-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Opinion - Ending the M a Mistake
- Thread starter SkipJG
- Start date
So I too see the issue - but with Lightroom and default sharpening, do also see noise at ISO 200 on my M6II in blue sky. A bit of sharpening can be needed on the 18-150 as in some situations; it's a nice lens but not the very sharpest. With say the 32mm, no sharpening often needed. I find the default LR sharpening really pulls makes noise notable.
If If turn down the sharpening down a little in LR, "problem" normally much mitigated.
Assume you will have Canon DPP? Not great software, but I reckon if you put these RAWs through DPP, you'll see a difference and less noise.
DxO PL6 I know costs, but I find even without Deep Prime is better than LR for the M6II with just a small amount of little HQ noise reduction. Deep Prime for me though gives amazing pixel level results at iso 800 and good above.
I saw on LR, pixel level noise on the M6II at ISO 200 as the same as pixel level noise on my 5DSR at ISO 400 with Lightoom with the same processing and default settings - e.g. the M6II is one stop worse in IQ at the pixel level in LR at the same settings. It kind of makes sense since the pixels are smaller - smaller even than most micro four thirds cameras like the Olympus's.
I do think with the M6II IMHO - Lightroom is part of the problem. Blue skies are an issue in LR and the M6II - IMHO
If If turn down the sharpening down a little in LR, "problem" normally much mitigated.
Assume you will have Canon DPP? Not great software, but I reckon if you put these RAWs through DPP, you'll see a difference and less noise.
DxO PL6 I know costs, but I find even without Deep Prime is better than LR for the M6II with just a small amount of little HQ noise reduction. Deep Prime for me though gives amazing pixel level results at iso 800 and good above.
I saw on LR, pixel level noise on the M6II at ISO 200 as the same as pixel level noise on my 5DSR at ISO 400 with Lightoom with the same processing and default settings - e.g. the M6II is one stop worse in IQ at the pixel level in LR at the same settings. It kind of makes sense since the pixels are smaller - smaller even than most micro four thirds cameras like the Olympus's.
I do think with the M6II IMHO - Lightroom is part of the problem. Blue skies are an issue in LR and the M6II - IMHO
R2D2
Forum Pro
Bingo. Problem solved. The problem is not the camera, it’s the processing.
DxO Photolab is the cure. Noise doesn’t even factor into my thinking any more. Seriously.
R2
--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries
Last edited:
M4Mobility
Senior Member
I have never seen anything like this in my picks and I am also using LR.OK. I exported a few of the photos.
I think the airplane is the most disappointing because I was hoping to crop and print that, but the noise is pretty bad all over - in the sky and on the plane itself - at ISO 200. I know I can denoise, but I never had to denoise pictures taken under equivalent conditions with my D5600.
To me the plane looks underexposed.
Also, ISO200 in all the shots. Do you use Highlight Tone Priority by any chance?
A tip: If you you are using sharpening in Lightroom, you should also apply some masking in shots like this. That may reduce the noise in skies and other "flat" surfaces.
My M6II photos looks actually very good in LR. There is no more noise than with my other APS-C cameras (when viewed at the same output size (picture level)).
--
- M
“I ain't afraid of no noise.”
Last edited:
Dareshooter
Veteran Member
That could be relevant here. If HTP was enabled Lightroom doesn’t recognise it so any shots coming in will appear one stop underexposed so could possibly exacerbate any noise already present.I have never seen anything like this in my picks and I am also using LR.OK. I exported a few of the photos.
I think the airplane is the most disappointing because I was hoping to crop and print that, but the noise is pretty bad all over - in the sky and on the plane itself - at ISO 200. I know I can denoise, but I never had to denoise pictures taken under equivalent conditions with my D5600.
To me the plane looks underexposed.
Also, ISO200 in all the shots. Do you use Highlight Tone Priority by any chance?
Couple of remarks here, if I may:OK. I exported a few of the photos.
I think the airplane is the most disappointing because I was hoping to crop and print that, but the noise is pretty bad all over - in the sky and on the plane itself - at ISO 200. I know I can denoise, but I never had to denoise pictures taken under equivalent conditions with my D5600.
- you should go all the way to 150mm on your lens. Being at 118mm you are wasting the sensor resolution and create unnecessary need for a bigger crop than needed
- there is no need for f/10 for such a shot. Just go for let us say 2/3 EV of stopping down your lens from wide opened for better rendering and that is it
- there is no need for 1/500s shutter time for this basically static object (if you pan with the plane). Your lens has IS so even at 150mm you would be way more than comfortable with 1/200s or even 1/100s.
- the both above would allow you to set the ISO to 100 to keep the noise down
- and the picture is underexposed by a stop or more which also helps the noise to be more visible.
Good exposure with logically matching exposure values are the key to keep the noise down.
The shot was taken on a hurry on a boat during a river cruise. I needed the faster shutter speed because the boat was bouncing to heck. I think I was in Tv mode because of that.
But that's not the point. I know how to get somewhat better exposure, but that situation didn't allow for it.
The exposure has nothing to do with the noise level, though. The sky is plenty bright and noisy and heck.
But that's not the point. I know how to get somewhat better exposure, but that situation didn't allow for it.
The exposure has nothing to do with the noise level, though. The sky is plenty bright and noisy and heck.
M4Mobility
Senior Member
So don't complain about the camera then, complain about the boat (or the river).
Of course the exposure has something to do with the noise level.
--
- M
“I ain't afraid of no noise.”
Last edited:
I understand. So for keeping 1/500s you'd select one stop faster aperture (from f/10 to f/7.1) and one stop lower ISO (from 200 to 100).
See above.
Well, the exposure has direct impact on the noise level. Doubling the ISO doubles the noise (not precisely but for a basic understanding you can take it this way).
Larry Rexley
Senior Member
Agree. Here's a re-post of my osprey image taken at ISO 3200 and pushed in DxO PhotoLab 6.0 by +3 EV to an amazing ISO 25,600, with a similar blue sky.
I cropped it, but it is full pixel resolution on the M6ii's 32 MP sensor, not downsampled.
Canon M6ii, Canon EF-S 55-250 IS STM (rear mount modded from EF-S to EF) + Kenko 1.5x Teleplus SHQ, 250mm x 1.5, f5.6 x 1.5, 1/1600s, ISO 3200 pushed +3 EV to ISO 25,600 in post using DxO Photolab 6, Deep Prime XD de-noise, sharpened, max CA applied
Here's the original image pushed +3 EV in DxO PL6 but with no sharpening, no CA correction, and no de-noise at all, for reference:
Canon M6ii, Canon EF-S 55-250 IS STM (rear mount modded from EF-S to EF) + Kenko 1.5x Teleplus SHQ, 250mm x 1.5, f5.6 x 1.5, 1/1600s, ISO 3200 pushed +3 EV to ISO 25,600 in post using DxO Photolab 6, no sharpening, CA, or de-noise applied
Original post
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65850543
Last edited:
Thank you for the detailed response.
I used two other Canon cameras on the same trip (an M200 and G9x) and neither's RAWs are markedly noisy when opened in the same Lightroom settings. Nor are photos from my D5600 from past trips.
I will try to check out DPP 4 after work. I can post this response on my lunch break, but I can't download any software here.
I'm not worried about how to fix the photos. I know that denoising software is now pretty amazing, and I know how to do it when needed. I also have many clean shots from my M200 (spouse was using) at the same locations and times that I can use instead when I put together the vacation photo book.
I haven't noticed any loss of sharpness at at f/8 or f/10 with the 22 pancake, but my 18-150 mm seems to always be soft at any aperture. I usually don't worry at stops below f/14 (I definitely saw the issue when I accidentally locked the ISO at 400 in bright sun and the aperture went to f/16 to compensate), but I will try to be more cautious if I start using my M6ii more again.
If f/8 is already showing diffraction in your experience, that seems like a strike against any sensor with such a dense pixel count. F/8 is considered the "standard" aperture for many situations, especially landscapes. Even 60 MP FF sensors don't have that problem, although the M6ii's (and R7's) pixels are smaller than the A7R5's.
I made sure that lightroom did not do any corrections for these exports because the purpose was to show you the uncorrected RAW as best I could.
There was no polarizer or any other filter at all on the lenses in these shots.
I don't have anywhere convenient to host the RAW publicly, but I can assure you that Lightroom wasn't doing anything. I specifically made sure everything was turned off so Lightroom was just serving as a viewer/JPEG converter with no changes made to the image (because the purpose of this was to show you what the unaltered RAWs look like).
I used two other Canon cameras on the same trip (an M200 and G9x) and neither's RAWs are markedly noisy when opened in the same Lightroom settings. Nor are photos from my D5600 from past trips.
I did not capture OOC JPEGs for these images. I almost never shoot in JPEG because so much of my photography is in difficult lighting (vacation photography forces you into mid-day sun, walking/river cruising in and out of shade, etc.) that I usually need to correct highlights and shadows at a minimum.
I will try to check out DPP 4 after work. I can post this response on my lunch break, but I can't download any software here.
I'm not worried about how to fix the photos. I know that denoising software is now pretty amazing, and I know how to do it when needed. I also have many clean shots from my M200 (spouse was using) at the same locations and times that I can use instead when I put together the vacation photo book.
I did not do any sharpening on these images, but I appreciate the tip.
I haven't noticed any loss of sharpness at at f/8 or f/10 with the 22 pancake, but my 18-150 mm seems to always be soft at any aperture. I usually don't worry at stops below f/14 (I definitely saw the issue when I accidentally locked the ISO at 400 in bright sun and the aperture went to f/16 to compensate), but I will try to be more cautious if I start using my M6ii more again.
If f/8 is already showing diffraction in your experience, that seems like a strike against any sensor with such a dense pixel count. F/8 is considered the "standard" aperture for many situations, especially landscapes. Even 60 MP FF sensors don't have that problem, although the M6ii's (and R7's) pixels are smaller than the A7R5's.
Larry Rexley
Senior Member
Sorry to hear your 18-150mm seems to be soft. The general consensus seems to be it's a relatively sharp lens for being a superzoom, and that has been my experience, that it's slightly sharper than the already pretty good EF-S 18-135mm IS STM I had previously.
Most copies of the 18-150 seem to be pretty good but I have heard of a few soft copies, perhaps you have one. My copy has a soft upper left corner at f3.5 at the 18mm end, but stop it down to f5 and it's quite sharp across the frame throughout its range, and I'm quite pleased with it, especially for 4k video where it's super useful in daylight.
When shooting with the 18-150, I do increase the global sharpness a bit almost automatically. It may also depend on the lens corrections applied during post, I've found that DxO Photolab's built-in lens corrections are very good, and DPP 4 as well.
I've tested most of my APS-C lenses pretty extensively, and using the M6ii nearly all of them are at peak sharpness around f5.6-8, with the sharpness starting to fall off at the pixel level due to diffraction by f11. This lines up with expectations using diffraction calculators with the M6ii's pixel size.
Most native APS-C primes (Canon, Sigma, Viltrox, Rokinon) get very sharp by around f2.8 or so and are reasonably sharp even wide open. A few exceptional ones such as the Canon 32mm f1.4 & Rokinon 12mm f2 (MF) are super sharp wide open.
Last edited:
I do not use highlight tone priority. All of the shots in this set are at ISO200 because I selected them as demonstrative of the low-ISO noise I see from my M6ii. I did take photos at various ISOs on that trip. Noise is at least this bad in all of them, but it is most obvious without pixel peeping in photos involving bright skies.I have never seen anything like this in my picks and I am also using LR.OK. I exported a few of the photos.
I think the airplane is the most disappointing because I was hoping to crop and print that, but the noise is pretty bad all over - in the sky and on the plane itself - at ISO 200. I know I can denoise, but I never had to denoise pictures taken under equivalent conditions with my D5600.
To me the plane looks underexposed.
Also, ISO200 in all the shots. Do you use Highlight Tone Priority by any chance?
A tip: If you you are using sharpening in Lightroom, you should also apply some masking in shots like this. That may reduce the noise in skies and other "flat" surfaces.
My M6II photos looks actually very good in LR. There is no more noise than with my other APS-C cameras (when viewed at the same output size (picture level)).
I did no editing at all for this particular JPEG export (the purpose was specifically to show what the RAW looked like initially).
I'm glad to hear that your M6ii doesn't do this. Maybe my sensor is a noisy lemon. I don't think it's my LR because a) I have no issues with RAWs from 5 other cameras (G16, G9x, M200, D5500 and D5600) and b) I've now opened these files in LrC and a fresh download of Lr with the same results.
Given the differences in our experiences, should I try to send my camera back to Canon? It is still under warranty.
Last edited:
It's underexposed by around 1/2 of a stop and I haven't adjusted shadows or done anything that might be expected to accentuate noise. If a camera can't handle a slight underexposure on a bright day at low ISO (so I can fix a small mistake by boosting shadows), well, that's another strike against the camera's crap sensor!
Furthermore, I was in Tv mode for this shot with no exposure compensation. This is the exposure my M6ii decided was correct. So that's yet another strike against my lousy camera.
Furthermore, I was in Tv mode for this shot with no exposure compensation. This is the exposure my M6ii decided was correct. So that's yet another strike against my lousy camera.
Yes, I could have done better given time to fiddle with settings in manual mode. I wasn't in manual mode. I set the shutter speed and the camera chose the other settings. The noise level is bizarrely high for the given settings NO MATTER HOW OR WHY THEY WERE SET.
ISO 200 isn't supposed to be noisy. It's not this noisy on my decade-old G16. It's not this noisy on my M200 or D5600.
Why are you blaming me for the crap performance of my equipment?
I opened it in lightroom classic and then in a fresh download of lightroom on a different computer just to make sure I hadn't screwed up a setting in LrC. Same noise in both (the export happens to be from the fresh Lr).
Well you are talking ISO 400 equiv - which in my experience is the same on the M6II as ~ ISO 800 on a larger pixel, lower density camera noise-wise at pixel level - e.g. so at pixel level I would expect a little noise.
What does it look like with LR sharpening set to zero? Or still some sharpening with smaller radius and a small amount of luminance noise reduction? Now standard noise reduction on LR is poor, but I suspect with tweak of these - reduced amount, smaller radius and a bit more masking coupled with small amount of luminance noise it would look a lot better.
I don't think he is - just trying to help.
Let us know perhaps how DPP looks - or with slightly different Lightroom settings with sharp Canon lenses. The M6II is good but is in effect at pixel level a dense small pixel micro four thirds camera.
(I either tolerate a little noise - or use DXO).
Quite impressive R2, but I think the AI is showing up issues here - not salvageable for the pixel peepers with some clear smearing and unnatural artefacts - but yes on less extreme cases really good what can be done.
No need to be in M for shooting at ISO100 ;-) .
I am not blaming you. Just describing which exposure settings and why would be more suitable for such a shot and which would bring less noise.
Also using your full zoom would significantly increase number of pixels per object so the noise would be less apparent.
you need to download the free Canon DPP and post these same photos running them through DPPI do not use highlight tone priority. All of the shots in this set are at ISO200 because I selected them as demonstrative of the low-ISO noise I see from my M6ii. I did take photos at various ISOs on that trip. Noise is at least this bad in all of them, but it is most obvious without pixel peeping in photos involving bright skies.I have never seen anything like this in my picks and I am also using LR.OK. I exported a few of the photos.
I think the airplane is the most disappointing because I was hoping to crop and print that, but the noise is pretty bad all over - in the sky and on the plane itself - at ISO 200. I know I can denoise, but I never had to denoise pictures taken under equivalent conditions with my D5600.
To me the plane looks underexposed.
Also, ISO200 in all the shots. Do you use Highlight Tone Priority by any chance?
A tip: If you you are using sharpening in Lightroom, you should also apply some masking in shots like this. That may reduce the noise in skies and other "flat" surfaces.
My M6II photos looks actually very good in LR. There is no more noise than with my other APS-C cameras (when viewed at the same output size (picture level)).
I did no editing at all for this particular JPEG export (the purpose was specifically to show what the RAW looked like initially).
I'm glad to hear that your M6ii doesn't do this. Maybe my sensor is a noisy lemon. I don't think it's my LR because a) I have no issues with RAWs from 5 other cameras (G16, G9x, M200, D5500 and D5600) and b) I've now opened these files in LrC and a fresh download of Lr with the same results.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum