where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
studio460 said:
Sure, noise can reduced in post, but at the expense of some degree of sharpness. But, I simply asked how many EV faster, the D700 is, over the D90. Does no one here own both?
read my first post, if You doesn't know that 1EV is 1 stop, than it only confirms for me, go to BASICS
also, chroma abb is not equal image noise, so please don't confuse it
adamz said:
read my first post, if You doesn't know that 1EV is 1 stop, than it only confirms for me, go to BASICS
also, chroma abb is not equal image noise, so please don't confuse it
Yes, I know that 1 EV equals one stop. If by "chroma abb," you mean chromatic aberration, I know what that is too. But that's not the point--the image noise is I'm talking about is NOT chromatic aberration.
adamz said:D90 is almost noise less till iso 800, and with good technique even up to iso 1600. d700 will give You max 2 stops better (if You have good technique, if not 1 stop), while d3s will give You app 3 stops better.
Yes, I did read your first post. I just found your post difficult to read, and your statement, " . . . will give You max 2 stops better (if You have good technique, if not 1 stop)," just poorly worded, if clarity was your goal. Also, you gave no source for this data. Is this "2 stops better" from your own, hands-on experience with both bodies?
Recent Convert said:
I hate to dwell on it, but the answer *is* in the link I gave in my earlier post. DXO states its method as follows:
>>>The Low-Light ISO metric indicates the highest ISO sensitivity to which your camera can be set while maintaining a high quality, low-noise image (based on a Signal-to-Noise-Ratio [SNR] of 30dB, a dynamic range of 9EVs and a color depth of 18bits). The Low-Light ISO metric is of primary importance in photojournalism, sports and action photography.<<<When you look at the rating for the D700, you will find a noise-free ISO rating of ISO 2303, while the D90 exhibits a noise-free rating of 977.
Not at all! Sorry, I was kinda tired when I was trying to look at your link. Thanks for extracting and summarizing some of that data!
anjz said:
Would someone help me out? I've been staring at the photo of that guy for 3 minutes and don't see any chroma noise. Maybe someone can describe the location that it exists. I just see some luminance noise where orange meets gray near the upper left-hand corner and generally around the photo, but nothing that probably wouldn't also appear in a D700 as well. I'd be interested in learning what I am missing.
Sorry, it's probably difficult to see in those files. As soon as I get a chance, I'll post some larger crops from the original file. I recently switched everything over to Macs, but I don't yet have a CS5 license for them--all of my Adobe licenses are for PCs (which are all sitting in a closet now). It's pretty noticeable full-size, on a large screen. It's most visible in the large wash of blue light on the cove, toward frame-right.
Here's a link to a full-resolution, uncompressed .tiff (cropped) of the first image:
yes, it's from my own experience (I've played with all of the Nikon bodies for long enough to have my own personal opinion), if I write about sth I googled I put a reference, if not it's from my own experience.
sorry that I wasn't clear enough, but english is not my mother tongue
anyway, have fun with d700 it's amazing camera
Thanks for the TIF. Frankly, I think the photo looks pretty good. Personally, I see mostly luminance noise in the crop. I would go and try out a D700 and see if you find much of a difference at that ISO. I performed a little test at my local camera shop between a D700, D90 and Canon 5D Mark II and found. I didn't see much difference at ISO 1600.
adamz said:
yes, it's from my own experience (I've played with all of the Nikon bodies for long enough to have my own personal opinion), if I write about sth I googled I put a reference, if not it's from my own experience.
sorry that I wasn't clear enough, but english is not my mother tongue
anyway, have fun with d700 it's amazing camera
I wasn't questioning your background, I was just wondering if the data was anecdotal, or performed under any sort of standardized procedure, i.e., identical light quantities, side-by-side body comparisons, etc. Also, I didn't mean to deride your ESL status--my apologies.
anjz said:
Thanks for the TIF. Frankly, I think the photo looks pretty good. Personally, I see mostly luminance noise in the crop. I would go and try out a D700 and see if you find much of a difference at that ISO. I performed a little test at my local camera shop between a D700, D90 and Canon 5D Mark II and found. I didn't see much difference at ISO 1600.
Certainly. I should have posted that crop initially. Thanks for your comments, but I'm sure on a large print, that noise would be pretty objectionable to just about anyone.
Well, again, thanks for everyone's comments. I'm not too familiar with the DxO data acquisition/testing methodology, and I'm much more comfortable with real-world image tests. Also, my images tend to have lots of chroma, so generic tests are rarely comparable to what I'll actually be doing with the camera.
I just heard from my other photographer friend who just came from another gallery opening:
1. Everything was printed to 32" x 40," Type-C, chromogenic prints.
2. Everything was shot with a Hasselblad, using a digital back.
While it's certainly worth a weekend rental to see what Nikon's highest-end FX body can do at that print size, it looks like I may have to at least consider going with a medium-format, digital back, which of course would be a rental, and/or a Mamiya 6 x 7 system and drum scans for this project.
It seems like the real test will be if people know you're lying when you tell them your stuff was shot medium format but it was actually a D3x. ;-)
Nikon D90 Chroma Noise at ISO 800:
Here's a crop from the original image's middle-left portion of the frame (indicated by the red outline in the original image, shown at bottom), showing an example of the Nikon D90's chroma noise at 800 ISO (it's a near-actual size, high-resolution .jpg at "best" quality--the image is very faithful to the original .tiff):
Nikon D90; Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8
ISO: 800; exposure: f/5.6 @ 1/60th; aperture-priority; spot-metered; -0.7 EV.
Here's the zero-crop, full-frame image, below:
Nikon D90; Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8
ISO: 800; exposure: f/5.6 @ 1/60th; aperture-priority; spot-metered; -0.7 EV.
This shot was taken last night at 8:31PM Pacific Time. This is the period of dusk known as, "magic hour," when the sky goes deep blue, and is also the precise time at which I'll be shooting all of my planned portfolio pieces.
You must log in to post.
