Noisy Olympus: Really Bad.......

Hacker · 30th January 2006

I find that Oly has lived up to its name of being very noisy under low light conditions. This is even after I have used Noise Ninja for #1 and #3 and Noiseware for #2. Shots of my brother-in-law's rooftop garden.

In case my current host FotoThing is down...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephen...57594056612040

#1

Exposure Time: 2.00
F Number: 4.00
Exposure Program: program normal
Bias: 0/10
Metering Mode: multi-segment
Light Source: 25
Flash: FL-50 with Omnibounce + Lightsphere PJ II Inverted Dome
Focal Length: 8.00

#2

Exposure Time: 1.00
F Number: 4.00
Exposure Program: program normal
Bias: 0/10
Metering Mode: multi-segment
Light Source: 25
Flash: FL-50 with Omnibounce + Lightsphere PJ II Inverted Dome
Focal Length: 10.00

#3

Exposure Time: 2.00
F Number: 4.00
Exposure Program: program normal
Bias: 0/10
Metering Mode: multi-segment
Light Source: 25
Flash: FL-50 with Omnibounce + Lightsphere PJ II Inverted Dome
Focal Length: 11.00

+evenstar · 30th January 2006

looks okay to me...

Mikefellh · 31st January 2006

Might help if you mentioned which model...this forum covers all Olympus cameras, probably even film cameras since there's no mention of being an Olympus digital forum!

abhivachan · 31st January 2006

Originally Posted by Mikefellh

Might help if you mentioned which model...this forum covers all Olympus cameras, probably even film cameras since there's no mention of being an Olympus digital forum!

As far as my knowledge, stephen is using Olympus E1. Stephen, I am sorry if i am wrong.

Hacker · 31st January 2006

Originally Posted by Mikefellh

Might help if you mentioned which model...this forum covers all Olympus cameras, probably even film cameras since there's no mention of being an Olympus digital forum!

Do you use the word "noise" to refer to film camera?

Raptor1 · 31st January 2006

Unless he already got an E-1. I know he bought an E-500 first.
Noise Ninja... hmmz. how it performs compared with Neat Image.

wind30 · 31st January 2006

I think hacker did not used high ISO from his exposure so picture not noisy lah.

He used tripod + low ISO + long shutter + flash. like that sure low noise. But I also agree, at least for E1, the noise performace is not that bad. The noise grain are very fine as easily removed by NR. Worst kind of noise is color BLOTCHES...

Hacker · 31st January 2006

Originally Posted by Raptor1

Unless he already got an E-1. I know he bought an E-500 first.
Noise Ninja... hmmz. how it performs compared with Neat Image.

Using E-500. NN and NW is very good. Did not try NI as the interface looked a little overkill for a simple person like me.

drektster · 31st January 2006

ok, let me know if i am wrong.

in my profession there are many renderer which produce grainy images. we would normally use neat image.

i have never use both before but as i enquire from some of my related field they recommended neat image.

look, a camera already produce very good image compare to a software renderer. if neat image can be used on an image by a renderer software. it should work better on a image taken by a camera.

apex · 31st January 2006

Hmm... Noisy? It looks pretty sharp and clear lay!

Hacker · 31st January 2006

Originally Posted by apex

Hmm... Noisy? It looks pretty sharp and clear lay!

When I look at the 100% crop, I can see artifacts in the sky...very different from film. The pictures have already been cleaned by NN and NW.

alwayschampion · 31st January 2006

It looks ok. The photo is sharp.

abhivachan · 31st January 2006

Originally Posted by Hacker

When I look at the 100% crop, I can see artifacts in the sky...very different from film. The pictures have already been cleaned by NN and NW.

Stephen, could you pls post the original image, then all can see the noise in the original image.

Hacker · 1st February 2006

Originally Posted by abhivachan

Stephen, could you pls post the original image, then all can see the noise in the original image.

100% crop of #2

surge · 1st February 2006

after seeing your pictures, i am more interested to get the PJII than worry about noise...

benedium · 1st February 2006

Yahloh... noise in the dark areas of digital pictures is normal i think... cannot compare to film. Wanna compare, compare to pictures from other digital cameras.

ykkok · 1st February 2006

Originally Posted by Hacker

When I look at the 100% crop, I can see artifacts in the sky...very different from film. The pictures have already been cleaned by NN and NW.

I hope we don't confuse JPEG artifacts with sensor noise.

tao · 1st February 2006

My experience with the E-500 is that there is no discernable noise at all at ISO 100, be it log or short exposure. Looks very very clean to me.

alwayschampion · 1st February 2006

Originally Posted by tao

My experience with the E-500 is that there is no discernable noise at all at ISO 100, be it log or short exposure. Looks very very clean to me.

