Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Iso 16000 & 32000?

PaulClements

PaulClements

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
1,995
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
47
Website
www.pclements.co.uk
I remember Jim said he was going to be shooting some tests at 32000, but can't recall or find anything about either tests being put up on the forum, seems ISO 8000 was the largest figure.

Did they get posted and if so can someone point me in the right direction here!

Cheers
Paul
 
Thanks Stephen, I thought I'd seen it and needed to show somone but couldn't for the life of me find it!
 
Because I was bored, I had a look to see if I could find any other HD cameras tested at 7 stops under, as everyone was saying this was amazing (but I had no reference)

http://www.cinematography.net/hdcamtests/Sony F23/Sony-F23.htm

This is the f23, latest from sony. The top pic is also 7-stops under. I took the pic into photoshop, quick levels adjusted and resized to the same image as Red posted.

Interesting comparisons. The noise on the Red camera seemed bigger grains than the F23, the F23 noise was finer and the image considerably sharper at 7 stops under; although that could just be that the Red image is actually out of focus.
 
darkline said:
This is the f23, latest from sony. The top pic is also 7-stops under. I took the pic into photoshop, quick levels adjusted and resized to the same image as Red posted.

Interesting comparisons. The noise on the Red camera seemed bigger grains than the F23, the F23 noise was finer and the image considerably sharper at 7 stops under; although that could just be that the Red image is actually out of focus.
Click to expand...

This is not quite an accurate comparison. The image RED posted was not of their production release. You also have to consider the size of RED's image. With a larger sensor, and 4K frame size, I think you can expect more grain.

I believe that the 32000K image was also exposed through a 300mm lens. (which I am pretty sure the SONY image was not).

I think the true noise test would be to see both images Color Corrected and projected in 4K.

David
 
battistella said:
I believe that the 32000K image was also exposed through a 300mm lens. (which I am pretty sure the SONY image was not).

David
Click to expand...

Hi David,

Why is the 300mm lens an issue? The Sony tests was done with Digiprimes.

Stephen
 
well i think its a fair test if you resize the sony image to the size of the reduced red image. it gives you a comparable level of noise at the same image size.

Of course is it fair to say Red is not a production model, but it's still interesting to see what other cameras are currently capable of
 
darkline said:
Because I was bored, I had a look to see if I could find any other HD cameras tested at 7 stops under, as everyone was saying this was amazing (but I had no reference)

http://www.cinematography.net/hdcamtests/Sony F23/Sony-F23.htm

This is the f23, latest from sony. The top pic is also 7-stops under. I took the pic into photoshop, quick levels adjusted and resized to the same image as Red posted.

Interesting comparisons. The noise on the Red camera seemed bigger grains than the F23, the F23 noise was finer and the image considerably sharper at 7 stops under; although that could just be that the Red image is actually out of focus.
Click to expand...

True, the F23 image looks sharper than the 32000 iso Red picture.
But there seems to be a lot more colored noise on the F23 picture, especially blue noise, which I personally don't like.
Red's noise looks much more monochromatic.
 
darkline said:
well i think its a fair test if you resize the sony image to the size of the reduced red image. it gives you a comparable level of noise at the same image size.

Of course is it fair to say Red is not a production model, but it's still interesting to see what other cameras are currently capable of
Click to expand...

For sure and I agree. The scaled down RED image is a fair comparison. I think we will see tests like this coming out when the camera has it's initial release.

These pictures were posted when they were trying to show us latitude and how far they could push the sensor.

The production release with the same lens would be a fair test. But I'd also like to see the sony image scaled up to 4K.
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi David,

Why is the 300mm lens an issue? The Sony tests was done with Digiprimes.

Stephen
Click to expand...

I just think that if you are comparing images they should be shot under the exact same circumstances, unless it is a fixed lens camera or something.

So if the test was a 300mm RED lens attached to both camera's it would be a fair comparison.

If you look at Evan's lens database, you can see that lenses behave vastly differently based on the aperture, so tests should always be apples to apples comparisons, to make a fair comparison.

It has nothing to do with the 300mm lens, but the fact that the conditions of the test are not the same.

David



David
 
Uh, wait a minute. "7 stops under" does NOT mean the same thing as ISO 32000.
Try this with your DSLR:
1) Light the scene for ISO 12800, f/2.0
2) Shoot the scene at ISO 100 and f/2.0
3) Shoot the scene at ISO 12800, f/22 (probably have to shoot at 3200 and boost 2 stops in post).

Ok, now both your pictures are 7 stops underexposed. But the noise looks a little different between ISO 100 and ISO 12800, doesn't it?
 
Hi,

It's not possible to use the same lens, however if you use Zeiss Digi Primes on the Sony & Ziess master primes on the Red you would be close. Thats what is done on the comparative tests @ CML.

Both the Zeiss Digi Primes & the Master primes work very well wide open, they are technically the very best & most expensive lenses available.

Stephen

battistella said:
I just think that if you are comparing images they should be shot under the exact same circumstances, unless it is a fixed lens camera or something.

So if the test was a 300mm RED lens attached to both camera's it would be a fair comparison.

If you look at Evan's lens database, you can see that lenses behave vastly differently based on the aperture, so tests should always be apples to apples comparisons, to make a fair comparison.

It has nothing to do with the 300mm lens, but the fact that the conditions of the test are not the same.

David



David
Click to expand...
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi,

It's not possible to use the same lens, however if you use Zeiss Digi Primes on the Sony & Ziess master primes on the Red you would be close. Thats what is done on the comparative tests @ CML.

Both the Zeiss Digi Primes & the Master primes work very well wide open, they are technically the very best & most expensive lenses available.

Stephen
Click to expand...

Great!

I am sure when they have a production release available to them CML will do the appropriate tests with the correct lenses.

Until then it's mostly just speculation because we do not know what improvements are being made in the final stages of RED before the first production release.

Maybe the SONY images will be better. You always have the choice to shoot with that camera and a set of Digi Primes if you want to, and I am sure that some productions will go that way just because there is tape involved.

David
 
I'm not sure how this comparison is useful. Unless the cameras are shot at the same ISO rating, there can be no meaningful comparison of noise. http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=62362&postcount=11

As far as sharpness goes, the RED's test may or may not be in focus, but the Sony cameras I've used tend to apply a significant sharpening filter by default. As we know, the RED cameras do not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top