Which DSLR performs best in low light and high ISO?


Status
Not open for further replies.
Jan 18, 2005
108
0
0
SG lahhhh
#1
hi pple, i need some advice on which dslr gives da best pic quality in high ISO + low light.

i'm using e330 currently, like da cam very much BUT when cum to using it in low light + at least a shutterr speed of 1/50 ( b/c of human movement ) i find theres noise anything above 400 iso. my settings r S mode 1/30- 1/50, ev +0.7, nosie reduction on, SHQ pic. quality, iso range between 800-1250. i tried reducing iso but speed b/c problem or pic too dark, high iso 1600 bright + good speed 1/60= very visible noise. izzit my settings r wrong or e330 doesnt perform well in high iso? any suggestion as in settings or which camera should i buy ? ( canon ? ) :confused:
 

huggable

Senior Member
Nov 2, 2004
3,702
0
0
East side
#2
The max ISO for the D50 is 1600, and very low noise. Check out dpreview for comparison, they have sample pictures at the various ISO settings, with their standard studio setup.
 

OlyFlyer

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2006
2,161
0
0
#3
The E-330 is miles ahead of D50 in all aspects. Sorry if I hurt anybody, but that is the result of my "independent" survey I did before I left the film world about two months ago. Nikon is good, actually is my dream to own a Nikon one day, but definitly not the D50.
 

OlyFlyer

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2006
2,161
0
0
#4
siaolang22 said:
hi pple, i need some advice on which dslr gives da best pic quality in high ISO + low light.

i'm using e330 currently, like da cam very much BUT when cum to using it in low light + at least a shutterr speed of 1/50 ( b/c of human movement ) i find theres noise anything above 400 iso. my settings r S mode 1/30- 1/50, ev +0.7, nosie reduction on, SHQ pic. quality, iso range between 800-1250. i tried reducing iso but speed b/c problem or pic too dark, high iso 1600 bright + good speed 1/60= very visible noise. izzit my settings r wrong or e330 doesnt perform well in high iso? any suggestion as in settings or which camera should i buy ? ( canon ? ) :confused:
Let me say that I don't have an E-330, but an E-500. I can not say how bad your picture is, since you don't show it to us, but I think you have the best cam you can get in that price class. If NR is on, then the camera should be able to handle noise, my E-500 handles over my expectations. But 1600 is a lot of ISO, you can not expect that to be the same as ISO 100, no matter what other people say. That is just technically not possible. Try to take some RAW images to test your cam, if you definitly find it disturbing, contact Oly support.

Noise is frequently discussed here, I recomand to do a search, you will find a lot that is said already about this subject.

To answer your title question: Nikon D200, but you can get several E-330 for the price of that.
 

jdredd

New Member
Mar 30, 2006
1,266
0
0
#6
canons generally have a good reputation for controlling noise at higher ISOs.

but ur E330 is a good camera and has as good a reputation for noise control as the equilvalent canon. so i dont think there is much more u can do about noise. as somenoe said, consider using anoise reduction program.

the thing that maybe you have missed out, is that for low light shooting, there are other options that just bumping up the ISO.

obviously, one is to use a good flash. the other factor in low light shooting, is that your lenses play as much a factor as ur camera.. so if you can, its good to try and get a good low light big aperture lens that can allow u to get by with lesser ISOs.

im not familiar with olympus lens prices, but for canons, we can get a F/1.8 50mm for just over a hundred bucks. and it makes for great low light shooting.
 

u2nofear

New Member
Feb 25, 2006
1,528
0
0
#8
canon 30D and nikon D200, maybe coming E2 !
 

zuikoku

New Member
May 11, 2006
403
0
0
#9
Low Noise Performance ?
Canon EOS 30D / 5D & 1Ds Mark2 are the best so far.
Not only for noise, their AF performance also terrific !
 

Jan 18, 2005
108
0
0
SG lahhhh
#10
thks everyone for enlightening me, it really helps, well i guess there's no such 'da perfect camera' buyin a higher end nikon or canon will b x, but for da price of e330 wif sswf, live view i cant complain plus i personally like zuiko lens compare 2 da rest. if only canon or nikon can come out wif a sswf + LIVE VIEW + swivel lcd + lens quality like zuiko high grade, i'll dif. get one. but unfortunately dats not gonna happen! hehe. hopefully E2 or E3 can make a run for da competitors and as someone said get a f2.0 zuiko. my conclusion right now will b ' noise ninja' + go for a high grade lens. i'll try n c how it goes.

maybe should chk out canon and nikon( damn i hate it w/o swivel lcd + live view). i was taking pics wif some canonians and nikonians ( usual tight space, crowded ) i could c their envy wif 330 tilt screen live view! they hav 2 get into many funny positions unlike me, diz da beauty bout' 330, no offence 2 any other brands cam. owner! but diz wat i opserved. kekeke....anyway, once again i like 2 thk u guys + girls for ur valuable advise!!:thumbsup: :D
 

plastic

Deregistered
Aug 19, 2004
700
0
0
In A Suitcase
#11
Personally, if Olympus really makes the new camera sensors so "noise free", it will break my heart. They will completely lose the film-ness vibe. The reason I got back to E-1 was for the noise. Well...
 

OlyFlyer

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2006
2,161
0
0
#12
plastic said:
Personally, if Olympus really makes the new camera sensors so "noise free", it will break my heart. They will completely lose the film-ness vibe. The reason I got back to E-1 was for the noise. Well...
We should suggest Oly to have a new button on the next gen cameras. The button should be called "plastic". :bsmilie: ON = Film OFF = Noisless digital :bsmilie:

Really, I agree with you plastic, this noise issue takes too much time from the subject of photography. The perfectionism some people long to will kill the art and fun part, forcing people to artificially add/subtract things and electronically manipulate images. ISO1600 is a whole lot of ISO, your naked eyes can hardly see under light conditions when ISO1600 is needed. If you want to get daylight results, wait until daylight, or use artificial light or accept noise. Anyway, I am so far perfectly happy with the way Oly handles noise.

Photography is about waiting for the right moment to arrive and then caching it on film or CCD. It is this part that makes a good or bad photo, not how noisy or noisless the picture is.
 

wind30

Deregistered
Mar 14, 2004
2,927
0
0
#13
how come nobody suggest the new Sony DSLR which is launching soon?

I REALLY advise you to wait for the new Sony DSLR launch in June if you want low light performance.

People here recommend D200... The new Sony is rumored to be 10MP, so probably similar performance to D200, with ANTI SHAKE. So you can mount a cheap 50mm f1.8 and have image stabilization and shoot at ISO1600.... The price tag is supposedly below S$2k... some rumors even say got dust removal...

If you want low light performance, should really wait for the Sony.
 

jdredd

New Member
Mar 30, 2006
1,266
0
0
#14
because people can only talk about what they know/ experienced or whats been tested...

so far, its all speculation re the sony..
 

knpan

Senior Member
May 2, 2006
3,462
0
36
Singapore
#15
canons high iso noise level is very little. In my opinion, all slrs have low noise at high ISO settings. they are build for that. look at canon 350d entry level dslr.
 

OlyFlyer

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2006
2,161
0
0
#16
wind30 said:
how come nobody suggest the new Sony DSLR which is launching soon?

I REALLY advise you to wait for the new Sony DSLR launch in June if you want low light performance.

People here recommend D200... The new Sony is rumored to be 10MP, so probably similar performance to D200, with ANTI SHAKE. So you can mount a cheap 50mm f1.8 and have image stabilization and shoot at ISO1600.... The price tag is supposedly below S$2k... some rumors even say got dust removal...

If you want low light performance, should really wait for the Sony.
Sony is not a photo camera, it is a TV, a home theater, a computer display or a video camera. It's like Canon is not a printer BUT a camera, HP is not a camera BUT a printer, Olympus is almost anything optical, Nikon is "only" a camera. At least for me. I know, they have other products also...

I may be a traditional old fool, but I would never consider Sony as a photo camera, other than for P&S purposes. Isn't this fairy tale new Sony everybody is talking about planned to have an electronic viewfinder? In that case it is just an advanced P&S according to me. What do you need the image stabilizer for otherways? That is even switched off in my video camera, because it just slows down the movement, creating irritating, strange and unwanted effects. Why would you need this magical ANTI SHAKE together with a 50mm? :dunno: If you would say 200mm, 300mm or 500mm then I would understand. But man, if you need anti shake for a 50mm then I suggest you contact a doctor, unless you are very old, or aiming at the moon during a dark night. In that case no difference what kind of lens you use, you need a tripod.

Shoot with 50mm 1.8 using ISO1600, I wonder, is there any light left on your subject, since you consider you need anti shake?
 

unseen

Senior Member
Dec 14, 2004
2,622
0
0
NTU and Wdls
#17
http://digitalcamera.impress.co.jp/06_02/auth/toku1/index_iso.htm
You get to see noise performance here.
Check out Pentax's *ist DS2. It performs as well as Canon's 5D at ISO1600. Perhaps even better.

sorry but all the Olympus dSLRS are so far behind in ISO performances that I believe some PnS (Fuji's notably) may perform better. I mean, my 350D ISO1600 outperforms the E500 ISO400 at noise cleaniness.

D200's noise profile isn't exactly very good either.

For the uninformed OlyFlyer, Sony took over Konica Minolta's entire camera department. What would you associate Konica or Minolta with?
As for Anti-shake, it's exactly the case of you saying grapes are sour just because you can't eat them. Being an Olympus user, it's little wonder you don't shoot much in the darker areas. When you're faced with ISO1600, 1/10s, F2.0 no flash with a 50mm, you'll understand why people rave about Anti-Shake. Till then, good for you. Not everyone's limited to brightly lit subjects, and what's sharp enough for some is too blur for others.
 

OlyFlyer

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2006
2,161
0
0
#18
unseen said:
...What would you associate Konica or Minolta with?
How about "Goners?" :dunno:

Sorry, I guess you did not get my point. The best camera is the one you have. Not because it is technically the best but because IT IS THE ONE YOU BOUGHT AND USE!!! I may be wet dreaming about Nikon D200, which you apparently don't call a good camera, but since I have an E-500 that is the worlds best camera. At least for me. All the rest is just hearsaying from more or less reliable sources. Now, since you have a Canon 350D, probably that is the worlds best camera for you. But how many Olympus cameras, and which models did you ever owned? So, if the answer is "none" than you just contribute to even more hearsaying. We all have our prejudice about things, some will admit that, some call them "the truth" some call them facts. With tests you can proof almost anything, depends on what you want to test and how you test it. There is just one very important test that is interesting, and that is: How YOU see on the pictures YOUR camera produces. Regardless if it is a Sony, Minolta, Canon, Nikon or even Olympus, what counts at the end is if you are happy. You don't have to call others "uninformed" just because they don't say every word you say. Others are also entitled to other opinions.

When I chose my Olympus E-500, I was very open minded, I compared Canon 350D, Nikon D70, Olympus E-330, E-500. All of these were within my budget. I selected E-500 because FOR ME that was the worlds best camera. And if I could make a choise again, I would still select the same one. You may call me "uninformed" (btw, how informed I am is nothing you know anything about) but I did not regret my selection as of today. I may be enlightened tomorrow, but today I am happy with my E-500. However, since I am so "uninformed", if I had the money, I would get a Nikon D200. And if you say Oly owners avoid darkness because of the "bad" noise handling, than sorry mate, but YOU are extreamly uninformed yourself. Or should I say "misinformed"?

And an other secret: It is not the perfect camera that makes a good photograph, it is the photographer behind the camera.
 

eow

Senior Member
Jun 22, 2004
10,060
6
38
#19
OlyFlyer said:
How about "Goners?" :dunno:

Sorry, I guess you did not get my point. The best camera is the one you have. Not because it is technically the best but because IT IS THE ONE YOU BOUGHT AND USE!!! I may be wet dreaming about Nikon D200, which you apparently don't call a good camera, but since I have an E-500 that is the worlds best camera. At least for me. All the rest is just hearsaying from more or less reliable sources. Now, since you have a Canon 350D, probably that is the worlds best camera for you. But how many Olympus cameras, and which models did you ever owned? So, if the answer is "none" than you just contribute to even more hearsaying. We all have our prejudice about things, some will admit that, some call them "the truth" some call them facts. With tests you can proof almost anything, depends on what you want to test and how you test it. There is just one very important test that is interesting, and that is: How YOU see on the pictures YOUR camera produces. Regardless if it is a Sony, Minolta, Canon, Nikon or even Olympus, what counts at the end is if you are happy. You don't have to call others "uninformed" just because they don't say every word you say. Others are also entitled to other opinions.

When I chose my Olympus E-500, I was very open minded, I compared Canon 350D, Nikon D70, Olympus E-330, E-500. All of these were within my budget. I selected E-500 because FOR ME that was the worlds best camera. And if I could make a choise again, I would still select the same one. You may call me "uninformed" (btw, how informed I am is nothing you know anything about) but I did not regret my selection as of today. I may be enlightened tomorrow, but today I am happy with my E-500. However, since I am so "uninformed", if I had the money, I would get a Nikon D200. And if you say Oly owners avoid darkness because of the "bad" noise handling, than sorry mate, but YOU are extreamly uninformed yourself. Or should I say "misinformed"?

And an other secret: It is not the perfect camera that makes a good photograph, it is the photographer behind the camera.
U mind show a 'Goners' user any of yr pics taken in lowlight? preferably those in action one at high iso?
talk is cheap..a pic spoke a thousand word
 

wind30

Deregistered
Mar 14, 2004
2,927
0
0
#20
OlyFlyer said:
Sony is not a photo camera, it is a TV, a home theater, a computer display or a video camera. It's like Canon is not a printer BUT a camera, HP is not a camera BUT a printer, Olympus is almost anything optical, Nikon is "only" a camera. At least for me. I know, they have other products also...

I may be a traditional old fool, but I would never consider Sony as a photo camera, other than for P&S purposes. Isn't this fairy tale new Sony everybody is talking about planned to have an electronic viewfinder? In that case it is just an advanced P&S according to me. What do you need the image stabilizer for otherways? That is even switched off in my video camera, because it just slows down the movement, creating irritating, strange and unwanted effects. Why would you need this magical ANTI SHAKE together with a 50mm? :dunno: If you would say 200mm, 300mm or 500mm then I would understand. But man, if you need anti shake for a 50mm then I suggest you contact a doctor, unless you are very old, or aiming at the moon during a dark night. In that case no difference what kind of lens you use, you need a tripod.

Shoot with 50mm 1.8 using ISO1600, I wonder, is there any light left on your subject, since you consider you need anti shake?
Actually, as someone pointed out, Sony is VERY strong is the camera business. Currently slightly more so than Nikon in my opinon. Why? Because they design and produce the single most impt piece of hardware inside the camera, the sensor. Do you know nikon uses Sony sensors for many of their DSLRs?

Does it has an electronics viewfinder? I certainly hope so but I don't think so. They are keeping the Konica Minolta body.

why do I need 50mm f1.8 ISO1600 + AS? Definately not shooting at the moon, the moon is very bright actually if you ever tried shooting at it. Anyway, conditions like nightime street shooting, shooting in a bar, dimly lit resturant, blowing of birthday cake with only candle light, etc. If the light is brighter, I could bump the ISO to 800/400 to get less and continue using the AS.

As to the need for image stabilizaton, I think there is no point argueing about it. You just have to see how well those IS products like panasonic OIS cams, nikon 18-200VR are selling. There is a huge demand for stabilized cams.

Anyway, I know that the sony is not released but it will be very SOON, so my advice is to wait for one week or two to see how good it is. Even if you don't like it, it's release may trigger a sharp price drop in other cams.

BTW, EVERYONE knows it is the photographer behind the camera..... what is the point of saying this. That guy just want a CAMERA recommendation...
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom