The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
T
thsinar
Guest
New sensor board, that's what I was told: I know that it is little information, but they don't tell me all!
Why not upgrade your "June '07" vintage? That will be possible starting June, at an attractive price.
Thierry
Why not upgrade your "June '07" vintage? That will be possible starting June, at an attractive price.
Thierry
I will strongly recommend the upgrade to the owner (not me).New sensor board, that's what I was told: I know that it is little information, but they don't tell me all!
Why not upgrade your "June '07" vintage? That will be possible starting June, at an attractive price.
Thierry
T
thsinar
Guest
I find it interesting!
What is of big help for me is to see how much information is in such a file, when one knows that it is under-exposed by about 2-stops and this at ISO 800.
Some little twicking in ACR/Aperture/LR or Raw Developer, and you are saved.
I was honestly not expecting this, when starting my test, rather something like a "usable" ISO 800 image.
Thierry
What is of big help for me is to see how much information is in such a file, when one knows that it is under-exposed by about 2-stops and this at ISO 800.
Some little twicking in ACR/Aperture/LR or Raw Developer, and you are saved.
I was honestly not expecting this, when starting my test, rather something like a "usable" ISO 800 image.
Thierry
I hope others find it interesting. Of course the file wasn't meant to be pushed 3 full stops, so the highlight clipping is understandable. It's the "but still..." part that is really impressive
Thierry, I know you're busy, but whenever you're able to,
I'd like to see what ISO 800 looks like with models
(e.g. as how James would use : http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=22425&view=findpost&p=193058
and http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=22425&view=findpost&p=193000 )
I'd like to see what ISO 800 looks like with models
(e.g. as how James would use : http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=22425&view=findpost&p=193058
and http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=22425&view=findpost&p=193000 )
T
thsinar
Guest
oh, I am not at all a model shooter, and certainly not at the level of James!
Will have to find somebody else.
Thierry
Will have to find somebody else.
Thierry
Billy,
I will try to do this for you on my next model shoot but please do not expect the level from James.
EH21
Member
Thierry,
Thanks for making the RAW file available. I downloaded it and was impressed with the low noise. I noticed in the metadata that this was converted via brumbaer tools to dng. Why not the Exposure and sorry hope this is not too big a question but what happens to the file on the way to DNG? To me it looked like some processing had already occurred. Thanks,
Eric
Thanks for making the RAW file available. I downloaded it and was impressed with the low noise. I noticed in the metadata that this was converted via brumbaer tools to dng. Why not the Exposure and sorry hope this is not too big a question but what happens to the file on the way to DNG? To me it looked like some processing had already occurred. Thanks,
Eric
A
asabet
Guest
Here are some 100% crops from the file after it has been pushed to ISO 6400 equivalent and resized to the native size of a Nikon D3 image:
I realize the Sinar and the Nikon don't serve remotely the same purpose, but
from a technology standpoint it was only a matter of time before the larger digital formats took the lead in low light performance. Seems that time has come.
gogopix
Subscriber
Bondo
i also couldnt open with 3.78 but C1 version 4 DID open a file that Graham sent me. try that.
Amin,
what file did you use? I would like to try. I must say, if you 'pushed' a file exposed at 800 to get 3 more stops (ev - 3.0 setting) that would be quite amazing. If I didnt see your file I wouldnt believe it.
I am also amazed that the difference between 7/-7 and 4/08 back based on a board (that is NON SENSOR improvement ) could be that dramatic.
As a long Phase (P25, P45 and P45+) user, I never saw this level of improvement or performace. If you look at foto-z 400 max thread I tried some noise reduction of 800 iso with P45+ and it doers clean up; however the raw files have a lot of noise-well behaved noise, but noise nontheless.
The possibility to walk into a dark cathedrale and click away at 5.6 at 1/60 (800 and EV - 3.0) would be a dramatic difference from noisy 5.6 and 1/3s
Victor
i also couldnt open with 3.78 but C1 version 4 DID open a file that Graham sent me. try that.
Amin,
what file did you use? I would like to try. I must say, if you 'pushed' a file exposed at 800 to get 3 more stops (ev - 3.0 setting) that would be quite amazing. If I didnt see your file I wouldnt believe it.
I am also amazed that the difference between 7/-7 and 4/08 back based on a board (that is NON SENSOR improvement ) could be that dramatic.
As a long Phase (P25, P45 and P45+) user, I never saw this level of improvement or performace. If you look at foto-z 400 max thread I tried some noise reduction of 800 iso with P45+ and it doers clean up; however the raw files have a lot of noise-well behaved noise, but noise nontheless.
The possibility to walk into a dark cathedrale and click away at 5.6 at 1/60 (800 and EV - 3.0) would be a dramatic difference from noisy 5.6 and 1/3s
Victor
A
asabet
Guest
Hi Victor,
Just to be clear, I pushed the ISO 800 DNG by three full stops in Raw Developer and converted to TIFF using default settings other than custom WB. Then imported into PS CS3, applied Noise Ninja (auto profile, default settings, 65% sharpen during noise reduction), downsized to match the diagonal dimension of a Nikon D3 file (ie downsampled to 12 MP), and sharpened (Smart Sharpen, amount 60%, radius 0.3). What I showed above were 100% crops from the processed, downsized image.
Here's a screenshot, not resized, from the file at 100% as it's being processed in Raw Developer at +3EV before Noise Ninja or downsizing:
The DNG file I used was downloaded from Thierry's FTP when he made it available earlier in this thread. I've uploaded for you in case it's not there any more.
Original ISO 800 DNG file
Native size 0, +1, and +2 EV JPEG conversions with no Noise Ninja
Downsampled +3EV conversion with Noise Ninja applied
Regards,
Amin
Last edited:
gogopix
Subscriber
Dear Amin,
yes, I understand you did in raw, but sort of equivalent at capture if you 'push' by adjustibg exposure 3 stops.
I want to see what the raw looks like. At the risk of repeat, here is what Noiseware PRO does at default (100percent crop, on screen, not resized) iso 800 P45+
so if combo of iso, ev adjust and noise reduction gets reasonable (say up to 16x20) then that is a BIG improvement
These shot is 1/3s need 1/30-1/60 even WA to get a reasonable shot and 5.6 MINIMUM for DOF
regards
Victor
yes, I understand you did in raw, but sort of equivalent at capture if you 'push' by adjustibg exposure 3 stops.
I want to see what the raw looks like. At the risk of repeat, here is what Noiseware PRO does at default (100percent crop, on screen, not resized) iso 800 P45+
so if combo of iso, ev adjust and noise reduction gets reasonable (say up to 16x20) then that is a BIG improvement
These shot is 1/3s need 1/30-1/60 even WA to get a reasonable shot and 5.6 MINIMUM for DOF
regards
Victor
Last edited:
A
asabet
Guest
I see what you mean Victor. This does seem like an unreal improvement, particularly since the sensor has not been replaced. All of these cameras and backs are out of my league. I was just interested to look at the file since I've always been told that high ISO performance was a weakness of digital medium format. I'm interested to hear what you think after you've had a chance to look at Thierry's RAW file linked above. Regards, Amin
T
thsinar
Guest
hi Eric,
as explained, Brumbaer does allow to use colour matrices and to make one's own colour calibration which gives a better colour rendition as in eXposure currently. Look at Graham's "ISO 400" sample to have an idea how it affects the colours in the shadows.
Other than this, there is a "Centerfold" correction applied (as well in eXposure), a highlight recovery takes place (as well in eXposure), and the Ref. File of the particular back is applied (as well in exosure), nothing else: there is for instance no noise reduction or such taking place.
This being said, I think anyway that whatever "happens" during the conversion, either in eXposure or else, doesn't really matter, but to know WHAT is available in the file and what can be done with it, that's what really matters, IMO. I remind also, that the shot was taken at ISO 800 with 1/40 sec. and f 5.6, and that it cannot be considered as a long exposure ISO 800 file: it was not dark like may be in Victor's situation and there was light available, though in the very early morning with just some light rays hitting the subject from a flat angle.
Best regards,
Thierry
as explained, Brumbaer does allow to use colour matrices and to make one's own colour calibration which gives a better colour rendition as in eXposure currently. Look at Graham's "ISO 400" sample to have an idea how it affects the colours in the shadows.
Other than this, there is a "Centerfold" correction applied (as well in eXposure), a highlight recovery takes place (as well in eXposure), and the Ref. File of the particular back is applied (as well in exosure), nothing else: there is for instance no noise reduction or such taking place.
This being said, I think anyway that whatever "happens" during the conversion, either in eXposure or else, doesn't really matter, but to know WHAT is available in the file and what can be done with it, that's what really matters, IMO. I remind also, that the shot was taken at ISO 800 with 1/40 sec. and f 5.6, and that it cannot be considered as a long exposure ISO 800 file: it was not dark like may be in Victor's situation and there was light available, though in the very early morning with just some light rays hitting the subject from a flat angle.
Best regards,
Thierry
Last edited:
Amin,
Thanks for taking the time to do this work and sharing the results. Of course, thanks too to Thierry for taking them. This seems to me a remarkable improvement over previous generation backs, at least the ones I've been using. Typically I don't have the need to shoot at the higher ISO levels but, as Victor says, it does open up interesting possibilities.
Thanks for taking the time to do this work and sharing the results. Of course, thanks too to Thierry for taking them. This seems to me a remarkable improvement over previous generation backs, at least the ones I've been using. Typically I don't have the need to shoot at the higher ISO levels but, as Victor says, it does open up interesting possibilities.
T
thsinar
Guest
Thanks too, Amin, for your work and time, appreciated.
It is definitively a huge improvement having taken place with this new sensor board in the Sinar eMotion 75: I am getting feedback from other users who praise this new achievement.
Thierry
It is definitively a huge improvement having taken place with this new sensor board in the Sinar eMotion 75: I am getting feedback from other users who praise this new achievement.
Thierry
A
asabet
Guest
David and Thierry, it was my pleasure. Thierry, thanks for letting us play with the RAW file and congratulations on this development. Regards, Amin
gogopix
Subscriber
Dear Amin
I did open the file in C1 version 4 (whatever they are callingit) and the files are remarkable. I 'pushed' only 2.5 ev but still, Thierry you guys have something here.:thumbs:
Very little noise even at 100% and pushed.
WARNING: C1 4 will put in MASSIVE amounts of NR, so that the image looks like 'paintbynumbers' Take all the NR off, and you will see it is NOT necessary!
now, about that design and color...:thumbdown:
Regards
Victor
PS I got lazy and just 'hypersnapped it only wanted to show the basic NO NR 100% filewith everything zero in C1 4 this is 2.5 PLUS about another 1-2 EV in the histogram, really!
I did open the file in C1 version 4 (whatever they are callingit) and the files are remarkable. I 'pushed' only 2.5 ev but still, Thierry you guys have something here.:thumbs:
Very little noise even at 100% and pushed.
WARNING: C1 4 will put in MASSIVE amounts of NR, so that the image looks like 'paintbynumbers' Take all the NR off, and you will see it is NOT necessary!
now, about that design and color...:thumbdown:
Regards
Victor
PS I got lazy and just 'hypersnapped it only wanted to show the basic NO NR 100% filewith everything zero in C1 4 this is 2.5 PLUS about another 1-2 EV in the histogram, really!
Last edited: