# 6d Highest Usable Iso?



## bradfordswood (Aug 28, 2013)

I am currently on a 60d and unhappy with the ISO performance. Even at ISO 100 there is noise, but anything above ISO 800 is particularly unacceptable to me. Some of that noise can be cleaned up in Lightroom, but I'd like a camera with a less noisy sensor. 

I was hoping the 70d would be a nice step up, but that doesn't really seem to be the case. So now I am considering a refurbished 6d. 

For those 6d owners out there, what is the highest usable ISO setting for you? 

Thanks for your comments in advance.


----------



## atvinyard (Aug 28, 2013)

6D is two stops better or so. So if 800 is your cut-off now, 3200 would probably be your cut-off on the 6D. Anyone else agree?


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Aug 28, 2013)

Shooting JPEG seems 6D has a 2 point advantage ISO. Shooting RAW seems to 1,5point.


----------



## sunnyVan (Aug 28, 2013)

<img src="http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5477/9618747632_af92aa4bdb_o.jpg" width="3872" height="2581" alt="IMG_3517"></a>

At 12800, I think the noise level in this picture is acceptable to me. But it's clearly subjective.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Aug 28, 2013)

sunnyVan said:


> <img src="http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5477/9618747632_af92aa4bdb_o.jpg" width="3872" height="2581" alt="IMG_3517"></a>
> 
> At 12800, I think the noise level in this picture is acceptable to me. But it's clearly subjective.


Yes, to print on A4 size paper looks very good. Congratulations for shooting and image processing. I would say that if the exposure is perfect the result is quite acceptable in ISO 12800. But if you need to brighten the image in post-processing, I think ISO 3200 is still very good. On paper sizes close to 1 meter long, I keep up to ISO 1600.


----------



## wsheldon (Aug 28, 2013)

atvinyard said:


> 6D is two stops better or so. So if 800 is your cut-off now, 3200 would probably be your cut-off on the 6D. Anyone else agree?



That's my experience coming from a 50D, where I was never happy with >800 ISO, and that's at the pixel level so comparing 15 MPix to 20 MPix (even more in favor of the 6D IQ). I set the auto-iso cut-off to 3200 and find those images very usable, and typically don't even apply NR to 800 ISO shots unless I underexpose and have to adjust shadow levels. For JPEG even 6400 is quite good, but with raw you do have to work a bit to do as well as the onboard processor. Pretty amazing, actually.


----------



## CTJohn (Aug 28, 2013)

wsheldon said:


> atvinyard said:
> 
> 
> > 6D is two stops better or so. So if 800 is your cut-off now, 3200 would probably be your cut-off on the 6D. Anyone else agree?
> ...


I agree. I have a 7D which I limit at ISO 800 in auto ISO...I limit my 6D at 6400 and I think the noise level is better at that level than at 800 on the 7D. A very pleasant surprise.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Aug 28, 2013)

I have no hesitation using my 6D up to ISO 25,600, If you have a properly exposed photo, noise is perfectly acceptable at high ISO.

This macro is ISO 20,000 without noise reduction.




Macro @ ISO 20K by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

ISO 12,800




Bull Moose Portrait by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

ISO 25,600




Grandma's Piano by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

ISO 25,600




ISO 25600 - No Noise Reduction by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

In my experience, my 6D's laugh at ISO 6400. It is cleaner than the 60D/7D at ISO 1600.


----------



## thgmuffin (Aug 29, 2013)

ISO 5000



Fatlace Fridays by THGBrian, on Flickr
At ISO 5000 there's barely any noise, I really push up to around 12800 ISO before noise even bothers me one bit!

It's absolutely amazing how there is no (or very little) color noise. Even at that point, the noise is very subtle and really complements the picture. I feel like noise reduction degrades the "feel" the 6D's noise.


----------



## bradfordswood (Aug 29, 2013)

Thanks for all the replies. It's stunning what this camera can do at high ISO.


----------



## amoore00357 (Aug 29, 2013)

bradfordswood said:


> Thanks for all the replies. It's stunning what this camera can do at high ISO.



Yes it is!!
I upgraded from the 60D and you wont regret it.
You will also like the feel of it better, like the dials and buttons are a lot softer and don't make noise like they do on the 60D. I guess its just called being a "professional camera."


----------



## captainkanji (Aug 29, 2013)

I don't even think about using NR in LR until I've hit between 3200 & 6400. While most of my low light shots are at 12800 or lower, I have a couple at 20000 plus. They turned pretty good with some NR and are decent for web use. "Average" users probably wouldn't know the difference, but you guys of course would notice the lack of sharpness or noise. I guess subject matter and proper exposure really make a difference, but my favorite "best" pics in low light are in the 6400 area. My 4000 ISO pics from the 7D I took last year look like ISO 20000 on the 6D.


----------



## PureShot (Aug 29, 2013)

Here 6D at 2000 iso, for me, the 6D is a revelation in studio, now i can make very nice picture in low light ambient. 
Pure Shot Studio 
www.pureshotstudio.com


----------



## Meatball_Sub (Aug 29, 2013)

To me, looking at these samples, the noise on the 6D looks more like film grain than the noise on most other cameras I've seen (and certainly ones that I've owned). I think it looks quite nice, actually.


----------



## drob (Aug 29, 2013)

Don't know if there is noise @ ISO 100 on the 60D. But I'd have to agree that the 6D ISO performance is outstanding compared to the 60D. I recently rented one for 2 weeks and didn't want to send it back. I was hoping the 70D would draw somewhat closer to the 6D in higher ISO images but it seems like that's not the case. I'm torn on upgrading to the 6D or hanging on until the 7DMkII. I'm starting to wonder if Canon limits high ISO abilities in the crop sensors to more or less direct people toward FF sensors.


----------



## Haydn1971 (Aug 29, 2013)

My auto ISO is limited to 3200 - beyond that, at full resolution, noise starts creeping in - however, I've had some good photos well beyond 3200, it really depends on your tolerance and the application. I use Instagram a lot, so don't mind noise in my "life-snaps" that I upload


----------



## sandymandy (Aug 29, 2013)

I think its just physical reasons. Bigger sensors just have less noise cuz the pixels arent so densly together and they just catch more light. Im sure there are other reasons too but i dont think Canon wants to push people to FF. APS-C should earn them more cash than FF.


----------



## pedro (Aug 29, 2013)

No intentions to spoil the thread. Here's a frame taken last weekend at absolutely low light (almost pitch dark, some weak ambiental light and a spot from a grass storage silo in the bg) by the 5D3, handheld. Exposure 1/5 sec.
First frame, no NR, second frame: Luminance 5, Chrominance 18. ISO 16.000. I guess the slightly lower MP count of the 6D really adds to the samples we see here. Congrats, folks. Anyway, I am really happy with my 5D3 although I am looking forward to where Canon will set its high ISO IQ (25k and above) standard about six years from now. 5DV, 6DIII.
Regards, Peter




5D3 ISO 16.000 color sample.  by Peter Hauri, on Flickr


----------



## tomscott (Aug 29, 2013)

I limit my 5DMKIII (basically the same performance) to 6400 but its fine at 12,800

12,800 




BMW F30 3 Series interior, centre console climate control by TomScottPhoto, on Flickr


----------



## mdmphoto (Aug 29, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> I have no hesitation using my 6D up to ISO 25,600, If you have a properly exposed photo, noise is perfectly acceptable at high ISO.



These shots are just fantastic, Justin! While I am still adjusting to the far greater latitude my 6D affords me over my 7D, I've mostly been puttering about at 3200 or so - and apparently I've been forgoing a great many shots unnecessarily. Thanks for the enlightenment!


----------



## vlim (Aug 29, 2013)

Wow stunning results Dustin  

Do you see the 6D as a potential body for relatively quiet wildlife (i mean not afraid) in a rainforest environment which requires high iso. The AF is so important too there...


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Aug 29, 2013)

mdmphoto said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > I have no hesitation using my 6D up to ISO 25,600, If you have a properly exposed photo, noise is perfectly acceptable at high ISO.
> ...





vlim said:


> Wow stunning results Dustin
> 
> Do you see the 6D as a potential body for relatively quiet wildlife (i mean not afraid) in a rainforest environment which requires high iso. The AF is so important too there...



The way that the 6D does begin to produce noise is more like film grain, and I (and many other reviewers) have found that the output from the 6D at higher ISO is actually oddly pleasing, even at higher magnification. It develops a film grain type noise, but chrominance noise (color noise) remains minimal. I will try to attach as large as possible a sample at 25,600 with no adjustment for you to look at. The most amazing thing to me is how well detail stands up.


----------



## Jim O (Aug 29, 2013)

drob said:


> Don't know if there is noise @ ISO 100 on the 60D. But I'd have to agree that the 6D ISO performance is outstanding compared to the 60D. I recently rented one for 2 weeks and didn't want to send it back. I was hoping the 70D would draw somewhat closer to the 6D in higher ISO images but it seems like that's not the case. I'm torn on upgrading to the 6D or hanging on until the 7DMkII. I'm starting to wonder if Canon limits high ISO abilities in the crop sensors to more or less direct people toward FF sensors.



If I had to *guess* - and that's all I really can do - I would think that the 7D2 will have better high ISO performance than the 70D. While Canon could do otherwise, I am thinking it will have high ISO performance close to if not similar to the 5D3 with more FPS shooting and better weather sealing. I doubt high ISO performance will be quite as good as the 6D but only because they want to differentiate their lines some.

This is how I see it. Again, it's just my guess:


1D X and beyond - for those that need or want the best, and those who need to shoot in a monsoon.
5D3 and beyond - for those that need an excellent all around FF camera for speed, AF, etc.
6D and beyond - for those that need extreme high ISO/low light performance and are willing to sacrifice a bit on AF. Also for the budget conscious who want to "step up" to FF.
7D and beyond - top of the line APS-C camera for those who want a well sealed tank of a camera with fast AF, high FPS, and may already have an investment in EF-S lenses.


----------



## PureShot (Aug 29, 2013)

6D and beyond - for those that need extreme high ISO/low light performance and are willing to sacrifice a bit on AF
I prefer the af in the 6D vs the 7D the 6D af is more speedy and in he can make focus in very low light condition
in studio my sweet iso spot is 2000 with 6D vs 400 iso with 7D.
www.pureshotstudio.com


----------



## Skirball (Aug 29, 2013)

Jim O said:


> drob said:
> 
> 
> > I'm starting to wonder if Canon limits high ISO abilities in the crop sensors to more or less direct people toward FF sensors.
> ...



The FF sensors have better high ISO abilities because... wait for it... they're bigger sensors that capture more light. Canon isn't intentionally limiting anything on the sensors. It would take a serious leap in technology to have the 7D2 match the 5d3/6D high ISO performance. And if they did, and had faster FPS and better weather sealing, get ready to pay for it.


----------



## captainkanji (Aug 29, 2013)

Straight from Lightroom with no edits (default sharpness). (Click photo for larger size)
ISO 6400, 1/50, f/4, 200mm, Canon 6D






ISO 20000, 1/80, f/4, 70mm, Canon 6D (no edits except defaults)





Here is a photo with the 7D, same lens (no edits except defaults)
ISO 4000, 1/50, f/4, 154mm, Canon 7D


----------



## papa-razzi (Aug 29, 2013)

Just got my 6D yesterday. I shot a High School cross country race with it yesterday late afternoon. So here is my 1 sports even comparison of the 6D vs 7D.

AF kept up for the most part. I used center point only servo. Not as good as my 7D, but I didn't miss many shots due to AF. I really missed the 8 FPS and large raw buffer on the 7D. I had to shoot JPEG only on the 6D to get any kind of fps.

I was using a 70-300L and I thought I was going to miss the crop factor on the long end. What I found is that the wide end was much more usable at 70mm than on the 7D. I got a lot of after-the-race candid adn posed shots which I would have had to change for a wider lens with the 7D, and the long end of the 70-300L was just fine on the 6D. So that was kind of a nice surprise for me.

The view finder doesn't seem as bright on the 6D - at least it was very hard to see the focus points in the view finder when the subject was in darker light such as shadows. I never had trouble seeing the focus points on the 7D. Still, using the center point worked out OK for what I was doing.

I used auto ISO, 1/1000 shutter - I had shots at 3200 ISO and 6000 ISO. I really couldn't tell much of a difference when the focus was on. On the 7D, the noise bothered me at ISO 800+. In very low light situations, noise would bother me at ISO 400. Maybe I have a more noisy copy of the 7D. Noise is the only complaint I have witht he 7D - othewise it is a fantastic camera.

Unless you are doing fine art prints or very large enlargements, I can't see high ISO being a real issue at all with the 6D. I'm very pleased. I'll have a better perspective when I do some indoor theater events with the 6D. My 7D fell over on its face trying to do that.

I'll keep using the 7D on all my outdoor sporting events. But the 6D is likely to be the camera I use for most everything else.


----------



## Kernuak (Aug 29, 2013)

atvinyard said:


> 6D is two stops better or so. So if 800 is your cut-off now, 3200 would probably be your cut-off on the 6D. Anyone else agree?


That would seem about right to me, judging by the 5D MkIII and 7D. I am willing to push the 7D to 1600 (same sensor as the 60D) and the 5D MkIII to 6400 (which probably isn't _too_ different to the 6D).


----------



## horshack (Aug 29, 2013)

I compared my 6D to my D3s (since sold) and outside of some technical aspects of IQ like a bit lower color saturation the 6D was almost neck and neck with the D3s at the Ultra High ISOs. It's that good.

I agree with other posters that it's more useful to state the usable ISO in terms of +EV stops relative to another body...because everyone has a different idea as to what represents usable in terms of noise and detail.


----------



## bradfordswood (Aug 30, 2013)

Thanks everyone for your replies. Being able to push a camera to ISO 3200, even 6400 and have acceptable results would be fantastic.

Not to get off topic, but can anyone compare their ISO experience between the 5D Mark II and the 6D? They are close in price refurbished, just wondering how they compare at the higher ISO settings.

Thanks!


----------



## Robert Welch (Aug 30, 2013)

I think Canon (and any other sensor manufacturer) will need to make a major technical breakthrough to seriously increase high ISO image quality in cropped sensor cameras from where they have been the last couple of years. From what I can tell, Canon hasn't done much to surpass the high ISO quality of the 7D, which is a 3 year old camera at this point. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the 7DmkII to be seriously better at high ISO than the current lineup of cropped sensor cameras, whether it's the 70D, 60D or 7D you are comparing it to (except perhaps for improved in-camera JPG NR processing, which is not a true improvement to my way of thinking).

The 6D (or 5DmkIII) are significant improvements in this respect, there really is no comparison. It will be interesting to see if there are improvements to be had in the next generation of the 5D series, which we may not see for a couple years yet. So, realistically, if you want improved high ISO performance today or in the foreseeable future, the 6D is the logical choice, hands down (or the 5DmkIII if you want more features).


----------



## thgmuffin (Aug 30, 2013)

bradfordswood said:


> Thanks everyone for your replies. Being able to push a camera to ISO 3200, even 6400 and have acceptable results would be fantastic.
> 
> Not to get off topic, but can anyone compare their ISO experience between the 5D Mark II and the 6D? They are close in price refurbished, just wondering how they compare at the higher ISO settings.
> 
> Thanks!


The 6D is pretty much superior to the 5D Mark II in every single way.


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 1, 2013)

If you look at the ISO comparisons on TDP the 6D is about half a stop better. Definitely not one full stop, but a good improvement.
However, I got a used 5D2 for a little over $1K (low actuations, good condition). Considering how good the 5D2 still is, I would look around the secondary market for a while before settling on a 6D, especially if you're just looking to upgrade from crop.


----------



## wayno (Sep 1, 2013)

9VIII said:


> If you look at the ISO comparisons on TDP the 6D is about half a stop better. Definitely not one full stop, but a good improvement.
> However, I got a used 5D2 for a little over $1K (low actuations, good condition). Considering how good the 5D2 still is, I would look around the secondary market for a while before settling on a 6D, especially if you're just looking to upgrade from crop.



I've handled a 6d and ergonomically I find it less handy than my 5d2. The 5d2 has some annoying functional limitations but as far as IQ goes, it's awesome. I was under the impression though that the 6d was a bit better than less than a full stop, ISO-wise... But I guess the figures don't lie.


----------



## captainkanji (Sep 1, 2013)

Just took these tonight at the DuQuoin State Fair.
Canon 6D, EF 70-200 f/4L USM
1/250, f/4, 200mm, ISO 12800




1/200, f/4, 126mm, ISO 12800




EF 24-105
1/200, f/4, 105mm, ISO 3200





If only I had a 2.8 70-200. Maybe next year I'll get the new Tamron. The EF 135L f/2 is next on my list.
Thank God for the White Balance Selector Tool in LR!!!


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Sep 1, 2013)

9VIII said:


> If you look at the ISO comparisons on TDP the 6D is about half a stop better. Definitely not one full stop, but a good improvement.
> However, I got a used 5D2 for a little over $1K (low actuations, good condition). Considering how good the 5D2 still is, I would look around the secondary market for a while before settling on a 6D, especially if you're just looking to upgrade from crop.



There is more to it than charts. I've used both cameras extensively, and the difference in real use is more dramatic than that. The 6D has far, far less color banding and color noise, even at very high ISO. Furthermore, the noise renders in a very pleasing, film grain like fashion, making it actually an asset for certain shots. There was noticeably more latitude in the RAW image for processing and, in particular, pulling shadows. I quickly dumped my 5DII for a second 6D. It is my opinion that as far as image quality goes, the 6D is actually the best product Canon currently has.

Functionality and AF are another argument, but image quality is the 6D's greatest strength.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 1, 2013)

This is a question that has no answer..... it all depends on subject matter, lighting, ability to post-process files, and personal preference.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Sep 1, 2013)

captainkanji said:


> Just took these tonight at the DuQuoin State Fair.
> Canon 6D, EF 70-200 f/4L USM
> 1/250, f/4, 200mm, ISO 12800
> 
> ...



Those are some really clean looking shots. Nice work.


----------



## captainkanji (Sep 1, 2013)

Thanks. I'm starting to see the limitation of my glass for low light events. 12800 wouldn't have been necessary to try to get 1/200 with the 2.8s. It's nice to know that I can shoot higher and not have to go too crazy with the NR.


----------



## randerson5726 (Sep 8, 2013)

It all really depends on how big your going to present the photo. I found that a 100% crop on screen will be basically noiseless up until around ISO 2000, with a bit of noise reduction. If I'm not printing a wall mural or poster I wouldn't hesitate to go way above that. I had a 60D before and was amazed at the difference in noise level. I think its the biggest difference. 

Basically, on the 60D I felt obligated to keep the ISO low which limited my creative decisions. On the 6D, I don't worry about the ISO, it's not limiting.


----------

