cwbe coordinatez:
101
63537
758948
1102981
1907031

ABSOLUT
KYBERIA
permissions
you: r,
system: public
net: yes

neurons

stats|by_visit|by_K
source
tiamat
K|my_K|given_K
last
commanders
polls

total descendants::
total children::1
show[ 2 | 3] flat


hmm?
obviously just for editorial use. The DOF isn't identical so the test isnt either but the histograms on these crops are similar. Here is the comparison for the ISO 400, 800, 1600 and 3200 without any noise reduction.
http://www.pbase.com/ystasino/image/48641131/original

and here is the way these 100% crops look after NN reduction using the respective 1DsII profiles.
http://www.pbase.com/ystasino/image/48641132/original

Without noise reduction, noise may be objectionable to some (but not me) at ISO 800, it is noticable at ISO 1600 (the last rating for the snesor) and objectionable at ISO 3200. I wouldnt hesitate to ise an correctly exposed ISO 1600 shot at full size and without noise reduction

With noise ninja reduction (1ds II profiles I m sure cutomising them would make them better) I could easily use ISO3200...




000001010006353700758948011029810190703101907241
ea
 ea      04.09.2005 - 10:23:37 , level: 1, UP   NEW
aj na 20D je do 1600 ninja zbytocny, akurat plastic feel urobi .)