How about a higher ISO ? Can you take photo of various ISO night shots and share here ?

a million thanks !!

ykkok · 1st February 2006

hacker,

From the pic you posted, quite obvious that you didn't turn on in-camera Noise Reduction on. This will invoke dark frame NR which eliminates hot pixel.

Also, underexpose area are usually prone to noise as well.

Sometimes I do like noise like this picture:
http://www.mytikas.org/portal/album_...ull=&pic_id=90

31st January 2006	#6
Raptor1 Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: EAST of Singapore Posts: 561	Re: Noisy Olympus: Really Bad....... Unless he already got an E-1. I know he bought an E-500 first. Noise Ninja... hmmz. how it performs compared with Neat Image. __________________ E-500,FL-36,14-45,40-150,12-60SWD,50-200SWD

31st January 2006	#7
wind30 Deregistered Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 2,929	Re: Noisy Olympus: Really Bad....... I think hacker did not used high ISO from his exposure so picture not noisy lah. He used tripod + low ISO + long shutter + flash. like that sure low noise. But I also agree, at least for E1, the noise performace is not that bad. The noise grain are very fine as easily removed by NR. Worst kind of noise is color BLOTCHES...

31st January 2006	#9
drektster Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 129	Re: Noisy Olympus: Really Bad....... ok, let me know if i am wrong. in my profession there are many renderer which produce grainy images. we would normally use neat image. i have never use both before but as i enquire from some of my related field they recommended neat image. look, a camera already produce very good image compare to a software renderer. if neat image can be used on an image by a renderer software. it should work better on a image taken by a camera.

31st January 2006	#10
apex Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 385	Re: Noisy Olympus: Really Bad....... Hmm... Noisy? It looks pretty sharp and clear lay!

31st January 2006	#12
alwayschampion Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 483	Re: Noisy Olympus: Really Bad....... It looks ok. The photo is sharp. __________________ Singapore Youth Group since 2002 Singapore Poly Student/Alumni

30th January 2006	#1
Hacker Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Cyberspace Posts: 3,023	Noisy Olympus: Really Bad....... I find that Oly has lived up to its name of being very noisy under low light conditions. This is even after I have used Noise Ninja for #1 and #3 and Noiseware for #2. Shots of my brother-in-law's rooftop garden. In case my current host FotoThing is down... http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephen...57594056612040 #1 Exposure Time: 2.00 F Number: 4.00 Exposure Program: program normal Bias: 0/10 Metering Mode: multi-segment Light Source: 25 Flash: FL-50 with Omnibounce + Lightsphere PJ II Inverted Dome Focal Length: 8.00 #2 Exposure Time: 1.00 F Number: 4.00 Exposure Program: program normal Bias: 0/10 Metering Mode: multi-segment Light Source: 25 Flash: FL-50 with Omnibounce + Lightsphere PJ II Inverted Dome Focal Length: 10.00 #3 Exposure Time: 2.00 F Number: 4.00 Exposure Program: program normal Bias: 0/10 Metering Mode: multi-segment Light Source: 25 Flash: FL-50 with Omnibounce + Lightsphere PJ II Inverted Dome Focal Length: 11.00 Last edited by Hacker; 1st February 2006 at 11:49 AM.

30th January 2006	#2
+evenstar Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 5,451	Re: Noisy Olympus: Really Bad....... looks okay to me... __________________ the SEARCH FUNCTION is there for a reason. USE IT!

31st January 2006	#3
Mikefellh Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,460	Re: Noisy Olympus: Really Bad....... Might help if you mentioned which model...this forum covers all Olympus cameras, probably even film cameras since there's no mention of being an Olympus digital forum!

1st February 2006	#15
surge Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: north Posts: 1,247	Re: Noisy Olympus: Really Bad....... after seeing your pictures, i am more interested to get the PJII than worry about noise...

1st February 2006	#16
benedium Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Upp Thomson Posts: 1,188	Re: Noisy Olympus: Really Bad....... Yahloh... noise in the dark areas of digital pictures is normal i think... cannot compare to film. Wanna compare, compare to pictures from other digital cameras.

1st February 2006	#18
tao Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Land of the Vegetables Posts: 2,951	Re: Noisy Olympus: Really Bad....... My experience with the E-500 is that there is no discernable noise at all at ISO 100, be it log or short exposure. Looks very very clean to me.

1st February 2006	#20
ykkok Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 531	Re: Noisy Olympus: Really Bad....... hacker, From the pic you posted, quite obvious that you didn't turn on in-camera Noise Reduction on. This will invoke dark frame NR which eliminates hot pixel. Also, underexpose area are usually prone to noise as well. Sometimes I do like noise like this picture: http://www.mytikas.org/portal/album_...ull=&pic_id=90