FZ1000 detail and noise @iso 6400 and higher

ANAYV · Nov 28, 2015

5 years back ISO1600 would look like this, perhaps even worse.

ISO 25,600 !!!

Yep, above shot is @ ISO 25,600 !

Here's same shot at ISO 6400

ISO 6400

Both shot indoors, behind glass, at local zoo.

Both Processed with FastStone ,and also using there not so good ' Reduce Noise' noise reduction algorithm .

Jon_T · Nov 28, 2015

With the images were you using the in-camera NR -3 setting?

As I'm sure you're aware the amount of high ISO noise in a image is far less in good lighting than with the same ISO setting in low light conditions (i.e., lighting low enough that with 1/60 shutter would require 6400 ISO).

I've noticed that FZ1000 in-camera default NR at higher ISO's (800+) takes on toll on smearing image's finer details (e.g., hair) as posted by others and myself in "In my experience" JPG NR posts.

Below is one of the images from my post on my experience with FZ1000 JPG NR at higher ISO's:

Just PP did some interior church pics from last Sunday, JPG+RAW (Standard Photo Style/Default settings; AWB) shots that ranged from 800~1600 ISO and saw the "mottled" you mentioned in fine details especially in people's hair shown below at higher ISO's (blurred portion of face for privacy reasons):

View attachment 979655

For a little more exploration I downloaded some JPG+RAW images from ImagingResource.com FZ1000 Review at different ISO's. Image below are a side-by-side comparisons of 125 ISO JPG, 800 ISO JPG, 1600 ISO JPG, and 1600 ISO RAW I processed with DxO Optics Pro 10 shows the finer details in the fabrics lost as the ISO increases. As one can see there's quite a difference in the fabric details between the FZ1000 1600 ISO JPG and the PP 1600 RAW image.

Bottom Left Image: OCC JPG 1600 ISO; Right: PP RAW 1600 ISO

For those that may be interested images below are the JPG OOC and the PP RAW images both reduced 50%; just viewing the initial first display size after clicking the "view original size" link can easily see the differences between the two images.

OOC JPG 1600 ISO

PP RAW 1600 ISO

ANAYV · Nov 28, 2015

Jon_T said:
With the images were you using the in-camera NR -3 setting?

-2 for NR

Jon_T said:
As I'm sure you're aware the amount of high ISO noise in a image is far less in good lighting than with the same ISO setting in low light conditions (i.e., lighting low enough that with 1/60 shutter would require 6400 ISO).

Is that pure darkness, lol.

For the 26,500 shot at 1/1600 , base iso would give a shutter speed of 1/6th shutter speed

Jon_T said:
I've noticed that FZ1000 in-camera default NR at higher ISO's (800+) takes on toll on smearing image's finer details (e.g., hair) as posted by others and myself in "In my experience" JPG NR posts.Below is one of the images from my post on my experience with FZ1000 JPG NR at higher ISO's:

Jon_T said:
Just PP did some interior church pics from last Sunday, JPG+RAW (Standard Photo Style/Default settings; AWB) shots that ranged from 800~1600 ISO and saw the "mottled" you mentioned in fine details especially in people's hair shown below at higher ISO's (blurred portion of face for privacy reasons):

View attachment 979655

For a little more exploration I downloaded some JPG+RAW images from ImagingResource.com FZ1000 Review at different ISO's. Image below are a side-by-side comparisons of 125 ISO JPG, 800 ISO JPG, 1600 ISO JPG, and 1600 ISO RAW I processed with DxO Optics Pro 10 shows the finer details in the fabrics lost as the ISO increases. As one can see there's quite a difference in the fabric details between the FZ1000 1600 ISO JPG and the PP 1600 RAW image.

Bottom Left Image: OCC JPG 1600 ISO; Right: PP RAW 1600 ISO

For those that may be interested images below are the JPG OOC and the PP RAW images both reduced 50%; just viewing the initial first display size after clicking the "view original size" link can easily see the differences between the two images.

No surprise there's more detail in the RAW images, Jon, but might be slightly more detail in the jpegs, if NR was lowered.

Plus I find the Natural photostlye to have less processing at defaults than Standard photostyle. Add in minus for sharpness, contrast and NR and the camera has less smearing of fine details and one can adjust in post a bit better, than if using default settings..

I am still experimenting on just the right settings, and choosing to use FastStone Image Viewer as my post production software.

Otherwise, I will have to spend some $$ on either PhotoShop, Lightroom or DXO Optics Pro, or other software, and then take some time to learn it.

Taking the easy, simple road these days. Hardly print anymore, and the occasional print is 8 x 10". Noise wont really show up much at that print size, and for posting on the internet, at smaller than 20MP sizes, I'm content with the results.

Not to say in the future, I wont shift back to RAW.

ANAYV

XVOYAGERX · Nov 29, 2015

Yep, ANAYV i find the FZ1000 files superb files to work on, they really stand up to a lot of editing, i had a quick try at removing noise and other very slight adjustments to your iso 6400 shot, (1600x1067) i hope you do not mind, i would say it came out rather well.

Cheers, Allan.

Original

Adjusted.

bill hansen · Nov 29, 2015

The highest ISO I've been willing to try with my FZ1000 is 3200. My results with ISOs higher than that have never been acceptable to me. Depending on the size at which I want to display an image, RAW beats JPEG by a mile - more than that. Web sized images can get away with a lot more than print sized images - I know that some people claim that prints show more detail and less noise than monitor displays of the "same size" (for example, a print size of 10 inches across, and a monitor size necessary to produce a print size of 10 inches) , but I respectfully disagree.

If NR is turned off, as much as possible (all the way back to minus 5) in JPEG, most of the JPEG smearing can be avoided, but th e camera always applies at least a little NR, and it's not subtle about it. An aftermarket noise reduction program has always worked much better than the in-camera NRs, for me. Currently I use Topaz Denoise or (for the highest ISO images where detail preservation is important) DxO Elite.

ANAYV · Nov 29, 2015

Nice results, Allan !

I'm using a free program, with a weak noise removal algorithm in FastStone.

Tried to balance less noise, while retaining detail.

Your result is much better!

ANAYV

Jon_T · Nov 29, 2015

ANAYV said:
Jon_T said:

With the images were you using the in-camera NR -3 setting?

Click to expand...

-2 for NR

Tanks

ANAYV said:
ANAYV said:

As I'm sure you're aware the amount of high ISO noise in a image is far less in good lighting than with the same ISO setting in low light conditions (i.e., lighting low enough that with 1/60 shutter would require 6400 ISO).

Click to expand...

Is that pure darkness, lol.

It would be really low lighting-- just an example; but I've had to use 6400 ISO @ f/2.8 to get 1/250 SS to prevent subject movement blur.

ANAYV said:
For the 26,500 shot at 1/1600 , base iso would give a shutter speed of 1/6th shutter speed

ANAYV said:

I've noticed that FZ1000 in-camera default NR at higher ISO's (800+) takes on toll on smearing image's finer details (e.g., hair) as posted by others and myself in "In my experience" JPG NR posts.Below is one of the images from my post on my experience with FZ1000 JPG NR at higher ISO's:

Just PP did some interior church pics from last Sunday, JPG+RAW (Standard Photo Style/Default settings; AWB) shots that ranged from 800~1600 ISO and saw the "mottled" you mentioned in fine details especially in people's hair shown below at higher ISO's (blurred portion of face for privacy reasons):

View attachment 979655

For a little more exploration I downloaded some JPG+RAW images from ImagingResource.com FZ1000 Review at different ISO's. Image below are a side-by-side comparisons of 125 ISO JPG, 800 ISO JPG, 1600 ISO JPG, and 1600 ISO RAW I processed with DxO Optics Pro 10 shows the finer details in the fabrics lost as the ISO increases. As one can see there's quite a difference in the fabric details between the FZ1000 1600 ISO JPG and the PP 1600 RAW image.

Bottom Left Image: OCC JPG 1600 ISO; Right: PP RAW 1600 ISO

For those that may be interested images below are the JPG OOC and the PP RAW images both reduced 50%; just viewing the initial first display size after clicking the "view original size" link can easily see the differences between the two images.

Click to expand...

No surprise there's more detail in the RAW images, Jon, but might be slightly more detail in the jpegs, if NR was lowered.

Plus I find the Natural photostlye to have less processing at defaults than Standard photostyle. Add in minus for sharpness, contrast and NR and the camera has less smearing of fine details and one can adjust in post a bit better, than if using default settings..

I am still experimenting on just the right settings, and choosing to use FastStone Image Viewer as my post production software.

Otherwise, I will have to spend some $$ on either PhotoShop, Lightroom or DXO Optics Pro, or other software, and then take some time to learn it.

Actually can use PhotoShop Elements 14 to process FZ1000 JPG+RAW images; currently on sale for around $60.00. Been using PSE since 1997 when a color printer I bought included Photoshop 4 LE. Been using FSIV since 2005; mainly as a image browser/ organizer and for its batch tools-- as per its namesake, it is a good Image Viewer.

3200 ISO PP w/ PSE

FSIV is a great free app, but its photo imaging tools are just the basics, and color adjustments (IMHO) are quite poor especially since there is no white balance tool.

ANAYV said:
Taking the easy, simple road these days. Hardly print anymore, and the occasional print is 8 x 10". Noise wont really show up much at that print size, and for posting on the internet, at smaller than 20MP sizes, I'm content with the results.

Not to say in the future, I wont shift back to RAW.

Well I can only encourage you to at least get PSE as you have capture some really great images that I've seen that truly could have benefited PP with PSE or other good quality photo imaging software.

IMHO using FSIV to edit FZ1000 JPG images is similar to paying $800 for a high quality stereo tuner/ amplifier then buying a pair of inexpensive $14.95 speakers. ;-)

Cheers,
Jon

Rodger1943 · Nov 29, 2015

Impressive result ANAYV. I have never pushed the camera that high in the ISO settings. As JonT pointed out though, high ISO works better in good light than low light. This image appears to be in reasonable light, but I still think it looks great even at 25000.

XVOYAGERX · Nov 29, 2015

Thanks ANAYV, I used Topaz De-Noise, you can download a free 30 day no holes barred trial of the software, however i think you would need one of the Adobe and/or PSP programs as the Topaz are plug-in programs and not stand alone.

Cheers my friend,

Allan.

bill hansen · Nov 29, 2015

I'm pretty sure Topaz used to have a standalone program as well as the plug-in. Maybe it's been discontinued?

XVOYAGERX · Nov 30, 2015

Yes, my mistake, Topaz `do` have a stand alone program, its called: `Topaz PhotoFXlab` However, this program by itself costs around £70 here in the UK, but you still have to purchase each/or all of the Plugins on top of this, then they can also be installed in to this program!

ANAYV · Nov 30, 2015

bill hansen said:
The highest ISO I've been willing to try with my FZ1000 is 3200.

About the same for me, although 1600 is probably best mad.

I have taken many, many shots of this Komoto Dragon over the years....and when I seen him posing, I decided to try at higher iso settings....actually from iso 400 to max 26,500. I wouldn't normally use max iso on any camera.

bill hansen said:
My results with ISOs higher than that have never been acceptable to me. Depending on the size at which I want to display an image, RAW beats JPEG by a mile - more than that. Web sized images can get away with a lot more than print sized images - I know that some people claim that prints show more detail and less noise than monitor displays of the "same size" (for example, a print size of 10 inches across, and a monitor size necessary to produce a print size of 10 inches) , but I respectfully disagree.

8 x 10" is max, if I even print. For these low resolution shots, it's OK, me thinks.

bill hansen said:
If NR is turned off, as much as possible (all the way back to minus 5) in JPEG, most of the JPEG smearing can be avoided, but th e camera always applies at least a little NR, and it's not subtle about it. An aftermarket noise reduction program has always worked much better than the in-camera NRs, for me. Currently I use Topaz Denoise or (for the highest ISO images where detail preservation is important) DxO Elite.

I might look into these...Thanks, Bill.

ANAYV

bill hansen said:
--
Bill Hansen
Ithaca NY, USA

damian5000 · Nov 30, 2015

ANANYV makes a solid point. I like the OP's post and comparison, but what does 25k ISO look like in a situation that actually requires it... And before any sort of PP would be interesting as well. I have g7x which has the same sensor and I dislike having to go past 1600. 3200 in a pinch. Though I am shooting jpg and very minor PP, no PP NR.

Here is one of my recent attempts at street shooting in low light which required 1250-3200 for 1/25-1/250. Though a strong case could be made that for a couple of these shots, I didn't need to shoot so bright and indeed some of them would have been more powerful if shot a bit dimmer or dimmed in post (14, 15). Conversely, some of these were shot slower than optimal, eg I'd like to have been at 1/125 for most of these to be assured of freezing action.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3930990

ANAYV · Dec 1, 2015

Jon_T said:
ANAYV said:

Jon_T said:

With the images were you using the in-camera NR -3 setting?

Click to expand...

-2 for NR

Click to expand...

Tanks

Jon_T said:

Jon_T said:

As I'm sure you're aware the amount of high ISO noise in a image is far less in good lighting than with the same ISO setting in low light conditions (i.e., lighting low enough that with 1/60 shutter would require 6400 ISO).

Click to expand...

Is that pure darkness, lol.

Click to expand...

It would be really low lighting-- just an example; but I've had to use 6400 ISO @ f/2.8 to get 1/250 SS to prevent subject movement blur.

Jon_T said:

For the 26,500 shot at 1/1600 , base iso would give a shutter speed of 1/6th shutter speed

Jon_T said:

I've noticed that FZ1000 in-camera default NR at higher ISO's (800+) takes on toll on smearing image's finer details (e.g., hair) as posted by others and myself in "In my experience" JPG NR posts.Below is one of the images from my post on my experience with FZ1000 JPG NR at higher ISO's:

Just PP did some interior church pics from last Sunday, JPG+RAW (Standard Photo Style/Default settings; AWB) shots that ranged from 800~1600 ISO and saw the "mottled" you mentioned in fine details especially in people's hair shown below at higher ISO's (blurred portion of face for privacy reasons):

View attachment 979655

For a little more exploration I downloaded some JPG+RAW images from ImagingResource.com FZ1000 Review at different ISO's. Image below are a side-by-side comparisons of 125 ISO JPG, 800 ISO JPG, 1600 ISO JPG, and 1600 ISO RAW I processed with DxO Optics Pro 10 shows the finer details in the fabrics lost as the ISO increases. As one can see there's quite a difference in the fabric details between the FZ1000 1600 ISO JPG and the PP 1600 RAW image.

Bottom Left Image: OCC JPG 1600 ISO; Right: PP RAW 1600 ISO

For those that may be interested images below are the JPG OOC and the PP RAW images both reduced 50%; just viewing the initial first display size after clicking the "view original size" link can easily see the differences between the two images.

Click to expand...

No surprise there's more detail in the RAW images, Jon, but might be slightly more detail in the jpegs, if NR was lowered.

Plus I find the Natural photostlye to have less processing at defaults than Standard photostyle. Add in minus for sharpness, contrast and NR and the camera has less smearing of fine details and one can adjust in post a bit better, than if using default settings..

I am still experimenting on just the right settings, and choosing to use FastStone Image Viewer as my post production software.

Otherwise, I will have to spend some $$ on either PhotoShop, Lightroom or DXO Optics Pro, or other software, and then take some time to learn it.

Click to expand...

Actually can use PhotoShop Elements 14 to process FZ1000 JPG+RAW images; currently on sale for around $60.00. Been using PSE since 1997 when a color printer I bought included Photoshop 4 LE. Been using FSIV since 2005; mainly as a image browser/ organizer and for its batch tools-- as per its namesake, it is a good Image Viewer.

3200 ISO PP w/ PSE

FSIV is a great free app, but its photo imaging tools are just the basics, and color adjustments (IMHO) are quite poor especially since there is no white balance tool.

Jon_T said:

Taking the easy, simple road these days. Hardly print anymore, and the occasional print is 8 x 10". Noise wont really show up much at that print size, and for posting on the internet, at smaller than 20MP sizes, I'm content with the results.

Not to say in the future, I wont shift back to RAW.

Click to expand...

Well I can only encourage you to at least get PSE as you have capture some really great images that I've seen that truly could have benefited PP with PSE or other good quality photo imaging software.

IMHO using FSIV to edit FZ1000 JPG images is similar to paying $800 for a high quality stereo tuner/ amplifier then buying a pair of inexpensive $14.95 speakers. ;-)

Cheers,
Jon

You make some good points, Jon!

Thanks..and my wallet is now $59.00 less.....just bought PSE 14 !

P.S. how cut back is the ACR version in PSE, compared to PS ?

Thanks again

ANAYV

Jon_T · Dec 1, 2015

ANAYV said:
...You make some good points, Jon!

Thanks..and my wallet is now $59.00 less.....just bought PSE 14 !

P.S. how cut back is the ACR version in PSE, compared to PS ?

Do not know about PSE14 as I'm still using PSE12 with ACR 8.5, and per the PSE12 on-line Help HERE, PSE12/ Camera RAW does not have:

The Tools Photoshop Elements does not have:
• Color Sampler Tool
• Targeted Adjustment Tool
• Spot Removal
• Adjustment Brush
• Graduated Filter

Image Adjustment Tabs Photoshop Elements does not have:
• Tone Curve
• HSL / Grayscale
• Split Toning
• Lens Corrections
• Presets
• Snapshots

With some of my DSLR lenses the "Lens Corrections" are the tools I wish were included, and have used the PTLens plug-in to correct lens pincushion/barrel distortion, vignetting, chromatic aberration, and perspective, and have used NeatImage plug-in for better NR and sharpening results.

ANAYV said:
Thanks again

You're more than welcome.

Below are couple FZ1K RAW images I converted to DNG files compatible with PSE12 and PP with PSE12:

I also recently bought PSE14 (& PE14) as for PP JPG, and for PP tools not in DxO Optics Pro 10. Due to current price reduction, the purchase price $89 vs $119 upgrade price from Adobe.com.

Cheers,
Jon

Jon_T · Dec 3, 2015

Just a FYI when I edit JPG images with PSE I open the images in PSE using:
File > Open in Camera RAW you get most of the editing tools as if opening/ PP a RAW file.

See my post HERE.

Cheers,
Jon

ANAYV · Dec 4, 2015

Rodger1943 said:
Impressive result ANAYV. I have never pushed the camera that high in the ISO settings. As JonT pointed out though, high ISO works better in good light than low light. This image appears to be in reasonable light, but I still think it looks great even at 25000.

ANAYV · Dec 4, 2015

XVOYAGERX said:
Thanks ANAYV, I used Topaz De-Noise, you can download a free 30 day no holes barred trial of the software, however i think you would need one of the Adobe and/or PSP programs as the Topaz are plug-in programs and not stand alone.

Cheers my friend,

Allan.

Thanks Allan.

Just bought PSE14, so next I will look at Topaz plug in for noise reduction.

ANAYV

Search

FZ1000 detail and noise @iso 6400 and higher

ANAYV

Forum Pro

Jon_T

Veteran Member

ANAYV

Forum Pro

XVOYAGERX

Senior Member

bill hansen

Forum Pro

ANAYV

Forum Pro

Jon_T

Veteran Member

Rodger1943

Forum Pro

XVOYAGERX

Senior Member

bill hansen

Forum Pro

XVOYAGERX

Senior Member

ANAYV

Forum Pro

damian5000

Senior Member

ANAYV

Forum Pro

Jon_T

Veteran Member

Jon_T

Veteran Member

ANAYV

Forum Pro

ANAYV

Forum Pro

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts