I never really worried about this as I only see it at high iso's combined with underexposure but I see banding when I have to push my exposure in ACR or LR over +1. I just realized that it actually happens on good exposure images but I would never noticed because I don't have to push the exposure that far. Once the good exposure images are converted to jpg's it is gone. I have seen others with the same issue so my policy is to just not underexpose but is this a canon serviceable call? It doesn't really bother me because it is rarely an issue but if there is a legit problem I guess I should have it fixed...


This is the same image. All the settings in ACR were the same except in one the exposure is at 0 and the other the exposure is at +3.99 to show the banding. Do your 5D RAW files do this too? Can someone else do the same test on a high iso shot that is properly exposed then pushed far? Thanks!
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment

I see this with my 5d files as well, and I see slight banding in the lamplight even on the first image. However, my screen might be overly sensitive, as I don't see the banding problem on an prints.
*head scratch*

I see it on the first one when I crank up my monitor brightness. That is actually what has me worried as I don't see it on a calibrated monitor but when I looked this morning at an image in the intro to my new website I saw it on a uncalibrated LCD monitor. It kind of scares me as so many people out there have LCD's where the brightness is really cranked up.
BTW- Noise ninja takes care of almost all of it unless it is really bad.

Here is a copy straight out of LR that I would go on to edit, the above one had the blacks at 0 and the contrast really low thus the brightness. I don't see any banding here, do you?

Take 3
Click to view attachment

No banding there... are 5d files just more "delicate"??

Good question. I think I am going to look at everything on my laptop with the brightness set to maximum from now on before I put up anything on the web. JIC.

there was a problem with certain lens and flash combos and continuous focus causing serious banding.. have you updated your firmware?

Yeah, I have the latest.
This image has off camera flash with a pocket wizard and a 70-200 2.8 IS. I have other images I found from my 24-70 that have it too. Was it that lens combo that did it? I kind of remember hearing about something like that.
I only notice it on 1 of 1000 shots, but it seems like it shouldn't be there at all!

Mine does that at ISO 1600. I'm running a test right now and I'll post it in a minute. I remembered a shot from my last wedding that was at ISO 800 and pushed 3.5 stops, it shows the banding, but not as bad as your example.

More in a minute...

Nope. Here is an ISO 1600 shot of a green plant properly exposed and pushed 3.5 stops in ACR. Noise, not much, no banding. I do see the banding if i underexpose and push, but not as much as you have... My D2H used to do that that bad.... ;-)

Can you try it on an image with lots of blacks?

Here is a pic at iso 1600 with pretty much good exposure. For both the shadows are 2, contrast to +5 and brightness at 90. The "good" one exposure is at 0 and the blown one is +4. You barely see any banding even in that one.
See what I mean? I have only noticed it in images with lots of blacks.
Click to view attachmentClick to view attachment

Bill- I do see it in your shadows...but it is only blue colors. Do you have noise reduction on in ACR? I am not doing any noise reduction.

Noise reduction is set to default, 25 color noise reduction...

OK, here are a couple shots of my coffee pot... ;-)

The first one is properly exposed and then pushed 4 stops.

The second one is as bad as I can make it. ISO 1600, 3 stops underexposed, pushed 4 stops in ACR, shadows 0, contrast 25, brightness 50. What do you think?

Yup, that's what I am talking about. Weird hugh? That first one is exactly what I was talking about- normal exposure pushed all the way and all this color banding pops out, especially in the black. There is also some blocky spots in the blacks. The more black the worse it is (well, the worse you can see, I'm sure it is still there).

Well at least I know I am not in this boat alone!

I've had this problem as well. It happens to me once every 50 shots or so, and is extremely annoying. I'll have a few shots in a row where everything looks normal, and then, bam, one shot has annoying banding through about 1/3 of the frame. The rest of the frame is okay. I believe mine is caused by the lens and continuous servo autofocus, as the lens I use (the 85mm 1.8) is one that has been cited as being problematic. I sitll haven't received any word from Canon on how to fix the issue. What's this with the firmware update? Is that supposed to resolve it?

Oh, here's a crappy example of the banding I'm getting, these two pix were taken one after the other (these were shot as JPGs and are presented here unprocessed).

Wow, I really haven't seen that... but I'll watch for it now.

Colin, is that the same experience you've been having, or is it more predicable?

Hmm, that is weird. Mine is totally predictable, it happens in every frame under the same settings with the same lighting. And it goes all through the frame, weird seeing it on just a part. Though I should mention that I am on a calibrated monitor and I had to look really hard to see it on those pics. Yours does sound like the AF caused one. I shoot on AI Servo, so it isn't supposed to be a problem right?
I ran a test and it doesn't start until iso 800 but is totally manageable until iso 1600. Even then it is consistant and can be removed by upping the blacks and contrast and possibly running noise ninja. Only when I really butcher exposure is it a problem.

oh. I just found this http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E5D/E5DA13.HTM and several other place where they talk about AI servo mode being the issue...I'm off to test, back in a few.

Nope, focus mode makes no difference on mine with a 70-200 2.8IS...maybe it is the lens?

I'm on a calibrated monitor as well, and the banding bugs the crap outta me. Plus I know what to look for, so I suppose that helps. At any rate, I have examples far more blatant than that, but I'd have to dig through the archives for them.

hehe, I know what you mean! Once you see it it is like a thorn in your foot! Are you on an LCD monitor? I'm on a crt that trues out to .03 so blacks are really black and I have a hard time seeing the banding on yours. I doubt that makes you feel better though
If you are on an LCD that is calibrated but can't get dark enough you will see it more. As I mentioned above, it is clients on LCD's that are way brighter that are making me go back and check everything. I found 1 pic on my site that had a problem and it freaked me out, thus all this thread

I went back and looked and hardly saw any with my 24-70 (but there was some) and more with my 85 1.8. Maybe the lens is causing it?

I am indeed on an LCD. The problem can be seen in prints, but I don't think clients would really notice unless it was pointed out to them. However, I do notice that when there is noise in the Canon 5D, it's that banded noise that you pointed out in your first post. I looked over some more pictures, and I see it even in files taken with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS. One website I found awhile ago claimed the 1.8 was the biggest culprit, but I find the problem in other images as well. It's completely unpredictable, though, and occassionally it is worse than what I posted. If I push it a stop (+1 exposure in my RAW converter), it's VERY obvious that something weird is going on. Obviously, I don't expect miracles from a 6400ISO image, but what concerns me is the fact that sometimes the weird banding is there, most of the time it is not. And I can see it down to 1600ISO.

The thing is, I have not seen such banded noise in 1D Mark II files. I am not primarily a Canon shooter, so I don't know if this is normal or not, but I don't think I've ever seen striping like either your examples and certainly not mine in the Mark II.

I think I will talk to the Canon people and show them examples at WPPI. It has only been an issue on one shot since I have had the camera but I want to see what they say. It seems that quite a few of us have this issue so they must have heard of it by now.

Hi Colin,
There was a heap of talk about this on DPReview ages ago - and someone came up with an action to overcome it. Maybe try this out mate:

http://nathanrodger.com/actions/5d_Deliner.atn

I'll see if I can dig out the link to the posts as well - as there was quite a commotion about it.

Let us know how you go!

Cheers,

Thanks Nathan. This is all jsut one more reason to never underexpose, even with the 5D!

No probs mate...

Oh here we go, there are hundreds of em over there - but here is the post by the guy who created the action with a description on how its used and the like:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp...eliner&qf=m

Good luck!

Peter, the shots you posted are different type of banding than what Colin posted (at least I'm like 90% sure of that ). Yours is interference banding that only happens at high ISO and in AI Servo, and only with certain lenses. Some kind of electronic interference is bothering the sensor and creating the banding.

Colin, I see a tiny bit of banding if I bump up the shadow, and push ISO 800 or 1600 3-4 stops (in pictures with a lot of darks). But it's not such a "clumpy" banding, it's more like a fine pattern ... not very noticeable.

I'm curious to see what Canon says.

Thanks. This is what I assumed the problem was. However, the interference happens with all lenses I've used on the Canon so far (70-200 f/2.8 IS, 85 f/1.8, 24 f/2.8). It is intermittent, only happens at 1600+ ISO (so far as I have noticed), but has ruined several shots for me. I was wondering if there's any way to fix it, but I have never been able to find a solution. Oh well.

edit: What the heck is this attachment that's appearing here?

I'd try a search over on fredmiranda.com ... that forum has a lot of great technical knowledge.

Canon's Chuck Westfall wrote a letter addressing the issue and mentioned this...



The full statement is available at
http://www.dslrphoto.com/2006/02/23/chuck-...banding-issues/

I was just doing some test shots with a 5D at Best Buy - and this is what I got in the shadow areas at 100% crop at ISO 800. 24-105 f4 IS

D200 at 100%, ISO 400. I also did some D200 shots at 1600 - more noise (but less than my 20D) and no banding.

Yep, there is some banding...and good luck getting those green splotches out of the D200 files.

I have found that the key with my 5D is nail exposure. With good exposures I have not had a single file require me to put in any extra work. When I underexpose by 2/3rd a stop AND the image contains lots of dark shadows I have to use noise ninja. It happens on my 5D at all iso's on every lens that I have put on it (24-70, 70-200, 85 1.8, 50 1.2).

Here is a real-world example. This is an image that I blew up to 3.5x5 FEET for a client. Both are from the same RAW file shot at ISO 100. The good looking one is with normal ACR settings-
Exposure- 0
Shadows- 5
Brightness- 50
Contrast- 25
Click to view attachment

The ACR blown version that shows the banding (and lots of jpeg artifacts...sorry)
Exposure- +4
Shadows- 0
Brightness- 125
Contrast- 25
Click to view attachment

So...there is obviously banding in this image but it doesn't affect the prints. When I push to these (ridiclous) settings, every image I have made with this camera has banding, it just isn't noticeable. Getting back to my original point: I find it weird that it is there at all, but at least it hasn't been an issue in the 4K shots I have taken with this body.

Well it was extremely obvious on every shot I took with this 5D. Outside of the studio a lot of shots are going to be "underexposed" - and, in fact, have to be if you want to keep your highlights. (All the Highlight Priority feature on the MkIII does is underexpose and then apply the same kind of curve you'd use manually in Photoshop anyway.)

Meanwhile the shots I did at 1600 with the D200 (processed with Bibble, including using the free version of Noise Ninja that is built in), were actually decent.

So I don't see that the 5D is worth the extra $1,000 over the D200 (or the $1500 over the 30D) - and the S5 should be even better.

Maybe you should stop using spot metering to prevent underexposure

And did you run the 5D file through bibble and use noise ninja? If you didn't then it isn't a fair test now is it?
At least with my copy, the banding can only be seen when you dramatically underexpose and you use ACR/LR setting that you would never use. Run it through noise ninja and it almost disappears.

It's definetly the spot metering.

I've noticed the banding issue too. Colin, did you talk to any of the Canon guys at WPPI about it?

So, one more time...to let you know how little of an issue this really is...

Here is my shot delivered as an 11x14 for the client. No banding could be seen, it was shot at ISO 1000 and I underexposed by about 2/3 a stop (the person holding my light miss aimed on this shot). I did NOT use Noise Ninja.

Settings:
Exposure: +.85
Shadows: 2
Brightness: +63
Contrast: +5
Click to view attachment

As you can see, there is no visible banding even in this underexpose/high iso shot. I was using a 70-200 2.8IS. However, when you "push" you can see that there is banding. It really isn't all that visible until you turn the blacks to 0. Even at +1 the banding is nearly covered, by +2 they are gone completely.

Same shot "pushed" in ACR to:
Exposure: +4
Shadows: 0
Brightness: +100
Contrast: +5
Click to view attachment
Again- these are ridiclous settings I would never normally use. I am pointing out that it is there but I am NOT saying it is an issue.

And just for fun, here is the same "pushed" shot run through Noise Ninja so you can see what happens.
Exposure: +4
Shadows: 0
Brightness: +100
Contrast: +5
Noise Ninja
Click to view attachment

Here is the best example of how big a non-issue this really is. Same image, same crazy settings but with +2 black
Exposure: +4
Shadows: 2
Brightness: +100
Contrast: +5
Click to view attachment

The only times I ever see banding is when I have blacks at 0 or very rarely at 1. By 2 it is gone.


And just for comparison, here is what happens to a D200 file at those same +4 settings:
Click to view attachment

haha, I was too lazy to push through the crowd of MkIII peeps!

I talked to a rep in store up north who said it is a combo of color noise (Nikon's in-camera software almost eliminates any chroma noise whereas Canon's just reduces it but leaves the color) and interference of some sort. It hasn't cost me any extra time in post so I am not very concerned about it but I just think that it is very odd to be there at all. Hopefully I don't ever need to use a very underexposed image though because it doesn't look very easy to completely remove.
Just to be safe, when I shoot at night I shoot in one shot AF mode which seems to reduce the severity of banding but doesn't remove it all together.

Update:
So I shot an entire wedding with Jpeg rather than RAW and saw banding issues. It is an issue in perfectly exposed images that have very dark areas at ISO's over 800.
The attached has a lot of black areas as is the nature of the image. The lighting is dramatic, as I planned (there is a strobe to camera left). I did just about all I can do and you can still see banding.
I tested further when I got home and realized that when I shoot in jpeg banding is more of an issue than in RAW. Weird, so off it goes to Canon.

Update:
I got it back from Canon. Their work order says nothing was wrong with it but they made minor "adjustments." It is now probably 50% better but still there in the right (er, wrong) circumstances.
I shoot often at night with strobes and have brightly lit subjects with very dark backgrounds, that is when it shows (see above). When I don't use the strobe but just expose for the backgound it isn't a problem. Some have suggested this is some weird morie issue because of the high contrast. I'm looking into it but don't have a way to get rid of it. As of now, I just have to be aware of when it will be a problem and shoot slightly lower contrast.