noise

<p>Hi, i have just purchased a Nikon d300s, an upgrade from the d80. I have not long had it so don't know my way around it yet but have notices that there is a lot more noise (artifacts to be precise, i'm told) in images from the d300s and wondered if i needed to adjust my settings. I checked out raw file settings on the camera and see that currently lossy is selected, am i right in thinking that this is a form of compression and that I'd do better to select non compression? <br /> Also I am getting a kind of ghosting on some images. I am in the habit of shoot my macros the same way, in low light, daylight, with long exposure. Always on a tripod but usually with a remote. I haven't figured that one out yet on the new camera. Would this make so much difference? Thanks, Sue</p>

<p>Your sample picture had quite bad compression artifacts, but I do not know if that happened in the conversion to png or did it come out as such from the camera. Have you tried shooting raw? That one should be free of compression artifacts and you can decide in the post processing how much compression is tolerable for you.</p>

<p>Set to RAW compression to lossless compressed. In my view, this is your best bet as it should not introduce any artifacts (and in my experience, it doesn't), without the rather excessive file size you get from uncompressed. The example you show, PNG is a compressed format too, so it's impossible to tell where the problem originates.</p>

<p>As for the remote, assuming you had the Nikon ML-L3 (if I recall well) IR remote for the D80 - that one won't work on the D300. Remote control for the D300 will unfortunately typically cost a lot more.<br>

Could it be the difference - in my view, without seeing an example, yes. In macroshots, any camera movement is hyper-visible, and squeezing the shutter on a tripod mounted camera often still makes the camera vibrate a bit. Alternative for what you're doing would be to set the self-timer to 10 seconds, worth the shot at least.</p>

<p>Hi Juhani, no the artifacts are there on the tiff which i exported from raw file in light-room @<br>

400 %. They can also be seen in lightroom on the raw file viewed at 4.1. I've cropped the image and saved as jpg to see if this shows any different for you. I understand jpg is also compressed but I can tell you they are as i am viewing them now. Actually not sure i'll get the opportunity to add an image again. </p><div></div>

<p>Hi Wouter<br>

Thanks for your response. The camera is set to lossless compression.<br>

RE the remote, I can believe it, i know I had this problem with the d80 so always used a remote with this kind of work. My remote is a generic cheepo so I guess i'll be buying another one! Self timer, yes good alternative, thank you. </p>

 

<p>Hi. Are you using mirror lockup for macros? This will almost certainly help. Also, try converting RAW files in either View NX or Capture NX. I personally find these make a better job of it than camera raw.</p>

<p>Hi Simon</p>

<p> No haven't tried that, thank you, I will. I guess the d300 mirror action is heavier than the d80. I'm using light room to convert but I could use the nikon software which i believe is good. </p>

<p>Sue when you convert raw to tiff you already process a lot using settings in lightroom.<br>

It would be good to either list all settings or better make a raw file available.<br>

It is generally helpful to post an example but in this case it may not be sufficient and I may nor be the only one who needs a little help in pointing out what exactly the artifacts are (I have no clue what the image should look like without artifacts).<br>

Are the posted images 400% crops? I know it can help to increase magnification but just going from 100% to 400% will generate some artifacts. Whether these are the ones we are supposed to identify or not is a question in itself .-)</p>

 

<p>I'll try a crop of the raw file. Thanks</p>

<p>Hi Sue,<br />The D300(s) are of factory set to Auto ISO ( mine was..), did you set iso to a fixed value before shooting ? Best performance, noise-wyse, is at iso 200 for the D300 cams, but when shutter times get above 15 sec's it is better to move to iso 400 or 800<br>

Also for longer times you can set noise compression on and active d-lighting to off..</p>

<p>Hi thanks for your response. I will look at the iso settings. Noise compression on is good advise too. If you set iso to 400 or 800 for long exposure when you want clear macro shots won't that defeat the object and make the images soft? I used to find it okay with my d80. I've had some good tips here today though so will try them all. Many thanks. </p>

<p>Hi thanks for your response. I will look at the iso settings. Noise compression on is good advise too. If you set iso to 400 or 800 for long exposure when you want clear macro shots won't that defeat the object and make the images soft? I used to find it okay with my d80. I've had some good tips here today though so will try them all. Many thanks. </p>

<p>Hi thanks for your response. I will look at the iso settings. Noise compression on is good advise too. If you set iso to 400 or 800 for long exposure when you want clear macro shots won't that defeat the object and make the images soft? I used to find it okay with my d80. I've had some good tips here today though so will try them all. Many thanks. </p>

<p>Hi thanks for your response. I will look at the iso settings. Noise compression on is good advise too. If you set iso to 400 or 800 for long exposure when you want clear macro shots won't that defeat the object and make the images soft? I used to find it okay with my d80. I've had some good tips here today though so will try them all. Many thanks. </p>

<p>Sue, I also saw from your example that you have set your aperture to F32 ?<br>

This will cause diffraction on digital slr's, so maybe you want to try wider apertures too, this allows for shorter shuttertimes, and this again helps reduce noise.. ( just play with this, I find optimum aperture for 105mm at around f8 till f16 for makro...)</p>

 

<p>CPM is right, anything smaller than f/11 will result in diffraction. this will be the case on a 10mp ccd D80 as well.</p>

<p>Ok thank you. Perhaps i've been mistaken in setting the aperture as small as i can thinking that there will be more detail but maybe as you suggest this is not right for the lens. That said with the d80 I was satisfied with the outcome. I will play around with this and see what comes up. <br>

Just out of interest the guy in our local shop suggests that it may be to do with lightroom as this seems to convert raws to dng when it exports original. I sent him a copy of the raw also and he was expecting it to be an nef as is standard for Nikon he tells me. </p>

<p>Okay Eric, thank you for your thoughts. I'll try that. </p>

<p>Actually i've just checked out an image shot at 200 iso @ 2.8 on the 105 and the artifacts are the same. Jagged. I've also tried lossless compression and no compression and it is the same more or less.</p>

<p>Sue, when you import image files into Lightroom, there are four options at the top of the Import screen.</p>

<ol>

<li>Copy as DNG - this is what you are doing but probably not what you want.</li>

<li>Copy - This puts a copy of each raw file in another location.</li>

<li>Move - This moves each raw file to a new location and removes them from the original location.</li>

<li>Add - This leaves the files where they were without moving or copying them. This is the option that I use, because I have already copied my raw files to the location where I want to store them, and I have already renamed them.</li>

</ol>

<p>I would suggest that you review your files in View NX before looking at them in Lightroom. View NX will give you the most "native" view of the files, i.e. as the camera's settings intended.</p>

<p>Regarding ghosting with macros, are you certain that your subject isn't moving, i.e. as when a flower is blown around by a breeze?</p>

<p>When you post files here for others to review, JPEG would be a more suitable format. You can export them as JPEG files from View NX or Lightroom. Lightroom can also resize them. 600 or 700 pixels on the long side should be plenty big enough for online display.</p>

<p>Make sure that the S, C, M switching on the front of the camera is set to S or C, not to M. Make sure that the lens is set to M/A rather than M if it has such a switch.</p>

<p>If you can fix these problems first, we'll have a better chance of figuring out what else might be going wrong. Further, why don't you take some "easy" pictures first, such as the side of your house in daylight from ten feet away to determine if the camera is working properly? I can't make anything out in the macro examples that you have posted thus far.</p>

<p>i dont seem to have a problem with high iso with my d300 with winter weddings i normally shoot above 1600 iso and sometimes 3200 & 6400 i have noise reduction set to high in camera and use topaz denoise or noise nin<img src="../photo/12012170" alt="" /><img src="../photo/12012170" alt="" />ja to tweak</p><div></div>

<p>take to lightroom 3 problem solved</p>

<p>good luck</p>

<p>Dan, thank you so much, i believe this may have solved the problem. The nef's are noticeably sharper, however at 4.1 magnification in lightroom the images still seem noisier than i would have expected. I will do some more experiments today.<br>

RE ghosting, no i'm shooting still life indoors so no movement other than maybe a slight bounce from the mirror perhaps? I will try today with the mirror up and timer. The tripod is on a wooden floor so maybe that could be the culprit. Many thanks again. Sue </p>

 

<p>Sue, WRT the remote release - Don't waste your money on the expensive Nikon version. I've been happily and successfully using both wired and wireless "Yung No" 3rd party releases for well over a year. These were bought from a well-known online source for about one-fifth the cost of Nikon's simple release cable for the pair of them. There is no way that the make of release can affect camera shake, unless you pull the cable while releasing it; but then you could do that with the genuine Nikon article as well.</p>

<p>Personally, I think it's high time that Nikon stopped overpricing its accessories the way it does. A cabled remote release is a simple pair of switches in a cheap plastic case: Manufacturing cost about $3 US.</p>

<p>Try lighting your macro shots with a small hand-held flash unit. This will eliminate any camera shake and give you a clearer idea of where the problem lies.</p>

<p>Hi Martin, <br>

Yep your image is as clear as a bell. Is it me or is the d300s actually better at shooting in hight iso? I have taking some really nice images on high iso. The problem for me is probably a combination of things which i must get to grips with. Dan's advice was helpful so will go from here with it. Other advise about the optimum f stop for a 105 may well be helpful though right now i'm trying to do like for like experiments under the same circumstances as other images shot on the d80 which previously i have been pleased with.<br>

Thanks for writing, Sue </p>