P30 Plus Noise test

BTW I turned the Luminance down to ZERO all processed in C1 4.8

Here they come 200,400,800 and 1600

Certainly 400 is excellent on the P30 + than it will go gradually 800 at 100 percent looks pretty darn good. 1600 is holding on but not for dear life and i will be using it under stage lighting a lot actually coming in two weeks.

I also did NO lens corrections either.

Okay same thing just different local

FF and Iso 100. This was set at daylight on the back

Okay again 200,400,800 and 1600

Overall I think pretty good . Maybe more equivalent to a Nikon at 3200 or something like that for 1600. Not sure but it seems pretty good and how often do we use things at 100 percent. LOL

Sometimes I think we pixel peep too much but that is okay good to know what you can and cannot do . Obviously if your in the crappier grab a Nikon or Canon. I could most likely improve it with more luminance for sure and fine tune more. I am slightly under on both series by about a 1/4 of a stop. The 28mm reads more space so you have to be careful of highlights in the frame.

Might be underestimating the ISO 800 here . It looks better than I thought on this second series. Any thoughts folks something I am not seeing. Oh end of test

I think you hit it on the head --- more detail in the 400 and under, a bit less at 800, and less still at 1600. But as you said, very usable 1600 which is what you were after!

:thumbs:

Exactly. What is pretty neat here is when it counts a lot 400 will give you two extra stops when your pushed against the wall on a ad campaign when you really need the big file

I was going to post the same thing: 400 looks very good, 800 usable, 1600 in a pinch, IMO. Though I would avoid 1600 when I could (duh). Just guessing, but they (the 1600 ISO shots) don't look so messy that they'd not clean up pretty nicely.

Guy,

For most event and PR work where you'd be needing the ISO1600, it certainly looks more than acceptable for all of those who will be peeking at it and passing judgement on it.

Kurt

Agreed and that was my criteria was that stuff was my concern and it seems fine for it. Thanks guy's

Good work Guy, thank you.

May I ask how far away from camera is the toaster? I'm trying to figure out how useful the 28mm will be for me.

Guy,
Have to add to the other's comments. Things look solid through ISO 400. ISO 800 is starting to lose some of the blacks and get more noise, but far more acceptable than most MF stuff anybody shoots at 800. The 1600 shots are showing even more disintegration of the blacks mostly, but still very acceptable. If you hit with a bit of NR, and maybe move the black point up a notch or so, it would be a very usable shot for what you are looking to cover. The details are holding, but the "pop" is going away a bit at 800 and a bit more at 1600, but still very usable.

Now, just get the firmware updated on the camera, and you should be cooking there. Also, I would still consider shooting a bigger WB target and setting a custom WB if you have the chance. These look good, but I still think it worth tuning the WB before you shoot, and getting the exposure tuned in also. Just suggestions. I have started to find that bit of extra on the front end makes everything come out nicer in processing.

LJ

Guy,

Is that Jergens lotion the secret to your firm, youthful skin?

Steve

Little playing around here , raised the color and luminance levels some and added a touch of black

Unfortunately, that increased the noise relative to the first 1600 frame above, at least in the hairbrush and the wood cabinets... IMO the first conversion is superior.

Probably never notice this in a 8x10 and for event stuff all you will ever need. Even the 800 is better than the P25+ and actually 800 is more normal for this stuff. I would most likely use 1600 when there is just no hope. I guess if I really wanted to work it Noise Ninja or something like that could fine tune this pretty well. Maybe D-Fine. I should send this raw to Jack to run D-fine on it, just to see how it does. I'm not a big noise reduction user

Yea I think so too bud. First one was at Zero luminance and color at 40 . Second one was at 23 and 57