ISO 65,000-ish GH2 experiment

[Amin]

Just for kicks, I took my GH2 and PL45/2.8 into my son's room last night as he was getting ready to sleep and took a single, manually focused image at f/2.8, 1/10s (handheld), and ISO 12,800. The resulting image was more than 2 stops underexposed, so I pushed it to ~ ISO 65,000 equivalent* during RAW processing in Lightroom and converted to B&W.

The room was flat out dark, and I was surprised that I could even get enough information from the EVF to get a ballpark manual focus. As you can see, the focus point is on the pillow in front of my son.

Anyway, I was just amazed that I could get anything resembling an image at this ISO...



* I shot at ISO 12,800 and then pushed the exposure slider to +2 stops, which is ISO 51,200 equivalent. The resulting image was still dark, so I pushed it further using curves. This second push was probably less than half a stop, hence my estimate of ~ ISO 65,000 equivalent setting.

 

[deejjjaaaa]

and here is Sony 12mp (2 generations old sensor) @ ISO12800 and +4 EV in ACR6.4RC

 

[Amin]

Just goes to show that even in the best of forums...

 

[Godfrey]

Just goes to show that even in the best of forums...

Should teach you a lesson: any time you get into the comparison of products, the "mine is better than yours" gene kicks in.

 

[Amin]

Now I'm learning lessons .

 

[pellicle]

and here is Sony 12mp (2 generations old sensor) @ ISO12800 and +4 EV in ACR6.4RC

the image doesn't really show well how much noise is there ... care for something less biased (towards hiding the noise)?

 

[deejjjaaaa]

the image doesn't really show well how much noise is there ... care for something less biased (towards hiding the noise)?

ACR6.4 = expose slider to +3EV and certainly resized to match OP dimensions (640px width)

 

[RichA]

ACR6.4 = expose slider to +3EV and certainly resized to match OP dimensions (640px width)

These noise tests at reduced sizes are pretty pointless, unless you only ever intend to post images on a computer or online. Any noise in an image will generally be visible in an 8x10 or larger print. I also notice that because chroma noise (specifically, yellow blotches) becomes visible on 4/3rds images at about 1600 ISO so conversion to black and white is common when presenting images.

 

[Riley]

shades of dpr

the image doesn't really show well how much noise is there ... care for something less biased (towards hiding the noise)?

thats the case
when light is a plenty with some diligent processing, pretty much any camera can make a good fist of it

E3, Konica 57/1.2 at f/2, 1/8000th sec, ISO3200

 

[curious80]

Amin, ignoring the pointless distraction, I think what you have shown here is pretty amazing!

 

[deejjjaaaa]

These noise tests at reduced sizes are pretty pointless,

yes, but address that to OP , not to me

the same image 4 times bigger (1280px wide) ::

 

[Amin]

Amin, ignoring the pointless distraction, I think what you have shown here is pretty amazing!

Thanks, I'm ignoring, I'm ignoring .

I will note for anyone confused that I was not comparing the GH2 performance to any other camera, only marveling that I could get any image with it under these conditions.

 

[raist3d]

Just for kicks, I took my GH2 and PL45/2.8 into my son's room last night as he was getting ready to sleep and took a single, manually focused image at f/2.8, 1/10s (handheld), and ISO 12,800. The resulting image was more than 2 stops underexposed, so I pushed it to ~ ISO 65,000 equivalent* during RAW processing in Lightroom and converted to B&W.

The room was flat out dark, and I was surprised that I could even get enough information from the EVF to get a ballpark manual focus. As you can see, the focus point is on the pillow in front of my son.

Anyway, I was just amazed that I could get anything resembling an image at this ISO...

While I agree (taking out the apparent nasty aspect) that a resized down image will hide a lot of noise, I think it's still nice the GH2 sensor could get some meaningful data to the point of showing what you are showing. I say this because even though resizing down will indeed make your camera look much better and reduce the noise, I have seen how sometimes you just lose so much data that you don't get anything.

But Panasonic as far as I know (maybe they did on the GH2 now) shifts their tone range so that you lose 1 stop in shadow DR, so maybe that's partially why also. UPDATE: I meant to say "*does not shift their tone range*".

But yeah, I would say honestly, showing something at the 1.7-2 megapixel mark (1600x1200/ 1600x1050) is much more meaningful for something I would consider useful. Hope that makes sense.

I think the most important point of your experiment is how resilient the GH2 sensor is to banding, considering how much you pushed it. I think there's hints of bands int there, but nowhere near what some other 4/3rds sensored cameras would band.

- Raist

 

[RichA]

The GH2 is a substantial improvement over the other 4/3rds sensor cameras. I would never shoot a dark scene with my G1 and raise the illumination levels by any amount because of gross noise and banding.

 

[larryk]

I must have missed the point. I thought the idea of the first photo was to produce a nice grainy B&W image. It succeeded. I don't see what the point would be of creating a flawless image at this high ISO. How often would you need to do that? All you have to do is turn on a light somewhere and reduce the ISO!

 

[shadzee]

And ... the water is cold... and DEEP too ;-)

 

[RichA]

I must have missed the point. I thought the idea of the first photo was to produce a nice grainy B&W image. It succeeded. I don't see what the point would be of creating a flawless image at this high ISO. How often would you need to do that? All you have to do is turn on a light somewhere and reduce the ISO!

Well, I've heard of one photog spending $1M to light an entire town street for a night shot, but that's bit excessive.