Sl2 improved in low light high iso over sl1?

mdandreas wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

mdandreas wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

mdandreas wrote:

This website indicates that the SL2/200D is about 1/3 stop better at high ISO than the SL1/100D or T2i/550D.

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%20100D,Canon%20EOS%20200D,Canon%20EOS%20550D

That's only in Dynamic Range.

Noise is an important limiting factor for determining Dynamic Range

Sure it is, but they are not the same thing.

I've found a full stop improvement in ISO Noise with the 24 MP Dual Pixel sensor over the older 18 MP sensors in actual shooting.

There may be other factors involved in your improvement. Perhaps noise filtering is a bit heavier with some loss of detail.

Well I admit to being a Pixel-Peeper. I view all of my images at 100% as I check for critical focus. I have noise reduction turned off both in-camera and in DPP (my RAW converter). Likewise with sharpening and all other processing such as DLO, HTP, etc etc. I only do selective noise reduction later on in Post if it's needed, and save sharpening for last after any cropping or resizing, as sharpening needs to be scaled to final image dimensions.

With this improved 24 MP Dual Pixel sensor it becomes clear very quickly that you can use a stop higher ISO and still maintain the same level of image quality. Or instead, you can leave the ISO the same and crop further into the image if desired (which I find very useful when birding).

All of this has been borne out with actual shooting. Many tens of thousands of images in my case, going back to the 18 MP 650D (same sensor as the SL1). Others have experienced the same improvements.

R2

Looking at page 6 of the SL2 review article: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-sl2-eos-200d-review/6, one can compare images from the SL2 vs the SL1.

The thread topic is on "high ISO" which I define as >800. RAW images taken with the SL2 are clearly better than the images from the SL1 taken at the same ISO setting. But RAW images taken with the SL2 are not as good as the SL1 images taken with an ISO setting one stop lower. (I did not compare JPGs due to the unknown difference of sharpening and noise filtering between cameras.)

I reject your assessment that "you can use a stop higher ISO and still maintain the same level of image quality". It might be more than 1/3 of a stop but it's still less than a stop.

You have to do a proper comparison (which I outlined in my next post), then you'll see the light. 

R2