Is the D300 ISO performance better than D40?

Started Nov 14, 2007 | Discussions thread
kocho Senior Member • Posts: 2,690
1.5 stops????

How do you compare? I've looked at my ISO1600 D40 samples and the JPGs off camera from the D300 and the differences seems to be as I describe them in my other post. I do not see a 1.5 stops difference at 100%. In fact it looks like a trade-off to me - more chroma in the D40 (relatively easy to clean in NR software) and more yellow blotches in the D300 (not so easily cleaned in NR software) at ISO1600. Neither is perfect but both are good for my normal use if not much processing is needed.

The above is pixel per pixel level. Downsize the D300 to 6 MP and then I would agree it gets the edge clearly. I suppose that's what matteres at the end for most practical purposes - clean final output at the desired small size. So I agree that with a D300 downsized to 6MP you will get probably a stop better or so.

To me personally for my own use (web and small prints) I am not sure that this justifies the increase in file size and the $$$ to upgrade my computers to handle that (they cope well with 6MP but were struggling a little already with the D200 10MP so I imagine 12 would be even tougher on them). I may still upgrade down the road but for other reasons - less moire, better metering, better focus, microfocus adjustments, etc.

I may just as well wait for the full-frame small-size camera to appear in a year or so (I hope). To me the D3 ISO1600 is what I find just about "perfect" - the D40 and D300 still has a way to go IMO to eliminate my need to use mandatory NR processing on ISO1600 shots - from the D3 samples I've seen I may not need to do NR every time at ISO1600 and that's what I'm looking for in my next camera in terms of high-ISO performance -;)

KennyKB wrote:

I have a D40 and I'm surprised to read that the D40 is the equal of
D300's (high) ISO performance. From the D300 samples I've seen,
nothing could be further from the truth.

The D300's ISO3200 is very much cleaner than D40's ISO1600. The D40's
ISO1600 is noisy but useable by my standard. I must emphasize "by my
standard" because pixel peepers who lament at the small amount of
noise for D300's ISO3200 at 100% crop will throw up their hands in
utter disgust!

I've not seen many samples of D300's ISO6400 in low light to make any
definitive judgement but the little I've seen shows promise that it
will be NOT worse than D40 ISO1600.

In fact, I'm considering upgrading to D300 for the better high ISO
performance as I shoot a lot of low light shots. I reckon at least
1.5 stops improvement. Not a scientific judgement but I have a D40
and I know what I see with my eyes.D300 beats

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