james_martin9 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 I have heard that the Canon is a better low light performer than my D200. Is the 30D really a step down from the D200, equivalent for low light theatrical shooting. I am considering moving to Canon and am looking for objective opinions, perhaps from someone who came from Canon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronald_moravec1 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 I would suggest you first download a trial of NeatImage.com and apply to some high ISO Nikon shots. you can only do a small section and you need a uniform area to calibrate. If you still are not happy, get a full frame Cannon and don`t screw around with a crop sensor at all. I would also get fast primes to take full advantage. Also learn to use the flash so they don`t look like flash pics. Available light in novice hands can look terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_martin9 Posted July 16, 2007 Author Share Posted July 16, 2007 I have made significant strides with the Nikon flash, but there are times when superior low light performance without a flash is still better. Hope to get more answers here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 James, you are already asking the same question in the Canon EOS Forum: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00LtML High-ISO result is one of the advantages Canon has over Nikon, but I agree that the 30D would be a step down. Clearly you are also aware of the Fuji S5 option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot1 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 Maybe you should switch to a d40. It beats the d200 and may beat the 30d! Will you switch back to Nikon when they 'beat' Canon with their next model? There are numerous excellent noise reduction programs. I use DXO which (by their claims) will make an ISO shot look like ISO 400 without loss in picture quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot1 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 That last sentence should read "make a picture shot at ISO 1600 look like it was shot at ISO 400" Sorry about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 Have you considered trying NoiseNinja or NoiseWare to any of your D200 shots. I would never go to a 30D over the D200. Personally I find that unless you really need super high ISO that Canon is somewhere I'd go & I don't need it. I personally prefer the color, detail & ergonomics of Nikon any day over any Canon. Only digital camera I've ever had problems with & has required repair was a Canon P&S. What ISO are you actually going for? Up to ISO 800 the D200 is just fine. JMHO Lil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterh Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 If you reduce noise you reduce detail (if it is there). No software can remove noise without removing detail. The algorithms for noise removal are pretty much worked out. So the software with the better user interface and the best integration into your work-flow wins. Elliot suggested DXO others prefer Noise Ninja or Neat image. I have little experience with DXO. The difference between Noise Ninja or Neat image is a matter of flavour. If you are willing to spend the money for the top Canon body you get better low ISO noise for the price of 2-3x D200. If you apply noise reduction software on an image with less noise you get a better result than if you apply the same software to an image with less noise - its that simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterh Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 I should add that good shooting technique (as well as post processing skills) will beat the better gear any time :-P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterh Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 Should read: If you apply noise reduction software to an image with less noise you get a better result than if you apply the same software to an image with MORE noise - its that simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hugo_vincent Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 > "Maybe you should switch to a d40. It beats the d200 and may beat the 30d!" The D40x (and D80) have better noise reduction in the in-camera JPEG processing. If you shoot RAW, the difference is much less pronounced, in fact they are all (D200/D80/D40x) pretty much the same. The Canon models do seem to have slightly lower noise (especially the 5D, it's ISO 3200 looks like the D200's ISO 800), in RAW, but more noticeably, the in-camera JPEG processing has much better noise reduction that doesn't crush fine detail like Nikon's noise reduction does. So if you're shooting raw and using a good raw developer, all the cameras (D200, D80, D40x, Canon 30D) will all have fairly similar amounts of noise and detail, but if you're shooting JPEG, the Canon models will look much cleaner and more detailed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_fasano Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 Now the only thing you'll have to contend with is Canon's legacy of focusing problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now