EOS-M noise reduction settings

Started Jul 11, 2013 | Discussions
NCB Contributing Member • Posts: 508
EOS-M noise reduction settings

Just been ploughing through the DVD Manual trying to find what control there is over noise reduction. As far as I can see, there isn't any, apart from high ISO and long exposure specific settings. Is this the case?

I'm astonished if it is. What's the point of having a high resolution sensor if the detail gets wiped out by noise reduction when it isn't needed? I shoot landscapes, where detail is critical, and use ISO 100 wherever possible, when there really shouldn't be a need for noise reduction. I've just had my had my first try-out with the EOS-M, and for landscapes the results are not good; I was using the point and shoot mode, so maybe the more refined settings I've just put in may improve things. I hope so, so far my 8 year old Nikon 8400 beats it hands down!

 NCB's gear list:NCB's gear list
Nikon Coolpix 8400 Nikon Coolpix P7100 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Nikon D3100 Nikon Df
rjjr Forum Pro • Posts: 14,331
Have you tried shooting RAW?
1

No text.

AdamT
AdamT Forum Pro • Posts: 58,597
Re: EOS-M noise reduction settings

NR on lowest does help the high ISO detail which is a good balance on that setting but it still leaves tons of greasy detail killing NR at ISO100 - I`ve found the best way to use the JPG engine is NR low and the Sharpness OFF and then sharpen in Photoshop ......

Iit`s still miles from the ultra-fine detail the camera is capable of in RAW with Capture one but it makes the JPG engine workable for less than critical work . Going by the 70D samples on Canon`s site, they`re getting worse and worse for slamming ISO100 JPGs with NR, if you think the M Is loaded take a look at those

-- hide signature --

** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **

 AdamT's gear list:AdamT's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85
papillon_65
papillon_65 Forum Pro • Posts: 27,030
Re: EOS-M noise reduction settings
1

NCB wrote:

Just been ploughing through the DVD Manual trying to find what control there is over noise reduction. As far as I can see, there isn't any, apart from high ISO and long exposure specific settings. Is this the case?

I'm astonished if it is. What's the point of having a high resolution sensor if the detail gets wiped out by noise reduction when it isn't needed? I shoot landscapes, where detail is critical, and use ISO 100 wherever possible, when there really shouldn't be a need for noise reduction. I've just had my had my first try-out with the EOS-M, and for landscapes the results are not good; I was using the point and shoot mode, so maybe the more refined settings I've just put in may improve things. I hope so, so far my 8 year old Nikon 8400 beats it hands down!

If you're serious about landscapes then you really need to be shooting raw and I would have thought that was obvious?

-- hide signature --

667....neighbour of the beast.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX50V +7 more
Hemidart
Hemidart Senior Member • Posts: 2,069
Re: EOS-M noise reduction settings

If you are that critical, why are you not shooting RAW?

 Hemidart's gear list:Hemidart's gear list
Sigma dp2 Quattro Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX80 Canon EOS 5D Pentax K-50 Canon Pixma Pro-100
rrccad Forum Pro • Posts: 11,108
Re: EOS-M noise reduction settings

NCB wrote:

Just been ploughing through the DVD Manual trying to find what control there is over noise reduction. As far as I can see, there isn't any, apart from high ISO and long exposure specific settings. Is this the case?

I'm astonished if it is. What's the point of having a high resolution sensor if the detail gets wiped out by noise reduction when it isn't needed? I shoot landscapes, where detail is critical, and use ISO 100 wherever possible, when there really shouldn't be a need for noise reduction. I've just had my had my first try-out with the EOS-M, and for landscapes the results are not good; I was using the point and shoot mode, so maybe the more refined settings I've just put in may improve things. I hope so, so far my 8 year old Nikon 8400 beats it hands down!

Looking at RAW's verus JPG side by side.

my settings are lens CA on, picture style landscape. shooting RAW + JPG

and I see very little difference between RAW and JPG. if i'm completely crazy.. i may see a slight micro contrast difference at around 100-200% magnification.

I suspect it's a combination of aperture / shutter speed or you are looking are pure uncorrected JPG's. which may "appear" more smeared by CA.

if you are using the default picture style - there's no sharpening applied.

you're used to a DLSR, so i'm assuming you're not comparing a P&S small sensor vast DOF versus a much narrower DOF of a APS-C sensor.

To be honest, and these are usually my rules for fine detail landscapes where humanly possible. and i think you broke all of them most likely

- never shoot below 1/150 - to 1/200th of a second shutter speed for micro contrast detail on foilage. never Auto ISO - know your ISO.

- know my lenses and apertures best used and shoot in Av mode

- shoot RAW and thank the camera gods for DPP's DLO

 rrccad's gear list:rrccad's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS M Canon EOS 7D Mark II +2 more
digital88 Forum Member • Posts: 71
Re: EOS-M noise reduction settings

Are you shooting [A]+ mode or P mode?  I believe that in the former it is limited to Auto ISO.  You may be better to switch to the Basic Zone and then choose landscape.

As the previous poster said, if you are using a point and shoot (your Nikon 8400) it will have vast depth of field, so everything will be pretty much in focus.  The EOS M is a much different animal with an APS sized sensor so the lens will need to be stopped down more to get more depth of field.

What lens are you using?  Did you check your other settings?  F-stop? Shutter speed?  Also you have to check your point of focus, more critical than your Nikon.

Hope that helps,

Bruce

rjjr Forum Pro • Posts: 14,331
OK...

digital88 wrote:

Are you shooting [A]+ mode or P mode? I believe that in the former it is limited to Auto ISO. You may be better to switch to the Basic Zone and then choose landscape.

As the previous poster said, if you are using a point and shoot (your Nikon 8400) it will have vast depth of field, so everything will be pretty much in focus. The EOS M is a much different animal with an APS sized sensor so the lens will need to be stopped down more to get more depth of field.

Now I'm wishing for a distance scale on the lens or a focus distance readout on the LCD so I can use hyperfocal settings.

Marco Nero
Marco Nero Veteran Member • Posts: 5,549
NR for EOS-M: images at ISO 1250 - 6400 / examples (PICS)

NCB wrote:

Just been ploughing through the DVD Manual trying to find what control there is over noise reduction. As far as I can see, there isn't any, apart from high ISO and long exposure specific settings. Is this the case?

I'm astonished if it is. What's the point of having a high resolution sensor if the detail gets wiped out by noise reduction when it isn't needed? I shoot landscapes, where detail is critical, and use ISO 100 wherever possible, when there really shouldn't be a need for noise reduction. I've just had my had my first try-out with the EOS-M, and for landscapes the results are not good; I was using the point and shoot mode, so maybe the more refined settings I've just put in may improve things. I hope so, so far my 8 year old Nikon 8400 beats it hands down!

Personally, I don't have a problem with the EOS-M producing noise. It's essentially no different than other APS-C sensor sized cameras and that includes an AWFUL lot of DSLRs. My wife uses a Canon 60D and she feels the EOS-M sensor is considerably better, especially in relation to noise. I thought they used the same sensor but I can see the differences she's talking about when I compare images side-by-side.

The EOS-M has much lower noise than earlier cameras with older (yet similar sized) sensors and that's a big advantage for those of us who want to shoot in low light without a flash. With the EOS-M, I find that the camera is effectively quite noise free from ISO 800 and under. When shooting at say ISO 1250 and higher, noise may be visible though it's often not intense enough to warrant any action to cancel it out.  Yet such minor noise is almost always resolved with editing software like Lightroom or modern editions of Adobe Photoshop... or a pluggin from a third party that interacts with either of these programs ( I use Neat Image on occasion, which is a Photoshop pluggin).

I only shoot in JEPG as I find the image-processing engine on modern Canon cameras to be effective and quite intuitive.  RAW doesn't interest me although some people making an income from their cameras might use it (eg Wedding Photographers).  Noise Reduction is applied to the images by the camera in JPEG mode but with so much software offering Noise Reduction these days, it makes sense to allow the photographer to decide when and how to apply it. We've come a LONG way from cameras that couldn't produce images over ISO 200 without generating obscene amounts of noise. Even my relatively recent s95 isn't particularly noise free at ISO 250 but it is useful. I certainly wouldn't bother to use it to take a shot at say ISO 1000+ But with the Canon EOS-M, I'll happily let it take charge by using AUTO ISO for most of my shots.

It's rare for me to need to apply noise reduction with the EOS-M but occasionally I'll apply it when processing an image on my computer if I think it won't affect other elements within the image.
Some examples below:

EOS-M: JPEG at ISO 1250 (MINOR noise reduction applied in Lightroom)

EOS-M: JPEG at ISO 3200 (MINOR noise reduction applied in Lightroom)

EOS-M: JPEG at ISO 4000 (MINOR noise reduction applied in Lightroom)

EOS-M: JPEG at ISO 1600 (MINOR noise reduction applied in Lightroom)

EOS-M: JPEG at ISO 3200 (MINOR noise reduction applied in Lightroom)

EOS-M: JPEG at ISO 5000 (MINOR noise reduction applied in Lightroom)

EOS-M: JPEG at ISO 6400 (MINOR noise reduction applied in Lightroom)

EOS-M: JPEG at ISO 1250 (MINOR noise reduction applied in Lightroom)

 Marco Nero's gear list:Marco Nero's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Canon PowerShot G1 X Canon EOS 60D Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS M +15 more
papillon_65
papillon_65 Forum Pro • Posts: 27,030
Re: OK...

rjjr wrote:

digital88 wrote:

Are you shooting [A]+ mode or P mode? I believe that in the former it is limited to Auto ISO. You may be better to switch to the Basic Zone and then choose landscape.

As the previous poster said, if you are using a point and shoot (your Nikon 8400) it will have vast depth of field, so everything will be pretty much in focus. The EOS M is a much different animal with an APS sized sensor so the lens will need to be stopped down more to get more depth of field.

Now I'm wishing for a distance scale on the lens or a focus distance readout on the LCD so I can use hyperfocal settings.

Many EF lenses do have a distance scale so if you use them with the adaptor then you're good to go.

-- hide signature --

667....neighbour of the beast.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX50V +7 more
rjjr Forum Pro • Posts: 14,331
Re: OK...

papillon_65 wrote:

rjjr wrote:

digital88 wrote:

Are you shooting [A]+ mode or P mode? I believe that in the former it is limited to Auto ISO. You may be better to switch to the Basic Zone and then choose landscape.

As the previous poster said, if you are using a point and shoot (your Nikon 8400) it will have vast depth of field, so everything will be pretty much in focus. The EOS M is a much different animal with an APS sized sensor so the lens will need to be stopped down more to get more depth of field.

Now I'm wishing for a distance scale on the lens or a focus distance readout on the LCD so I can use hyperfocal settings.

Many EF lenses do have a distance scale so if you use them with the adaptor then you're good to go.

Thanks, I know and I do use my L glass on the EOS-M but I think the 22mm STM would make a decent landscape lens (obviating the need to carry my EF lens and adaptor) but it doesn't have a distance scale..

Come to think of it, why don't digital cameras have a focus distance readout on the live-view LCD or EVF when so equipped? Seems to me it shouldn't be hard to implement.  In fact it shouldn't be difficult to implement a hyperfocal option in a landscape mode where the processor calculates the hyperfocal distance based on camera parameters and sets the lens to focus at that distance.

papillon_65
papillon_65 Forum Pro • Posts: 27,030
Re: OK...

rjjr wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

rjjr wrote:

digital88 wrote:

Are you shooting [A]+ mode or P mode? I believe that in the former it is limited to Auto ISO. You may be better to switch to the Basic Zone and then choose landscape.

As the previous poster said, if you are using a point and shoot (your Nikon 8400) it will have vast depth of field, so everything will be pretty much in focus. The EOS M is a much different animal with an APS sized sensor so the lens will need to be stopped down more to get more depth of field.

Now I'm wishing for a distance scale on the lens or a focus distance readout on the LCD so I can use hyperfocal settings.

Many EF lenses do have a distance scale so if you use them with the adaptor then you're good to go.

Thanks, I know and I do use my L glass on the EOS-M but I think the 22mm STM would make a decent landscape lens (obviating the need to carry my EF lens and adaptor) but it doesn't have a distance scale..

True, I think it's a trial and error thing though I've found focusing at infinity works best on most occasions on the EOS-M.

Come to think of it, why don't digital cameras have a focus distance readout on the live-view LCD or EVF when so equipped? Seems to me it shouldn't be hard to implement. In fact it shouldn't be difficult to implement a hyperfocal option in a landscape mode where the processor calculates the hyperfocal distance based on camera parameters and sets the lens to focus at that distance.

You would think so, I think the first manufacturer to do it will get considerable kudos.

-- hide signature --

667....neighbour of the beast.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX50V +7 more
OP NCB Contributing Member • Posts: 508
Re: EOS-M noise reduction settings

Thanks for the replies. A bit of background. My main piece of kit is a Nikon D3100 used almost entirely with the excellent Nikon 16-85 IS zoom. I've just returned from an extended Scottish trip where in all weathers (mostly rough!) it delivered the goods. In other words, I knew what I wanted, I expected to get it, and I did. However, I need something I can stick in a rucksack for extended walks, for which the D3100 is a bit on the big/heavy side. In fact I took 4 cameras, the other three being the 8400, a Nikon P7100 which I'd grabbed at a low end-of-line price not long  before going, and a Panasonic G1 which I bought when it came out, attracted by its relatively low size and weight (plus the 14-45 kit lens had a good reputation). I wanted to see how I felt about the lot of them together.

As I said, the D3100 delivered. The G1 is also good, except I've reservations about the colours, and it's tricky trying to fix that fully; others might think they're fine, maybe its just a question of taste, I like the camera but the D3100 is better. The 8400 is as I knew it would be, good lens sharpness, reasonable colours, but it's 8 years old and you see it in more tricky lighting, and it has a lousy EVF. The P7100 has great controls, a pretty good and very useful 28-200 zoom, but the colours are plain odd, biased much too much towards blue/green, so that dull days are fine, even impressive, but put a bit of sun in and it looks grim. And, you can't turn noise reduction off, so I lose fine detail. Like I found with the EOS-M. When I came back, I realised I hadn't sorted the 8400 replacement question, found a good offer on the EOS-M, thought that could do it, so bought it.

I don't shoot raw, I don't have time. What time I do have I'd rather spend out there getting pictures rather than follow a raw workflow. I do tweak every pic for sharpness, tone and so on (I normally shoot 1/3 of a stop under, and set low contrast or equivalent such ADL on the D3100 to avoid blown highlights, and turn sharpness down, so tweaking is needed), but that's it, and it's quick. It means that I look for cameras with good jpeg engines; the Fuji X-E1 interested me on that score, but the EOS-M was available at a knock-down price and I thought I'd give it a go.

I  approached the EOS-M as if it was the D3100. Used Av mode with the aperture at f/10, which I reckoned would give good enough depth of field without being diffraction limited. ISO 100 which I assumed would give minimal noise. Shutter speed ended up around 1/150 - 1/200 depending on condition. And I made sure that it was focusing on something distant (at least, that's what it said it was doing).  The lens is the 18-55 kit zoom.

Since the first post I've tried it on landscape mode. Depth of field seems just a bit better, although that's not really the issue. But noise reduction is still messing up the detail where it matters. Anyway, you've given me a few ideas, and I may try raw just to see what the result is.

 NCB's gear list:NCB's gear list
Nikon Coolpix 8400 Nikon Coolpix P7100 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Nikon D3100 Nikon Df
Gesture Veteran Member • Posts: 5,804
Re: OK...

"Come to think of it, why don't digital cameras have a focus distance readout on the live-view LCD or EVF when so equipped? Seems to me it shouldn't be hard to implement. In fact it shouldn't be difficult to implement a hyperfocal option in a landscape mode where the processor calculates the hyperfocal distance based on camera parameters and sets the lens to focus at that distance."

Exactly. Instead of a miniature filter, I wish the OEMs would ask photographers what they'd like to see.

rrccad Forum Pro • Posts: 11,108
Re: EOS-M noise reduction settings

NCB wrote:

I approached the EOS-M as if it was the D3100. Used Av mode with the aperture at f/10, which I reckoned would give good enough depth of field without being diffraction limited. ISO 100 which I assumed would give minimal noise. Shutter speed ended up around 1/150 - 1/200 depending on condition. And I made sure that it was focusing on something distant (at least, that's what it said it was doing). The lens is the 18-55 kit zoom.

Since the first post I've tried it on landscape mode. Depth of field seems just a bit better, although that's not really the issue. But noise reduction is still messing up the detail where it matters. Anyway, you've given me a few ideas, and I may try raw just to see what the result is.

it's not noise reduction.

f/10 if you are critically inspecting at 100% is most certainly diffraction limited - by f/10 or so you are losing around 10% of your resolution via diffraction.  you could also be losing more via CA depending on how well it was clamped (or if you have that enabled).

but it really depends on how you are viewing these - if you look at your d3100 or even P&S camera at the same sized print as the EOS-M I doubt you'd see more detail on either versus the M.

the ability to "see diffraction" or the effects of diffraction is really based upon the image size, f stop and observer distance - the M image will certainly be larger then the D3100 viewing both at 100% - diffraction will be more evident.

 rrccad's gear list:rrccad's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS M Canon EOS 7D Mark II +2 more
rrccad Forum Pro • Posts: 11,108
Re: OK...

Gesture wrote:

"Come to think of it, why don't digital cameras have a focus distance readout on the live-view LCD or EVF when so equipped? Seems to me it shouldn't be hard to implement. In fact it shouldn't be difficult to implement a hyperfocal option in a landscape mode where the processor calculates the hyperfocal distance based on camera parameters and sets the lens to focus at that distance."

why? hypofocal is so dependent upon final image size - most hyper focal calculators are based upon 8x12 print size and normal observer distances of 18 inches or so - which is totally inadequate for digital.

 rrccad's gear list:rrccad's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS M Canon EOS 7D Mark II +2 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads