New Nikon D5 reviews and ISO comparisons

I-am-Nikon-D5
A new Nikon D5 review with sample photos, ISO comparison and more was recently published at DCView/Google translation. DCFever also has their Nikon D5 review out (Google translation):

Nikon D5 ISO comparison

Another D5 ISO test can be found here (link to the beginning of the article):

Nikon D5 ISO 204800 (Hi 1)

Nikon D5 ISO 204800 (Hi 1)

Nikon D5 ISO 409600 (Hi 2)

Nikon D5 ISO 409600 (Hi 2)

Nikon D5 ISO 819200 (Hi 3)

Nikon D5 ISO 819200 (Hi 3)

Nikon D5 ISO 1638400 Hi 4

Nikon D5 ISO 1638400 (Hi 4)

Nikon D5 ISO 3280000 Hi 5

Nikon D5 ISO 3280000 (Hi 5)

Update - two more ISO comparisons, first Nikon D5 vs. D4s:

Nikon D5 vs. D4s ISO comparison
Next, Nikon D5 vs. D750:

Nikon D5 vs. D750 ISO comparison
The Nikon D5 is scheduled to start shipping at the end of March and can be rep-ordered here.

This entry was posted in Nikon D5. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • Really impressive !

    • Spy Black

      …if youre into in-camera JPEGs. Until there is access to RAW files (and the ability to process them), this is table dressing.

      • Murat Sahan

        Yes. Im into JPEGs and yes they do look impressive. Very much so.

        • Spy Black

          So you buy $6000 cameras to shoot JPEGs?

      • shaun ly

        News flash! Most sport and photojournalist shoots jpeg. They need to get their pictures online instantly. Not every photos requires studio quality prints. Those guys need to get the shot more than nip picking at DR, noise, color render, sharpness etc…

        • Spy Black

          Well, yes, you have a point. Still would like to see how far you can take this camera however.

  • PabloNY

    D4s owners: how does the ISO compare to yours?

    • RMJ

      the first link has D5 vs D4s comparison.

      http://gallery.coolpix.com.tw/image/34

      • Shutterbug

        Looks like at least a stop, with much better color retention, at least in that particular test. JPEG performance looks to be more like at 2 stops or more.

        • PabloNY

          I’m asking because I’m thinking to get a used D4S and sell my D800 or buy a D500 and keep my D800. I mostly do my own family portraits with speed lights, kids playing outside and wildlife on the weekends (Mostly birds) . I have the 2.8 trinity and 200-500.

          • Tadao_Isogai

            For your use, used D4S purchase + D800 sale sounds very wise. The D4S generates fantastic images; the AF is very, very good.

          • Allen_Wentz

            I never liked the smaller pro bodies but after testing the D500 I preordered one rather than upgrade from my D3 to D4s. I would say keep your D800 and add a D500. Just my 0.02.

          • Brian

            I will be selling my D4S when my D5 arrives..

        • Horshack

          Yes but keep in mind this is a comparison at ISOs that aren’t useable for most scenes so the improvement in Ultra High ISO performance (25k+) isn’t very useful in general shooting. At usable ISOs the advantage is much smaller, at least based on the comparison against the D750:

          http://gallery.coolpix.com.tw/image/35

          • Thanks, I will add this link to my post.

          • Eric Calabros

            At low ISOs even sensors from 5 years ago are good enough, so what?

        • HF

          At 51k? No, not to me. At the higher ISO the advantage is clear. But who is going to use ISO200k or higher other than emergency or tiny web images? Wildlife shooters?

          • Voltax

            nobody is using that.
            it´s for the featurelist.

            • Nicholas

              Police and Military use the very hi ISOs

          • s.dunn

            The Police!!!! Seriously… Often. A 400000 iso that clean allows you to stop motion in the dark… It’s a good thing

            • Philip Dauber

              Police carrying D5s strapped to chest in addition to everything else. Poor people. Back problems will force them to retire in 5 years!

            • Piotr Kosewski

              A camera strapped to a chest? WTF?

              Cameras are widely used in professional situations. A professional situation is not only when you are an awesome photographer shooting for National Geographic.
              People use cameras to record images. Most of these shots will never be made public. They have no artistic value. They simply save some information for later.
              I’m not sure if many police groups can afford to buy a $6000 body, but I’m pretty sure they’d like to. 🙂

          • Anyone shooting nightlife pictures in extremely dark venues will just love the new high ISO capability. We will be able to shoot at higher shutter speeds, and in ever-darkening venues. Well worth it for me.

            • HF

              As I don’t see a big difference (if at all) to the D4s at ISO 51k (according to the 100% jpgs), and beyond that I wouldn’t want to go at all or need to go at all, I will pass. For the additional 4000 Euros compared to an D750 I can buy a lot of fast lenses compensating the improved ISO or some nice flash equipment or an other body. Shooting weddings and events myself, I don’t see the need for a D5 for this. For _me_ it is more of a sports/wildlife camera. But, whoever means to shoot in the near dark and wants to spend the money will certainly get a very capable camera.

            • Eric Calabros

              Faster than f/2.8 tele lens? This one is taken at ISO 65k f/3.5 1/1600s. What you would do with D750 in this situation? You had to go as low as 25600 and 1/500s, and it would become much worse than this. Water is already blurred with 1/1600 here.

            • HF

              Ah, cherry picking. I didn’t deny at all that there are situations where you need such a performance. As I stated above, I don’t for my type of shooting. This is a scene I would attribute to sports/wildlife situation this camera is build for. At weddings I don’t need to freeze the bride using settings like this, I can use flash, too. Nevertheless, looking at the image on this site I don’t find it very pleasing unless for small web size. Click on it and you see the softness due to noise reduction. If you need to shoot images like this for the park you can do it in better light, too.

            • Eric Calabros

              D5 can see things in situations other cameras are completely blind.
              ISO 800k:

            • Philip Dauber

              What you see here is a comparison of in-camera noise reduction, little more. Marketing hype for the low information photographer.

            • Piotr Kosewski

              And why exactly is in-camera noise reduction not worth a comparison?

              A lot of photographers use JPEGs. I’d say it’s even more important (and used) in pro bodies compared to enthusiast-oriented models.

              But even looking at the lower price segments, you have a proof that good JPEGs are important. This proof is called “popularity of Fujifilm”.

          • Nicholas

            Military and law enforcement use the very high ISOs all the time

            • HF

              I think we are not talking about those kind of applications, here, with a D5. No doubt, that there are always situations you could need those.

        • akkual

          The four extra mpix will also help.

  • n11

    Wowza… Up to 200,000 looks great! I’d consider 400,000 usable in a pinch. 800k is where it clearly becomes mostly unusable. Would like to see comparisons against D810 and D4S, maybe 1dx..

    • Shutterbug

      It’s actually quite ‘usable’ right up to ISO 3.28M 🙂 Keep in mind there are other uses for these cameras, such as surveillance, where being able to effectively see in the dark and make out a person’s face or a licence plate is all that it needs to do. Three stops higher than the nearest competition in this area is an enormous advantage to some lines of work.

      The detail and color it holds on to at ISO 204,800 is nothing short of incredible – it only really starts degrade more quickly after that.

      • Yes, I was really impressed by 204,800. This is really cool! Gotta save my pennies for the D5. Really nice upgrade from my D4.

      • EvilTed

        Down sample a 204,800 image to 12 MP and compare with A7s II and I think it will beat it.
        Very impressive!

  • looking pretty good so far compared to my D4S, but still waiting for the ISO 12K to come up

    • Shutterbug

      If you visit the link you can see all ISO’s, from 50 – 3.28M

      • yes, i know, i hit it, and it took roughly 5-10 minutes to load, … the photo that is, so I could see it full size, ….. it is nice

        • Shutterbug

          Oh ok. The champagne bottle link has 100% crops already and loads right away, I assumed that was what you were looking at.

          • i was looking at the one of the young asian woman, ….. go figure

  • HD10

    The D5 is approximately at least half a stop better than D4s?

    • EvilTed

      Looks closer to 2 stops to my eyes…

      • Nick

        It is 2 stops better than the D4 from evrything I’ve seen, I think the D4/D4s is only about 1/3 of a stop

        • HF

          At 100k and up the jpg 100% crop is clearly better. Looking at the reasonable ISOs you usually use I guess the difference is very small. Look at the ISO 51k shot of the camera at 100%, hardly any difference to the D4s (jpg, not RAW). Where do you see 2 stops here? How many people shoot at 100k ISO and up at weddings? For web-sized images in emergency cases fine. In real life shooting 1/3 of a stop (your D4/D4s difference, which is more subtle imo and not as clear according to measurements) is hardly detectable.

          • Voltax

            everything above 400k look like crap.
            and nowhere i see 2 stops improvement.

            • Eric Calabros

              has denying noise performance become a kind of religion or something?

            • Captain Insane-O

              Has declaring something without proof a new religion?

              But I’m sure all those people stating the new d-FiveHundo will perform better than new ff cameras will be dead on right! Lol.

              Why is denying history such a transcendent trait?

            • TylerChappell

              Well, I mean….religion has always been about declaration without proof. 😉

            • silmasan

              The devil you say! 😀

          • Philip Dauber

            The reason why the “improvement” is visible only at very high ISO is because it’s achieved only with in-camera noise reduction.

      • Voltax

        get new googles….

        • EvilTed

          Get some respect boy

      • Shang-Hsien Yang

        I don’t know how you get so many thumbs up for your nonsense comment. The image of D5 at H1 is not better than D4s at H1 (2 stops lower), and so are H2 and H3.

  • fanboy fagz

    wow crap. if you dont have a pretty strong computer it will come to a turtle crawl. theres tons of images in that link and a LONG page as well. they should have broke it down to a few.

  • donaldejose

    Very impressive. Looks close to a two stop high ISO improvement to me. I would say up in the range of ISO 200 to 400 thousand try post processing noise reduction or switch to black and white to let the noise emulate grain for “atmosphere.” When this sensor is put into the replacement for the Df and used with a lens which has distance markings you will be able to preset hyperfocal distance on the lens and shoot street photography in really low light. For wildlife photographers you should be able to use higher ISOs and thereby avoid the cost of the f2.8 or f4 super telephoto lenses.

  • It outperforms the D4s, how does it compare to the A7s II?

    • Federico Gallinari

      because even the a7rII have similar output at high iso to the d4s, and the a7s have better output (more dr same snr) to d4s, so have sense.

    • EvilTed

      I’d say it looks better.
      Having owned an A7s for a year, I upgraded to the A7s II but ended up trading it for a second A7r II because when down sampled to 12MP, they are indistinguishable to my eyes.

      The A7s II can take an image at 102,400 ISO but it needs pretty heavy NR and usually conversion to B+W.

      The D5 seems to be achieving the level of noise at 204,800 that the A7s achieves at 51200.

      Also, bear in mind that the D5 is 20MP, so it can be down sampled to 12MP before NR is applied and will probably be even better.

      • Too bad Nikon is always on the “almost” when it comes to video. I don’t really get why Nikon is so inconsistent, they did a pretty good job on recent Nikon, I seems that the D750 is the best one but there are still a lot of quirks when it comes to video, it would be more interesting for consumers if Nikon could deliver it.

        2016-03-09 17:06 GMT-03:00 Disqus :

      • HF

        That remains to be seen, especially for RAW. Jpgs look very good but have a lot of parameters set, affecting IQ. How much NR, sharpening, contrast etc.? I don’t think Nikon invented new sensor tech increasing s/N ratio by 2 stops over the A7s. NR baked in Raw may have improved, though. For the ISOs used for producing large prints differences will be minor.

      • akkual

        You apply first NR, then downsample, then sharpen for best result. The result of NR will be better the more samples there are of same subject (e.g. fine detail). By downsampling, you do “coarse” NR, but lose information for the later actual NR. Better to do first real NR, then downsample (“coarse” NR) and then sharpen the remaining info (so no unnecessary noise gets sharpened).

  • Federico Gallinari

    Even if there is a lot of light (f11..) the result seems very good.
    looking on d4s vs d5 the result seems 2 stop better…but…it’s not so simple because seems like the d5 jpeg use more contrast and black shadows rather than d4s, a little less chroma.
    Looking on dcview sample, the first impression is 2 stop (Olympus camera crop) but looking well on the detail I see less chroma but in my opinion is only 1 stop of better result (Jpeg) and some process that give less cnoise.
    Anyway a great works on Cnoise, no way to use HI value (orrible chair in bw at 400k…terrible) but seems very good till 100k, I just wanna look for DR at low iso because rather than d4-d4s I see very very dark shadows..

  • peter w

    the colors seem to hold on the jpegs upon 25000 ~ 50000 iso. Impressive.

  • Dariusz Breś

    Still no RAW? only jpeg with noise reduction?

    • Shutterbug

      I haven’t seen any useful RAWs yet, but clearly the JPEG engine is improved from previous models. The fact that ISO 204,800 and 409,600 aren’t just blobs of noise, but actually look decent is amazing (to me, anyway).

      • Dariusz Breś

        Noone can shoot in RAW, i wonder why?

    • Steve Perry

      Nikon probably won’t update their software until the release date. As for Adobe and the rest, figure at least a month or two for RAW support.

  • Michiel953

    Yes, that sort of despicable image quality obviously won’t do.

    Uhh..; when will this sensor/processor combo trickle down to the Df2?

    • fanboy fagz

      Ill even take the D4 or D4s sensor. but a decent AF module. not like the POS D600 one they put in the DF. it must have 4k video for me to get it though.

      • Shutterbug

        I want this sensor in a D810 body, ~21MP is enough that I would give up my 36MP in return for incredible ISO performance. Hopefully the D810 successor is 50+ MP and a good case can be made for a lower resolution body with near identical features.

        • D-RiSe

          Yeah lets start the d700 replacement discussion again 🙂

          • Shutterbug

            The D700 was replaced (for most people) with the D800/D750, that is old news. What I want is a pro-body with lower resolution than the D810 successor will presumably have, but it’s anyone’s guess. A D750 successor with an improved body, perhaps.

            • Allen_Wentz

              If you have not tested the D500 yet, do so. You may be surprised how competent 2016 Nikon DX can be. I was waiting to see what the D810 replacement looked like, but once I tested the D500 I immediately preordered one.

            • Shutterbug

              I’ll be having a look at it for sure, but I do a lot of ultra wide angle and low light shooting and don’t need the crazy FPS so I think DX is still probably a no-go for me. I will definitely give it a good look though.

            • Michiel953

              When I would want to replace my 810, in … five years? Would I want 50 Mp? Who knows where surrounding technology is then?

            • PhilK

              You realize that’s exactly the same silly rationalization we heard for years about the nonexistent D300s replacement, right? It’s just as false now as it was then. The demand for the D500 is proof enough of that.

              Some of us (me included) don’t care about 36MP, but it would be really nice to have an outstanding low-light-performing camera that is also fast with snappy handling in a solid semi-pro body style with XQD cards instead of toy SDs, nice high-magnification finder, weather-sealing, etc…

          • One strong requirement for D700 replacement was for high FPS and deep buffer. ( That makes two). In order to not hurt D5 sales, nikon can keep FPS and buffer at sub-optimal levels in that body. It will be ok for most users.

            • Eric Calabros

              8fps for 5 seconds
              But you know D750 is close to update time, and if they offer that 8-5 with new AF module in 760, D850 S Edition will be hard sell, cause it would be same as 760 but bulkier with $1k higher price. Unless they cripple 760 to keep room for that.

            • silmasan

              Uh… anybody else thinking Canon and Nikon have made some sort of unofficial agreement now that the cheaper/lighter/alternative high fps action camera has been delegated to APS-C (7D II & D500)?

            • Rather they learned from results of each others’ mistakes and are following pure business sense.

        • Allen_Wentz

          Shutterbug’s request certainly does seem logical. If the 810 is upgraded to some 50 MP beast making an FX D500 sort of makes sense – – except that is what the D5 is, for lots more $$. I do not see Nikon doing that until after at least a year of D5/D500 sales.

        • Captain Insane-O

          Why I got the d750. Only missing that joystick and af-on button

    • MonkeySpanner

      Yes, please put a better sensor and AF module and ship a df2. That way I can get a df classic on fire sale.

      • nwcs

        That would be sweet. I’d love to get one cheap. 16mp is not a problem to me.

        • MonkeySpanner

          I think I would pay around 1.2k for the df body

  • AlphaT

    I can’t read Japanese/Chinese (or whatever those are).
    Are those images JPEG out of the camera? Or processed NEFs ?

    • I could not post a Google translated link – it did not work for me.

    • oneuglycar

      Using Chrome’s auto translate. I found this sentence. “Since the software is not yet supported D5 of RAW files, so use D750 to let everyone feel the difference on both sides.” Which makes me think that the images were all taken as jpegs.

      • AlphaT

        Didn’t know Chrome has auto translate, will look for that.
        That’s what I thought with these early samples are, that they are all jpegs for now. Would be nice to see samples from raw files.
        Makes me think Nikon will only roll out the RAW converter the same time as the release date. They did not finalize the firmware so Adobe/DxO/CaptureOne/etc can’t reverse engineer the NEFs.

        • oneuglycar

          Auto translate is super useful especially for tech things where we’re not looking for poetic verse. I think Nikon is being very conservative about showing Hi ISO samples because their specs on the D5/D500 “seem” so outrageous. They probably want to make sure they get it absolutely right and they are taking all the time they can to make sure it is right.

          Yes, I agree they will only roll out the RAW converter upon release.

          If the release date doesn’t get delayed and stays as late March, I think it would be impractical to not have them shipped on boats by now… of course, what do I know about container ships or transportation, zero.

  • Pragmatic_NYC

    Wow. That’s impressive. Better than the A7s.

    • Federico Gallinari

      again…don’t assume that! you have no idea of light in the scene, I use all actual camera and no actual camera have the A7s performance in high iso, even the d4s have same snr but no dr like sony, it’s another story and you have to compare in the same output not looking at 100%.
      It’s possible because in the Jpeg I see something like 1stop, but we have to see on raw to understand how much is good, every new camera there are a lot of enthusiastic opinion, but using in real life difference are very very low.
      I hope..but I never dream it.

      • Pragmatic_NYC

        I shoot the A7s in low light pretty regularly. Granted, I didn’t shoot the D5 samples, but from what I can see here, it’s cleaner at high ISO than I could ever get out of my A7s.

        Just sayin’.

        • Federico Gallinari

          me too, with a 7s and with the other, but you say…with low light!
          f/11 isn’t low…try to use with enough light and you will see that here there are no miracle.
          As I told, maybe..it’s possible, I hope that to give a sense in my nikon camera upgrade but is too early to make a real idea of the performance.

          • I think they are using F11 to get the max shutter just correct at very high iso setting and of course to not get too much diffraction by exceeding to F16. But I may be wrong. The bottle image doesn’t look as if it is shot in bright light.

  • Voltax

    i am recalled… soon.

    • nwcs

      you are….getting tiresome.

    • Shutterbug

      Really? The same joke is posted multiple times under nearly every news item. It’s not even remotely original or funny.

    • Fox sweN Lies

      lol

    • ITN

      The last single digit Nikon DSLR body recall was the D2H, around 2005.

  • Eric Calabros

    I remember people who said Df is DOA, now look at the demand for its upgrade.

    • Michiel953

      Well, there’s certainly room for improvement with the Df…

      But no video button please.

      • Eric Calabros

        and some other people say “no mirror please”. We have to wait to see what Nikon will do. I personally like to have video option, just internal recording, no HDMI port, and just 4k, not 1080p or smaller, and just 24p 🙂

        • Michiel953

          I’d like the Df2 to get as close to a digital FM3a as possible. Stills only, no parafernalia.

          • Eric Calabros

            and a compact 5 elements lens like this

            • Michiel953

              Nahh… E-series glass is out of bounds. Sorry.

          • I would like if back display will be very small, like 1.5 inches, and B/w. Histograms in remaining space would be welcome. And of course split or microprism screen.

  • NikonPhotographer

    Wow! Impressive. Finally, something significantly better than the D3s. I’ll be saving up for two of these to eventually replace my two D3s bodies. Bravo, Nikon!

  • longzoom

    Wow! Really impressive! And so powerful battery is prohibited by nobody! Most strongest in Nikon history battery now admitted to planes! So what happened, Nikon? Why I did put all of my previous batteries to garbage coze you, Nikon, has switched polarity? Yeah, it was stupid, outrageous, shameless trick of yours, Nikon! Never, ever again, I, personally, hope!

  • Dino Brusco

    OMG! It looks like we truly have a winner here !! Basically images becomes suddenly noisy after 204/409 k which is just unbelievable ! D5 outperforms the D4 of 2-3 stops and also the D750 at 51200 looks much worse ! ( relatively speaking )

  • Clubber Lang

    Rejoice folks, we are inching closer to being able to capture photos of a pimple on the buttocks of an alien 12 galaxies over to the left.

    • catinhat

      Not really. Take a look at the full resolution picture of the dolphins at ISO 9000 on the referenced page. There is a lot of heavy NR there, I doubt pimple would survive that. My guess is D5 is in the ballpark of everything else we have seen so far, except D5 liberally applies NR at ultra high ISO, more so than the earlier bodies. It’s all good though, believers will believe.

      • Clubber Lang

        Good grief man…….do a shot of Jameson or similar and go smell some spring flowers.

        • catinhat

          Will do, LOL

      • HF

        My guess, too.

  • TO-DOUG

    What I find really interesting is the the photographer’s view of the Veuve Clicquot BRUT bottle (excuse my French…) gets progressively more blurry after each glass of champagne that s/he consumes! Or am I missing something here?
    [I better insert one of these 😉 so that I won’t be taken seriously.]

  • usa

    “If you are around that many bottles of Veuve, and the labels don’t look splotchy, you’re not doing it right.” Professional Drinker/Amateur Photographer

  • Lee

    These aren’t low resolution enough. Please give us something smaller so it can fit on the screen of my iPhone 4s without scrolling. /sarcasm

    Why did these people even bother?

  • saywhatuwill

    Wow. I want. Can y’all FundMe $7k? LOL

  • D700s

    I’m impressed. That’s enough reason for me to buy it.

  • Tadao_Isogai

    Active D-Lighting set to ‘Extra High 2’; processed with ‘Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 9.3’; other mis-set shoot and processing parameters in evidence.

  • NicP

    1st photo at ISO 2000 and 22nd at ISO 3200 have heavy noise, for sure not better than D4. Not impressed.

    • Shutterbug

      “Heavy” noise at ISO 2000, haha I’ll have what this guy is having.

      • NicP

        Seems what you get makes things look better which is fine.

  • AYWY

    I’ll pick up a Df2 or a consumer body with this sensor maybe in 2021 when it’s 30-40% off.

  • TheMeckMan

    Why do all (and I mean all, 3200 and up) the D750 images in the comparison look like they have had contrast turned down (like a tint or haze)

    I’ve never seen that in any of my studio images when compared to my D4s… They also look smugged.

  • D700s

    B&H Deal Zone has a pretty good deal on Benro travel tripod. Four versions up to $200+ off.

  • Julian

    Really impressive! just a shame its out of my budget for now.

  • Eno

    I worry for Canon if D5 is so good and D500 may be with 1,3 stops worst this cold mean D500 may yield a comparable or even a little bit better image quality than 1Dx mk 2.

    • Federico Gallinari

      Bah…I don’t believe in miracle, and we will not see miracle.
      What we can see here is about 1 stop (I REPEAT 1stop) over the previous sensor that was very very near to the 1dx iso performance (why people don’t look on dxo?).
      So…can the 1dxII be worst than previous model? no I don’t think, maybe equal, but maybe something better.
      I can’t tell if Canon will be 1 stop, half stop (that means nothing because the half stop does not exist)…or other, but what we can expect is something similar that in the past.
      Personally I think that D5 will give a little advantage on top high iso, nothing more, and a camera is not only a little less noise in >25k iso.

      Photography is not a war, the brand is a brand…stop, the difference between system are very very little, the great difference is in the brain of the people.
      What we see on this test is marketing, just look…I put just a little contrast over 750jpeg….you see more than 1stop?

      https://www.dropbox.com/s/c7m479bbydjr2ca/Senza-titolo-1.jpg?dl=0

      • Eno

        From what I see, D5 is roughly 1,5 stops better than D4s which was better than 1Dx. Canon will also improve their image quality but I bet it will probably be in a half stop stop + – territory (they did not even increased the maximum ISO value at all). It’s pretty safe to assume D500 will probably be a little bit over one stop worst than D5, thus equal or better than the older generation FF cameras.

        • Federico Gallinari

          I never see for 1.5 stop but 1stop no more, and we have no idea on the real condition of the test.
          Even the assumption of 1/3 stop is not real, I mean..even if we can think that on the real use is near nothing (and that is the result of rescale dxo graph), because every images need an otuput and the output give no real difference between the cameras…event to the a7rII.
          I agree with Dxo in that because I see the same in my works, with 1dx, a7s, a7rII D3s, D4…and so on.
          Difference are so little that it’s very very negligible.
          I think that we will see in real use (as Dxo test) better result from D5 but not so much as many people (here) are expecting, and that’s means that (maybe) with the D5 will be possible to have better result on print with shot over 50kiso….ehm..that in real works are so little that is just an idea..not an issue.
          And in most case every actual apsc can works as the FF, the difference is in other terms.

          • Eno

            Look closer, D5 it’s definitely 1+ stops better compared to previews Nikon FF’s.

        • HF

          What older generation FF cameras? Please compare the DXO S/N ratio measurements. D4 to D4s, A7s, A7rii, D750. The difference is very very small. That doesn’t mean that NR-algorithms used within the camera don’t improve. A D7200, NX1 is clearly one stop behind. Now how, all of a sudden, not using BSI tech or whatever, do we achieve this 1stop improvement in APSC? You would need to get to D750 level, ie. overcome the twice larger light gathering sensor area. How do we get the 1.5 stops here for the D5? In a shot noise dominated situation, surely not. Read noise? Could be improved, but looking at the improvement over previous generations 1.5 stops is unlikely. QE? No. So , I can’t see where this improvement other than by using software NR in conjunction with dual gain tach for DR improvement is coming from. I am eagerly awaiting Nikon to explain the tremendous new tech they developed to achieve this. This would really be a breakthrough by Nikon (I would love to see, since I am heavily invested in lenses and cameras).

  • Davis5

    impressive the Hi 1 204.800 iso… but IMHO the Hi5 options is partially useless… hi4 is on the limit edge…

    • Shutterbug

      It’s actually very useful right up to the maximum. Keep in mind people use these cameras for more than the average photographer uses them for. Surveillance, for example, makes use of ridiculously high ISOs where image quality is not a priority, but simply making out a number, face, or shape is enough. The majority will never venture that high, but it isn’t there for the average user. Always better to have the option than to not. The fact that it has selectable ISO 3 full stops higher than the nearest competition is a huge advantage to some lines of work.

    • AlphaT

      It depends on what you use the camera for.
      Nikon reps have been preaching the gospel that the extreme high ISOs are definitely not for wedding prints, etc, but still are “useful” for evidence and forensics. Agencies and the likes looking for this type of camera might be extremely excited (in taxpayer’s expense of course). So there’s a market out there.

  • PhilK

    OK, I’m only on the first page of comments but I’m noting a conspicuous absence of all the people previously claiming an ISO performance improvement was impossible, or what people were seeing on the LCD on the demo units was somehow inexplicably tricking their eyes because the resolution of the panel is higher. LOL

    • HF

      I am still careful in jumping to a conclusion too fast. I hope I will be wrong, but I still guess that DXO will show at most 1/3 of a stop improvement over most of the range until the very high ISOs (which are for the spec sheet, imo). In the range useful to most people here (<25600 maybe 51000k, since the 100k ISO wildlife photos published a few weeks ago showed the limit for me at least very clearly) the difference looks to be very small compared to the D4s. The D4s vs. D5 images above seem to indicate it (remember, jpg output with lots of processing involved, can be seen by obvserving the loss of detail). My bet is that no wedding or wildlife photographer will sell huge ISO200k and higher images, where a much larger improvement is very likely. That is nice to have for some web images, but oftentimes still useless in my opinion. So the main advantage in my opinion is NR by software baked in raw, instead of sensor technology. In that case, the question I have is how close does NR in post get me then with the D4s?

      • Federico Gallinari

        LOL I wrote near the same just a previous post.
        I agree in every words..are you a pro photographer?

        • HF

          My wife is, I am her second shooter at weddings, events and larger portrait shoots. I am an engineer and physicist.

          • Federico Gallinari

            ok now I understand the practical comments and without alteration by a fanatic enthusiasm

  • I am waiting – theres still not enough clarity nor transparency from Nikon with actual files shot under conditions we know the parameters of.

    I for one will not throw down this amount of cash without firm and unequivocal proof of true ISO performance in RAW files.

    I would be happy with a decent ISO 3200 I can use never mind the ranges being toted here as possible.

    • Federico Gallinari

      3200iso are perfect on a lot of camera (D3s…but in maybe all actual FF even on A7IIR)

  • Adnan

    To me high ISOs are very impressive..

    Why do people always start complaining for a product for which they have been “supposedly” waiting for a long time?

    “High ISOs are not for me” and etc, etc.

    This camera is basically for action,may it be sports,wildlife or press.

    There are lot of scenarios and places where one cannot use flash

    Studio PGers might get to impress clients but wont go above 100-200 anyway and many are still using D3,D700 and D800 line for large prints.

    ISO 51200 looks great on both D5 and D500.

    I have no use of D5 but I’m really going to ditch my D7200 for D500.

    D800,D7000 IR and D500 are more than what I need.

    A camera allowing me to shoot at 1/250 at 4-5.6 with a cleaner ISO of 51200 well, hell yeah! i’m going for it!

  • aarif

    that’s why I want this sensor plus the AF in a D750 like body

  • JJ168

    I AM – THE LORD OF DARKNESS!

  • Another Darth Vader of a camera, indeed! It seems that Nikon is still the king of photon-counting.

  • neversink

    I’m very suspicious of these test shots. And I can’t really make an opinion based on close ups of flat, mostly textureless images like a label on a bottle of cheap champagne or a close up of a vintage camera, both poorly photographed.
    To this so-called reviewer: At least buy a decent bottle of champagne and put it under some decent lighting and then turn the lighting down as you photograph. This bottle of Krug, which is photographed much better than the bottle in this spurious ISO test, cost a mere $21,000 (give or take a dollar or two.)

    • Ben Bibikov

      the problem is, D4s failed at the cheap champaign test. This tells me something.

  • I read when I write. You read full sentence. max shutter (higher value) JUST correct at VERY high ISO setting.

    • Federico Gallinari

      I told you, f/11 Is not so low light, so…if you need to compare with shot at low light you have to compare with low light.
      If you make a high iso test you put light and then you need to close diaphram at f/11 because you are limited to the max 1/8000s at max iso you put too much light…thats it!
      Or you have to compare a7s with shot at F/11 with fast shutter speed..

      • Light levels are associated to exposure value which is made of a combination of aperture-shutter and iso. Considering only aperture doesn’t tell you anything about light level. What I am saying is that, ” to get all the iso’s to cover at same exposure value, they may have chosen F11. The champagne bottle shot looks to be low light ambient . The first comparison gives you an exposure value of F5.6 at shutter of approx half second with ISO-100. That may not be very low light but it is also not bright light.

        • Federico Gallinari

          ehm sorry but i’m talking on Olympus camera shots, where i see the exif data, and again the light is not low.
          You are talking about bottle, I don’t see the data, where do you see this f.5.6 with half second at 100iso?

          • Very true. But I started believing in miracles from nikon when I saw results of D800. Technology can sometimes advance in leaps and bounds.

  • To explain myself further…
    F11 allows them to use 1/8000 shutter at almost max ISO without upsetting exposure value. If you see Hi 5 ISO is overexposed as 1/8000 cannot be exceeded. And like I said before, F16 may be giving diffraction problems.I don’t see how else they would be able to maintain exposure without use of ND filters. But then again I may be wrong in this interpretation.

    • Federico Gallinari

      I have d800 too….and is so distant from miracle that I hope you will have better idea of miracle 😀
      the sony 36mpx is only a high resolution (that you don’t need for 99% of works) that give photos like many other cameras.
      PS
      I have a7rII too…and is many step forward to d800, but anyway have no sense resolution, extraordinary performance for 42mpx in output, but I will change for a 18-20mpx BSI now!…maybe in a7s3?..mah

      you talk about diffraction…on iso test…why? you have an idea of postproduction in this photos? diffraction problem? it depends on lens first…

      Anyway make your photos and be happy 😉

      • I guess you have forgotten about the cameras at the time D800 launched. Then too everybody was saying with guarantee that because of its huge MP count, the noise level should be very high. In reality they were at par or even better than D700. That in itself was a minor miracle. If you don’t think so, it’s your opinion. It never helps to compare old cameras with latest and best. Apples and oranges.
        I talked about diffraction because results and sharpness tests may get skewed because of it. And in a test like this, everything counts. And of course it depends on individual lens but it always is there at small apertures, especially for apertures smaller than F11. Besides those all were my thoughts on why they may have used F11 aperture. I also said, I may be over analyzing their reasoning.

  • Ben Bibikov

    We know that ISO is impressive on this camera, ok? But what do we know about the DR improvement? Is there any? Did we at least reach 16stops of DR?

    • lefantome

      I guess such high DR like 16 stops or so is left for the D810 successor to achieve.

  • Cinematism

    I really impressed. I think until the 400k ISO is usable.
    And when compared to compacts cameras, even 1.6 million ISO is better than 1600-3200 ISO

  • BrainBeat

    Looks like it has at least 1 stop over the D4s and 204800 or even 409600 may be usable. The rest may be usable if you shoot raw and go black and white due the the colour noise issues. That said I am not sure I can see very many cases when you would need to shoot even in H1 but I am sure it would be good to have if you need to.

    I wonder how the D500 is in comparison or did I miss that post?

  • Back to top