Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: stevecoleccs on June 27, 2007, 07:10:54 pm
-
I had the chance to shoot a couple of shots today with the P30+ / Conxax.
I shot at iso1600, alsome!
~ cole
-
opps - bit of a problem here - try this link for a download.
~ cole
http://www.stevecole.com/1600iso.zip (http://www.stevecole.com/1600iso.zip)
-
Thats impressive!
The noise cleaned up nicely without too much softening.
opps - bit of a problem here - try this link for a download.
~ cole
http://www.stevecole.com/1600iso.zip (http://www.stevecole.com/1600iso.zip)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125284\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
impressive.... very usable.
-
Hello Cole,
I would love to have a look at the raw file,
would it be possible for you to put it up for download, please ?
Regards
SH
-
Hello Cole,
I would love to have a look at the raw file,
would it be possible for you to put it up for download, please ?
Regards
SH
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125345\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
that would be great if you could. im close to make a decision between a p30 or a p30+, just got to figure out if i really should be shelling out a bit extra money.
cheers paul
-
Here is the RAW link - cole
http://www.stevecole.com/raw_1600.zip (http://www.stevecole.com/raw_1600.zip)
-
Here is the RAW link - cole
http://www.stevecole.com/raw_1600.zip (http://www.stevecole.com/raw_1600.zip)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125429\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thank you very much.
-
Steve,
When you processed your images, did you have the noise suppression turned off or down?
Did you process through C1 Pro?
Thanks,
Chris Lawery
Capture Integration
www.captureintegration.com
-
Chris,
If you look the first images, he say noise & sharpen it's turn off.
with C1
BlasR.
Steve,
When you processed your images, did you have the noise suppression turned off or down?
Did you process through C1 Pro?
Thanks,
Chris Lawery
Capture Integration
www.captureintegration.com
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125460\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Thats impressive!
The noise cleaned up nicely without too much softening.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125307\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I woudn't even think to clean up that level of noise; I much prefer the "noisy" version. The noisy version *does* in fact, already have chromatic noise reduction applied.
-
Hi Cole,
the level of noise is amazing.
RawDeveloper reads the exposure data as
1/125s and f13 are those correct or just proxies ?
Regards
SH
-
I prefer the 'noisy' version as well, I dislike the smoothing and loss of detail you get when removing the noise. The 'grainy/noisy' version I find a lot more appealling but than again I tend to be one of the few that does.
It looks very good for 1600ISO. Truly impressive.
-
Dear Cole,
Could you give details about this shot?
f13 at 1/125 does more likely point to an ISO of 100, rather than 1600, under the light conditions seen in this image.
The noise is definitively "impressive", if shot at ISO 1600.
Best regards,
Thierry
Hi Cole,
the level of noise is amazing.
RawDeveloper reads the exposure data as
1/125s and f13 are those correct or just proxies ?
Regards
SH
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125548\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Hi Thierry - this was shot at 1600iso, I also shot another one of the same
subject at 800iso. I shoot with the P30 most of the time at 400 & alot
at 800. I was very concerned before I bought the P30+ if it could shoot
at 1600iso, so I had to see for myself when I went to Capture
Integration in Atlanta & test it for myself (my P30+ has not arrived yet)
~ cole
quote=thsinar,Jun 30 2007, 03:51 AM]
Dear Cole,
Could you give details about this shot?
f13 at 1/125 does more likely point to an ISO of 100, rather than 1600, under the light conditions seen in this image.
The noise is definitively "impressive", if shot at ISO 1600.
Best regards,
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125700\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/quote]
-
Hello Cole,
do you remember what the exposure time and aperture were ?
Are 1/125 and f13 correct ?
Nobody doubts that you took the shot with ISO 1600 and nobody doubts your credibility.
But the shooting parameters are an interesting point:
ISO1600 is supposed to give you a well exposed image with the same exposure time and aperture, which would result in an image underexposed by 4 stops if it would have been taken with the same exposure time and aperture, but ISO100.
If the above values are correct I guess that the image would be overexposed by about 4 stops.
That would mean that the digital values are 16 times (4 * 4) higher than they would be, if it would have been taken when using the "correct" shooting values for ISO1600.
This means that the noise is much lower than it would be on an "real" ISO1600 shot.
A good test would be to take two shots of the same subject one "correctly" exposed ISO100 shot and a second shot with ISO1600 but 1/16 of the exposure time of the ISO100 shot.
Kind regards
SH
-
Hi SH - thanks for the input, I'm not much into the tech stuff, I
think of concept & design first & tech stuff near last. All I know
if I set the iso on the camera back to 1600 - it's 1600, good
enough for me. Thanks again for your test idea, maybe someone
else with a 30+ will spend time with your test.
~ cole
Hello Cole,
do you remember what the exposure time and aperture were ?
Are 1/125 and f13 correct ?
Nobody doubts that you took the shot with ISO 1600 and nobody doubts your credibility.
But the shooting parameters are an interesting point:
ISO1600 is supposed to give you a well exposed image with the same exposure time and aperture, which would result in an image underexposed by 4 stops if it would have been taken with the same exposure time and aperture, but ISO100.
If the above values are correct I guess that the image would be overexposed by about 4 stops.
That would mean that the digital values are 16 times (4 * 4) higher than they would be, if it would have been taken when using the "correct" shooting values for ISO1600.
This means that the noise is much lower than it would be on an "real" ISO1600 shot.
A good test would be to take two shots of the same subject one "correctly" exposed ISO100 shot and a second shot with ISO1600 but 1/16 of the exposure time of the ISO100 shot.
Kind regards
SH
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125761\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Hi Cole,
the level of noise is amazing.
RawDeveloper reads the exposure data as
1/125s and f13 are those correct or just proxies ?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125548\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
C1 reads meta data as 1/125s, f/13, and ISO 1600.
-
Can you please provide us with the shooting parameters (speed and aperture) for the equivalent shots you took at 400 and 800 ISO that same day on the same setup?
Thank you in advance,
Regards,
Bernard
p.s.: even my Nikon D2x - not the best camera around for high iso photography - performs beautifully at ISO 1600 when there is plenty of light...
-
Something here doesn't scan.
Could someone with a P30+ * do a "normal" 1600 ISO shoot in "normally" low light ?
Edmund
-
i would like to see tha too. ofcourse first view looks great, but most digitals look good if used in daylight even with hi isos. this may change under tungsten or real low light conditions. also,- without any misscredit to the author here ,- but i cant understand also how to use iso1600 in daylight ( even shadows are visible, so minimum lv13-14 ) without overexposing the lights totally, with f13 + 1/125 @ iso 1600. would be nice if someone could show with lo light shot that the noise we see here holds up under mor "normal" conditions also. thank you.
-
p.s.: even my Nikon D2x - not the best camera around for high iso photography - performs beautifully at ISO 1600 when there is plenty of light...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125815\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The difference in noise between cameras with the same size sensor is mainly in the read noises, which are a small noise that blankets the signal, and has almost no effect at all in the highlight areas, and has its main effect in the deepest shadows. If your subject falls only in the midtone and highlight areas, there is little difference between cameras with the same size sensors except their resolutions. The noise in the highlights and the midtones is mostly shot noise, determined by real exposure and the quantum efficiency of the sensor/microlens/filter combo.
-
Nobody doubts that you took the shot with ISO 1600 and nobody doubts your credibility.
Really? I don't get that impression based on some of the responses Cole has received in this thread.
Mark
-
Really? I don't get that impression based on some of the responses Cole has received in this thread.
Mark
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125980\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It has generated interest, which is good, and verrifying accuracy or the conditions needed to get this result shouldn't be an issue, it is from a production line so there are more backs around.
The first part of these images I looked at was the low values of the black soil. Looks great! I would be interested to see if the same sort of values in a different scene, say a night shot with a longer exposure, would give the same sort of relatively noiseless result.
I'm also interested in the idea that using a high iso is the same as underexposing. I was under the impression that there was more to it than that, that the data read from the chip has a compensation for the the settings of the exposure.
David
-
Edmund - if you want a test done at 1600iso - call a rep, get a demo AND DO IT YOUR SELF!
~ cole
Something here doesn't scan.
Could someone with a P30+ * do a "normal" 1600 ISO shoot in "normally" low light ?
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125896\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I will try to do just that. But maybe someone who has a back can just dial it up a bit during his next shoot, and shoot with modeling lights instead of the strobes and post an image ?
Hey, I'm a scientist, we bunch believe in independent verification of results. In fact some of my papers were accepted not because they were original, but because they confirmed other people's work.
Edmund
Edmund - if you want a test done at 1600iso - call a rep, get a demo AND DO IT YOUR SELF!
~ cole
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125994\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Thanks for posting these images, I found them very helpful
-
Really? I don't get that impression based on some of the responses Cole has received in this thread.
Mark
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125980\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
@Mark,
at the time I wrote this I hadn't got the impression that anybody doubts his credibility, definitely not me. It was an ordinary question and of technical interest.
Asking what shooting parameters were used in a shot is standard procedure.
And with digital backs you never know whether all shooting parameters are correctly transferred from the camera to the back. May it be that the camera doesn't offer the values or the back doesn't take them. Only the exposure time can be determined by the back without any additional information of the camera.
The same goes for the ISO setting on the back. Jut because you tell your back to use ISO 400, it doesn't mean your camera will adapt it's exposure metering and time automatic.
And not knowing about such things does not reduce credibility, avoiding answers or giving knowingly wrong information does. And I have no reason that Cole did or does so.
And by the way I'm still interested in the shooting parameters but it looks like Cole can not remember them. Probably somebody else knows whether the P30+ on a Contax does read the aperture and exposure time correctly and whether the Contax reacts to changes of the backs ISO value (which is of secondary interest if the values are correctly read by the back).
Regards
SH
-
Sorry everyone - I did not mean for this to be a scientific test, just a quick small one.
What I do remember about my quick test is:
P30+, iso1600, natural light, Contax camera, 35mm lens, handheld. 125th shutter @ F/13
Processed with C1Pro, noise suppression: Low, Banding: off, Sharpen: Disable
This was shot just outside the front door of Capture Integration last week
during a PhaseOne open house.
My P30+ will not arrive until a few more weeks, maybe if someone with the time &
a scientific mind with a P30+ can do a real test, or call up Capture Integration in Atlanta
& set up a demo, they are great to work with.
~ cole
-
Cole, Thank you very much.
Regards
SH
-
The same goes for the ISO setting on the back. Jut because you tell your back to use ISO 400, it doesn't mean your camera will adapt it's exposure metering and time automatic.
Point taken but it also doesn't take too much 'detective work' from anyone who has exposed even
a few film/digital captures in their lives to know that shooting in the shade, as Coles example clearly was, at 100iso will never yield an exposure combination of 1/125 sec and f 13.
Mark
-
Point taken but it also doesn't take too much 'detective work' from anyone who has exposed even
a few film/digital captures in their lives to know that shooting in the shade, as Coles example clearly was, at 100iso will never yield an exposure combination of 1/125 sec and f 13.
Mark
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126077\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hello Mark,
I do not understand why you are so aggressive, did I do anything to you ?
My line of thought is simple.
125/f13 at ISO 1600 will be about lv10. For me it looks like a bright sunny day as I do know them from the Mediterian. More like lv14-15.
So let's deduct a stop or two or 3 for the shade.
So it seems natural to ask for the parameters, especially for judging noise which depends heavily on the scene and exposure parameters.
I haven't attacked anyone, I haven't blamed anyone, I have asked and have been given an answer and I'm thankful.
And now that I've got an answer I will go and buy my first camera.
Any suggestions, I mainly take pictures of my kids and school sport.
I thought about a Canon 1dIII first, but it has so many confusing dials. And now I lean to one of these real sports cameras which can capture more than 20 frames a second and the best is, they are not only faster but are even cheaper than the canon and have less buttons
I hope you don't mind if I turn to you for help in case I need some ?
Kind regards
SH
-
if you are shooting your kids i would suggest to take the h3 with its 39mp back ( maybe you could buy for the kids one or two waterproof canon 1dmk3 ),-
if you are interested mostly in cat pics i would suggest you buy the p45 or p30+ ( black colors! ) either with a h2 or with a contax,-
if you shoot the landscapes around berlin you could buy an a75, which will give you a nice line in the center of your images to put the horizont on it ( you should shoot in germany/ brandenburg mainly in portrait position landscapes,- i dont know why but it is a fact ) and
if you want to make pics of your house buy the e75 with gottschalt or alpa for the good workflow eMotionDNG can bring you.
and dont forget the mamiya option if you take the car to travel.
hope this helps
-
if you are shooting your kids i would suggest to take the h3 with its 39mp back ( maybe you could buy for the kids one or two waterproof canon 1dmk3 ),-
if you are interested mostly in cat pics i would suggest you buy the p45 or p30+ ( black colors! ) either with a h2 or with a contax,-
if you shoot the landscapes around berlin you could buy an a75, which will give you a nice line in the center of your images to put the horizont on it ( you should shoot in germany/ brandenburg mainly in portrait position landscapes,- i dont know why but it is a fact ) and
if you want to make pics of your house buy the e75 with gottschalt or alpa for the good workflow eMotionDNG can bring you.
and dont forget the mamiya option if you take the car to travel.
hope this helps
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126107\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks for your post and your good intentions,
but all it did is make me realize that this photography thing is too complicated for me.
I'm grateful that your post reached me just in time, before I wasted any money on it.
It will be better to spend my money on brushes, colors and canvas and start painting.
I just have to train my kids to freeze in motion, when I want to take a picture.
Regards
SH
-
-
Thanks for your post and your good intentions,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126109\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
you are welcome.
i know this kind of problems but unfortunately painting does not give me the freedom to spend
€ xx.xxx,-- every year in new gear....
best regards and good luck for your future ....
rainer
-
you are welcome.
i know this kind of problems but unfortunately painting does not give me the freedom to spend
€ xx.xxx,-- every year in new gear....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126111\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
On the other hand, there is no limitation in output size with painting, which can be a great opportunity to spend big bucks as well, especially if you think about storage area in central Berlin.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I hope you don't mind if I turn to you for help in case I need some ?
Unfortunately,you'll be needing more help than I'm qualified to give
Mark
-
I heard Hasselblad are introducing a new Blurrix model, especially for brides: 80 MP totally gaussian filtered straight in the camera so no mistakes can occur in post. Might come useful for the wives too, but not for cats
Edmund
-
Unfortunately,you'll be needing more help than I'm qualified to give
Mark
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126168\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
@Mark
than you better start learning about photography, so I can ask.
Regards
SH
-
While this may be the dream camera for the wedding photographer, I am waiting for the release of the old Twilight Zone camera where the captured image is 5 minutes into the future. I will take film or digital version and do not care about the quality of the included lens.
I heard Hasselblad are introducing a new Blurrix model, especially for brides: 80 MP totally gaussian filtered straight in the camera so no mistakes can occur in post. Might come useful for the wives too, but not for cats
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126170\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
here you can see again how antique film is: till you have developed your film its already past, not longer future. maybe a pola back, but will be difficult to get polas as you might know. would suggest here to take a future back with live view. i do not know why i suggest that, its a feelig of me and i learnt to trust my feelings. thierry, does sinar have something in the pipeline? we all want that, w all need that, so companies shuld listen to the needs of the photographers if they ask their money.
why not to paint the future? here you can go even 1 hour in th future with the right tools ( already exisiting ) !!!!
-
hi Rainer,
sorry, the pipeline is stuck: I can't see through!
More seriously: it is a function which is on our "wish-list", but I have no idea about implementation or decision to do it. Certainly not a priority right now.
Kind regards,
Thierry
here you can see again how antique film is: till you have developed your film its already past, not longer future. maybe a pola back, but will be difficult to get polas as you might know. would suggest here to take a future back with live view. i do not know why i suggest that, its a feelig of me and i learnt to trust my feelings. thierry, does sinar have something in the pipeline? we all want that, w all need that, so companies shuld listen to the needs of the photographers if they ask their money.
why not to paint the future? here you can go even 1 hour in th future with the right tools ( already exisiting ) !!!!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126184\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
In the show it was like a polaroid so instant developing
here you can see again how antique film is: till you have developed your film its already past, not longer future. maybe a pola back, but will be difficult to get polas as you might know. would suggest here to take a future back with live view. i do not know why i suggest that, its a feelig of me and i learnt to trust my feelings. thierry, does sinar have something in the pipeline? we all want that, w all need that, so companies shuld listen to the needs of the photographers if they ask their money.
why not to paint the future? here you can go even 1 hour in th future with the right tools ( already exisiting ) !!!!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126184\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I apologize to all that find this a waste of bandwidth, but I because I' m seriously considering switching to a paint system, I thought I give you my first impressions based on an presentation at a local dealer.
And than I will let it rest. Promised,
The first thing you realize is the big interchangeable screen. It comes in different sizes as small as 15x10 cm up to 88 x 124 mm.
There are also special solutions with even larger or even smaller screens.
The image on the screen is absolutely color correct and the colors are guaranteed to match those of the final print.
You must have seen it to believe it. The colors are gorgeous and the screen can be looked at from all direction without any color shift.
In contrast to most other camera and computer screens, this screen works perfectly in full sunlight, thanks to it's reflective design. The drawback is that the screen is hard to watch in low light condition. For fans of available light image capture the screen can be equipped with battery operated front-lighting to make the screen readable even in the absolute dark.
Another feature, that I haven't seen on other systems is that you can watch on the screen how the image comes into existence.
Because of the big screen the complete system is rather large and you will have to use a sturdy tripod in most cases. There are some people that are able to take pictures without a tripod, but usually only on small format systems and with short exposure times of about 3 hours or less. On longer exposures hand and leg shake get visible.
Because most pictures are taken with a tripod, IS is not available.
Talking about exposure times. Exposure times are between some minutes and many weeks. But rest assured that the exposure time has absolutely no influence on image noise. But once in a while, white hotspots appear on long exposure times especially when taking images in the open in areas frequently visited by birds.
To cut the exposure time you can increase the iso value (international size organisation). Higher values lead to shorter exposure times. The good news is that absolutely no noise is created due to using a larger size brush, but the bad news are that detail is lost in the process. The noise filtering seems to be a bit too aggressive.
But it is possible to use different layers to combine a high iso and a low iso image to get the shorter exposure times of high iso and add the higher resolution of low iso in the areas of interest. Those images are called HDR images (hidden detail reactivation).
Focusing works well for most people and people with glasses can focus as easily as people without.
The focusing system is so flexible that you can have different areas of focus in the same picture. A real innovation.
There is absolutely no brightness falloff to the edges of the image and even perspective correction can be applied in the device.
Overall you can say that the quality of the optical system is as good as your eyesight.
The sensor is maintenance free, only spectacle wearers should clean their glasses regularly. This can be done with a piece of cloth and water. There is a whole industry offering more complex solutions for spectacle wearers with more demanding needs. Swaps with the same width as the glasses are the latest hype.
Talking about sensors we will have to talk about the centre fold issue.
This system has a centre fold problem. Up to now I've seen it only on large prints. When the print came out of the system it looked fine, but after I took home the A1 print in my A2 storage system, I realized a straight line in the center of the image.
When I called the representative he told me that he never has seen this before, but what can you expect.
The prints are instantly available after the exposure is completed.
Depending on the paper chosen the magazine holds between 1 and 50 sheets. Roll paper is also available.
There are different color systems to choose from and no matter whether you are a Canon or a Epson man, dye as well as pigmented colors are at your command.
The colors differ a bit between manufacturers, but there are also standard colors available which allow proof output on all devices.
In the output itself there is no visible grid and you can't see single dots. The number of colors seems to be endless, at least 16 bits per channel. Non primary colors seem to be created by a process similar to dye sublimation, but no excessive heat is needed.
For b&w enthusiast there is a large range of b&w inks, which are absolute devoid of any color cast.
I'm quite happy with the workflow as shown by my dealer, but he is a pro of course, so it might look simpler than it is. I tried to focus on a scene and bring it to paper, but I'm still shaky with the focusing system no matter how hard I try, the images don't really look tack sharp, sometimes the don't even look real.
I think I will buy a special starter kit, which gives you step by step instructions and has numbers printed on the screen to ease image creation.
Once I master the basics I will be happy to post some images.
Regards
SH
-
wow.
i hope this system will be avalable soon...
is it possible to shoot with it also the future?
-
Once I master the basics I will be happy to post some images.
Regards
SH
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126189\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I trust you'll go postal then
Edmund
-
Stefan,
I think you should take some lessons from this guy: he seems to master the system perfectly!:
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=661434&cache=1 (http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=661434&cache=1)
Cheers,
Thierry
Once I master the basics I will be happy to post some images.
Regards
SH
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126189\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]