50D ISO 1600 Sample

[Doug Brown]

Here's another photo from yesterday. Again, it's a JPEG with default camera settings. I edited it in PS the way I normally process photos, except that I didn't apply any additional NR to the image. The only NR in this photo was that which was applied in the camera. I'm impressed with the well-preserved feather detail at ISO 1600, and also with the lack of noise. I don't believe that the 40D looked anywhere near this good at 1600.

[Maxis Gamez]

Dang Doug.... that looks pretty good in my book. Love the colors and details.

I'm impressed!! I can't wait to put my hangs in one of them!!

Thank you for sharing!

[Ed Cordes]

Wow! ISO 1600 may actually be usable.

[Maxis Gamez]

Wow! ISO 1600 may actually be usable.

Maybe?? :confused:

[Doug Brown]

I like to call ISO 1600 the new ISO 800! :) Wait till you see ISO 3200! It's surprisingly good too!

[Glenn Bartley]

Nice stuff Doug. And cool to see that ISO 800 and 1600 might be more and more usable. I'm planning a trip down to Ecuador for January and I anticipate using ISO 800 more than I would here (which is never).

How do you feel the detail is in the 50D vs. 40D image files? Ive heard some concerns that the extra resolution would lead to less detail than the 40D image files. Any thoughts on this? Maybe if you have a really nice and sharp image that you have shot at ISO 400 or lower you could post a 100% crop???

[Juan Aragonés]

Doug the performance of the body at ISO1600 seems very, very good but would love to see how does it works in situations with less amount of light. Considering that this one is a jpeg, the quality of the file is very impressive and no doubt about the useability of such a high ISO (I am very happy with my D2X but I cannot imagine using that high ISO on it due to its poor performace on my body:(). Congratulations for the new toy and have a lot of fun:)

[SeanKP]

Cracking shot Doug. I'm hearing so many conflicting stories about the 50D. Some folks claim it's almost no improvement on the 40D whilst a few such as yourself are seeing definite improvements. For sure I couldn't get an ISO 1600 shot from the 40D as clean as this.

Cheers.

Sean

[Ákos Lumnitzer]

Wonderful colours and reflection. Looks like the 50D is a good body. :)

[Neil Losin]

Nice WODU and it looks awfully good for ISO 1600. Like Glenn, I'm curious to see some 100% crops. Do you also see a low level of noise in the RAW files, or is this mostly a result of in-camera JPG processing improvements?

[Doug Brown]

Here you go Juan. I took a couple of photos to try and answer that exact question. I think the 50D fares very well in reduced light. This is another JPEG with in-camera NR only. It's probably 70% of the full image. I applied sharpening and a couple of minor adjustments to the bird only, in line with how I normally process photos (although I did this one on my laptop and spent much less time than I normally do). I did not apply any additional NR. This was shot with my 400 f/5.6, at ISO 1600, f/7.1, 1/250, hand held. I still think it looks remarkably clean, and the feather detail is excellent.

[Juan Aragonés]

Wow, Doug that is a very, very good result. Two of my best friends have a 50D on order and this morning I wrote an e-mail to then saying "Hey guys, have a look at this thread about the 50D". Now, after watching your post, they are more than happy photographers :D . Thanks for sharing your results:)

[Doug Brown]

I'll see what I can do about your photo request Glen. I've not seen much about less detail in the 50D. Most of what I've read claims that there's more detail, not less.

[Doug Brown]

I'm not trying to sell Canon cameras here. I'm posting my photos and will let you draw your own conclusions. I will say that there are a lot of pixel peepers out there who can't see the forest from the trees when it comes to noise and image quality. I know from my short time with the 50D that the 40D can't touch its ISO 1600 or 3200. Noise is minimal and entirely manageable with PP, and feather detail is superb, even at ISO 3200.

[Glenn Bartley]

Thanks Doug! Even if it is just a portrait of a gull or something. Just an image at ISO 400 or below that is shot with a good lens.

If you arent crazy about posting it here you could shoot me an email too :)

[Doug Brown]

Here you go Glen. ISO 400.

[Sabyasachi Patra]

Thoroughly enjoyed going through this thread. I will definitely be upgrading from my 40D. :-)

When I shoot with the 40D in low light, I am always cursing myself. 50D seems to be much better.

Thanks for sharing.
Cheers,
Sabyasachi

[IvoZafirov]

Тhank you for the post Doug! Next week I am getting my hands on it (50D) :-)

What about the AF? Any difference with 40D?

[Doug Brown]

Much better than the 40D in my opinion. Probably better than my Mark III too.

[Jim Victory]

These are very nice captures!

I have been using my 50D for about two weeks now and I chose to turn NR off in-camera because I didn't want to sacrifice detail for NR. Would you mind sharing what in-camera setting your using for NR. I believe it came with a default setting of Standard. I might have to try it and see what the difference will be compared to no NR.

Even not using NR I have found the files to be better than the 40D too. The AF acquisition is much faster and more accurate too.