Ridiculous amount of grain even at low ISOs

fates

fates

Active member
So I'm enjoying the potential of this camera, but it seems like the grain levels on my unit are HORRIBLE. I've tried changing the custom settings functions to have ISO Expansion off, but to no avail. Everything is really noisy. Is there a sweet spot setting that I'm overlooking, or is the kit lens just really a lot slower than an f4? Even at ISO <800 I'm seeing grain... not on screen but definitely monitoring the camera's h.264 QT output. It's smoothed out a little in the Prores exports tho...


Also is anyone else experiencing a lot of red artifacts in the shadow areas, like this frame, they dance like crazy in motion? In the shadow areas on the roof the sensor is throwing in some crazy colors.
Cr_testframe.jpg
 
Try iso 160, 320, 640 & 1250 these are the isos that have been proven to have the lowest noise. Obviously 160 being the cleanest. The F4 lens is a little slow and you will generally see some noise shooting indoors without lighting equipment.
 
Definitely 160,320,640,1250 like stated above. But - I can honestly say that I have never had that same issue. My image is virtually grainless up to iso1000. I find myself consistently working at 320 and 640 and I am able to cut in the same scene between these ISOs without issue. I have also never had a problem with transcoding to prores as long as you use media manager so it doesn't mess with your gamma.
 
Thanks guys!
What compression would you suggest other than Prores 422? I haven't seen too many workflow examples outlined for this camera yet. I've been following P.Bloom's 24p conversion workflow, but now I've read that transcoding to XDCAM EX 30p in Mpeg Streamclip also works well.

Is there a post somewhere that lists tricks & tips for 5D users? I found a few posts on cinema5d about the ISO issues and the stepping of the 160,320,640,1250,2500,5000 sweet(er) spots. My camera's a pretty new build, serial # 092xxxxxxx that shipped with the new firmware. So hopefully it's not defective, but I just thought the low light would be better than this...

I guess I need to get some faster glass!
 
It looks to me like you have definitely got an aliasing issue. This looks like files I have seen from the old Kodak DSLR (photo-not video cameras). Aliasing isn't just moire, it is also this kind of splotchy color in what should be otherwise neutral areas. I would go into the camera's personal profiles and turn down the saturation to begin with.
 
Last edited:
Not sure what Kholi's experience is. But I love prores. I use it every day. If there is something better I would like to know. I strongly prefer prores over cineform because of compatibility issues with other computers.

Anyway, my vote is to stay with prores. Prores is not what's causing this. If you can see the issue in the original quicktime, it has nothing to do with the conversion.
 
I agree about the Prores. The conversion to EX CAM seemed to accent the splotches more. So I'm interested in whatever might be better.

I tried another test today outside at f11-16 with 160 ISO and still found splotches and noise all through out the shadow areas, I'm starting to get worried... :(

Here is a quicktime to see the issue in motion. Look at the roof of the truck.
5Dmk2 160 ISO kit lens f13
 
squig said:
Are you over or underexposing when you shoot?

And have you turned off everything auto?
Click to expand...

I'm trying everything. :-BlackEye(DBG

Over, under, and properly exposed. It just seems so noisy with large color splotches, even with good exposure. Even at ISO 160. I posted a clip (above this post) at 160 ISO to illustrate.

I've tried full manual, auto, picture styles (by flattening contrast & saturation images improve slightly), ISO expansion in off in Custom Functions, HTP is off, and probably more than that... my mind is to busy spiraling into depression to recall every function adjustment.

I'm starting to wonder if this really is a defective unit.
 
Prores is a great codec and its not your problem . Damn, professional environments use prores , you'd think they would abandon it if it didn't deliver. I use it and its solid.

The data rate of your clip is 893.2 K/s or 6.8 Mbs. Thats your problem.

Either you have your cam settings wrong or your camera is messed up.
 
ryansheffer said:
Not sure what Kholi's experience is. But I love prores. I use it every day. If there is something better I would like to know. I strongly prefer prores over cineform because of compatibility issues with other computers.

Anyway, my vote is to stay with prores. Prores is not what's causing this. If you can see the issue in the original quicktime, it has nothing to do with the conversion.
Click to expand...


ProRes isn't bad. Just saying that it introduces noise to image. It may or may not be part of what's going on here but it's certainly true. Which is why I made the suggestion to try something else.

We stopped using proRes for the most part in our red workflow because of this. But mileage may vary.

So far as the mkii footage goes the last project shot with it we kickd out some 480 files and offlined the footage, then reconnected the 1080s. So I'm not sure how much of a difference prores really makes with mkii footage.

Again, a suggestion.
 
Ok, maybe my sensor just overheats REALLY fast. Like 5 minutes on in live view fast. I'm in the high summer heat in Florida, but to overheat this fast makes it unusable. Here are two straight from camera H.264 mov's. I waited 20mins between each one to make sure the sensor was cool from the 5 seconds of shooting each time. :thumbup:

H.264 f4 160ISO 1/50 shutter

H.264 f11 2500ISO 1/50 shutter

What do you experts think about the reds in the dark gray area? Acceptable?

Ok, then how about this one....

H.264 f4 2500ISO 1/30 shutter

See how my darker areas and flesh tones are splotchy? 90% of what I shoot looks like this unless I'm throwing 80k worth of lights or the sun at this camera... is this what everyone's footage looks really looks like? I just need to run faster glass and scale down the size to 720p to smooth out what comes out of this camera?

Thanks again for all the replys!:dankk2:
 
Hey Mico,
How doi you know what the data rate is for his clip and where is this in the camera settings?
 
The boobs definitely look fake to me

I've been going through my raw clips and I noticed that the codec really doesn't like hot pink. The h.264 tends to get a bit lazy with large areas with no detail like in the first 2 clips particularly grey, red and green areas I've noticed. I shot some footage today of my kid riding her bike on a bitumen path, it looked good slightly over-exposed but when I shot it slightly under-exposed the codec didn't like the large dark grey areas of bitumen.

The last shot doesn't look right to me, I haven't shot much in low light yet but I've seen a lot of MKII stuff that looks very good. Post this stuff over at cinema5D and see what they think. You can generally get a DOA replacement if you return something within 7 days, I'd do it just to be sure. There's a dude over at cinema5D who sends his MKII to canon to be calibrated and if any MKII needs it yours certainly does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top