40D vs 50D at high iso

[MARINERMAGNUM]

Does the in camera NR in the 50d work as well,better or the same as NN?

[Steve Foss]

MM, I haven't tried NN NR on the 50D yet, but I will PDQ as soon as NN makes 50D profiles available. How's that for a bunch of initials?

My workflow would be to use strong NR in-camera pretty much all the time and then apply NN as needed, if needed. But I'll have to check if NN has the 50D profiles available for download.

[Steve Foss]

Just checked the Noise Ninja site. No profiles yet for the 50D. They better get their stuff in a group, since the camera's been on the shelves a few weeks already.

[Dbl]

Quote:

Without the in camera NR, I suspect at iso 3200 it would be a mess of noise. The images they posted in the test looked like-to me anyway- that the 40D had better detail and clarity.

My results I guess don't show that, in fact they are much better than my 20D/30D and Mark IIN. I've sent quite a few of my RAW files to another photog with a 40D to compare and he has in fact used my 50D. He likes the results of the 50D, not monumentally better, but better.

Quote:

Cropping into an image really sets off the noise IMO. I remember seeing some deer images that jimalm posted on here with his 30d that were at iso 1600,and by not cropping and just sizing down,the noise was invisible-I was amazed.

What really sets off noise at any ISO is improper exposure. Expose properly at ISO 3200 and you get very clean results with a 20D/30D/50D 1 series camera. I've sold a lot of 20 x 30 size shots that were taken at 3200ISO and cropped that looked pretty darn good!

The nice thing that my results have born out is having 15mp allows you to crop. You have so much more data to work with. I've cropped some 50D shots 50% and been very happy with what I was left with and that is at various ISO's.

Quote:

Does the in camera NR in the 50d work as well,better or the same as NN

My shots show that the in camera produces better results than NN at least for now with no noise profile. That my change, but for now the camera does a better job.

One of the least attractive features for me initally was the 15mp. One of the most liked features after using the camera for the past few weeks has been the 15mp. I've stated a few reasons above, cropping ability being the big one!

I've used the camera lightly at high ISO's but that will be changing very shortly and I will be giving 6400ISO and 12800ISO a lot of work this winter. One thing the 40D cannot do is that same work Is it too much noise? My initial impressions are that I will have few to little reservations doing my type of work at these ISO's.

I've already seen over 800 printed photos from a few jobs I've had with the camera and I love the JPEG results. The clarity, color and sharpness the larger files seem to produce for me is impressive.

I personally think Canon had to go to a 15mp sensor to avoid another 20D/30D upgrade. In spite of the features they would have been crucified if they released the 50D with the same MP as the 40D but with the upgraded feature set. I've said this before, you are getting a pretty impressive camera at this price point. A few months ago I would have to drop $4500 on a Mark III to get the ability to shoot at 6400 ISO.

Most folks won't take advantage of this cameras high ISO capability, but for some it will be a welcome thing. If you don't need that capability a 40D/30D/20D Xti might be all that you want or need. Each person has to evaluate what they need and expect from a camera and do what makes sense for them.

[MN Shutterbug]

If I was a sports shooter, I'd definitely dish out the dough. If nothing else, I could save money by not having to buy lightning fast lenses.

[Dbl]

X you would still shell out the bucks for fast lenses because you can never get enough shutter speed indoors! "If I only could get one more stop of speed!" I keep saying this over and over and over!

[MN Shutterbug]

Somehow, I expected this from you Dan.