ISO: New Cameras VS Old Cameras
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 07. 2024
- I hope this made sense.....
Please Subscribe!
Check out some of my other videos!
Epic Video Hack:
• CGI VIDEO WITHOUT THE CGI
Ultralight Gimbal:
• Ultra light-weight gim...
Overhead Shooting Rig:
• Unconventional Overhea...
Moza Mini Mi:
• MOZA MINI-MI Cenematic...
The MS Paint analogy was genius. Thanks for putting this video together. Also just be yourself, we don't need another McKinnon.😬
Yeah I'm just trying to be a little more lively on camera. I am predisposed to being monotone when talking to just the camera so I'm trying to branch out a bit.
Great comparison video Chris! Novel approach with the paint shop example also.
THANK YOU. When I started photography I would have prefered knowing the truth about iso as opposed to being told "high iso = noise". There's been a shift recently with more and more awareness about this and it's nice to see. People have to stop saying iso is sensitivity to light and is the cause of noise. It is super misleading.
Christopher, I'm impressed by the way you explain this in a clear, concise, and easy to understand manner. You're a consummate communicator.
It was kind of a daunting amount of info to get in to a CZcams video. I'm glad it all came across correctly!
“It looks like a plaid shirt!” .... “like the one I’m wearing”! 🤣
I definitely had the thought! Lol
Christopher Burress definitely perfect.
One can make comparison with sound, low level sound need amplification either in post or in camera (pre-amplifier). The last one is better than the first one, generate less noise.
Exactly the same.
Thank you for explaining this concept! Now I can't help but think how the newest cameras like the Canon EOS R6 / Sony A7siii compare to actual film! Or more so 4x5.. medium format film
Sony a7iii is a beast. maybe because of the dual native isos??? at 100 and the 640 ?
Possibly. I was astounded at the 3200 performance, it looks literally perfect.
That's exactly correct, you can see this clearly with dxomarks testing.
The boosted a7 III image looks worse than the ISO 3200 image because the 2nd native ISO (which increases noise levels less) on the dual gain sensor only activates at ISO 640.
It still isn't nearly as extreme as the Canon example
Due to the dual native ISO on the A7 III sensor, you could get the EXACT SAME IMAGE if you shoot one at 640 ISO and other at 51200 ISO.
Same if you were to use ISO 100 and ISO 500.
BUT the ISO invariance does NOT apply when you cross the limit between the dual gain values (i.e. ISO 100 and ISO 3200) like you did here.
You can try and see for yourself, that’s actually a widely used technique for astrophotography, where you usually are at more than ISO 640.
In your examples there’s a clear advantage to the ISO 3200 image when compared to the ISO 100 image with boosted exposure, and this is the reason why.
super helpful!
Did you deactivate in camera noise reduction for your tests ? Because it helps, but it also destroys some infos, and takes a bit time to process after capturing the photo... I’m curious about what i should do with my a6500, noise reduction or not ?
I typically turn it off just to preserve the most info. I don't think it really kicks in until the higher iso's. But I don't know specifics
can you help me i don t know what i choose if i buy a7rii or a6500 for video
without looking for the budget
The a6500 is better for video. Better 4k, better slow motion, better autofocus.
@@ChristopherBurress thank you very much and a7rii in super 35 which is better
The 4k improves to match in s35 mode. The slow motion and autofocus still isn't as good.
with my a6300 i have very much noise allready at iso800 ... everything above is just not bareable anymore.
how can the 6500 look so fine at iso 32000 ???
can i send you some picures and you tell me if i am doing something wrong ?
Yeah send me a google drive link and I'll check em out.
I've been thinking this for a while. I used to have film cameras and I was thinking ISO is just a software trick in a digital one, and setting it in camera only has the effect of boosting the image so that you can see what you are shooting, and is no different from shooting at ISO 100 and boosting in photoshop yourself later.
At least that's maybe true of my EOS550D. Maybe it's time I got a newer camera ;)
Did you turn off the default color noise reductions? Lightroom defaults the color slider to 25. You need to disable the noise/sharpening tab
I disabled it.
Damn A7III looking fire!!! Wanting to switch from my a6300 haha!
I was shocked! It performs great!
You need to test 640 vs the higher isos which is the dual gain part of it.
I may look into that with an a7iii low light/high iso video.
@@ChristopherBurress Haha rekt 🤣
Really confused about what you were doing when toggling layers and referring to Lightroom ISO100... I take it you were using images exported from various editing suites where you had “corrected” exposure in post in a noticeable way by exaggerating the stops to bring out the noise that was baked into the image?
That is correct, sorry if that was unclear
Christopher Burress No worries. I’m sure most understood, but I’m a noob. Thanks for the great videos and information!
hot topic everywhere eh
Gotta jump on the train lol
"what are you doing with your life?" Did you pick that up from Camera conspiracies? :D
Call me a hipster, but I kind of like noisy black and white images. Although I do not welcome noise when it comes to colour.
There are little fairies that determine the quality of image inside every camera. Prove me wrong.
But, I... I can't...
You mean like the one in my refrigerator who turns the light on and off?
Goblins are far too large to fit inside cameras, don't be ridiculous....
@@ChristopherBurress : Gremlins, maybe?
I can see it now.... There is going to be a wave of "photographers" running around shooting at ISO 50 at F/8 and double the focal length shutter speed without flash. When the image comes up on the back of their screen, it's just pure black and they say "Nailed it!" This is stupidity. ISO is a tool to help photographers to compose and hold the correct shutter speed for the situation. That is it. Everything else is down to the sensor.
Also, that is entirely not how ISO works. The sensor is not capturing light. It is producing EV (electron voltage) values based on the intensity and duration of light hitting the sensor. You get more noise on your image the longer you have the shutter open because you are not only getting more light hitting the sensor, but also other forms of near visible light exciting the sensor via infrared, ultra violet and other forms of radiation like heat. This is a well known fact in astrophotography and they actually super cool their sensors to eliminate the heat factor from the equation to get less noise. this is also why your camera's sensor has a IR filter in front of it. Raising your ISO just multiplies the speed at which this happens. The sensor quality dictates everything. Once again the more you expose your sensor to any form of radiation, the more noise is going to be in the image, not the other way around that you are trying to describe.
You must have missed my concluding recommendation....
Even in astro, you would rather run a 1 min exposure than shoot at iso 500,000. Again, light gathering reigns king over high iso.
@@ChristopherBurress Light intensity is king. A.K.A. lumens. That is why flash images are so clean. This is the point I was trying to make.
Duration allows non visible radiation to gather on the sensor producing noise. Duration does not "clean up" an image. It is about purity of signal. The longer you are exposed, or the higher your sensitivity the more noise you get.
Astrophotography does not have the luxury of light intensity so they are forced to use long exposures which is why they super cool the sensors. It was an example of why longer exposures to attempt to clean up an image is the opposite of what you want to be doing.
The reason why a dark image causes higher ISO noise once you correct the exposure in post is because you are bypassing the eV averaging algorithms. The digital processor takes the sum average of the eV signals from each pixel and looks for anomalies that go against the average eV in the general area of that pixel. Lower ISO's are using less heavy handed noise reduction techniques on the raw files. So if you boost it out of camera you are seeing what the sensor saw without the digic processor averaging the eV values to reduce the noise. This is also why higher ISO raw files lose sharpness. The pixels in the raw files are being heavily averaged to attempt to reduce noise.
Which is in a sense the front end processing that I mentioned. As tech gets better at these averaging algorithms, it's does better and better with high iso/low light. And with intensity, higher intensity = more photons = less noise. The benefit of higher intensity (flash) is faster shutter speed which dovetails nicely with your point that long exposure time introduces it's own type of noise.
@@ChristopherBurress If you want to do a real test of ISO noise, do a shot comparison of a static shot done with hot lamps at a low shutter speed and properly exposed vs one done with flash tubes at a high shutter speed with the same ISO. It would be interesting to see how the old camera compares to the newer cameras as that would be a true test of sensor quality.
Oof
first :)
Thanks for watching!
@@ChristopherBurress No problem! this is one of my favorite channels
Its called color noise
No, it's called Microsoft paint.
Why does every CZcamsr has to ride non whatever another one does...can you guys come up with your own ideas???
Everyone adds their own opinions and information to it. What I covered in this video is nowhere in either of the other videos I mentioned, but this video was inspired by them, not a duplication of them.
There are no original ideas. Every idea is an advancement of someone else's idea. That is how it becomes a good idea; because it evolves it each time someone else gets hold of it.
People think Star Wars is original, but George heavily borrowed from others and just added to it.