Are some canons better at higher ISO than others? Recently posted a few shots taken with canon 80D and asked for critique. One helpful responder remarked that the ISO at 3200 and at...

genocolo Loc: Vail and Gasparilla Island

Recently posted a few shots taken with canon 80D and asked for critique. One helpful responder remarked that the ISO at 3200 and at 5000 may have been too high for the 80D to handle comfortably. Did not realize that some Dslrs are better than others at higher ISO. Would mark iv or 5dsr be better and how much? Seems I take a lot of wildlife photos at distance at lower light.

PhotoKurtz Loc: Carterville, IL

genocolo wrote:

Recently ... Seems I take a lot of wildlife photos at distance at lower light.

I don't know the answer to your question, but I share your wildlife shot issue. If I'm not shooting for stock photos I'll bump the iso to capture that moment and not fret about the grain.

Reminds me of an old Navy joke where she asked, "who you gonna please with THAT?" and he answered... "Me!"

BassmanBruce Loc: Middle of the Mitten

Adding a flash and getting closer are probably the places to start, but from a tech point of view this might help: https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Ratings

Edit: Scroll down a little, the "sports" header is their idea of how high you can crank the iso without much problem.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

Yes, some DSLRS are better at high ISOs than others. True of all brands. Two factors contribute: technology, sensor pixel size. For the same technology and megapixels, full frame is lower noise than APS-C. However, you get nothing for nothing. For any given focal length lens, APS-C has more reach. For Canon, 1.6 times more, for Nikon 1.5.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Yes. In general, the full frame Canons (5D and 1D series) are typically ~ 1 stop better in terms of noise at high ISO. For actual data, go here, and plug in the cameras you’d like to compare: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm

crazydaddio Loc: Toronto Ontario Canada

TriX wrote:

Yes. In general, the full frame Canons (5D and 1D series) are typically ~ 1 stop better in terms of noise at high ISO. For actual data, go here, and plug in the cameras you’d like to compare: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm

That's a great link! Confirms a lot of conversations about DR for cameras ...

PaulR01 Loc: West Texas

genocolo wrote:

Recently posted a few shots taken with canon 80D and asked for critique. One helpful responder remarked that the ISO at 3200 and at 5000 may have been too high for the 80D to handle comfortably. Did not realize that some Dslrs are better than others at higher ISO. Would mark iv or 5dsr be better and how much? Seems I take a lot of wildlife photos at distance at lower light.

I would suggest your helpful responder to get a job. An 80 D is good for around 8,000 to 10,000 ISO. Not all photos are going to be printed as a 4' x 4' poster, the majority of shots are viewed on a small computer screen. I took a shot Friday night at a football game at 25,800 while it was raining. Guess which picture was used for the paper Saturday morning. We as sports photographers crank up the ISO to maintain a high shutter speed to stop motion. Even at 20,000 ISO off a 5Diii you can print great large posters. Its all about how you handle the noise in post. In camera over expose some so you wont have to add noise to the photo correcting highlights. Lower the black slider bar and never increase exposure or contrast settings in post with high ISO shots. I don't own a lens that doesn't at least have a 2.8 F stop or larger.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

genocolo wrote:

Recently posted a few shots taken with canon 80D and asked for critique. One helpful responder remarked that the ISO at 3200 and at 5000 may have been too high for the 80D to handle comfortably. Did not realize that some Dslrs are better than others at higher ISO. Would mark iv or 5dsr be better and how much? Seems I take a lot of wildlife photos at distance at lower light.

5D3, 5D4, 6D, 6D2, 1DX, 1DX2 are all much better. 5DS and 5DSR are both worse than the 80D.
In general most full frames outperform ANY crop sensor at high ISO's

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

genocolo wrote:

Recently posted a few shots taken with canon 80D and asked for critique. One helpful responder remarked that the ISO at 3200 and at 5000 may have been too high for the 80D to handle comfortably. Did not realize that some Dslrs are better than others at higher ISO. Would mark iv or 5dsr be better and how much? Seems I take a lot of wildlife photos at distance at lower light.

I've always equated photosite size with low light performance, i.e.: the larger the photosite, the better the low light performance. DxO Mark shows Low Light performance for all the cameras they test; good spot to check.

bwa

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

PaulR01 wrote:

I would suggest your helpful responder to get a jo... (show quote)

I am that "helpful responder". What does my being retired have to do with the advice I give?? If you had provided advice yesterday, then perhaps I wouldn't have said anything, but I did the best I could even though I do not use Canon. You still have a chance to redeem yourself by responding over there
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-488269-1.html

{and I'm not sure which of your comments in this thread actually respond to the question asked here}

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

genocolo wrote:

Recently posted a few shots taken with canon 80D and asked for critique. One helpful responder remarked that the ISO at 3200 and at 5000 may have been too high for the 80D to handle comfortably. Did not realize that some Dslrs are better than others at higher ISO. Would mark iv or 5dsr be better and how much? Seems I take a lot of wildlife photos at distance at lower light.

Yes, without a doubt. Nikon makes/made three cameras. The D3S, D4 and D5 - all of which have no problem shooting ISO 25,600. Canon is good but not quite as good. The 5DSR is quite good, if you shoot raw and downsample your images to 12-18 mp.

None of the crop sensor cameras can compete with full frame cameras when it comes to noise, and especially if you print. Magnifying an image 50% or 60% more will reveal flaws like noise.

sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

The Canon 6D is a "not-many-frills" full-frame Canon that has been called "one of the 5 best cameras ever developed". It is amazing at getting low-light photos. This allows me to use my 100-400 telephoto hand-held in some fairly dim conditions.

This post includes photos of an anteater bathing at the zoo - images ranged from ISO 5,000 to 12,800. http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-470932-1.html

The image below from my recent trip to South Africa is of a white rhino taking a mud bath at twilight as the moon rises. ISO is 12,800 This was with the 6D, the 100-400mm (at 100mm) lens hand-held with a shutter speed of 1/500.

(Download)

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

genocolo wrote:

Recently posted a few shots taken with canon 80D and asked for critique. One helpful responder remarked that the ISO at 3200 and at 5000 may have been too high for the 80D to handle comfortably. Did not realize that some Dslrs are better than others at higher ISO. Would mark iv or 5dsr be better and how much? Seems I take a lot of wildlife photos at distance at lower light.

Yes. Find reviews and comparisons.

(Reviews) https://www.youtube.com/user/TheCameraStoreTV/videos
http://www.cameradecision.com/
http://cameras.reviewed.com/
http://camerasize.com/
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
http://snapsort.com/compare
http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/cameras?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=mainmenu&utm_medium=text&ref=mainmenu

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

genocolo wrote:

Recently posted a few shots taken with canon 80D and asked for critique. One helpful responder remarked that the ISO at 3200 and at 5000 may have been too high for the 80D to handle comfortably. Did not realize that some Dslrs are better than others at higher ISO. Would mark iv or 5dsr be better and how much? Seems I take a lot of wildlife photos at distance at lower light.

For Nikon the professional line is better in low light than the lessor Nikon's. You gotta get what you pay for.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

For Canon I would say the 1Dx MkII is the best and the 5D4 a close second. Full Frame will generally beat Crop Sensor cameras of the same relative age or era. I am one who looks at ISO as Gain over Time. If people are interested The Angry Photographer, Ken, has videos on YouTube talking about ISO. Interesting stuff...

I shoot drag racing at night at ISO 4000-12000 using flash also. Noise can be dealt with in PP if you learn how to do it. I am still learning, always trying to get better...

Best,
Todd Ferguson