Vancouver by night

[Darren Bradley]

After seeing Chris's night shots of San Diego, I was reminded of some shots I did of Vancouver last summer when I was up there visiting family. I sometimes go out at night looking for shots when I'm up there. These were both shot with the 5D2 and the Canon 17mm TS-E, 50 ISO at f4.

 

[Darren Turner]

OMG Night Photography PORN.................!!

They are stunning, everything lit up in the big city looks fab, and the image is made even better by the reflection in the water. Really great spot for a photo or 2.

Great work, just wondering what the big ball like shape on image 2 is all about..............?

Daz

 

[Thomas brookes]

Stunning!

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Gorgeous!

Just interested in your reasons for using ISO 50 on the 5D2?

I've read mixed reviews on ISO 50 - including comments that it tends to blow out highlights because of the way the 5D2 'fakes' the low ISO setting

 

[Darren Bradley]

I hadn't ever heard that, or seen it in anything I've shot, have you? I like 50 because I see noise even at 200 otherwise, in some cases.

 

[Hamish Gill]

Best response is always at "Base" iso
On the d3 200 is base, it goes lower to 100 equiv but quality is not as good (not that it's noticeable really)
For best results shoot at base iso ... I think it's 200iso on the 5dmkii

Of course this is theory ... Practice may differ ... And again I'm talking about canon ... Something I shouldn't do

Edit - looks like base is 100
http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/slrs/canon_eos5dmkii

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Mmmm I think base ISO on the 5D2 may actually be 160, based on tests like this:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/38215965@N04/sets/72157617903991680/

When you look at the (amplified) noise at ISO 100, then compare with the ISO 160 image, the difference is startling. It's better than ISO 200 as well.

I've never used ISO 50 on the 5D2, so have no images to compare.

Now, how valid the results are when transferred into real world shooting, I don't know.

I do see a lot of folk complaining about banding/noise on ISO 100 5D2 images - because they've had to push the exposure in PP.

if the noise levels are naturally higher at 100, then this may explain why they see pattern noise in PP

of course, correctly exposing the image in camera is the way to avoid banding/noise - but it's interesting if the camera actually performs better at ISO 160

Here we all are (well DB and I for sure) selecting low ISO for optimum image quality - when in fact ISO 160 may be the one to go for...

Requires further testing I think - but food for thought!

 

[Chris Dodkin]

DB - Knew I'd read it somewhere!

To quote my Canon EOD 5D MKII Digital Field Guide (Brian McLernon)

"Be aware that ISO 50 reduces the dynamic range in the highlights by approximately 1 stop, which makes the sensitivity less useful in high-contrast light."

 

[Darren Bradley]

Oh, thanks Chris! That's really good to know! I'll have to try ISO 160 then. Are you sure that's the base ISO?

 

[Chris Dodkin]

I can't find a definitive answer - some say ISO 100, some say ISO 200, the test shows ISO 160 as lowest noise and other posts I've found confirm this.

In fact 160, 320, 480 etc are the lowest noise ISOs - I see posts saying this is because of the way these 'non standard' ISOs are processed in camera.

Clearly there is a lot going on here behind the scenes - need to research more and do some testing in the real world I think.

Just as a matter of interest, do you use any built-in noise reduction on long exposures? C.Fn II-01

 

[Darren Bradley]

On the long exposures, I don't like to use any of the built-in noise reduction because of it softens the images. I don't really see the point, either, to be honest, because if you're doing a long exposure, you can do whatever ISO is optimal, right? In theory, you won't have any noise anyway. I never use the Long Exposure NR feature. Have you tried it?

By the way, does Brian McLernon go into any sort of explanation about why ISO 50 reduces dynamic range? Is it only because you can't use the highlight recovery feature on the camera with such a low, or does it go beyond that?

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Never used the built-in NR - as you say, haven't seen the need to because the images are very clean.

The explanation of ISO 50 seems to be that it's really just ISO 100 with 1 stop over exposure, which is then adjusted in camera to make it look like ISO 50.

That 1 stop adjustment looses you 1 stop of dynamic range.