More grain on good lighting then i expected!! Any thoughts????

[Tero Ahlfors]

I still don’t understand what kind of performance you’re expecting from a DSLR. There will be noise with EVERY camera. Either deal with it or denoise it if it bothers you.

[Austin shelton] “I had good lighting in the video. It was a bright diffused day and it was coming through a window.”

That’s not good lighting for a dark kit lens when shooting inside.

[Austin Shelton]

Well i suppose im wrong then? Expecting less noise than that.

I’v seen video all over youtube showing better noise performance using the KIT lens and they was outside at (night). No digital noise removal on most iv seen as they have stated that.

[Tero Ahlfors]

[Austin shelton] “I’v seen video all over youtube showing better noise performance using the KIT lens and they was outside at (night).”

Well they probably pick their compositions so they can use the lowest ISO they can and expose properly with the limitations in mind.

[Rob White]

I try to never shoot more than 400 ISO on any DSLR. I know some say Native 800 or 1600 but I prefer 100 @1/50 @ f/2 if I have to or if I want shallow DOF. I usually try to light for whatever I want my camera to be set at.

If I am shooting a band in a dark club, for example, I prefer to light the band, and have a very small, optional on-camera LED. That way I can shoot around f/4 or f/5.6 at 400 ISO and it generally will look OK (AS LONG AS THERE’S ENOUGH LIGHT) If they aren’t lit, and lighting is unavailable, call it a night and drink with the band after you fake that you’re getting some good video. If need be, go up to 800 or 1600 at the VERY MOST. Unless you’re using a 5dMkiii which will probably have superior noise reduction. But don’t expect magic out of your DSLR unless you’re lighting like a master.

[Ryan Holmes]

Austin – the image you’re seeing is exactly what the 700D (or t5i here in the States) produces. Nothing is abnormal or wrong with your camera.

Some things to keep in mind:
(1) Higher ISO’s will create more noise. I believe the base (i.e native) ISO for most Canon DSLR’s is 160. Staying in multiples of that usually results in the “best possible picture.” But again “best possible picture” does not mean no noise. It just means it’s minimized.
(2) Kit lenses are slow are usually poor quality. Shooting at f/4 or f/5.6 means you need to up your ISO if you want to have a shot at exposing correctly with only minimal lighting (like you have in your video above).
(3) You need more light. All cameras need to be fed a steady and constant diet of light. The notion that people can buy a DSLR and run around in the moonlight (or on a cloudy day inside their room) and shoot images that are spectacular with no extra effort is a misguided notion perpetuated by too many videos from 2008-today. To expose well you need light. To run at a lower ISO, you need light.
(4) My experience with the ML hack is a double edged sword. It allows you the ultimate flexibility over the image in post, but it also seems to allow you to see all the flaws of these cameras and sensors. So running RAW means you’re gonna see the good, the bad, and the ugly of a consumer camera. If you’re not planning on doing some work in post with it (denoise, sharpen, color grading, etc) then it’s probably not the right tool for the job.

Just my $.02

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
@CutColorPost

[Austin Shelton]

Ok thanks guys this all makes sense.
Im getting a lens with a f stop of 1.4 in 3 days so maybe that will allow the best image. Its a vintage lens but its better than the nifty fifty and its sharper 🙂 Iv been learning and learning and it keeps getting better and better. I mean iso 800 was not allllllll that bad tbh the more i look at it. Nothing a little denoise wont fix and and maybe some color correcting with some contrast so i can crush the shadows just a tad to hide the noise right? i mean the white was very clear so maybe im just expecting to much with this.