Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
lct

Cleaner fw 2.014?

Recommended Posts

I've been taking tonight some pictures at ISO 1250.

 

I don't see any noise improvement but something has changed.I really don't know. I wonder if some color corrections and/or a sharpen algorithm improvement give me this impression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do we have these multiple subjective posts ?

If you really want to know do some objective testing.

 

Clarkvision.com: Canon 1D Mark II Sensor Noise, Dynamic Range, and Full Well Analysis

 

Quote "It takes me about 3 days of work to analyze the data and write it up.""

 

Which is why I don't

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do we have these multiple subjective posts ?...

Because there is a tiny bit of art in photography perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because there is a tiny bit of art in photography perhaps?

 

There is indeed but I see no evidence of it in these posts which are all concerned with wether the new firmware has reduced noise. This is purely technical. My "complaint" is the discussion is technical but all the assessments are subjective.

I also would like to know and understand the curiosity but multiple posts of single shots without accurate measurements is getting us no where.

 

I know the answer before you post stop reading the thread

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curiosity got the better of me so I did a couple of quick test shots before and after upgrading the firmware.

 

Obviously I was crazy enough to do this, but hope it'd benefit the discussion here. Both photos were shot indoors (at night, so there were no extraneous light sources) under a single ceiling light bulb. Photos were taken at from a tripod (to achieve identical framing), triggered by a 12 second self-timer, ISO 2500, same white balance (I checked during the process of converting DNG to JPEG files), same lens, aperture (f/8) and shutter speed (0"7 sec) for a +1/3 stop exposure compensation and same point of focus.

 

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj64/liquidkiwi/LeicaImageNoiseComparison.jpg&key=7c4686d99e13bd29bac088bfcfcee6e0ae24d59699e656bd945f38b95134c7c2">

 

To my mind at least, there are very few differences between the two. Subjectively things may be worse AFTER the firmware upgrade, but the difference is so small I couldn't tell you which was which in a double-blind test.

 

Call me mad, but I am not the slightest bit disappointed with the high ISO performance of the M8 whichever way we cut it. This comes from having used a Canon 1Ds MKI that only went to ISO 1250 (photos were grainy but sharp) and a Fujifilm S5 Pro that goes to ISO 3200 (photos have less chrominance noise but soft). With a bit of chrominance noise reduction in Lightroom, the results are completely usable IMO. I've never liked silky-smooth noise-free images however, which probably explains my high tolerance to image noise.

 

Image noise ain't gonna make or break the image IMHO, especially as unobstrusive as they are from today's cameras.

 

Bottom-line is, this is a very interesting discussion. I'd be very glad if there were genuine improvements to image quality as a result of this firmware. But even without that, man, I love my 'vaniila', unadulterated M8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've been taking tonight some pictures at ISO 1250.

 

I don't see any noise improvement but something has changed.I really don't know. I wonder if some color corrections and/or a sharpen algorithm improvement give me this impression.

 

I also did some tests and can't see a difference in noise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Measuring the noise in the samples Andrew posted, the noise in the image captured with 2.014 is actually lower by 5.9% compared to that captured with 2.005. Noise is defined as the standard deviation of the distribution (StdDev in the summary table).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See!!!! I told you so. It is obviously better.

 

 

.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Measuring the noise in the samples Andrew posted, the noise in the image captured with 2.014 is actually lower by 5.9% compared to that captured with 2.005. Noise is defined as the standard deviation of the distribution (StdDev in the summary table).

Luminance noise is indeed slightly lower while chrominance noise looks worse. The two squares don’t cover the exact same area, though, so the result may be skewed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Luminance noise is indeed slightly lower while chrominance noise looks worse. The two squares don’t cover the exact same area, though, so the result may be skewed.
Oy, you are spoiling the fun;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Michael's comments are valid, mmk60's remarks are completely irrelevant. Sensor noise measurements include temporal noise estimation where about 100 frames are needed to get valid statistics, and spatial noise estimation - which is what was performed here from 7650 pixels - where a single frame is fine.

Edited by Bert N

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see any difference at all which is great because the M8 files are just the best IMO ....never shoot above 640 And at 640 the files are really special .

 

Best

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Line - made me smile.

 

Mine makes an annoying click every time I press the shutter, no matter what the ISO!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 +1 +1

Bottom-line is, this is a very interesting discussion. I'd be very glad if there were genuine improvements to image quality as a result of this firmware. But even without that, man, I love my 'vaniila', unadulterated M8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...