jcad70
Leading Member
I have never had a noise problem with my D300?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Well, those crops look about right to me. I've found my D300 "feels" a little noisier than my D200 in defocussed areas at ISO 200, and a bit more so at ISO 400 (but not after that). When I say "feels", I've never done a side-by-side comparison (although I still use both bodies), but I find myself noticing it more with the D300, especially in dark areas (e.g. dark foliage - say shaded conifers - when the scene is correctly exposed). And yes, I do have Active D-Lighting switched off.
Having said that, it's not something that I've ever considered to be a problem - it doesn't show in A4-sized prints, and I've always thought it looked quite pleasing in nature.
--
My gallery of so-so nature photos:
http://martinch.zenfolio.com/
Having said that, it's not something that I've ever considered to be a problem - it doesn't show in A4-sized prints, and I've always thought it looked quite pleasing in nature.
--
My gallery of so-so nature photos:
http://martinch.zenfolio.com/
Tony Beach
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 11,967
- Solutions
- 5
- Reaction score
- 7,035
I have, numerous times.
That's bunk.
Therein lies your problem since I use ETTR with both cameras and the difference in light gathered is actually about 1/3 of a stop. Even with the D200 exposing 1/3 longer though, the shadow noise on the D300 is clearly better.
I'm pretty certain you do not know how to handle these cameras, at least the D300. You pretty much proved that with what you wrote above.
You clearly don't know what you are talking about. Read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_speed#Digital_camera_ISO_speed_and_exposure_index
No, you are stuck by your own lack of understanding of how to properly expose the D300/D300s. Do some true experimenting and get a grip on ETTR and you will find all of these issues you are having will go away.
Even the D700 and D3s have shadow noise at base ISO, you just have to look further into the shadows to see it. Thom Hogan wrote about the D300 DR and said it had about a stop more DR than the D200 or D2x, either Thom and I are wrong or you are.
The OP's shots were clearly underexposed.
HSway
Senior Member
Marco, I red you conclusions with open mind. I am the last who is happy about iso speed/noise ratio. My interest is low iso and using d90 that is very close to D300,s by no means worse and if the hair better, it’s irrelevant mentioning. My practice takes place outdoors. I agree the noise level is uncomfortable high still. At the same time some of your statements I simply can’t get over and see them far -fetched. Perhaps you are not used to be focused on work with exposures? Or you are exaggerating to oppose vigorous augmenting Tony is used to use?
Exposure is the major matter to me. I do bracketing rarely as my habit is to do multiple versions (focus,aperture a such in addition). I tune my exposure very carefully and sometimes I distinguish only in workflow that I need the other one. What I want to say is, when one pay great deal of attention to the exposure, some of your statements appear exaggerated. I don’t find the same thing in my practice. I am regularly viewing my photographs under 300,400%. Rarely using nr to be bothered with.
I say also though, the noise, grain, is sometimes very willing to show up. I saw people here on forum that had difficulties to understand noise levels at low iso speeds. I know this is very well possible. It’s one of main reasons my wife has to be shooting with camera with ‘archaic’ display and other functions as she prefers better overall sensor performance over recent canon cameras (we are likely to resign on 60D – next month?, fingers..we see some movement). So yes, there is number of occasions the noise is brisk to pop up at basic and low setting and it would be great to move further aps so that results are not so labile and more resilient or tolerant (exposure).
Tony, it’s difficult speaking to you. You promote your opinion to a fact. But facts are always relative. Obviously we take it that way and is included in our argument (we have many things very similar or same – in photography) so we can most of the time be based on quite clear fact level. But, that’s not the end of the fact relativity. That is always present and is to be remembered. It is cause of wars we had when individual of this manors had a power.
I personally don’t like calling out names by which shielding my argument or experience. And I also don’t like laughing at people’s opinions and invasive care you manifest of them. Needless irony, shorting into boxes – “ crowd of D200 fans ” doesn’t make for constructive debate either.
