This is to show you that Nikon's high ISO is not as noisy as you may think with respect to the same ISO equivalent in Canon. This should show that it's more on how the two products handle noise, as mentioned in the previous thread (http://www.digitalphotographer.com.ph/forum/showthread.php?t=1828).

These sample images should explain. They are all taken using the following settings:

Camera: Nikon D200
Lens: Nikkor 18-70mm Kit Lens
ISO: 800
Shutter: 1/60
Aperture: f/4.5
Light: Available
File: NEF (RAW)


SAMPLE 1

Process with Nikon Capture 4.4.2 (Level, Curves and D-Lighting) then converted to JPG.

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/3047/peach1hs2.jpg

100% Crop
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/5479/peach1100gf3.jpg
Noisy eh?


SAMPLE 2

Process with Nikon Capture 4.4.2 (Level, Curves and D-Lighting), converted to JPG and then processed in noise reduction software.

http://img93.imageshack.us/img93/8736/peach2mr6.jpg

100% Crop
http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/9202/peach2100sh0.jpg
Wow, Canon? Nah!


Photographers accustomed to the in-camera noise handling of Canon will easily mistake this photo to be coming from a Canon Camera. But as you can see, this may not be as noisy as the one in the first sample... it came from the same camera. <g>

Like Jerry Tieng said in his thread, Nikon's way of handling noise gives the photographer a greater control over the noise. And IMHO, third party noise reduction softwares are more powerful and flexible than any in-camera noise reduction.

I hope this has been of help to those who wishes to use Nikon but are being stopped by the noise issue.

Excellent post Rolando!

Nice post and point Rolly-Bro.! It's all in the post processing... I'm comfortable using my camera up to H-2 (ISO-3200) if deemed necessary. I've also tried to PP a friend's D2H files at ISO-6400, and can still find the files workable. :)

I guess this would answer some of the Noise issues that people are discussing about Nikon Cams. Thanks for taking time out for doing the test. Cheers!

thanks for sharing!
i prefer the grain ;D

Somebody gotta wake those who think Nikons are noisy and Canons are not. If you will trace the technology, CMOS should be notorius in noise, it is inherent to the device, but Canon able to negate that trait by using in Camera noise solution. So the user would think that, wow, Canon is noiseless!

What is the difference between CCD and CMOS image sensors in a digital camera? (http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/question362.htm)

If Nikon did it like Canon, it would also have that silky if not plasticly photo look. Thanks to Nikon for allowing the photographer control this issue. At least we can have a say on how plasticly or silky we want our photo. :D Excuse me Canon.

But then again, these are just my thoughts. :D

amen to this.

control is power:)

:D

Funny, my late idol always say "Knowledge is power" after his program in the radio.

Hehehe

"Remember, Knowlegde is power. If there is no Knowledge, there is no power. Buh-bye."

:Shock:

amen to this.

control is power:)

I'm confused. When talking noise about the Nikon versus Canon. There shouldn't be a 3rd party software involved right?

We're talking about photos off cam. Looking at your photos, ISO 800 is still very noisy(to my taste) out of the cam. If I'm not mistaken, it might be as noisy when using ISO 800 in a Canon 300D or even worse.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a Nikon user and I'm happy I shifted. But I still believe the Canon has still the better noise-reduction technology on-cam. But I normally don't shoot over ISO 400. No noise reduction software can bring back the detail.

My 2 cents.

Noise is relative...

I took Noise Reduction out of my workflow a long time ago, I found that it gave my photos more character and detail than "clean" images, even when I was still doing NR, I would always leave a degree of noise in the photo for some details, after that i just took out the procedure from my workflow entirely. I feel it gives my pictures that extra "something" special. :)

Peace!

Do not be confused. I am simply implying that the difference between the two products is that Canon decided to include the noice reduction built-in while Nikon have chosen to leave it at user's control. Afterall, post processing is part of handling the photo.

No reduction can bring back the detail? Very true. With Nikon, you can see what was lost after the noise reduction. In Canon, you can't see how much is lost. Therefore, with Nikon, you can control how much detail are you willing to loose when applying noise reduction tools.

Correct me if I'm wrong here... From what I've heard Canon's NR is even applied to it's RAW file by default... Is this true?

I am simply implying that the difference between the two products is that Canon decided to include the noice reduction built-in while Nikon have chosen to leave it at user's control.

Correct! So if it's built-in with the cam it saves you more time. Sometimes you just want your photos off-cam.

Thank you Rolly for the effort. I hope we clarified that all images have noise, it's just a matter of preference where you want the noise reduction to be applied -- in-camera where you have little control, or out-of-the-camera where you can choose to keep it to enhance the image's character or remove all of it - to satisfy those who thinks grain refers to uncook rice.

It would be neat if the same subject was shot with both a Nikon and a Canon. From the images posted, you can see how the 2nd image has become 'plasticky' and the edges have lost it's definition.

I'm also sure that the 1st image will look great on print (Fuji Crystal Archive please).

So, Melvin, what brought you to Nikon?

When you are being creative, you have time you need as you can see on the sample photo, this photo is taken in a "take your time" fashion. It deserve to be post processed with all the time it needs.

Now if you are talking about time crucial situation like documenting a car crash along C5, then why would you care about the noise? The police will not tell you that, "Hey your photo is noisy, what ISO was used"? :D

Bottom line, read mesage #14 (http://www.digitalphotographer.com.ph/forum/showpost.php?p=36529&postcount=14).

So, Melvin, what brought you to Nikon?
Definitely it's not better noise reduction. The reason I shifted was better colors of course.


Now if you are talking about time crucial situation like documenting a car crash along C5, then why would you care about the noise? The police will not tell you that, "Hey your photo is noisy, what ISO was used"? :D

Bottom line, read mesage #14 (http://www.digitalphotographer.com.ph/forum/showpost.php?p=36529&postcount=14).
A point and shoot cam would also be enough for this case. Plus, it's better to carry.

You nailed it. But some doesn't realize this and pass judgement on the Noise issue head on. Thus, I made this thread. There are more to choosing a camera than pixel peeping to see what brand has no noise where in fact ALL camera has noise. And then they failed to learn that it's a matter on how the manufacturer implemented or addressed the noise issue.

As I said at the last sentence of my original post, I hope it will help those who are deciding to give Nikon a try but are being perplexed by ONE issue... noise. I hope by this thread, they can set aside noise and see other properties of the camera such as color, handling, ease of use, or other things greater than the other brand.

I am sorry that doesn't include you since you shifted already. Wouldn't you be glad if you learned about the Nikon colors before you held your old system? I could have been economical, right?

Definitely it's not better noise reduction. The reason I shifted was better colors of course.

What NR did you use rolando?

this has the workings of a brand bashing thread. i suggest (if we will put up tests like these) to just stop saying the other brand's name. Also no need to say things like canon pictures are plasticy. Thats your opinion and it reflects your view of their pictures. I bet when you said that there are some canon users who subconciously felt the need to defend their brand and when that happens then the thread gets hijacked into a brand bashing free for all.

Just show your findings maybe do a side by side and say "There! now make your own decision".

Well put Christopher.

Point taken. No negative comments, no brand names. :)

Point taken. No negative comments, no brand names. :)

Sustained... :)

If it is too noisy, you are too old. :D

this has the workings of a brand bashing thread. i suggest (if we will put up tests like these) to just stop saying the other brand's name. Also no need to say things like canon pictures are plasticy. Thats your opinion and it reflects your view of their pictures. I bet when you said that there are some canon users who subconciously felt the need to defend their brand and when that happens then the thread gets hijacked into a brand bashing free for all.

Just show your findings maybe do a side by side and say "There! now make your own decision".

well said.

Apparently I like controled noise on my images. Thats why some people shoot in high iso settings, because they want the noise to be there. As i see it from the test above, there are certain situations where you use a specific unit. The choice output really depends on the person taking the shot.

Apparently I like controled noise on my images. Thats why some people shoot in high iso settings, because they want the noise to be there. As i see it from the test above, there are certain situations where you use a specific unit. The choice output really depends on the person taking the shot.

Brother Migs! :) Long time... Anyway...

I definitely agree with your statement. :)

OT: Earl bro, certainly is... my skin's dirtblack from all the hiking we did in the desert, not to mention muscle pains caused by wrestling with the strong current during our underwater escapades in the Red Sea.

... Replying...

OT: Earl bro, certainly is... my skin's dirtblack from all the hiking we did in the desert, not to mention muscle pains caused by wrestling with the strong current during our underwater escapades in the Red Sea.

Damn! Nakakainggit! :Grin: So where's the pics? mmmmmmmm... Red Sea, high salt content, strong surface tension... Yeah, indeed you'll be tired! :)

^ As soon as I get a replacement of the busted video card for my workstation. :sigh:

^ As soon as I get a replacement of the busted video card for my workstation. :sigh:

Goodluck Bro., actually I just got my main workstation too this week coz of a toasted Board and Duo-core 2 processor coz of the wasted power supply. :Angry:

Anyway... This going back... This thread is all about MORE ON NIKON NOISE.

:(Will i switch or not?? really, that noise issue with nikon bugs me.... please convince me to stay with Nikon and it's CCD sensor (was it made by sony?):Thinking:

:(Will i switch or not?? really, that noise issue with nikon bugs me.... please convince me to stay with Nikon and it's CCD sensor (was it made by sony?):Thinking:

if you invested in a system already, i cant see the reason why you have to switch just because of the "noise"...

i like nikon...and if i have nikon as a system and what i have right now, i'd stick with it!

:(Will i switch or not?? really, that noise issue with nikon bugs me.... please convince me to stay with Nikon and it's CCD sensor (was it made by sony?):Thinking:

Ricky, Bro., no one can convince you to switch or not but yourself... You have to find a way to appreciate which results you want based on your output images... Noise is a very subjective thing. What may appear noisy infront of your monitor, may not be so in print! :)

thanks, rollie!!!

which 3rd party NR software do you use?

Ricky... welcome to DPP. Earl is spot on. Unless otherwise there are other reasons for you to switch other than the supposed noise factor..... it's only you who can decide for yourself. Good luck!

Ricky, I won't convince you to stay or switch. But if you do, let me know, I'm interested in whatever Nikon DSLR system you have right now.

;)

Noise is a very subjective thing. What may appear noisy infront of your monitor, may not be so in print! :)

Good point Earl and Ricky pls take note. I also had problems with noise on my D70s for high ISO settings but this noise was very apparent in my PC's CRT monitor and, to my surprise, was almost non-existent in my new core duo notebook.

This is a problem with digital photography in general. In film, we only based quality on actual "prints". Now we have to deal with monitors and video cards to preview. Then we have to deal with printers to print. Ang daming intermediate processes before we get the final product! Each PC and printer will read your photos differently, depending on their settings.

Good point Earl and Ricky pls take note. I also had problems with noise on my D70s for high ISO settings but this noise was very apparent in my PC's CRT monitor and, to my surprise, was almost non-existent in my new core duo notebook.

This is a problem with digital photography in general. In film, we only based quality on actual "prints". Now we have to deal with monitors and video cards to preview. Then we have to deal with printers to print. Ang daming intermediate processes before we get the final product! Each PC and printer will read your photos differently, depending on their settings.

Nice point raised as well... Ryan, also realize that your choice of camera can also be dictated by your target output... If your endpoint/endproduct is something printable, then you have to test your choices and at least work on some sample images to see which you are comfortable with... On the other hand, if your images will never leave monitors or it's basically for web or on-line distribution, or just for screen viewing--then in this case you might not even need a DSLR. :) Consider your choices well, coz you are not just investing in a camera... You'll be immersing yourself into a system which has alot of intricacies and complications. :)

Those who asked for the noise software, well, I bashed a Canon with a hammer and hacked on the software.... hehehe

I used Noiseware. It's the simpest! The community or FREE version works great.

To the other guys, you do not expect me to praise Canon here, do you? Now, move along.. I mean you no harm. AND, do not invest your emotions to a machine... :D :D :D

To the other guys, you do not expect me to praise Canon here, do you? Now, move along.. I mean you no harm. AND, do not invest your emotions to a machine... :D :D :D

Well expressed Rolly! :) Subtle yet firm!

Ricky, I won't convince you to stay or switch. But if you do, let me know, I'm interested in whatever Nikon DSLR system you have right now.

;)

Nice one, Jerry... :Grin:

@Ricky
But honestly, I agree, no one can decide for you. It's really to each his own. :)

To the other guys, you do not expect me to praise Canon here, do you? Now, move along.. I mean you no harm. AND, do not invest your emotions to a machine... :D :D :D

Well said, Rolly!!! :Grin:

Wild Swan. :D

Well expressed Rolly! :) Subtle yet firm!

Wild Swan. :D

OMG! I thought you'd pull that one off! :D hahahahahaha

"Wildswan", ain't that familiar.

@Rolando I agree, I read the same article before that CMOS supposedly noisy than CCD's, and CMOS is cheaper to produce than CCD. but the canon Processing matters in reducing noise with silky and a little plastic-like effect. For newbie on DSLR they can easily conclude that CMOS is better than CCD.

But that's the canon way which give them edge in in-camera processing regarding noise. But playing catch-up on this department is not bad at all as shown in Nikon D40. The next Nikon DSLR will be exciting to see if they can deliver the goods.

Noise also means detail. Removing too much noise will also reduce the detail of the image. I myself do not want too much "in camera" noise reduction. I would prefer doing it myself in PP so that I can control how much of the image detail is lost during noise reduction. The Nikon D80 has an adjustable High ISO noise reduction, but I havent really tested it. Maybe I'll do that tomorrow and post some of my findings here. :)

Hi pips, can you please recommend a good noise reduction software? preferably the cost-effective or license-free ones?

Thanks!

i use noiseware community version. i got it from this thread. works perfect for me :)

Hi pips, can you please recommend a good noise reduction software? preferably the cost-effective or license-free ones?

Thanks!

I have noise ninja, tell me if you want it. I'll email you the program. Photoshop plugin ito ha. :)