JP/Avery Loc: Australia

yes i did notice tgr fisher man but the photo is headed unedited i was more worried about the noisr as its only a tester shot.

:thumbup:

singleviking Loc: Lake Sebu Eco Park, Philippines

There's a third source for noise in DSLR photos that is caused by gamma radiation and radioactive isotopes causing x-ray and gamma ray bursts that show up in photos as noise. The longer the shutter speed, the more of this form of noise can be observed. In camera noise reduction will not remove all of this type of noise in many cases.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Just about any camera taking a 13 second exposure is going to have slight noise. I'd say that the slight noise that I see in your example is nothing to worry about. As stated by others, the image is slightly soft which could be that there was slight movement from the mirror or tripod. Also, the 3rd party lens probably isn't the sharpest.

PhotoArtsLA Loc: Boynton Beach

The first issue with long exposures is that most current tripods cannot maintain stability for anywhere near that exposure length. My mistaken purchase of a Manfrotto tripod in the $500-ish range revealed modern tripod fallacy as it has an awful case of coffee nerves. 13 seconds? The Manfrotto can't handle 1/125.

Secondly, under low light, with landscape, there is no reason to be at f/22. There would be no benefit, only detriments, even with OEM lenses. Most lenses are at peak performance just 2-3 stops from wide open, all else is not quite as good. Some lenses are designed for peak performance wide open, but these are not really common for landscape use.

Third, with long exposures, your ISO can be set at the lowest setting your camera offers. This limits grain. You definitely do NOT want auto ISO, as this can do weird things, including offering variable noise structure within the same frame.

It will take a lucky break with the dilettante nature of current tripods to be anything approaching sharp at 13 seconds. Thus, I wish only the best luck to you. Good shooting.

Phreedom Loc: Kitchener, Ontario, Canada

Two tiny white dots in your photo (circled in red), when enlarged, appear to be perfect X's. I've never noticed anything like this before.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

How did you get that upside down backwards question mark there?

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Now there's a mystery that needs a solution!

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

I don't think they are dots or noise; they look like dead pixels to me.

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

ʖ Alternative Keyboard ʕ

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Are you a secret agent who has to type lots of messages in code? :D

(Only kidding! Please don't send anyone to my house!)

Phreedom Loc: Kitchener, Ontario, Canada

Mogul, it appears that the mysterious white X’s are not dead pixels, which are black, but the polar opposite, hot pixels which show during long exposures and especially at higher ISO settings.

Other than post processing, correcting for this requires a remapping of the camera sensor. You can have this done at the service center.

From http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1153538

“…current Canon DSLR cameras create a new bad pixel map whenever the firmware is updated or the manual sensor clean function is selected (I have personally verified this for my 5D2 which has two hot pixels). Newbies may report that this doesn't fix their hot pixels because the function only maps out pixels that are bad enough to appear stuck for exposures of about one second at ISO 100. Pixels that work at this setting are not mapped out because they work fine for typical photographs. If you care most about long exposures then you can increase the number of pixels mapped out by first heating up the sensor by using live view. If the manual sensor clean is selected right after using live view for at least two minutes then the increased sensor temperature will result in more of the marginal pixels appearing as stuck to (and therefore mapped out by) the mapping out routine. Of course this will need to be repeated after every time the sensor is cleaned or the firmware is updated or the marginal pixels will reappear.”

More on do-it-yourself at:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/1246778@N22/discuss/72157622456754945/

and http://www.hdcamteam.com/2011/07/18/canon-service-center-experience-hot-pixels/

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Considering the invisibility of the "defect," I'd ignore it, although doing a repair sounds ridiculously easy. Paying Canon $300 does not sound like a good idea, though. I like the flickr solution.

Dun1 Loc: Atlanta, GA

I did not see the noise issues, I agree the image might be out of focus or you might want to shoot at F/ll or F/16 and take the best of those two settings to see which one you prefer and produces the best image