“ Maybe if you could define it then you could better understand what it is you love about it.”
“ all I see in posts like yours above is lots of speculation, opinion..”
I think we can do better.
Hynek
--
http://www.sunwaysite.com
Exposure is the major matter to me. I do bracketing rarely as my habit is to do multiple versions (focus,aperture a such in addition). I tune my exposure very carefully and sometimes I distinguish only in workflow that I need the other one. What I want to say is, when one pay great deal of attention to the exposure, some of your statements appear exaggerated. I don’t find the same thing in my practice. I am regularly viewing my photographs under 300,400%. Rarely using nr to be bothered with.
I say also though, the noise, grain, is sometimes very willing to show up. I saw people here on forum that had difficulties to understand noise levels at low iso speeds. I know this is very well possible. It’s one of main reasons my wife has to be shooting with camera with ‘archaic’ display and other functions as she prefers better overall sensor performance over recent canon cameras (we are likely to resign on 60D – next month?, fingers..we see some movement). So yes, there is number of occasions the noise is brisk to pop up at basic and low setting and it would be great to move further aps so that results are not so labile and more resilient or tolerant (exposure).
Tony, it’s difficult speaking to you. You promote your opinion to a fact. But facts are always relative. Obviously we take it that way and is included in our argument (we have many things very similar or same – in photography) so we can most of the time be based on quite clear fact level. But, that’s not the end of the fact relativity. That is always present and is to be remembered. It is cause of wars we had when individual of this manors had a power.
I personally don’t like calling out names by which shielding my argument or experience. And I also don’t like laughing at people’s opinions and invasive care you manifest of them. Needless irony, shorting into boxes – “ crowd of D200 fans ” doesn’t make for constructive debate either.
“ Maybe if you could define it then you could better understand what it is you love about it.”
“ all I see in posts like yours above is lots of speculation, opinion..”
I think we can do better.
Hynek
--
http://www.sunwaysite.com
I must be the only one who noticed your post. I will bet money that this is what caused the underexposure and the resulting noise, at least in this photo.
I just traded up to D300s from D200 and using the same techniques and lenses have not found ANY inferiority, in fact the only thing that D200 did better (to my taste) is the White Balance presets. When someone pointed out to me that these can be finetuned, my results turned out better then when I had the D200. The only time I get noise in D300s is when it's underexposed, at any ISO. Although, if I start pixel-peeping, I'm sure I'll find some.
Fun activity for the day - find your best, sharpest photos from film days and view them at the same magnification as you do digitals. You will never complain again. Well, maybe not never, but for at least a day.
Tony Beach
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 11,967
- Solutions
- 5
- Reaction score
- 7,035
Then don't.
I try to counter opinions I disagree with by presenting factual evidence.
Calling the D300/D300s a noisy camera relative to the D200 at any ISO is ludicrous (that's my opinion). Compensating exposure values to optimize base ISO in fact marginally improves the D300/300s performance at base ISO; turning on ADL worsens it -- there is nothing relative about encouraging people to better understand how to handle exposure on their cameras.
Every time one of these threads is started, there is a crowd of D200 fans who show up to perpetuate their arguments (largely based on myths about CCD v. CMOS, or their unwillingness or inability to address the metering differences between the D200 and D300) -- that's a fact.
As far as I'm concerned, that's constructive advice.
Yes, goes back to the unsubstantiated CMOS v. CCD hypothesis. I've seen this go both ways and I'm equally critical of those that claim CMOS is better (they used to often say it was "magical") as I am of those that claim CCD is better.
HSway
Senior Member
I didn't mean me. Besides, if we don't face the difficult where would we be?
You are nor successful a bit. Still confuses facts, your priorities and opinions for it. And it's painfully transparent.
That's not a fact. That' only exactly what you see as a fact, you are in fact creating it even - the fact you should probably truly hate.
He will take care of his understanding Tony, not to worry. It' rude and invasive behaviour you are displaying, far from constructive..
Mmmmm. Probably a good time to say I actually agree with you, unless you have noticed already. And I like your general attitude to myths. I said though before, there is a fine line..... There are different ways we have to cope on this planet. We have seen this manner endings far too often in the past and right now its also present more than enough. Besides, you are getting very close and very easy too far, distorting, misunderstanding, and the more distorting. It's not effective nor has it a good value of factuality. But even you had to notice.
If you are pretty sure you see a fact, go easy, gentle. Don't break it and deliver it clean, give an example and wish the other the best in the first. This backward silly thing keeps one on right track and everything works better. Should it do at all. We don't need to put world to the row of fact any more. We are quite happy to be different each other and enrich our minds and lives by it.
Hynek
--
http://www.sunwaysite.com
jelani newton
Active member
I just bought a D300s also and I have to agree with the OP. I'm not bashing either and have tried shooting in RAW, 14bit, uncompressed, I leave the in camera sharpening at 0, NR @ 0, no ADL, shoot in Neutral, develop in LR3 and CS5, and the noise is still great deal more than I expected. This is coming from shooting 2 D90 bodies. It's the same using the CF and the SD Card slots. At times it has a look I can appreciate but it not as clean as my D90 were and of course no where near my D700. Maybe this is an issue affecting only certain bodies as some people see the obvious issue and others aren't seeing the same issue. Many here have expressed that it could be user error but I honestly don't see how. It's a consistent issue from folks who've used multiple camera bodies, [I've owned and used a D70, D80, D90, D300, D700, and D300s, also an N65, N8008, and a Mamiya RB67]. I get the issue even when bracketing so I don't think it's an exposure issue.
Tony Beach
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 11,967
- Solutions
- 5
- Reaction score
- 7,035
Not understanding the exposure differences between the D200 and D300 is the number one reason why people argue that the D200 has a sensitivity that the D300 does not have.
Whatever -- see above. People can learn to handle the camera differently or they can just moan about how Nikon has taken a step backwards (as far as they are concerned) with the D300 vis-a-vis the D200. If the D300 is a step backwards, then Thom Hogan's review of the D300 and his personal preference to take the D300 and D90 to Africa with him are mistakes. My observations are in line with Thom Hogan's and I arrived at them independently before his D300 review came out.
Bill Dewey
Veteran Member
Well, I haven't posted here in quite some time, maybe some "old timer" might remember who the heck I am, if so, please remind me 
. Heck, I even recognize that Tony Beach person .......
Good to see that not much has changed, so perhaps a bit of unbiased information might help.
I might suggest that you ( the Royal You meaning everyone ) visit the good folks at http://www.dxomark.com and compare the ISO, Signal to Noise Ratio, etc. of the D300s, D300, D200 and whatever other cameras you might want to compare. To my eye the objective, not subjective, testing pretty much says it all. And from what I can see, well, I'd just comment that the results as noted here are quite subjective, and obviously cannot be reproduced in any meaningful manner in any objective way.
So, I'll believe the objective testing from the good folks at DXOMark, as well as my own experience, rather than the non-reproducible horrible noise shown here, at least I can't reproduce it and don't see it at all with my old an moldy D300. Oh, for reference, I still have one of my old D200's, and I'll take the D300 at any ISO first. That last statement is very subjective.
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
. Heck, I even recognize that Tony Beach person .......Good to see that not much has changed, so perhaps a bit of unbiased information might help.
I might suggest that you ( the Royal You
meaning everyone ) visit the good folks at http://www.dxomark.com and compare the ISO, Signal to Noise Ratio, etc. of the D300s, D300, D200 and whatever other cameras you might want to compare. To my eye the objective, not subjective, testing pretty much says it all. And from what I can see, well, I'd just comment that the results as noted here are quite subjective, and obviously cannot be reproduced in any meaningful manner in any objective way.So, I'll believe the objective testing from the good folks at DXOMark, as well as my own experience, rather than the non-reproducible horrible noise shown here, at least I can't reproduce it and don't see it at all with my old an moldy D300. Oh, for reference, I still have one of my old D200's, and I'll take the D300 at any ISO first. That last statement is very subjective
. --
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
HSway
Senior Member
I think many people might not have appreciated exposition to the degree it is unfortunately necessary whatever file their photography is based on. And many people used to their long time used equipment they are one body with can’t handle in the same manner unfamiliar one and are prone to rash conclusions. I have witnessed this far too often personally. I’d have probably similar calling, it’s something naturally beneficial to us thousands of years alongside the progressive way we thank we have such a thing as digital camera in hand at all. It’s us.
I prefer clearly D300/90 over D200 in many respects iso speed behaviour included. At the same time I have full understanding for D200 proud users that value its characteristic rendering, color response and interesting basic iso performance. I wouldn’t be killing them by arguments that it’s not true making every bit of effort to prove it as I learnt that the positive makes for mutual consensus far better than negative. Even in our differences. I would definitely recommend being more reserved and less generalizing. They are sensitive matters we should be able to distinguish even in the dust of rapid opinion exchanges. It’s my honest view and I will share it although at risk of making scholastic impressions n rhetorics.
Best,
Hynek
--
http://www.sunwaysite.com
GaryDeM
Veteran Member
just some thoughts-
-view any image at the size that you are goijng to use it for no larger, thejn decide about noise. try putting the image at a 8x10 size then decide at noise.
-why are you shooting at 1/2000? back the iso down to 200 then shoot. and make sure the exposre is correct. the images yoiu sahowed are underexposed. and underexposure make ANY image more noisy.
-if you using flash, use it in the correct way then look at the images. DO NOT EXPERIMENT TTHEN SAY MY IMAGES ARE NOISY. what you are doing with your experimenttation is inviting more noise to show up, and it does.
-if you wish wish to see how noisy the d300s really is. just go outside your house any take a wellexposed picture, view it at a normal size, say 8x10 or 11x14 or 20x30, then decide about the noise. i think you will find that the camera will give you a good noisefree picture.
- i shot film slides and negatives for 30+ yrs. ANY DSLR CURRENTLY BEING SOLD BY ANY MAKERS IS LESS NOISY/GRAIN THAN A SLR WITH FILM. instead of complainijg you should thank the makers for their unnoisy cameras.
-view any image at the size that you are goijng to use it for no larger, thejn decide about noise. try putting the image at a 8x10 size then decide at noise.
-why are you shooting at 1/2000? back the iso down to 200 then shoot. and make sure the exposre is correct. the images yoiu sahowed are underexposed. and underexposure make ANY image more noisy.
-if you using flash, use it in the correct way then look at the images. DO NOT EXPERIMENT TTHEN SAY MY IMAGES ARE NOISY. what you are doing with your experimenttation is inviting more noise to show up, and it does.
-if you wish wish to see how noisy the d300s really is. just go outside your house any take a wellexposed picture, view it at a normal size, say 8x10 or 11x14 or 20x30, then decide about the noise. i think you will find that the camera will give you a good noisefree picture.
M
Marti58
Guest
do you ever print them ?
i dont think the D300S is bad at all, well exposed image are absolute ok, i print A4 A3 and i never saw any problem in prints.
neutral colour setting as basic and corrections if needed in NX2.
people are making so much fuzz (imho).
--
All my Post Processing is done with Capture NX2
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marti58/
i dont think the D300S is bad at all, well exposed image are absolute ok, i print A4 A3 and i never saw any problem in prints.
neutral colour setting as basic and corrections if needed in NX2.
people are making so much fuzz (imho).
--
All my Post Processing is done with Capture NX2
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marti58/
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum