Canon 1s Mark III Noise

[danazoo]

I agree and frankly, I do not think we should have to do ANY noise reduction at ISO 100.

Thats great news. I won't hear anything from Canon until it's fixed. It did't look bad enough to be a defective sensor, but time will tell. The images I was getting were still amazing.
Dennis
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=184504\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[danazoo]

I have loaded a NOISY image online for review which was processed in:
- Capture One V 4
- PSCS3
- Canon DPP

the image is online at

www.michellehoff.com/test.jpg


Dana

To me, that sounds like a defective sensor with many dead pixels.  easy way to tell (though i'm sure there are better ways).  get into a dark room with a single color light source (like the red lights from a christmas ahem, holiday, tree) put it on a tripod and take a long exposure with that light.  If you see single white spots around the image, those are dead pixels.  I can't recall if they end up giving you a bit of a cross hatch, where the pixel at the four corners will also look a bit off, but one will be especially white.  Something that shouldn't happen if you only have red light. 

I had this problem with my 10D, and its the first thing I check on each new digital camera.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=184566\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Panopeeper]

A JPEG image is worthless for the purpose of such analysis.

[danazoo]

"A JPEG image is worthless for the purpose of such analysis."

Yes, my sincere apologies on the low quality jpeg format which was posted online. I would post a fill size 60MB tif for review if I knew how. I would post the original RAW file for download if I had an ftp access that would hold a 28MB file. But I don't have either.

The reason I posted the jpeg was to portray a simple illustation of the white noise.

Regards,
D

[Panopeeper]

" I would post the original RAW file for download if I had an ftp access that would hold a 28MB file. But I don't have either

The best way is to send it with yousendit.com. There is no need to register.
You can sent it to a fictional email address, you don't even need to use your own email address, that too can be fictional.

In response, you receive a URL (an internet address) from yousendit, which is required to download the file; you should post that here.

But pls do not upload the TIFF. The point is, that everybody can try his/her way on a raw file, but not on the TIFF or JPEG.

[danazoo]

Thanks Pano,
I took your advice and uploaded a RAW file. If you wish and for those interested too, it can be downloaded here:

http://download.yousendit.com/120FF39637D1A5C8

Once you download it, the first thing you will notice is that it is a fuzzy out of focus image. The camera moved during the shot. This was a very very windy evening. Not to worry, the noise levels are juist as lovely on this frame as a smooth crisp interior image.

As for proccessing these images, I found the following to be true:

- Photoshop CS3 had the best results, or least amount of noise. Especially is I used the noise compensation adjustments. I will also ad that he PSCS3 images were the least sharp overall of the three proccesses I compared. And the noise is still there to some extent.

- Canon DPP produced the second Tiff file, with the noie appearing as red, blue and green specs along with a few white images. The white pixels seem to be the largest. These are viewable pre and post processing in DPP.

- Last I used Capture One V 4 which produced images with white noise. These are the sharpest and cleanest of the images as per image content. And also the most noise visable. I use C1 for most of my work.

As I have had the 1Ds Mark III for three months now, I went back and looked at images from January. They were fine and free of noise. Unlike the images today. I also noticed that from day to day, the noise or ghost pixels are in the same spot on the image/sensor. That leads me to think there is a sensor problem.

I mentioned all of this to Canon. They still failed to correct the issue when the camera was sent in. Now they want me to send the camera in again.

ugh.

The best way is to send it with yousendit.com. There is no need to register.
You can sent it to a fictional email address, you don't even need to use your own email address, that too can be fictional.

In response, you receive a URL (an internet address) from yousendit, which is required to download the file; you should post that here.

But pls do not upload the TIFF. The point is, that everybody can try his/her way on a raw file, but not on the TIFF or JPEG.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186274\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Panopeeper]

I don't find this image noisy. Perhaps you should point out, which area is noisy.

However, I see hundreds of hot or stuck pixels. Your "the noise or ghost pixels are in the same spot on the image/sensor" indicates, that you too are thinking of these (if the "noise" is always on the same pixels, then you can be sure it is not noise).

I'm afraid the sensor of your camera is beyound repairability. Pls make a "black frame" shot: with lens cap on, but tightly, viewfinder covered, 1 sec, and upload that too. Some (even some dozen) hot pixels are ok, but I think this is too much.

You see less of them in CS3, because ACR removes most of them.

[danazoo]

Yes, I agree. I was never sepakingof noise in terms of grainy imagery. I was speaking of hundreds of white pixels with no color in them.

As for the sensor needing to be replaced, I am on week two of that fight with Canon. As I said, they have already had this camera once for this problem and did nothing.

d

I don't find this image noisy. Perhaps you should point out, which area is noisy.

However, I see hundreds of hot or stuck pixels. Your "the noise or ghost pixels are in the same spot on the image/sensor" indicates, that you too are thinking of these (if the "noise" is always on the same pixels, then you can be sure it is not noise).

I'm afraid the sensor of your camera is beyound repairability. Pls make a "black frame" shot: with lens cap on, but tightly, viewfinder covered, 1 sec, and upload that too. Some (even some dozen) hot pixels are ok, but I think this is too much.

You see less of them in CS3, because ACR removes most of them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186303\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[danazoo]

As it turned out, the imagery in my Mark III had a problem. I sent my camera to Canon twice for the problem. On the second go round, I demanded they provide me with better professional service. I also got my Dealer as well as his Canon Rep involved.

While it took a little over a week to sort this out, I received a brand new Mark III today. Thank you Canon.

[Quantum]

Any progress report with new camera? Trust all is well now.