tells us that the image is incorrectly reproduced (usually in the attempt to hide the high noise level in the dark end).
Timo Autiokari http://www.aim-dtp.net
Say if we had two identical D60 cameras and also the ability to alter the tonal curve (transfer function) that the firmware applies and we'd give camera n
1 a gamma curve of 1/1.72 and to camera n 2 a gamma curve of 1/2.50.Then we'd shoot exactly the same scene with them, using the same camera settings (less that the tonal curve is different).
Then when we view those shots on a PC system someone could declare that camera n
1 has VERY low noise compared to the camera n 2.But large portion of the dark end of the tonal range of camera 1 appears to be way incorrect, way too dark or appears as pure black, so naturally the noise there appears to be much less also.
So, the image has to be reproduced naturally (accurately), only then visual assesment of noise level is valid. When we view directly with the un-aided eye an outdoors scene we very rarely notice surfaces that appear as pure black and everything in our field of vision has detail. When a photograph that is reproduced on the CRT shows large areas that either appear as pure black or have no detail this tells us that the image is incorrectly reproduced (usually in the attempt to hide the high noise level in the dark end).
Timo Autiokari http://www.aim-dtp.net
sarhento
Forum Enthusiast
Enlarged at 100%, the noise is "deafening like a cannon". You didn't see it?
Sam
Sam
Igor R.
Senior Member
Well, ye, cuz flash is giving 5500K light temperature, that means no WB compensation at all, so the best available quality. If camera is using WB correction it means more noise either for Red or Blue color. But anyway ISO 1,000 is for extreme conditions, how often do you use ISO 1,000 film?
At ISO 400 D60 is doing great!
Igor R.
Senior Member
Ye, JPEG sucks, RAW rulez!
Well, software denoiser could help.
They saying that those images are stored in sRGB space (camera converting from its own space to sRGB?) I don't know if it is really so...
BTW, Timo, thanx for the profile for Casio VQ camera, it is really helping! QV's space is very far from sRGB, and your profile is including all corrections that I was doing in Photoshop every time.
George Smith80814
Leading Member
I shoot raw only, it is not as uncommon as you must think. Why would you want the camera to make all of the image choices for you?
--GSmithCreate an image today that will make someone's day today.
I know there are a lot of RAW shooters around, one is me. But the reason for shooting RAW can be different. Personally, I don't need all the bits of RAW and would be happy with a "raw" jpeg with no processing at all, only because it's a lot smaller and loads faster and in every imaging program. So, for me convenience is important.
But now Timo has convinced me that RAW is the only way to go if you want to have it all, and respect the D60 for what it's able to.
Bart
But now Timo has convinced me that RAW is the only way to go if you want to have it all, and respect the D60 for what it's able to.
Bart
Z (is real)
Veteran Member
One of the D60 (and ESO-1D) features that is really cool is the ability to simultaneously record RAW and JPEG. This is a really useful workflow feature...
-Z-
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum