where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
Alright the new Nikon D3s is maybe one stop better at high ISO performance in comparison to the new Canon EOS-1D Mark IV, so why not give it one more stop or two, I realize this is not going to produce picture that have great IQ but neither is The Canon at ISO 102,400.
Could this be upgraded by firmware or is their more complexity to do it. Like giving the camera more ISO boost settings
Pete
rhodium said:
You could probably do this in post yourself, but the results aren't going to be pretty... In-camera boost would likely be done by software rather than physical amplifiers.
It might not be practical, but just like Canon lets beat them in the number game, admit if Nikon could get the same result at ISO 204,800 as compared to the Canon at ISO 102,400 why not do it
Pete
Well when you become a Nikon engineer, you can add that to the D4?
Deal?
NSXType-R said:
Well when you become a Nikon engineer, you can add that to the D4?Deal?
To old for that, but I was wondering if the Boost settings could be modified to have one or more extra steps, just for bragging rights
The D4 if at higher MP will properly not match or better the D3s in high ISO, the new Canon EOS-1D Mark IV kind of showed that higher MP will kill real high ISO
Pete
Are you seriously asking Nikon to, in effect, reach for the lowest common denominator and claim "features" which are nothing more than marketing babble?
Is this not part of what we bash Canon for? I, for one, am glad Nikon tends to take the high road. It is refreshing.
Hey! look it's soap! Long time no see. I take it your home for the holidays now.
Anyway I agree with ya and I don't think Nikon should throw in a higher ISO just so Ashton Kutcher can mention it in his D4 commercial :^(
Come to think of it, what do you guys think the D4 will deliver? Higher MP (18 MP, perhaps?) with low-light performance equal to that of the D3s? Or a sensor keeping the 12.1 MP but delivering usable images at ISO 51,200? Or perhaps a mix of the two, a 15 MP sensor with usable ISO 25,600?
Anyway, I agree with soap. Nikon shouldn't stuff in marketing gibberish into their products like Canon does just because they can.
The easy 204 800 if you need it would be to shoot underexposed 102 400 shots...
It won't be good.. but you can always do it.
I can remember in the late 60's, with a special processing technique I developed (no pun intended), pushing TRI-X to ASA 74,000. And, yes, it worked.
Think about it from a marketing perspective, especially if they already have the ability do it. The next iteration will go up another two stops = 'NEW IMPROVED MODEL' for a zero R&D expense to Nikon's bottom line.
You must log in to post.
