High ISO of D800 still amazes me as does the whole Nikon system

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
olyflyer
Forum ProPosts: 20,312
Like?
Re: Not my point Oly...
In reply to JimPearce, 7 months ago

JimPearce wrote:

My point is that ISO 6400 is a stop too far on the D800 if you are looking for top quality wildlife pictures. These pictures are colourful and engaging, but the background is posterized.

I don't see the posterization you can see in these images.

The detail argument is a separate argument, but I'm skeptical that the differences are visible at web posting sizes.

It is definitely visible and I am actually even using the same lenses I used on the D300s, so we can't blame the lens for the increased detail.

So, the ""fair comparison" for me is that the D800 is good at ISO 3200 versus ISO 2000 on the D3 and ISO 800 on the D300.

Yes, it is fair to say that lower ISO is better even on the D800, but comparing them your way is not what I'd call fair test since you could not take the same image with an equivalent lens at that low ISO due to the fact that the shutter speed would end up far too low. Even 1 stop from ISO6400 to ISO3200 is too much but two stops below that would make it totally impossible, so no, it would not be fair to compare that way at all.

This represents substantial progress in five years, but I wouldn't be waiting for a D400 if I could see the fairy dust you see.

Fine, I am not trying to convince you. Wait for the D400 if you still believe in it, maybe I'd do that as well if I were you. Never the less, I don't think that what I see is just fairy dust, technically it is fairly easy to show with two identical images and I actually did that more than once, though I would not start a mud throwing fight for it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow