P30+ the real world noise

[Guy Mancuso]

Okay this is the biggest problem area i encounter when shooting event work is black drops with color splashed on them. This is normally the worst that noise shows up and what prompted me to move to the P30 plus. Now at 1600 it is good not great but still clean and acceptable. Obviously with the P25 plus this was my limitation but I can safely say i certainly picked up a stop in noise. My old P25 plus 800 is the P30 plus 1600 no doubt about it but more important the P30 plus 800 is just killer good. Crap shots here but this is paying work so you don't argue you shoot and collect your money 90 days later. Yes welcome to shooting the corporate world you simply never get paid in a reasonable time frame. Regardless this pleased me very much the results . As you can see the problem area is in the red glow and anytime they do this on staging you swallow with a big lump in your throat because you know it is several stops under from what your subject so you need a lot of latitude . This first one is ISO 1600 at 1/60 at 4.8 with a Metz flash

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Now this one is at 800 at 1/60 at F4 and both images shot with the 150 2.8 D lens. Reason I bought this lens SHARP wide open although this is F4 .

Now maybe no apparent on screen here but this sucker is really clean, the 1600 above has some slight noise but for this stuff still very acceptable. Both images processed in C1 with luminance at 10 which is low and noise at 50 which is riding the middle of the slider without degrading or smearing of the image.

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Guy, serious question, why are you using MFDB's for this kind of work? It doesn't begin to need it. Why not use tools made for the task or have you sold all your 35mm stuff?

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Now back to the ISO 1600 shot . Usually these are the area's that will bite you and what you have to watch for. The color red area as you see , the white/grey area and than strictly on the black drop that has light hitting it. This is pretty decent not perfect but under a 8x10 print will probably never bother anyone but given this is a MF back which are not known for high ISO work this is a welcome that you can cheat death with them. Obviously a D3 or canon 5DII will handle ISO 1600 better, I still don't find the need for the DSLR although I will freely admit i am chomping for a Sony A900 which i just like the look of the files even though not a high ISO performance king. Now what i don't know is how the P40+ would be with pixel binning. Here obviously a case i don't need 31mpx but how is the 1600 on the P40 + is it cleaner or not. I need Phase and CI to send me a back to test that possibility out

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Guy, serious question, why are you using MFDB's for this kind of work? It doesn't begin to need it. Why not use tools made for the task or have you sold all your 35mm stuff?

I have NO 35mm stuff and trying avoid buying any. I am cheating death here my friend. LOL

You may not realize it but i am one crazy hombre.:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:

 

[ptomsu]

Guy,

I must say, that my 5D2 could do this shot MUCH better WRT noise. And I think you would hardly notice the difference between 21MP and 31.

So maybe the current 1 or 24MP DSLRs are not so bad solutions for folks who want higher resolution, which is in the range of MFDB 2 years ago but much lower price than today's MFDBs and better high ISO performance.

Just trying to find arguments why not to buy into MFDBs :ROTFL:

 

[stephengilbert]

"You may not realize it but i am one crazy hombre?"

Guy, isn't that insulting to Ben? I think we are all aware you're "a bit different."

 

[Henry Goh]

Guy, unless the client needs 31Mp (which I doubt) downsizing to his need will certainly make whatever little noise disappear. Nice sharp images Guy.

Here's one shot on P30+ and ran through Helicon Focus. Really love this back like you.

 

[Jack]

Guy,

I must say, that my 5D2 could do this shot MUCH better WRT noise. And I think you would hardly notice the difference between 21MP and 31.

So maybe the current 1 or 24MP DSLRs are not so bad solutions for folks who want higher resolution, which is in the range of MFDB 2 years ago but much lower price than today's MFDBs and better high ISO performance.

Just trying to find arguments why not to buy into MFDBs :ROTFL:

Peter:

I think the point is this...

First, as givens I think it's safe to say,

1) If you regularly do a *LOT* of high ISO grip and grin type shooting OR require really high framerates, then for sure one of the current crop of DSLR's is probably the best choice due to superior noise handling an/or capture speed.

2) If you do a lot of studio, landscape or other work where critical image quality rules the day, then the quality from the MFDB reigns supreme.

So, what to do if you do either/both on a regular basis? Here I think there are a variety of answers:

Group One: Own multiple independent systems, each tailored to it's specific strength.

Group Two: Own the one system that covers the MAJORITY of your needs, yet can be pressed into service for the others in a pinch.

I suspect Guy falls into group two and in his case having the maximum IQ rules the day. Also, he recently moved from the P25+ top the P30+, giving up frame size for one (maybe 1-1/2) stops more usable ISO. IOW, he has tailored his system to optimally cover the majority of what he does. Note the one-system approach has the benefit of not having to lug around two or three different systems as he heads out on a job. It also has the benefit of being infinitely familiar with the operation of his chosen tool.

My .02,

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Anyone else notice that nasty colour noise banding on the lectern? That's a subject that should be near the top of the histogram and should be the least problematic noise wise.

 

[kdphotography]

I suspect Guy falls into group two and in his case having the maximum IQ rules the day. Also, he recently moved from the P25+ top the P30+, giving up frame size for one (maybe 1-1/2) stops more usable ISO. IOW, he has tailored his system to optimally cover the majority of what he does. Note the one-system approach has the benefit of not having to lug around two or three different systems as he heads out on a job. It also has the benefit of being infinitely familiar with the operation of his chosen tool.

My .02,

I see a P40+ in Guy's future....

Let's start a pool.....

:ROTFL:

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Of course it's not 'if' but 'when'....

 

[Guy Mancuso]

You guy;s are killing me. I want to try that P40+. Also I fall into the group 2 as Jack describes and echo his comments, Obviously we talk a lot about this ourselves. But I would rather have the high end for the real work and press this into the grey area when I have too. The other thing is I actually like shooting MF over 35mm. Yes i am a different breed for sure.

 

[Don Libby]

I like how Guy is stepping outside the box and showing what and how good the P30+ can shoot. If I remember correctly some folks thought I was crazy shooting landscape with a back that was made primarily for fashion. The p30+ is the little back that can..

Jury is out on Guy getting the P40. I can see him getting that only if he decides to take the plunge to a technical camera however the one obstacle in the way is the lack of longer exposures.

Just my 2 cents worth...

Don

 

[ptomsu]

Well, but before I would go for another intermediate step I would directly move to the P65+

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I like how Guy is stepping outside the box and showing what and how good the P30+ can shoot. If I remember correctly some folks thought I was crazy shooting landscape with a back that was made primarily for fashion. The p30+ is the little back that can..

Jury is out on Guy getting the P40. I can see him getting that only if he decides to take the plunge to a technical camera however the one obstacle in the way is the lack of longer exposures.

Just my 2 cents worth...

Don

And that is a obstacle even though it can shoot faster which is a big plus. Something I will just have to try out and see what it can do. I like to push the envelope. Must be my guinea pig syndrome like the old Life cereal commercial. Let's get Mikey to try it. Okay the old dogs will know that one:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:

 

[Don Libby]

who calling old?

 

[Shelby Lewis]

Must be my guinea pig syndrome like the old Life cereal commercial. Let's get Mikey to try it. Okay the old dogs will know that one:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:

I'm exactly the same way, lol... I'm using the a900 now and getting stellar results MOST of the time. Shot a wedding a week or so back and let's just say some of the high ISO shots were "acceptable". Down-res them and they are quite nice. At full res... not so nice (but still detailed!)

A d700 it isn't (even though the color is infinitely superior IMO)... but it gets a vast majority of my work done with flying colors. The rest of the time I keep my butt cheeks cinched up a little. I'm also still shopping for MF as well and if I can help it I'll not buy another super smooth high-iso machine again. I just love the files... warts and all... of the cameras optimized for low-iso work. If they can get digital MF to keep the low-iso "look" of the big CCDs while being even more useful at high-iso without resorting to the smoothing I see in most 35mm cams... then I'd love to see a return to the old days where wedding photogs shot with "proper cameras" eek... ie with hassy and mamiya and contax.

(that was a joke... sort of)

Cheating death... the only way to live :ROTFL:

 

[Guy Mancuso]

We are sick campers and a lot of old school thinking as well. LOL

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

I have to say that I'm still gobsmacked by those iso 1600 files (when I processed in C1, ACR was horrible) that you put up when you first got the camera Guy. I wouldn't have a problem using them for my wedding work and the Canon 5D is my present tool and benchmark! Were those natural llight only or shot with flash?