ISO 2500 Color Noise and grain

U

usccharles

Well-known
Local time
1:47 AM
Joined
Nov 6, 2005
Messages
331
can someone evaluate this? took this tonight, M8, 35 Asph Summilux, handheld, ISO 2500, 1/15th sec, at 1.4 aperture, RAW image processed with all setting neutral on CS2.

sign-vi.jpg


100% crop

signcrop-vi.jpg


do very low-light photos at ISO 2500 have this much grain and color noise? is this normal? anybody have other examples i can compare my picture to??

thanks
 
Images from the M8 @ ISO 2500 can be noisy as compared to say, a file from a Canon 5D. However, a lot has to do w/how the raw file is post-processed. Have you tried looking @ the same file run through Capture 1? You may be pleasantly surprised by the difference.

usccharles said:
can someone evaluate this? took this tonight, M8, 35 Asph Summilux, handheld, ISO 2500, 1/15th sec, at 1.4 aperture, RAW image processed with all setting neutral on CS2.

sign-vi.jpg


100% crop

signcrop-vi.jpg


do very low-light photos at ISO 2500 have this much grain and color noise? is this normal? anybody have other examples i can compare my picture to??

thanks
Click to expand...
 
Kodak just released a new plug in that is supposed to clean up images like this very well. I have downloaded but not tested yet.
 
barjohn said:
Kodak just released a new plug in that is supposed to clean up images like this very well. I have downloaded but not tested yet.
Click to expand...

Jonh buddy- how about a link for us lazy Leicaphiles? Also what's the plugin plug into? PS, C1, Lightroom (I wish?)
 
furcafe said:
Images from the M8 @ ISO 2500 can be noisy as compared to say, a file from a Canon 5D. However, a lot has to do w/how the raw file is post-processed. Have you tried looking @ the same file run through Capture 1? You may be pleasantly surprised by the difference.
Click to expand...


as you wish :)

using capture one LE

L1000199captureone-vi.jpg


100% crop

L1000199captureonecrop-vi.jpg


this was processed without any adjustment on capture one LE. still pretty grainy and noisy like the CS2 processed image.

i don't mind the grain, it is ISO 2500 anyway, but i'm not really liking the color noise. is this normal of ISO 2500? can anybody post some similar situation pictures?

thanks
 
usccharles said:
i don't mind the noise, it is ISO 2500 anyway, but i'm not really liking the color noise. is this normal of ISO 2500? can anybody post some similar situation pictures?

thanks
Click to expand...

Did you muck with the color slider in the Noise Reduction pane of ACR or Lightroom? That tends to reduce the off-color garbage some I've found - especially the red dots.

As an aside, the 2500 images often look good in B/W. Personally I usually keep it to 1250 or less and love the results. Very film like.
 
The C1 treatment is quite different. Not necessarily better or worse, but some detail was lost in the shadows.
 
In astronomical imaging where we expose for many minutes if not hours in the dark, we will do a dark subtract that eliminates much of the noise. The M8 can do this if you expose more than a minute (it does its own dark subtract). Try that if you have not. The method we use in astronomy is more complicated in that we photograph many times at the same time and temp, and then use the dark subtract image in software to subtract the digital noise.

So you might want to try that. Close the lens down forcing the M8 to do a dark subtract.
 
BTW, if you shoot RAW with the Canon DSLRs, you'll also see a crazy amount of color and luminance noise at the highest ISO settings.

If you shoot JPEG, you'll probably be surprised at how much noise gets cleaned in-camera (I'm talking about the M8). I've shot comparisons between JPEG and RAW at 1250 and 2500, and I've decided that I'm shooting JPEG at those ISO settings.

I do the same with the Canon DSLRs; if I shoot ISO 800 or higher, I default to JPEG. If I shoot ISO 50 or 100, no question, RAW (even though there's a little bit of noise in the shadows, which cleans easily)

I agree with Trius, Capture One treatment is so-so. But I recommend keeping some of the luminance noise in your picture; once you play with it, you can see that you get a "film grain" look, specially if you convert to B&W.
 
Well, they are a little spendy (if you buy each one).

They are pretty easy to use, but I highly recommend Neat Image:

http://www.neatimage.com/

I've been using it for years, and it works wonderfully. Many people use it a lot; I use it in dreadful cases. It has a learning curve, so be warned.
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
If you shoot JPEG, you'll probably be surprised at how much noise gets cleaned in-camera (I'm talking about the M8). I've shot comparisons between JPEG and RAW at 1250 and 2500, and I've decided that I'm shooting JPEG at those ISO settings.
Click to expand...

here are some raw/in-camera-jpg comparisons

RAW
signraw-vi.jpg


In-Camera-jpg
signjpg-vi.jpg


RAW
dograw-vi.jpg


In-Camera-jpg
dogjpg-vi.jpg


the pic with my dog is also at ISO 2500 but under a street light. low grain and noise is very good in this picture for this ISO i have to say.
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
BTW, if you shoot RAW with the Canon DSLRs, you'll also see a crazy amount of color and luminance noise at the highest ISO settings.
Click to expand...

Which ones? The 20D (own one), 5D (used several) and I presume the 30D and latest of the Rebels are nowhere near as noisy as those shots, I mean, not by a country mile. A bunch of people who own the M8 and a 5D or 20/30D have said there's no comparison.

That said, in b&w I've been tempted to use the film-emulator that came free with my copy of DxO v.4 because sometimes I would actually like to have some grainyness. From what I can see, the noise of the M8 looks kind of random and clumpy like film grain, which looks way better than typical digital sensor noise, at least in b&w.
 
Ben Z said:
Which ones? The 20D (own one), 5D (used several) and I presume the 30D and latest of the Rebels are nowhere near as noisy as those shots, I mean, not by a country mile. A bunch of people who own the M8 and a 5D or 20/30D have said there's no comparison.
Click to expand...
I didn't say at all that the Canon RAW noise was near as noisy as these shots. I said they were also noisy, and it's significant. If you read again what I wrote...

Oh, I'm not going to get into another debate. Forget it. You choose to read with whatever bias you have. Just don't put words in my mouth. I'm tired of this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom