35mm vs Digital Grain

Following on from this thread: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-

fetch-msg?msg_id=006uv6

 

I'm increasingly drawn to digital - I think the workflow is more

suited to my general work ethic ('workflow', 'work ethic' - I've

spent too long working in marketing).

 

However, my main concern is noise, especially at high film speeds.

How does digital noise compare to 35mm grain at high speeds? I'm

considering a Canon DSLR and Sony F828, and I understand the Sony

performs badly in this area.

 

Would be interested to hear any opinions from users of both 35mm and

Digital.

 

Many thanks.

I've found film grain much more obtrusive than digital noise when comparing equal speed film to digital iso settings. Since this is comparing scanned film to digital capture I can't be sure if the cause is the film grain or noise picked up from scanning.

Not as much an answer as another consideration...Products like Neat Image and Noise Ninja can help reduce noise (and grain on scanned images)...They may lessen your concerns w.r.t. noise/grain.

 

Seems that Canon DSLRs have particularly good reviews with high ISO noise. I use a Nikon D100, it's noise is quite noticable at high ISO, but I only use high ISO for 'snapshots' so I don't have the same judgement criteria as others may have. With that qualification, I don't mind the D100 noise for some types of photos. (I also like grain sometimes.)

<P> <a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/d30/d30_vs_film.shtml">This</a> is probably the first article which claims exactly that. </P>

<P> The high ISO noise of DSLR-like is probably an inherit problem due to the small sensor size. Although the 828 is <a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony828.shtml">very good</a> at ISO 100, noise becomes a real problem above it. For quality high ISO shots, the 10D and 300D are the market's benchmarks. </P>

 

<P> Happy shooting , <br>

Yakim. </P>

Noise is a problem on small sensor P&S digitals like the Sony F828. (Actually, I hesitate to call the F828 a "point and shoot" as it's a very capable and flexible camera. Never the less, it has a small sensor like digital P&S.) F828 noise is comparable to a good ISO 100 color film, but at higher speeds it starts to fall apart.

 

However, large sensor DSLR's, especially the Canon models, excel in noise performance. I feel my 10D set to ISO 400 out performs scanned Provia 100F. At 8x10 the images are cleaner. At ISO 100 there is no noise to speak of.

 

When I shot 35mm I wouldn't shoot anything higher than ISO 400. I found I just couldn't tolerate the grain. On my 10D I'll push to 800 or even 1600 in a pinch. The 10D is simply amazing in this regard.

 

If I were you I would strongly consider a Canon 300D or 10D. I'm scanning wedding film for some friends right now (Fuji Reala ISO 100) and the workflow can't compare to a fully digital workflow. And quite frankly, Reala is another film my 10D would beat even at ISO 400.

Films have improved so significantly over the years that I can't see any grain below ISO400. It really only starts to get annoying at around ISO3600 and, even then, there is a pleasant randomness to the grain pattern which is different from the 'static' of digital camera noise.

 

Noise has become a bit of a boogeyman for digital users and the companies jump through all sorts of technological hoops which leads to a rather artificial appearing shot...as if all the naturally occuring variances in color and texture have been overwritten in the cause of getting rid of the last speck of 'noise'.

 

The best comment I ever heard on the subject was that "photographs have grain just as paintngs have brush strokes." Nobody ever said, "That Mona Lisa is a nice picture but I can't stand those distracting brush strokes!" One wonders how they can stand to look at photographs printed in newspapers where the dots are also clearly visible.

 

Specifically on this topic, I have seen Sony 828 shots taken at ISO800 that have been 'cleaned up' with the 3rd party software mentioned above and the problem is negligible.

<p> A question about <a href=http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=006ruC>digital for low light photography</a> came up a few weeks back, and it got me off my butt to try some pushing RAW files and noise reduction software. There are some full res crops in there at ISO 640 and 1250, you may want to look at them to see what the digital noise is like.

<p>The beauty of digital is that you can do a 1-1.5 stop push on a RAW file with little increase in noise/grain. Shadow detail is very good in digital, so you lose a lot less than you might think.

You MUST be shrooming, Meryl.

 

Film grain is a reality, and is quite offensive to me at ISO 400 and above. Even many

films at ISO 200 have objectionable grain, especially in continuous-tone areas (such

as the sky). Digital noise is highly variable depending on the camera used. With the

10D, it's hardly noticeable until ISO 800, and not overly offensive at ISO 1600.

I'm intrigued by the comments about film grain or lack thereof. My personal experience now that I scan my own negatives and slides for enlargments (I scan at 4000 dpi), is that what appears to be film grain quite often is very noticeable. However, I think this is may be due to the film being scanned. I've had enlargements made traditionally where there is no visible grain. Enlargements I make myself from scans of the same negative or slide are sharper but show more grain if I don't use a grain reduction/noise reduction software. For what it is worth, I find Velvia 50, Konica Impresa 50 and some of the newer 100 speed slide films show almost no grain when scans are used to produce 11x16 inch prints. In general negative film shows more grain but the noise reduction software programs can really help clean this up quite a bit. I've been surprised at how sharp Fuji's Superia Xtra 400 is (it is a bit grainy but after running Neat Image on it, I've gotten far better results than I would have thought possible from 400 speed film a few years ago) and disappointed in how much grain I see with Agfa's Vista 100 film.

 

One of the things I like about my Sony F717 (the 5 MP precursor to the Sony F828) is the very sharp images and lack of grain (I shoot almost exclusively at ISO 100 though). I've made beautiful 11x16 prints from it. In theory at least, the 5 MP F717 should have less digital noise than the 8 MP F828 since they use the same size sensor. More pixels with the same size sensor means fewer photons per pixel and more noise unless this is compensated for by more sophisticated image processing algorithms. For the same reason, a digital SLR will typically show less noise because the imaging chip is larger. If you are thinking about the F717, the main drawbacks are the slow refresh rate of the EVF (using it while panning will give you a headache), shutter lag and optical distortion particularly at the wide end of the zoom.

 

Jason