Serious doubts on the D7100 at high ISO

Started Mar 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
mistermejia
Senior MemberPosts: 2,822Gear list
Like?
Re: Serious doubts on the D7100 at high ISO
In reply to Horshack, Mar 25, 2013

Horshack wrote:

edo21 wrote:

After hundreds thousands of shots with the D90 I can get what I expect, knowing that the usage limit for the D90 is ISO 400. I rent when i need D700 or D3s for works at 800 iso and more.

I shoot in NEF and all settings (all) are manual. I have thousands of stunning images taken with the D90 also in critical condition.
In some photos I posted here after trying the manual settings i tried the aperture priority. Up to now all the images that I use for my works are jpgs, converted and not modified NEF files with View NX
Again, this forum now iis full of D7100 pictures at 3200 ISO that appear perfect.
Unfortunately, these are not the results that I got.
What I would like to share with you is to know if after 5 years from the release of the D90 from a new camera concepts like the D7100 might be expected to arrive in 1600 with good iso files.

The D7100 has lower noise than the D90 at equivalent reproduction sizes. The only way you're going to convince yourself of this reality if you shoot the exact same scene with both cameras using the same exposure and do the comparison yourself. Noise is 99% dependent on the absolute exposure and looking at low-key exposures from one camera and comparing those to the noise you remember seeing from a high-key exposure on a previous camera is a surefire recipe to convince yourself the new camera has more noise; i can show you a D3s ISO 1600 image that is noisier than a D3s ISO 6400 image, where the difference is simply the absolute exposure (ie, the amount of light that the camera allowed to reach the sensor).

But edo21 has already shot "hundreds of thousands of amazing photos" for his professional work with the D90, so why isn't he getting them with the D7100?

edo21, can you post some photos that might look similar to this shot from Italy?  Correct me if i am wrong, but you shoot in RAW but you don't PP???  Might as well shoot jpeg, no?

i was kind of like you in the begining, why the hell PP??  why should i have to do that and not the camera itself i said to myself ??  Unfortunately like others have already said, these newer more modern sensors/micro chips DO HAVE their own little built-in dark room in them, where YOU or us, are the ones that have to process the photo as in older film days, but now that's done with programs.  One option you have is pay some else to do it for you, that would be like taking your film rolls to the store and have them do the PP

me, personally, i am also getting used to shooting RAW more and more.  Is just the way it is nowdays.  I know is a pain on the butt (literately) and i have to go to Office Depot one of this days to "upgrade" my super hard chair to a more confortable one since i am spending a lot more time in PP now.  What else can i say??

 mistermejia's gear list:mistermejia's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Rokinon 85mm F1.4 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
lessNew
noneNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow