Reading mode: Light Dark

Official D3 samples here

Go to last post
One stop advantage will be good. 2 stops will be awesome. But I doubt it.

One stop over D200 will be two stops over D2X. Hell they didn't put any high ISO samples from D300
mpixel said:
jeminijoseph said:
still this is very impressive.

Sad that they don't have higher ISO from D300
Click to expand...
Well, during a tour of the Sendai factory Amateur Photographer
magazine (UK) were told by Nikon that the image quality of the D300
at 3200 ISO was equivalent to that of the D200 at 1600 ISO. This was
published as part of this weeks D300 preview.
mpixel said:
--
Thanks
Jemini Joseph

http://www.wildbirdimages.com

Click to expand...
--
GMT+1 (BST)
Click to expand...
--
Thanks
Jemini Joseph

http://www.wildbirdimages.com

 
Try shifting skin tones to more realistic skin tones using hue & saturation in 400 asa shots. FUNKY.This is similar to the color problems I had with skin tones on the D1.Hope I'm wrong and its just Mixed Light sources, even so.
--
Tony G-J.
 
Nikons in camera exposure compensation has had me confused for a long time. That's not entirely true I guess. I've never cared about it, never used it, never really plan on using it.

BUT

I just checked a few of these samples and the two I pulled into Capture NX show an exposure comp of more than 1 full stop. WOW... seems odd to me.

Can anybody out there shed any kind of light on WHY this might be? Prototype cams that aren't dialed in yet?

Thanks for your time.
 
Some people prefer to use EV comp and matrix metering instead of very selective spot metering, or it could have been prototype issues (the software on the D3 shots reads version 0.18)
 
I was going to say the same Guy, the detail retention at high ISO is nothing short of amazing in the D3. Their image processing gives a great quality to the noise that does show up...and notice none of it is chroma noise even in that dark ISO 6400 sample. Amazing. Now that detail is preserved and noise is supressed admirably at ISO 6400 I wonder what detractors will use to pick at the high ISO quality??... and you know it is coming. DR ? Nope the dynamic range seems amazing as well, with full saturation of tones even at ISO 6400. At this point the D3 would have to have a major Achilles heal to take away from the momentum it currently has commanded. With these samples Nikon basically says "I told you so." to everyone that doubted until now if they would wrest the best IQ crown from Canon, it's a done deal.

Regards,

--

 
I'm sorry that's just ridiculous IMHO. Yes there is High IS0 NR set for Normal, but to compare a ISO 3200 or 6400 image to a low ISO image is just ludicrous. No one would expect them to have the same level detail.

Try comparing them to other camera's ISO 3200 and 6400 images.
mpixel said:
If it isn't immediately apparent to you that the 3200 ISO image lacks
detail, please compare it to the lower ISO images of the model.
sfisher said:
mpixel said:
Thanks for posting.

Low noise but low detail too at ISO 3200 and 6400. Too much NR.

I do like the samples though. Manufacturers images are often really
quite poor.

--
GMT+1 (BST)
Click to expand...
--
-Steve
===================
When everything is coming your way, you're in the wrong lane. ~ Larry
the Cable Guy
Click to expand...
--
GMT+1 (BST)
Click to expand...
--
-Steve
===================

When everything is coming your way, you're in the wrong lane. ~ Larry the Cable Guy
 
mpixel,

Your posts reflect a balanced, critical view of camera performance, but I wonder if your observation about the 5D vs D3 and MKIII will hold up. As I look at the Nikon 6400 ISO nightclub image I see the cleanest 6400 I've ever seen together with decent detail, despite NR on. The face and hat comprise the area of focus. Viewed on a 2560 x 1600 monitor, and printed at 8.5 x 11, these areas appear noise free and detailed - each skin pore - each whisker - each hat thread and even a hint of veins in :)s. The 5D 3200 stage shot you offer for comparison is nice, but.. the ISO is one stop down, there's twice as much available light, and there's more noise - especially chroma - compared to the D3 image. The 5D image also holds no more detail. Several things contribute to its sense of detail. Because this was taken at 400mm, most of the picture comprises the area of focus, and the image shows obvious signs of sharpening. The D3 image has no such sharpened appearance. The MKIII comparative images at 6400 aren't even in the same ball game as 5D and D3. I realize we need to wait for more objective comparisons.
 
about the peach fuzz but then I realized you were talking about the ISO 400 image, I was looking at the ISO 3200 image! ;) Still the peach fuzz is there with every gob of detail. Some people see (or don't see) what they want...the objective viewer can't deny the detail retention is quite good for this jpeg engine , imagined resolution loss from AA filter mumbo jumbo aside.

Regards,

--

 
sfisher said:
I'm sorry that's just ridiculous IMHO. Yes there is High IS0 NR set
for Normal, but to compare a ISO 3200 or 6400 image to a low ISO
image is just ludicrous. No one would expect them to have the same
level detail.

Try comparing them to other camera's ISO 3200 and 6400 images.
Click to expand...
I wonder if you're reading this properly. I see a lack of detail in the 3200 ISO image (and also the 6400 ISO image). However since neither of us are at currently at that particular photo shoot we can't walk up to the model and look at the detail on her body and compare that to the detail in the image. However she is missing detail that should be there. To put it another way you can see the broad-brush strokes but not the detail. On the lower ISO images you can see the detail.

So the next best thing is to look at what the camera is capable of at lower ISO and that is shown in some of the other images that I suggested you look at.

Once the camera is released there will be comparisons of the same subject at different ISO levels and with NR on off etc but for now we have to make do by looking at all the samples available and using the samples of similar subjects at different ISOs and our own general knowledge of the subjects photographed.
sfisher said:
mpixel said:
If it isn't immediately apparent to you that the 3200 ISO image lacks
detail, please compare it to the lower ISO images of the model.
sfisher said:
mpixel said:
Thanks for posting.

Low noise but low detail too at ISO 3200 and 6400. Too much NR.

I do like the samples though. Manufacturers images are often really
quite poor.

--
GMT+1 (BST)
Click to expand...
--
-Steve
===================
When everything is coming your way, you're in the wrong lane. ~ Larry
the Cable Guy
Click to expand...
--
GMT+1 (BST)
Click to expand...
--
-Steve
===================
When everything is coming your way, you're in the wrong lane. ~ Larry
the Cable Guy
Click to expand...
--
GMT+1 (BST)
 
that Nikon claims a 300% high ISO IQ improvement over the D200, which would be 1.5 stops. That would put the D300 roughly on par with the 5D.
 
David SL said:
about the peach fuzz but then I realized you were talking about the
ISO 400 image, I was looking at the ISO 3200 image! ;) Still the
peach fuzz is there with every gob of detail. Some people see (or
don't see) what they want...the objective viewer can't deny the
detail retention is quite good for this jpeg engine , imagined
resolution loss from AA filter mumbo jumbo aside.
Click to expand...
I take it you have never used a camera without AA filter...

I also assume you have never compared a jpg to a raw with any camera and definately not compared jpg vs raw from a leica?

Now, that would explain things...

Sure, there's a lot of detail in the image. It just isn't 12mp worth of detail...
--
Anders

Some of my pictures can be seen at;
http://teamexcalibur.se/US/usindex.html

event photography and photo journalism
 
Harris I was thinking the same thing ,traditional attack points:

1) To noisy!

Well scratch that, the noise is barely visible even at ISO 6400 the highiest in spec. ISO level! With that it is almost devoid of chroma AND unlike the D2x the detail is ALL there. No more water color smudging ...I don't know if it has to do with new IQ processing due to the expeed processor or the amazing DR of the sensor or both but it is certainly working its magic here. Look at the deep shadows of that ISO 6400 image, no overtly visible noise. Though exif shows NR was on, you can't tell** and that IMO is the best and only kind of NR I care to see in an image. Still I'd like to compare NR on and OFF at high ISO , my hunch is there won't be much difference (a bit more chroma noise but luminance will stay the same) amazing either way.

2) Low DR!

Again, these images show amazing tonal range at very high ISO. Though we know DR is reduced with increasing ISO the D3 does a great job of hanging on to it, that dark ISO 6400 shot is all the proof of that.

3) No detail !

Again, look at that ISO 6400 image. The skin pores are clear around the lips of the trumpeter. Lashes in his eyes, hair strands in his eye brows, and look at the fenestrations in his hat...the D2x would have turned all of that into a soapy mess at ISO 1600 and here it is richly detailed with no NR smudge at ISO 6400 ..amazing.

4) It's desaturated!

Quite familiar with the loss in saturation that attended the highiest ISO's of previous Nikon DSLR's the D3 surprises yet again. Saturated and rich colors up to ISO6400.

Nikon apparently wasn't blowing steam about the class leading IQ of the D3. Combine the reports of shooting performance (Ed Betz so far..) and this is set to be Nikon's huge whale for the coming year.

Regards,
--

 
Pradipta Dutta said:
I am totally sold on this camera - this is way-way better than ISO
800 on my D2X.
Click to expand...
The results are truly jaw-dropping. The ISO 400 shots are desperately smooth, and i bet even the 6400-shot could have been printed LAARGE without any problems. Not the most inspiring shot perhaps, but fantastic noise performance.
 
echelon2004 said:
But where's the detail?
Click to expand...
You must compare to something, right? Are you comparing to ISO 100 images from D2X? Then yes, noise reduction affected the level of details. Are you comparing to ISO 3200 images from Mk3? Then I do not see any problems for Nikon.

--
no text
 
obviously the detail will reduce with increased ISO this happens for ALL cameras. The point you are missing is though the detail is reduced compared to lower ISO levels for this body it is still amazingly retained given the high ISO levels at which it starts to get degraded. As some one asked earlier , what ISO 6400 sample for any existing camera can retain detail to this degree??? Answer: None. That makes it an amazing result whether or not the detail is lower than the lower ISO level...as no one would ever say isn't true for any camera. These images show clearly why Nikon was bragging about the IQ and why early reports from pro's essentially are mirroring what Nikon has said.

--

 
I down loaded all images into PS CS3 and took a careful look. My impressions:

1- At 6400 and poor light the D3 is BETTER at ISO 6400 than my D2x was at 800. Without a direct comparison it is hard to say, but my guess is that ISO 640 on a D2x would be close to the D3 at 6400. That's one heck of a jump. And . . . the noise had a nicer quality to it compared to my D2x.

2- At ISO 3200 the quality was amazing. The lighting (on the lady) was very harsh, but similar to what a PJ or event photographer has to deal with.

3- At ISO 400 I uprezed the file to 240 dpi at 48 inches wide. Did a slight USM at 0, .4, and 150% . . . and made a 10" print from a cropped section (around the eye). Pretty impressive! Looks very sharp from a the distance you would read a magazine from. Again, it's a guess, but I would say that the 12 megs in the D3 resolves better than the 12 megs in my old D2x . . even at ISO 400 vs 100 with D2x. Two extra stops AND better resolution - it looks like. We shall see, but that's my take.

--
Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
 
How long after availability of the new cameras will we be able to download an upgrade to raw magick? We'll surely need one, ain't it ?
--
Jean Bernier

All photographs are only more or less credible illusions
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top