T100 iso 1600 and 3200

[AAK]

Thank you for these posts, they are wonderful.
Your T100 seems to redefine the limits of the small sensor.

And I vehemently -disagree- with everyone who claimed your test was invalid and that you had to shoot pictures in the dead of night to prove the usefulness of the higher ISOs.

That's ridiculous.

The purpose of the higher ISOs is NOT to take underexposed pictures.

Your reshoot was underexposed for the camera settings. ALL underexposure, at any ISO, increases noise.

The test is how the camera performs when the ISO 1600 or ISO 3200 takes -properly exposed- shots. I'm not interested in high-ISO to get dark shots. I'm interested in high-ISO because I want the pictures to be bright and beautiful and because ISO 1600 or ISO 3200 allows me the correct exposure to get it right.

I have seen ISO 3200 pictures taken with the Canon 5D (one of the best high-iso cameras) that would be embarassing to print because the resultant picture was still underexposed and the noise was deafening!

In my opinion, your first two pictures were the better and more demonstrative ones, showing that you can get well-exposed, relatively detailed images at ISO 1600 without huge blotches of chroma noise or heavy smearing.

You've got some heavy noise (mostly luminnance, apparently) in the darkest shadows of a black object. Trust me, I can live with that!!!

Good work. Don't let the naysayers get you down.
Thank you for taking the time and effort that went into this.
--
=~ AAK - http://www.aakatz.com
=~ Author of The White Paper
=~ http://www.aakatz.com/whitepaper

 

[AAK]

That may have been a pre-production camera.

So far, all the high-ISO shots posted here from "real" cameras have been amazing for the small sensor!

BTW, more megapixels on the same sensor does not necessarily mean more noise. It depends on the sensor design, and the size they retain for the aperture (which gathers light) vs. the size of the entire pixel.

Sony has been improving its sensors with exactly this technology.

Also, even though you may gather less light, it is just as effective to minimize noise (that's what Canon does on its CMOS sensors) which Sony is also doing by shortening the pathways the analog information needs to travel to the A/D converter.

There are lots of variables.

In the past, I've had many digicams with many larger sensors. And yet, their noise was unbearable above ISO 100!

Times change, technology changes.

Let us know how you make out!

I'm still worried after seeing this post from a few days ago:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&message=22376526

We need some more low light images ! Also, how are the flash
images...dust spots? red eye?

--
=~ AAK - http://www.aakatz.com
=~ Author of The White Paper
=~ http://www.aakatz.com/whitepaper

 

[AAK]

Are you referring to the ones taken at moderate light levels (EV8)
or those taken at low light levels (EV2.9)?

The latter are not noiseless, in my view.

No they're not. But they're also underexposed, no? Especially compared to the first set.

This was not a good test. The test is to see how the camera performs when ISO 1600 and ISO 3200 give you good exposure, not bad.

Underexposure causes noise. Underexposure also causes you to raise the EV in post-processing and that really, really increases noise!!

If the latter two shots had been done to achieve the same exposure as the first two shots, now -that- would be a valid test!

--
=~ AAK - http://www.aakatz.com
=~ Author of The White Paper
=~ http://www.aakatz.com/whitepaper

 

[Diamond2a]

'Deafening imagae noise' I love that term, i'm going to have to start using it!
--
KM Dimage Z2
http://www.pbase.com/diamond2a

 

[Jerry Stevens]

The test is how the camera performs when the ISO 1600 or ISO 3200
takes -properly exposed- shots. I'm not interested in high-ISO to
get dark shots. I'm interested in high-ISO because I want the
pictures to be bright and beautiful and because ISO 1600 or ISO
3200 allows me the correct exposure to get it right.

I understand what you are saying, Alan, and agree with your points.

However, I do a good bit of museum, "NO FLASH ALLOWED" type shots in my travels overseas, and a number of these have maddeningly low-light exhibits, or exhibits in which the bulb is out over the very object you wish to try to capture, making the whole scene almost like a night shot. I still want a shot of that object. It's an important artifact and my only chance to have my own image so that I do not have to worry about scanning out of a book and begging copyright permissions for my own publications.

I am just saying a light-challened, underexposed shot is exactly what I get sometimes, because the museum guard is pushing me along ("Take your camera off the glass, sir!"), so I have no time to set up manually.

Jerry
--
Gerald L. Stevens

 

[mastermind]

The T100 were on sales here and I was testing out the T100 for my friend who wants a PnS for dummies that work well indoors. In fact, I was bragging about the fact that Sony is the only company that did it right with high ISO and SSS together while other rival companies most of the time just got one right.

I don't think they (the Sony promoters) will be so silly to put a pre-production camera that sucks in order to promote the boxes of great "real" cameras right behind. Especially when they took great efforts to promote their gears

When I first reviewed the photos it looked great on the T100 screen but when I look at it in my PC I saw all the heavy NR at work.



Then again, I may be wrong. Or that camera that I held was a lemon. Or its a problem with the subject that I took a picture of. I'm just doing a service by posting what I observed online if you don't want to believe it, that's fine but if you thought that it was "pre-production", perhaps you could just ask.

That may have been a pre-production camera.
So far, all the high-ISO shots posted here from "real" cameras have
been amazing for the small sensor!

--
=~ AAK - http://www.aakatz.com
=~ Author of The White Paper
=~ http://www.aakatz.com/whitepaper

--
Photo Gallery: http://community.webshots.com/user/sci00285

Photo Blog: http://simpleus.blogspot.com/

 

[AAK]

If the ISO 1600 and ISO3200 are as good as they look here (not perfect, but pretty impressive), you should be able to get good, well-exposed shots of your museum exhibits.

Jerry, that's my point. If you get underexposed images, you're going to get noise regardless of the camera or ISO capability.

But if you can get the right ISO so that you can open up the lens at a reasonable shutter speed, you won't have any setup issues to take time with, and you should be able to get much better pictures. The closer you get to properly exposed, the better. And with higher-ISO, you will get closer to proper exposure.

Believe me, you can have the best Canon DSLR and you will still get noise if your images are underexposed. I've seen it hundreds of times.

Unfortunately, I've done it too, with my Nikon D200.

My killer is when you get to the point that ISO 3200 still isn't good enough for good exposure, usually because I have someone moving onstage (dancer or other performer) and have to keep the shutter speed high.

The result is often disastrous.

However, your subjects don't move! It should be a piece of cake for you.

--
=~ AAK - http://www.aakatz.com
=~ Author of The White Paper
=~ http://www.aakatz.com/whitepaper

 

[AAK]

Sorry, John.
DPReview was wrong.
Of course, it also initially said the H9 had no movie mode or manual focus!!

Dpreview's news announcement of the T100 states in the specs that
it's a 7 megapixel camera.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0702/07022704sonyt100t20.asp
Sony Style however agrees with you that it's an 8 megapixel sensor.

http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_BrowseCatalog-Start?CategoryName=dcc_DIDigitalCameras_megapixels_8&Dept=cameras
--
John Dunn
My show 'Serenity': http://fototime.com/inv/6A04BAB6F082B6C

--
=~ AAK - http://www.aakatz.com
=~ Author of The White Paper
=~ http://www.aakatz.com/whitepaper

 

[AAK]

Now you've confused the heck out of me.

Both the picture you posted and the link are not to T100 shots. They're DSLR: Alpha 100 shots. Check the EXIF information.

If those were the pictures you were checking, you were checking the wrong camera!!!

I don't think they (the Sony promoters) will be so silly to put a
pre-production camera that sucks in order to promote the boxes of
great "real" cameras right behind. Especially when they took great
efforts to promote their gears

When I first reviewed the photos it looked great on the T100 screen
but when I look at it in my PC I saw all the heavy NR at work.



Then again, I may be wrong. Or that camera that I held was a lemon.
Or its a problem with the subject that I took a picture of. I'm
just doing a service by posting what I observed online if you don't
want to believe it, that's fine but if you thought that it was
"pre-production", perhaps you could just ask.

That may have been a pre-production camera.
So far, all the high-ISO shots posted here from "real" cameras have
been amazing for the small sensor!

--
=~ AAK - http://www.aakatz.com
=~ Author of The White Paper
=~ http://www.aakatz.com/whitepaper

--
Photo Gallery: http://community.webshots.com/user/sci00285

Photo Blog: http://simpleus.blogspot.com/

--
=~ AAK - http://www.aakatz.com
=~ Author of The White Paper
=~ http://www.aakatz.com/whitepaper

 

[Jerry Stevens]

However, your subjects don't move! It should be a piece of cake for
you.

Ha! Indeed. Sometimes I'm just moving too fast and forget my settings, though. That's why I know I am an amateur. But you are right. If I can slow down the shutter, the higher ISO capability should kick in well enough to help me get a decent exposure--when I can remain lucid in the moment with a guard breathing down my neck.

Jerry
--
Gerald L. Stevens

 

[mastermind]

Pal,

Yes, that's my A100 taking a photo of the aggressive Sony promoters to prove my point.

You want T100 picture.. you get T100 picture.

Was testing out the focusing ability of the T100 with this shot.



again at ISO1600.



100% crop



100% crop

Let's just pray that Sony knows how to spend money on marketing but does not know how to choose a non-lemon non-pre-production camera for us to try.
--
Photo Gallery: http://community.webshots.com/user/sci00285

Photo Blog: http://simpleus.blogspot.com/

 

[Jerry Stevens]

Pal,

Yes, that's my A100 taking a photo of the aggressive Sony promoters
to prove my point.

Sorry. I misread your post almost exactly like AAK. I thought the image you posted was supposed to be a T100 "for example" shot. EXIF just didn't make sense on that score. Sorry, but your wording and your image just did not seem to connect apparently as you intended.

Jerry
--
Gerald L. Stevens

 

[dehlers]

I think we should get the same results with that one also. Your pics look to be every bit as good or better than the Fuji F30.

 

[Mek]

T100 review on:

http://plusd.itmedia.co.jp/lifestyle/articles/0703/01/news012_4.html

;-)

 

[theranman]

Me rike Engrish reviews much betta.

Do they reach any kind of concrusion?

 

[zackiedawg]

Thanks for digging up that review.

That's the first opportunity I've had to look at the full 8MP resolution shots at ISO800 and ISO1600 in lower light situations to really see what the noise looks like.

The OP did a very nice job at showing what it can do in good light - but the largest size posted was 1024x768...But this site had several samples posted at 3264x2448 without any processing.

I for one am extremely optimistic with the advances they have made in in-camera processing. The ISO800 results are definately holding more detail than the H2/5s, maintaining color fidelity, and have almost completely eliminated chroma noise. And the ISO1600 is surprisingly usable for downsized prints or emergency use.

I can't wait to see the actual samples from the H9 - same sensor, different lens - since that's the camera I would be interested in.

Thanks again!

--
Justin
galleries: http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg

(I'd be honored and overjoyed to have any of my posted photographs critiqued, commented on, or post-processed - I can attribute everything I know about photography to the wonderful people who have done this for me in the past!)

 

[mamallama]

Me rike Engrish reviews much betta.

Mocking is not necessary.

--mamallama

 

[Kirwin]

I can't get this site to open up... and I have cable. Frustrating.

T100 review on:

http://plusd.itmedia.co.jp/lifestyle/articles/0703/01/news012_4.html

;-)

--



Regards,
Kirwin
http://timebandit.smugmug.com

 

[Jerry Stevens]

Hmmm. Seems to be loading fine on my cable. The site server could be getting a lot of hits, or perhaps your cable has loaded down on traffic.

Jerry
--
Gerald L. Stevens

 

[Kirwin]

Thanks. Still no go... just sits there 'waiting'. I'll try later in the day.

Hmmm. Seems to be loading fine on my cable. The site server could
be getting a lot of hits, or perhaps your cable has loaded down on
traffic.

Jerry
--
Gerald L. Stevens

--



Regards,
Kirwin
http://timebandit.smugmug.com