Canon EOS-1D X iso 51,200 before boosting

[melsky]

I see the new full frame 18 megapixel Canon EOS-1D X has amazing high iso performance, see quote below. Handheld DSO's anybody

"Another benefit of more processing power, combined with an improved sensor is an expansion of ISO range, says Westfall: 'The ISO range on this camera, just the standard range, goes from 12,800 on the 1D Mark IV and 1600 on the 1DS Mark III, up to 51,200. And this can be expanded up to 204,800 - that's going to be an enabler of all sorts of new possibilities for a lot of people"

Mel

[Psychobilly]

I tried some shots at 12,800 the other day with a 7D...

The background level tends to rise between successive subs with longer subs ... but it was usable for shorter exposures and the 7D is a APS-c sensor with small pixels...

A full frame sensor with larger pixels should be less noisy...

We live in interesting times...

Peter..

[Sparrow]

Very interesting. I think the real point of interest would be the improved sensor - this is the heart of the machine and IMHO improving the sensor is the real benefit here. I'll be interested to see some images taken at these high ISOs to see what the performance is really like.

Regards

John

[Psychobilly]

It will be worth keeping an eye on dpreview.. They only have an overview at the moment no hands on yet...

Canon EOS-1D X overview: Digital Photography Review

[Coco]

My 5D MKI was noisier than my 40D at ISO 800, I ended up selling the 5D to fund an Astrotrac. Much bigger pixels on the 5D but older tech..

From a none modified camera point of view I think the Nikon D3/ D700 looks like a winner.

[Psychobilly]

And D800 and D4's just around the corner... I think I will have a dilemea when it comes to picking a full frame body early next year...

[tingting44]

Very interesting. I think the real point of interest would be the improved sensor - this is the heart of the machine and IMHO improving the sensor is the real benefit here. I'll be interested to see some images taken at these high ISOs to see what the performance is really like.

Regards

John

WOW you have some awsome dso pics in your sig!! are they all taken with your 1000D?????!! AMAZING!!!

i really want to get into DSO imaging, but is impossible with my AZGOTO mount

[Sp@ce_d]

Ah.. bit of a coincedence resurrecting this old threat. I was just reading Craig Starks Profiling the Long-Exposure Performance of a Canon DSLR over on CN. Makes for some interesting reading. I think I'll be dropping my standard 800 ISO setting down to 400 on my next run.

[allcart]

Have you got a link to Craigs article. sounds like it could be worth reading.

[Photosbykev]

Have you got a link to Craigs article. sounds like it could be worth reading.

http://www.google.co...ZPJRYWxPPpeCyNg

in summary, best compromise for noise, dynamic range and sensitivity is shooting at iso 400

[sologuitarist61]

Having high ISO capabilities is fine but not for ever application. It would seem from the O's quote that this is acheived through processing power as opposed to sensor capabilities, so the images will be processed to within an inch of their lives and that doesn't make for good clean images usually. Be interesting to see what results are like when available and reviewed

[GlassWalker]

With a terrestrial photography hat on, it's well known that beyond a point, increasing ISO will start to limit your dynamic range. Generally the level needs to be set to keep your wanted detail out of the shadows while not excessively clipping highlights, considering other exposure parameters appropriately of course. In a quick scan of the article, the claim that increasing ISO much beyond 400 doesn't improve faint DSO detail is an interesting one, but I'm conflicted as to if it does or doesn't.

Having had a little think, I suspect this comes from different usage in terrestrial and astrophoto applications. For terrestrial use, increasing ISO enables you to use a proportionately shorter shutter time assuming optics remain constant, and we accept the noise trade off caused from the reduced light collection. For astrophoto use, we're typically exposure time limited, and we need to optimise the ISO for whatever we get from that. I have to admit I've largely stuck to 1600 for astro use, although I think I have some data at lower ISO also. I think I need to revisit that... if going above ISO400 is only amplifying noise and not providing a useful sensitivity increase, then logically I might as well use that and regain some highlight headroom e.g. for stars.

Shall have to dig out that old data and have a play now

[dph1nm]

in summary, best compromise for noise, dynamic range and sensitivity is shooting at iso 400

I think in the subsequent discussion he revised this opinion towards higher ISO (as ISO400 contradicted what others had found).

NigelM

[RikM]

Is there a radical difference between camera models as to the optimum ISO?

[sologuitarist61]

I believ so but cannot say that with any certainly. I have two DSLR's, both the same make but two models apart and the Canon 30D is nowhere near as forgiving as the 50D when the ISO is turned up, however I still try to keep the ISO at ISO800 or below, as I cannot see the point in using a faster ISO and then having to take remedial action with software to get rid of the increased noise. I also have two two quality compact cameras from different manufacturers and they are appalling at anything above ISO400.

[Photosbykev]

I think in the subsequent discussion he revised this opinion towards higher ISO (as ISO400 contradicted what others had found).

NigelM

Thanks NigelM, I didn't read beyond the pdf file, I'll go back and have another look