ISO800 on 5D

While I’m now comfortable using ISO3200 on 5DII, the ISO800 on 5D is my limit before noise come in! Is this so or

is it me experience this?<div></div>

Is the exposure about right because I have recently calibrated my monitor and have to adjust the brightness level accordingly!

Husain-Re: Calibration- you can't control how other's have their monitors adjusted, so it's best to adjust for your own purposes (IE one monitor to another in a network, printing profiles etc). That said, it looks like it might be a little on the dark side, about 1/3-1/2 stop. (This monitor is set brighter than most calibrated equipment.)

<p>I have a color calibrated 24" monitor that is VERY bright (Asus ProArt) and the image appears a touch under-exposed on my monitor. Thus I second Randall's guess that it is 1/3 to 1/2 a stop too dark.</p>

<p>I shot with a 5D for 3 years and ISO 1600 was a little noisy in shadows and low mids but cleaned up very well with Topaz Denoise. I wouldn't think twice about using it. I mainly needed to control noise in twilight skies. ISO 800 is even cleaner and barely needs any NR unless underexposed.</p>

<p>Available light / Low light / Soft Light samples using a 5D:</p>

<p><a href="../photo/10963088&size=lg">5D at ISO400 No Noise reduction in PP</a></p>

<p><a href="../photo/10442919&size=lg">5D at ISO800 No Noise reduction in PP</a></p>

<p><a href="../photo/10738709&size=lg">5D at ISO1600 No Noise reduction in PP</a></p>

<p><a href="../photo/10442934&size=lg">5D at IS3200 No Noise reduction in PP</a></p>

<p><a href="../photo/10442964&size=lg">5D at IS3200, about three stops underexposed Basic Noise reduction in PP</a></p>

<p>WW</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thank you WW, that matches my (remembered) experience. I was <em>always</em> satisfied w/ my 5Ds noise characteristics (though my understranding is that some individual units perform far worse)...</p>

<p>I used 3200 on my 5D (original) last week because I was in a dark smokey Hmong house in Northern Vietnam. And still required 1/25, f4. Got a few decent pics. Greg<br>

<img src="http://www.personal.psu.edu/ggl103/hmong0010.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>High ISO noise becomes apparent earlier than at the highest usable ISO, but noise reduction software can be used to take it out. Getting the exposure right is critical, though, because bring up the exposure in post exaggerates the noise. I tend to try to overexpose by 1/3 or 2/3 when using high ISO just to be on the safe side.</p>

<p>As a complete aside, whenever I shoot Hmong I stand in the doorway, or very close to it, it is a trick I learnt from watching Steve McCurry.</p><div></div>

<p>Shock！<img src="http://www.healthonlinee.com/img/images/1.png%20" alt="" /></p>

<p>William,</p>

<p>how was the 3200 ISO image converted/PPd? It really does <em>look</em> rather heavily NRd.</p>

<p>Husain, the same question to you - there's really not much point in you asking your question unless you tell us how you convert and process your files.</p>

<p>Suffice it to say that if you're using (say) Lightroom 3 or 4, I'd be <em>very, very</em> surprised to find that your 5D files were hitting any sort of usability limit at only 800 ISO.</p>

<p>For some context, this is from the <em>7D</em> at 3200 ISO, converted in Lr 3:<br /> http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/cap_one_1000.jpg</p>

<p>Clean as a whistle.</p>

<p>This is 6400 ISO, with some additional NR from Topaz Denoise:<br /> http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/Lr-2047_6400.jpg</p>

<p>6400 ISO converted in Capture One:<br /> http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/IMG_2465_cap_one_2.jpg</p>

<p>More "Real World", 1600 ISO from the 7D:<br /> http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/101010/goldcrest_st_marys_7b.jpg<br /> http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/101010/goldcrest_st_marys_12.jpg <br /> http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/101010/goldcrest_st_marys_1.jpg<br /> http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/101010/goldcrest_st_marys_8.jpg</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>how was the 3200 ISO image converted/PPd? It really does <em>look</em> rather heavily NRd.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><a href="../photo/10442964&size=lg">5D at IS3200, about three stops underexposed Basic Noise reduction in PP</a><br /> <em></em> <br /> <em>"I processed the RAW image via Photoshop 3 and used the Sharpening before JPEG conversion and also the Luminance Noise reduction."</em></p>

<p>All the other PP details are also stated under the image, in my response to Axel.<br>

<br /> I'd consider Photoshop 3 a "basic" NR programme - i.e. it is not a specialized add on program fopr Noise Reduction.<br /> Yes the image was "heavily" treated - it was about 3 stops UNDER exposed on skin tones for the man<br /> WW</p>

Many thanks for your helpful comments and prompts, folks! I use PS 5.1 for JPEG/ RAW (depending which one is better) - e.g. I have increased the exposure in this picture as suggested by some! Does this indicate improvement!

 

Where needed, I also use PS plug-in, Noiseware!

 

I agree that more skilful use of metering and exposure composition is much better than post capture processing - I'm learning!

 

However, using high ISO does require adjusting contrast and along with this, the brightness!<div></div>