E-1 noise at high ISO

Hello,

I went through Phil's E-1 review and was disturbed at the noisy images at higher ISOs. I know the review is preliminary, but I need to shoot in dim lighting a lot and that level of noise is simply not an option for me.

I like everything I hear about the E-1; I use the E-20 and the slow response time and small buffer are terrible problems for me. If the E-1 is a fast camera that I can use for sports and events I would consider getting one. Otherwise I have to move to the D1x or D2 (I don't want to do Fuji S2 or Nikon D100, for a bunch of reasons). But all that noise at 1600...simply NOT okay for my kind of shoots.

If anyone can reassure me, I'm all ears! otherwise I guess I'll have to wait for the "real" model's release.

Cheers, Maya in NH

thanks for picking up this issue maya. that's the main issue bothering me. everything else speaks clearly for the e-1

the dp.now samples at high iso as well dont look encouraging.

I myself am sure that they chose this 5 mp sensor because it gives olympus the best possible options also regarding low noise at higher iso. when they want to compete with higher models than the d10 and the d100, they have no choice than being better at higher iso. I am still expecting something in the range of the s2.

oly's just fine tuning the firmwares, algorythms and so on.

but to be on the safe side, you must wait for two or three reviews with production models. but in a month or so from now that issue should be clear.

but I'm confident that the e-1 will deliver.

Daniel Kestenholz said:

I myself am sure that they chose this 5 mp sensor because it gives
olympus the best possible options also regarding low noise at
higher iso. when they want to compete with higher models than the
d10 and the d100, they have no choice than being better at higher
iso. I am still expecting something in the range of the s2.

Click to expand...

which higher models are you referring to?

i don't think you can expect the E1 to be better than the S2 in the high iso range, because that's not what the E1 is for.

the E1 is positioned to compete with the 10D, d100 in areas where they can't deliver, namely weight, WA support, sealed body, auto sensor cleaning, full frame viewfinder, 12 frame buffer, USB2.0, firewire, etc.

if you want high iso performance, then go with the 10d, d100, etc because that's their strength.

i would go for the E1 simply because i don't shoot at high iso for my work, but rather look for light weight and fast processing of images, which the E1 excels.

regards,

clifford

you may be right clifford, but I guess if higher iso would not be of importance for olympus' pro line, they would go with higher pixel output.

there lies some compromise in the 5 mp sensor.

as we can see from the formula 1 samples, iso 100 quality is outstanding.

and let's not forget. shooting at higher iso with some grain/noise is not unattractive.

with softwares like neat image noise-traces would anyway disappear.

more and more, I think I am getting ready to get that cam - with the 14-54 and 50-200 lenses.

would be happier with full aperture at 2.8, but then again, oly knows what they are doing. they are not going for imaging quality compromises when they launch a "new way" of photography.

and at the end of the day, we all know it, its one's shooting quality and not so much the hardware that will deliver. no more excuses therefore if you're shooting with the e-1!

Daniel, thanks for the encouragement to wait...my local pro shop had an E1 a couple of weeks ago and the guys LOVED it. They said it was heavy, durable, and FAST. It felt good to them. They know that I am about to buy either the D1x or D2, and yet they kept telling me to wait and try the E1. I think that's a huge vote of confidence from people who tend to be kind of cynical about cameras because they repair them and play with really nice, pricey ones all the time.

I really want to wait. The price is better, and it's better IMO to have a separate set of lenses for my digital camera. I'd like to keep my Nikkors on my F100 and leave them there LOL.

But for example, if you do any weddings, you want the fast action AND the ability to enlarge. Wedding lighting is often very dim. I just can't enlarge something THAT grainy.

Anyway...I'll hang around here and let y'all convince me to keep waiting!

Thanks, Maya in NH

Maya Rushing Walker said:

Hello,

I went through Phil's E-1 review and was disturbed at the noisy
images at higher ISOs. I know the review is preliminary, but I
need to shoot in dim lighting a lot and that level of noise is
simply not an option for me.

I like everything I hear about the E-1; I use the E-20 and the slow
response time and small buffer are terrible problems for me. If
the E-1 is a fast camera that I can use for sports and events I
would consider getting one. Otherwise I have to move to the D1x or
D2 (I don't want to do Fuji S2 or Nikon D100, for a bunch of
reasons). But all that noise at 1600...simply NOT okay for my kind
of shoots.

If anyone can reassure me, I'm all ears! otherwise I guess I'll
have to wait for the "real" model's release.

Cheers, Maya in NH

Click to expand...

I'm with you, Maya. I also shoot professionally, with a Canon 1Ds, and am so intriqued with the E1 that I'm considering buying one as another backup camera. High ISO performance is going to make or break the deal for me because there are situations where ISO 1600 (or better yet, 3200) is very useful. Using C1, my 1Ds is fairly clean at 1250 and my 10D is good at 1600 and sometimes useable at 3200. I lost a large sale of stock contra dancing pictures (to Yankee Magazine) two years ago because they were shot with a D30 and had too much noise at ISO 1600. There are many situations, of course, where flash is not the right solution and I'm sure some casual photographers don't realize that.

So, here's hoping the E-1 can perform at high ISO. Otherwise, for my purposes, the Canon 10D is best as a back up camera. Certainly, there are many photographers who never need higher ISO, I'm just not one of them.

Cheers,

Sean Reid (in VT)
Northeastern Imaging

What if the images clean up really well with post processing? Take this with a grain of salt, but Oly says their policy with the E-1 is to not let noise reduction cause issues with other areas of image quality. If true, then high ISO images should clean up really well (of course, at the expense of some detail -- noticeable or not). Also, the noise filter option may be there for those that would prefer clean images. Every camera has some sort of noise reduction built in, and they get tuned to the manufacturer's philosophy on image quality. It looks like Oly's philosophy is to not let noise reduction harm color detail or sharpness.

Sean Reid said:

Maya Rushing Walker said:

Hello,

I went through Phil's E-1 review and was disturbed at the noisy
images at higher ISOs. I know the review is preliminary, but I
need to shoot in dim lighting a lot and that level of noise is
simply not an option for me.

I like everything I hear about the E-1; I use the E-20 and the slow
response time and small buffer are terrible problems for me. If
the E-1 is a fast camera that I can use for sports and events I
would consider getting one. Otherwise I have to move to the D1x or
D2 (I don't want to do Fuji S2 or Nikon D100, for a bunch of
reasons). But all that noise at 1600...simply NOT okay for my kind
of shoots.

If anyone can reassure me, I'm all ears! otherwise I guess I'll
have to wait for the "real" model's release.

Cheers, Maya in NH

Click to expand...

I'm with you, Maya. I also shoot professionally, with a Canon 1Ds,
and am so intriqued with the E1 that I'm considering buying one as
another backup camera. High ISO performance is going to make or
break the deal for me because there are situations where ISO 1600
(or better yet, 3200) is very useful. Using C1, my 1Ds is fairly
clean at 1250 and my 10D is good at 1600 and sometimes useable at
3200. I lost a large sale of stock contra dancing pictures (to
Yankee Magazine) two years ago because they were shot with a D30
and had too much noise at ISO 1600. There are many situations, of
course, where flash is not the right solution and I'm sure some
casual photographers don't realize that.

So, here's hoping the E-1 can perform at high ISO. Otherwise, for
my purposes, the Canon 10D is best as a back up camera.
Certainly, there are many photographers who never need higher ISO,
I'm just not one of them.

Cheers,

Sean Reid (in VT)
Northeastern Imaging

Click to expand...

--
dgrogers

http://www.pbase.com/drog

After having used the E-1 one month ago, I would definately warn people from judging this camera by too early samples. Oly seems to be working hard with firmware, and it simply isn't possible to draw any conclusions before the camera is shipping, which will be very soon.

The camera has both a long exposure NR mode and a general NR setting in-camera, the latter is off by default, compared with many other DSLRs who set this option on by default or it is always in use (somtimes variable with changing ISO settings). Shooting RAW files (I have RAW files but no software yet to process them) will give users 2 different opportunities:

1. Using the Viewer software shipping with the camera, which will more or less process files like in-camera processing to JPG or TIFF.

2. Using the optional Studio software which expands the options considerably. Seems like a truly pro software with much better NR and RAW converting than in-camera.

As always, before judging. Is the image shot in JPG? Which NR setting? Which firmware? If RAW, which converter and what settings?

We may well look into a surprise. Wait and see.

Toralf

dgrogers said:

Sean Reid said:

Maya Rushing Walker said:

Hello,

I went through Phil's E-1 review and was disturbed at the noisy
images at higher ISOs. I know the review is preliminary, but I
need to shoot in dim lighting a lot and that level of noise is
simply not an option for me.

I like everything I hear about the E-1; I use the E-20 and the slow
response time and small buffer are terrible problems for me. If
the E-1 is a fast camera that I can use for sports and events I
would consider getting one. Otherwise I have to move to the D1x or
D2 (I don't want to do Fuji S2 or Nikon D100, for a bunch of
reasons). But all that noise at 1600...simply NOT okay for my kind
of shoots.

If anyone can reassure me, I'm all ears! otherwise I guess I'll
have to wait for the "real" model's release.

Cheers, Maya in NH

Click to expand...

I'm with you, Maya. I also shoot professionally, with a Canon 1Ds,
and am so intriqued with the E1 that I'm considering buying one as
another backup camera. High ISO performance is going to make or
break the deal for me because there are situations where ISO 1600
(or better yet, 3200) is very useful. Using C1, my 1Ds is fairly
clean at 1250 and my 10D is good at 1600 and sometimes useable at
3200. I lost a large sale of stock contra dancing pictures (to
Yankee Magazine) two years ago because they were shot with a D30
and had too much noise at ISO 1600. There are many situations, of
course, where flash is not the right solution and I'm sure some
casual photographers don't realize that.

So, here's hoping the E-1 can perform at high ISO. Otherwise, for
my purposes, the Canon 10D is best as a back up camera.
Certainly, there are many photographers who never need higher ISO,
I'm just not one of them.

Cheers,

Sean Reid (in VT)
Northeastern Imaging

Click to expand...

--
dgrogers

http://www.pbase.com/drog

Click to expand...

--
---
Toralf Sandåker, writer and consultant, Norway
Technique Editor, Fotografi

Sean Reid said:

I lost a large sale of stock contra dancing pictures (to
Yankee Magazine) two years ago because they were shot with a D30
and had too much noise at ISO 1600.

Click to expand...

Since you have experience with this issue, I'd thought you might be able to offer some real world experience.

Have you found that stock agencies will commonly accept the smaller files from cameras such as the D30, if noise is not an issue? I've always been under the impression that they turn these smaller files down.
Thanks.

--
markE
pbase supporter

'In wildness lies the preservation of the world.'
-Henry David Thoreau
-Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/marke/gallery/wingsoflight

My tip is simply give them what they want. If they want a 30 meg RGB file, rez it up and give it to them. If they want slides, print it to a slide. They won't be disappointed.

Toralf

markE said:

Sean Reid said:

I lost a large sale of stock contra dancing pictures (to
Yankee Magazine) two years ago because they were shot with a D30
and had too much noise at ISO 1600.

Click to expand...

Since you have experience with this issue, I'd thought you might be
able to offer some real world experience.
Have you found that stock agencies will commonly accept the smaller
files from cameras such as the D30, if noise is not an issue? I've
always been under the impression that they turn these smaller files
down.
Thanks.

--
markE
pbase supporter

'In wildness lies the preservation of the world.'
-Henry David Thoreau
-Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/marke/gallery/wingsoflight

Click to expand...

--
---
Toralf Sandåker, writer and consultant, Norway
Technique Editor, Fotografi

Toralf Sandåker said:

My tip is simply give them what they want. If they want a 30 meg
RGB file, rez it up and give it to them. If they want slides, print
it to a slide. They won't be disappointed.

Click to expand...

Thank you very much for your reply.
Is this a common practice? (rezzing up)

--
markE
pbase supporter

'In wildness lies the preservation of the world.'
-Henry David Thoreau
-Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/marke/gallery/wingsoflight

markE said:

Sean Reid said:

I lost a large sale of stock contra dancing pictures (to
Yankee Magazine) two years ago because they were shot with a D30
and had too much noise at ISO 1600.

Click to expand...

Since you have experience with this issue, I'd thought you might be
able to offer some real world experience.
Have you found that stock agencies will commonly accept the smaller
files from cameras such as the D30, if noise is not an issue? I've
always been under the impression that they turn these smaller files
down.
Thanks.

--
markE
pbase supporter

Click to expand...

I'm afraid I don't know about stock agencies as I've always dealt directly with photo editors or art directors. In the case of Yankee, I had been working on the contra dancing pictures for some time (documentary - self assigned - my own stock) and they were on my web site. The photo editor at Yankee heard about the project, looked at the pictures online and then wanted to use quite a few of them for an article. The noise problem killed the deal but I never could have made the series with flash - it's too disruptive to the dancers and flash lighting would have been wrong for what I wanted.

A couple years ago, many magazines were very suspicious about the quality of digital capture but I've sold quite a few pictures made with the D30 to magazines, text book companies, tourism promoters, etc. In fact, a picture I made in Nova Scotia with a Nikon 950 (it was all I had with me at the time) ran full page in "Rider" which is a national motorcycle magazine, and it looked pretty good.

My rule of thumb is to always carry a camera with me which could, if need be, produce a "publishable" file. You never know when something you make might be of commercial interest to someone even when you're just shooting for pleasure and to satisfy your own interest. My primary commercial photo work is of architecture and clients are very happy with the files out of the 1Ds. In general, one can be pretty confident that those files can be used just about anywhere and be up to snuff. But I also carry a little Sony DSC-V1 with me in a jacket pocket and (sharpness and contrast set to low) it'll produce a useable file that could be sold.

So I'm sorry that I can't answer the stock agency question specifically but I hope the above is of use.

Cheers,

Sean Reid
Northeastern Imaging

Now that I'm thinking about it, I just pulled up some of those D30 1600 ISO files and compared them to the ISO 1600 files I'm getting out the 10D. There's no doubt about it, the 10D files are dramatically cleaner. And sometimes being able to grab that extra stop or two makes all the difference. I process the 1Ds and 10D files in C1 which also helps. Neat Image, etc. can make some improvements in a noisy file but none of those programs can work miracles - basically the file has to be pretty good to start with.

I don't know the anglo-american markets at all. I know how Norwegian agencies and publishers work, and I have more than 25 years of experience in this business here. They most often act from prejudices and lack of knowledge on digital photography. Often, they can't tell the difference between scans and digital photos.

Personally, I frequently publish images from my Nikon CoolPix 5000 (5 Mp) up to full page in a photo magazine. I use JPGs at ca. 1,5 MB as digital originals. You won't tell the difference if the lightning and other parameters are OK. A 5-6 Mp DSLR would easily scale to a full spread.

No big deal, I think.

This is the 21st century, come on.

Toralf

markE said:

Toralf Sandåker said:

My tip is simply give them what they want. If they want a 30 meg
RGB file, rez it up and give it to them. If they want slides, print
it to a slide. They won't be disappointed.

Click to expand...

Thank you very much for your reply.
Is this a common practice? (rezzing up)

--
markE
pbase supporter

'In wildness lies the preservation of the world.'
-Henry David Thoreau
-Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/marke/gallery/wingsoflight

Click to expand...

--
---
Toralf Sandåker, writer and consultant, Norway
Technique Editor, Fotografi

Hi Sean,

I actually feel better now about the E1 after seeing the responses to my question! At a gut level that camera seems like a great option, especially with its own proprietary lenses. I will do a lot to avoid hassle, and having separate lenses will save brain cells during a shoot!

I am impressed that you work with Yankee...I am in NH and have had that one around the house for a long time. I would love to get into stock photography but I fear that I am not organized enough. I travel a great deal so it makes sense for me to catalogue my photos...I just haven't figured out how to do it so it doesn't take over my life.

I will be paying anxious attention to this forum to see if anyone can reassure me about the noise levels...I still use my E20 but never for anything where my subject moves!

Cheers, Maya in NH

Toralf, I'm sure you are right! I am waiting to see what comes up.

I love shooting in RAW! Amazing images. But with my E20 RAW is just too slow. I miss too many shots that way. I hope the E1 will let me shoot RAW quickly. I really do need to be able to shoot off at least 3-4 images quickly.

The S2 has low noise but it often has soft images, IMO. So I understand about the trade-off. I use Neat Image for noise reduction post-processing, but I really hate when I feel forced to use it on every single image. I need to do it for scanned negatives, but I never need it for low ISO images on the E20. I guess I am looking for something in between.

Appreciate everyone's input SO much!

Thanks, Maya in NH

I can assure you that RAW format doesn't slow shooting speed. The buffer is generous, and the internal computer seems up to the task. You can set the camera to record RAW+JPEG (any quality) and it will be just as fast, meaning ca. 3 fps with bursts up to 12 images. Also, the camera is responsive even when it saves to the card.

Saving a JPEG file (with or without RAW) means processing the image, so it's some task to achieve this. If you want a camera with better shooting performance, you need to pay the double.

Toralf

Maya Rushing Walker said:

Toralf, I'm sure you are right! I am waiting to see what comes up.

I love shooting in RAW! Amazing images. But with my E20 RAW is
just too slow. I miss too many shots that way. I hope the E1 will
let me shoot RAW quickly. I really do need to be able to shoot off
at least 3-4 images quickly.

The S2 has low noise but it often has soft images, IMO. So I
understand about the trade-off. I use Neat Image for noise
reduction post-processing, but I really hate when I feel forced to
use it on every single image. I need to do it for scanned
negatives, but I never need it for low ISO images on the E20. I
guess I am looking for something in between.

Appreciate everyone's input SO much!

Thanks, Maya in NH

Click to expand...

--
---
Toralf Sandåker, writer and consultant, Norway
Technique Editor, Fotografi

Toralf Sandåker said:

They most often act from
prejudices and lack of knowledge on digital photography.

Click to expand...

That's also the impression I get from talking to others here in the US.

Toralf Sandker said:

A 5-6 Mp DSLR would easily
scale to a full spread.

Click to expand...

That's what I've heard from other pros over here.

Toralf Sandker said:

This is the 21st century, come on.

Click to expand...

No kidding!

Thanks for your reply, and sharing your experience.

--
markE
pbase supporter

'In wildness lies the preservation of the world.'
-Henry David Thoreau
-Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/marke/gallery/wingsoflight

Sean Reid said:

Now that I'm thinking about it, I just pulled up some of those D30
1600 ISO files and compared them to the ISO 1600 files I'm getting
out the 10D. There's no doubt about it, the 10D files are
dramatically cleaner. And sometimes being able to grab that extra
stop or two makes all the difference. I process the 1Ds and 10D
files in C1 which also helps. Neat Image, etc. can make some
improvements in a noisy file but none of those programs can work
miracles - basically the file has to be pretty good to start with.

Click to expand...

--
markE
pbase supporter

'In wildness lies the preservation of the world.'
-Henry David Thoreau
-Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/marke/gallery/wingsoflight

Daniel Kestenholz said:

you may be right clifford, but I guess if higher iso would not be
of importance for olympus' pro line, they would go with higher
pixel output.

Click to expand...

in my opinion that's not what the E-1 is positioned for, i.e. low high iso shooting, because a lot of dslr can already do that. had the E-1 been positioned that way, people would say it's a "me too" camera, nothing new.

as for higher pixel output, there's always the question of price as it will affect the entire system design, like processing speed.

all in all, the E-1 is positioned for a new way of photography...the digital way.

regards,

clifford