h00ligan Posted January 8, 2010 Share #1 Posted January 8, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) As many of you know I go out every day under various circumstasnces to try and learn more about photography, understanding light, exposure, etc. Tonight I decided to take the DL4 as a final try with this cam - and ran into something that continues to be a problem for me, noise. I'm convinced I must not be understanding something correctly when I see such magnificent photos coming from this cam. Could some kind soul here perhaps explain why I am getting this level of noise? Please bear in mind, these are exercises in understanding - there is nothing good about this photo - but it does illustrate the issue I am having. The idea (yes quite a trite or silly one) was to try and contrast the skyline and understand shapes in composition. Shot in raw with 0 pp. Thanks very much for taking the time and tolerating such basic questions. Full shot jpg downsized for forum regulations - and then a 100% crop. Relevant info Iso 80 Focal Length 5.1mm 1/400 at f/3.5 Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/108978-d-lux-4-noise-beginner-question/?do=findComment&comment=1178795'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 8, 2010 Posted January 8, 2010 Hi h00ligan, Take a look here D-Lux 4 noise - beginner question.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
delnerdo Posted January 8, 2010 Share #2 Posted January 8, 2010 If by "noise" you mean the speckling pattern in the blown-up/crop version, get used to it. To me it looks like random fluctuations in sensor response to light energy. With film, it would be called "grain" (clumping of the silver halide crystals or processed dyes). Here is a fundamental principal of the materials and processes of photography: Density is a function of log exposure, plus noise. Post-processing might smooth the grain, but it's inherent to the process. Do others agree? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertoDeRoma Posted January 8, 2010 Share #3 Posted January 8, 2010 Edward, Aside from the fact that what you are seeing is to be expected, I smell a bad case of "pixel peeping" about to infect you . Stop now while you can ... seriously. Focusing - no pun intended - on great composition/subject/themes is 100% more rewarding and more fun. Alberto Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted January 8, 2010 Author Share #4 Posted January 8, 2010 The problem Alberto, is that It's clearly visible in even reduced size :/ I don't want to be a pixel peeper! Delnerdo - I get that noise is inevitible given certain situations, however with a low iso and fast shutter speed - I am really wondering why it's hitting me as hard with this cam - I guess the sensor size. I took out my rebel dslr with 50mm 1.8 lens and didn't have any discernable noise at higher iso and longer exposure. I guess I'm wondering what I am doing wrong when I see such clean shots from this cam - Are people turning down sharpening into the - space? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delnerdo Posted January 8, 2010 Share #5 Posted January 8, 2010 No the noise is always there. You don't notice it in a complex scene. Please post the Canon shot if you think it's worth comparing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rexbo47 Posted January 8, 2010 Share #6 Posted January 8, 2010 I generally don't lik in-camera sharpening, preferring the control I have in Photoshop. I have used Nik software's D-Fine for noise reduction and been satisfied. Photographic Noise Reduction I've also used Noise Ninja. Noise Ninja: The gold standard for image noise reduction You can't expect any small sensor camera to deliver the same results as the larger sensor on a quality SLR. The D Lux 4? Just love it for what it is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted January 8, 2010 Author Share #7 Posted January 8, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Delnerdo - here is a pic from the canon - the iso is 2.25 higher on this shot. I tried to crop in a darker area since the light changed. Iso 200 Focal range 50mm 1/500 @f8 Both untouched from lightroom aside from sizing for the full. The thing that is bothering me is even at iso 80 in bright light, the dlux seems to show a lot of noise - perhaps because I am more used to in cam jpg processing - maybe i'll shoot raw and jpg tomorrow. I don't have a good handle on noise reduction in Lightroom - to be honest it doesn't look like it changes anything. I wonder if my inexperience leaves me in the cold as far as getting good shots on a small sensor camera - or if maybe it's an indication of needing to learn pp more. I appreciate the comments - and help. Sometimes this all gets very overwhelming... and i start to wonder when I'll actually get off the exercises and make a photo worth sharing with the world. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/108978-d-lux-4-noise-beginner-question/?do=findComment&comment=1178885'>More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted January 8, 2010 Author Share #8 Posted January 8, 2010 Here's another uncorrected shot from the dl4 at iso 400 (the camera chose it). People talk about iso 400 being fine with this cam - and I have seen evidence of that.. but just look at this shot.. it's awful (yes, all of it but i'm talking about the technicals). I MUST be doing something wrong, thats like iphone level noise. I'm just wondering if i have some setting wrong or something?!? Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/108978-d-lux-4-noise-beginner-question/?do=findComment&comment=1178887'>More sharing options...
kalina Posted January 8, 2010 Share #9 Posted January 8, 2010 Shadow areas are going to look bad on almost every digital camera, even the full-frame D3s outfitted with a fast lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinchico Posted January 8, 2010 Share #10 Posted January 8, 2010 Hi h00ligan This photo was hand held at 400 ASA,Shutter 1/8,Aperture F/2.5 at 7:28 AM:) Herbert Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/108978-d-lux-4-noise-beginner-question/?do=findComment&comment=1179710'>More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted January 8, 2010 Author Share #11 Posted January 8, 2010 Thanks for sharing - it shows me that I must be doing something wrong.. I think I am going to shoot jpg today and see what the results yield. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted January 8, 2010 Share #12 Posted January 8, 2010 Edward, My guess (and it's no more than that) is that you're experiencing the marshmallows on mud problem. If you find a load of marshmallows floating on a bowl of mud and start to ladle the marshmallows into a plate so that you can enjoy their delicious flavour then the first one or two ladlefuls will be fine but eventually as the level of marshmallows drops you'll start scooping up mud too. Uh-oh. The example photos you've chosen are right on the edge of performance for a small sensor because there just isn't very much light for the sensor's photodiodes to capture so the amount of light (marshmallows) is small compared to the amount of natural noise (mud) generated by the photodiodes. This means that the camera's processing software (ladle) is having to try too hard to sort the bona fide light information from the noise tolerance level and is coming up with more 'mud' than we'd like. So the scene is 'starving' the sensor. It looks to me like you're not seeing a similar noise profile from your dSLR because its sensor has more real estate, which may mean that its photodiodes are going to be physically larger than those in the DL4 and therefore can each capture more light because of their larger surface area. The photodiodes in some small sensors approach 1 micron in diameter, which can be smaller than the wavelength of the light that its trying to capture (like trying to fit a very large hose into a small bucket so some of the water flows past the edge and misses the bucket) whereas photodiodes from larger sensors are several microns across and several hoses can be fit into their buckets without missing any water. (Jeez, talk about mixed metaphors. Oh well ... ) Long story sorta shorter, your dSLR's sensor will naturally capture more light than the DL4's sensor but you should be able to improve the DL4's signal to noise ratio (marshmallows to mud ratio) by making sure it has plenty of light in low light shots. You could deliberately overexpose by 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop and then adjust in pp to achieve the same looking light levels but you should find less noise. At the end of the day, physics always wins. Tha moral of the story? Never pour your marshmallows into a bowl of mud. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted January 8, 2010 Author Share #13 Posted January 8, 2010 Thanks Pete, that was a very clear explanation that made a lot of sense - and made me chuckle. Helpful as always. I am very appreciative of your expertise and time. I will try the overexposure compensation and report back my results! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted January 8, 2010 Share #14 Posted January 8, 2010 Edward, Let us know whether the marshmallows were tasty too, won't you? Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digitom Posted January 8, 2010 Share #15 Posted January 8, 2010 Hi, thats an very interesting thread! I just bought an older D-Lux 2 model a few weeks ago (as a "everytime companion" in addition to my Digilux 2) and I like it - but I also see these noise problems at ISO 400. Finally I only use ISO 80 or 100, sometimes 200. Now I have just an idea: Does the menu of D-Lux 4 has the possibility to change the "Noise reduction" at the "Picture regulation" submenu from "High" via "Standard" to "Low"? Maybe if yes, you could try to change this setting? Just an Idea... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted January 8, 2010 Share #16 Posted January 8, 2010 Thomas, Edward mentioned that he shot the photo in raw so changing Noise Reduction and Picture Regulation would have no effect. I agree with you about ISO 400 on the D-Lux 2 and when I had mine I stuck to ISO 80, or if unavoidable, no further than ISO 200. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertoDeRoma Posted January 9, 2010 Share #17 Posted January 9, 2010 Thanks for sharing - it shows me that I must be doing something wrong.. I think I am going to shoot jpg today and see what the results yield. Hi Edward, it's always hard to tell with the compression going on for online posting, but I am not sure that this picture shows any less noise than yours. I see more noise and artifacts. I don't think you are doing anything wrong and I believe that Pete's great post (thank you for that Pete) explains why you (and we) see what you see. >At the end of the day, physics always wins. True, but we've made some amazing progress in the last decades and achieving some pretty amazing performance per $ - with more to come as technology progresses. There I go, warning against pixel peeping and then jumping into the discussion . Alberto Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalina Posted January 9, 2010 Share #18 Posted January 9, 2010 Somewhere on Nikon's site are D3s (or is it D3x?) sample pics captured at ISO 102,000. You don't even have to look very closely to see the grittiness. Does it look like film grain? I don't think so. Even "normal ISOs" like ISO 800 and 1600 will exhibit grittiness, albeit small amounts. If the D3s can't capture shadow areas at high ISOs, no compact camera can hope to do so, either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted January 9, 2010 Author Share #19 Posted January 9, 2010 I was just surprised to see the level at 400, and noticeable noise at 200. - edited response to be more clear. btw - I've posted a b/w i shot in the other photo section, would appreciate feedback! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delnerdo Posted January 9, 2010 Share #20 Posted January 9, 2010 So larger sensors = less noise = greater cost. C'est la vie. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.