Reading mode: Light Dark

D750 noisier than D800?

Go to last post
Big Ga said:
R Vaquero said:
Shooting at base ISO 100 and exposing for highlights, it's well known that the D800 has a dynamic range that lets to get detail from shadows when developing the RAW file, with almost no noise.
Trying to do the same thing with the D750, I've found that it seems to have more noise than the D800.
Any one has any experience about this?
Click to expand...
Not really. I've tested mine side by side and there is so little in it as not to be worth worrying about.
Click to expand...
Thank you, will try to get the best of it.
--

Entrada destacada en LensCulture < Ramon Vaquero - Fotografia

Ramon Vaquero - Fotografia
www.ramonvaquero.com www.ramonvaquero.com
 
Zoran K said:
Lab results are for reference. Since every shooter is unique in his experience, it is therefore not unreasonable to expect that different shooters will have different results.
Click to expand...
Que? We are talking about a silicon-based integrated circuit system here that behaves in a deterministic way. There is absolutely no way 'different shooters' have any bearing on the result. This is not like lenses where there is sample variation.
 
Last edited:
R Vaquero said:
Ramon Vaquero said:
R Vaquero said:
Shooting at base ISO 100 and exposing for highlights, it's well known that the D800 has a dynamic range that lets to get detail from shadows when developing the RAW file, with almost no noise.
Trying to do the same thing with the D750, I've found that it seems to have more noise than the D800.
Any one has any experience about this?
Click to expand...
Not really. I've tested mine side by side and there is so little in it as not to be worth worrying about.
Click to expand...
Thank you, will try to get the best of it.
--
http://www.ramonvaquero.com/en/
Click to expand...
Yes, you do a very good portfolio. Didn't notice mentioned which RAW converter did you use for the D800 and D750 for your comparisons? You mentioned you metered for high lights. How many stops did you need to raise the shadows?
 
thelenspainter said:
Zoran K said:
Lab results are for reference. Since every shooter is unique in his experience, it is therefore not unreasonable to expect that different shooters will have different results.
Click to expand...
Que? We are talking about a silicon-based integrated circuit system here that behaves in a deterministic way. There is absolutely no way 'different shooters' have any bearing on the result. This is not like lenses where there is sample variation.
Click to expand...
We can agree to disagree.
 
StillLearning said:
R Vaquero said:
StillLearning said:
R Vaquero said:
Shooting at base ISO 100 and exposing for highlights, it's well known that the D800 has a dynamic range that lets to get detail from shadows when developing the RAW file, with almost no noise.
Trying to do the same thing with the D750, I've found that it seems to have more noise than the D800.
Any one has any experience about this?
Click to expand...
Not really. I've tested mine side by side and there is so little in it as not to be worth worrying about.
Click to expand...
Thank you, will try to get the best of it.
--
http://www.ramonvaquero.com/en/
Click to expand...
Yes, you do a very good portfolio. Didn't notice mentioned which RAW converter did you use for the D800 and D750 for your comparisons? You mentioned you metered for high lights. How many stops did you need to raise the shadows?
Click to expand...
Glad you like my portfolio. I use ACR -sometimes Capture NX2 with the D800. I never push shadows that are under 4 stops.
--

Entrada destacada en LensCulture < Ramon Vaquero - Fotografia

Ramon Vaquero - Fotografia
www.ramonvaquero.com www.ramonvaquero.com
 
R Vaquero said:
Ramon Vaquero said:
R Vaquero said:
Ramon Vaquero said:
R Vaquero said:
Shooting at base ISO 100 and exposing for highlights, it's well known that the D800 has a dynamic range that lets to get detail from shadows when developing the RAW file, with almost no noise.
Trying to do the same thing with the D750, I've found that it seems to have more noise than the D800.
Any one has any experience about this?
Click to expand...
Not really. I've tested mine side by side and there is so little in it as not to be worth worrying about.
Click to expand...
Thank you, will try to get the best of it.
--
http://www.ramonvaquero.com/en/
Click to expand...
Yes, you do a very good portfolio. Didn't notice mentioned which RAW converter did you use for the D800 and D750 for your comparisons? You mentioned you metered for high lights. How many stops did you need to raise the shadows?
Click to expand...
Glad you like my portfolio. I use ACR -sometimes Capture NX2 with the D800. I never push shadows that are under 4 stops.
--
http://www.ramonvaquero.com/en/
Click to expand...
So did you do your comparison with ACR for both D800 and D750 or did you use ACR with the D750 and CNX2 with the D800?
 
StillLearning said:
R Vaquero said:
StillLearning said:
R Vaquero said:
StillLearning said:
R Vaquero said:
Shooting at base ISO 100 and exposing for highlights, it's well known that the D800 has a dynamic range that lets to get detail from shadows when developing the RAW file, with almost no noise.
Trying to do the same thing with the D750, I've found that it seems to have more noise than the D800.
Any one has any experience about this?
Click to expand...
Not really. I've tested mine side by side and there is so little in it as not to be worth worrying about.
Click to expand...
Thank you, will try to get the best of it.
--
http://www.ramonvaquero.com/en/
Click to expand...
Yes, you do a very good portfolio. Didn't notice mentioned which RAW converter did you use for the D800 and D750 for your comparisons? You mentioned you metered for high lights. How many stops did you need to raise the shadows?
Click to expand...
Glad you like my portfolio. I use ACR -sometimes Capture NX2 with the D800. I never push shadows that are under 4 stops.
--
http://www.ramonvaquero.com/en/
Click to expand...
So did you do your comparison with ACR for both D800 and D750 or did you use ACR with the D750 and CNX2 with the D800?
Click to expand...
ACR for both, NX2 does a much better job with noise than ACR or Lightroom. But I was comparing images with the NR untouched and found the D750 had an unexpected amount.
--

Entrada destacada en LensCulture < Ramon Vaquero - Fotografia

Ramon Vaquero - Fotografia
www.ramonvaquero.com www.ramonvaquero.com
 
R Vaquero said:
Ramon Vaquero said:
R Vaquero said:
Ramon Vaquero said:
R Vaquero said:
Ramon Vaquero said:
R Vaquero said:
Shooting at base ISO 100 and exposing for highlights, it's well known that the D800 has a dynamic range that lets to get detail from shadows when developing the RAW file, with almost no noise.
Trying to do the same thing with the D750, I've found that it seems to have more noise than the D800.
Any one has any experience about this?
Click to expand...
Not really. I've tested mine side by side and there is so little in it as not to be worth worrying about.
Click to expand...
Thank you, will try to get the best of it.
--
http://www.ramonvaquero.com/en/
Click to expand...
Yes, you do a very good portfolio. Didn't notice mentioned which RAW converter did you use for the D800 and D750 for your comparisons? You mentioned you metered for high lights. How many stops did you need to raise the shadows?
Click to expand...
Glad you like my portfolio. I use ACR -sometimes Capture NX2 with the D800. I never push shadows that are under 4 stops.
--
http://www.ramonvaquero.com/en/
Click to expand...
So did you do your comparison with ACR for both D800 and D750 or did you use ACR with the D750 and CNX2 with the D800?
Click to expand...
ACR for both, NX2 does a much better job with noise than ACR or Lightroom. But I was comparing images with the NR untouched and found the D750 had an unexpected amount.
--
http://www.ramonvaquero.com/en/
Click to expand...
That's what I thought. Explains why I don't see any difference between my D810 and D750 at ISO 100. I run them both through NX-D. I don't like the way ACR handles the conversion of Nikon Raws and noise.
 
R Vaquero said:
...against the D750, that I find it's a fantastic camera in most ways, and I love it. Only I have noticed something unexpected about shadows recovery, that's all.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't think this would matter unless you're going deep into the shadows but the D800 and D750 use different versions of Expeed and handle Black Level differently; specifically the D800 is clipped at 0 and the D750 is nominally at 600 (14-bit DNs).
 
R Vaquero said:
Of course NXD manages noise really great. But I find it too slow and unproductive for working with series of images.
--
http://www.ramonvaquero.com/en/
Click to expand...
I understand. I use a I9 processor plus moved my cache files to a different drive and allocated 4 gb on that drive within NX-D. It helped speed up my process time but may still not be fast enough for you. I only use NX-D to convert to jpeg with a few settings and finish in CS5.
 
Zoran K said:
R Vaquero said:
Shooting at base ISO 100 and exposing for highlights, it's well known that the D800 has a dynamic range that lets to get detail from shadows when developing the RAW file, with almost no noise.
Trying to do the same thing with the D750, I've found that it seems to have more noise than the D800.
Any one has any experience about this?
Thanks.
Click to expand...
These are lab measurements D750 vs D800:

b3a4b7dea93f4bc19327f78b4e6bd276.jpg

d11cf0502b3c45188e99dc0ede3d91fd.jpg

7ba24e714b0a491ab774deef2677d7fd.jpg

d103f574ebc447569a570c2e0cc86e8d.jpg
Click to expand...
"Screen" tab means you are enlarging the D800 more than the D750. Select the "Print" tab and there is essentially no difference between them.

--
 
StillLearning said:
R Vaquero said:
Of course NXD manages noise really great. But I find it too slow and unproductive for working with series of images.
--
http://www.ramonvaquero.com/en/
Click to expand...
I understand. I use a I9 processor plus moved my cache files to a different drive and allocated 4 gb on that drive within NX-D. It helped speed up my process time but may still not be fast enough for you. I only use NX-D to convert to jpeg with a few settings and finish in CS5.
Click to expand...
Shame that Nikon couldn't go on with Capture NX2. Best NEF converter ever IMHO.
--

Entrada destacada en LensCulture < Ramon Vaquero - Fotografia

Ramon Vaquero - Fotografia
www.ramonvaquero.com www.ramonvaquero.com
 
bclaff said:
R Vaquero said:
...against the D750, that I find it's a fantastic camera in most ways, and I love it. Only I have noticed something unexpected about shadows recovery, that's all.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't think this would matter unless you're going deep into the shadows but the D800 and D750 use different versions of Expeed and handle Black Level differently; specifically the D800 is clipped at 0 and the D750 is nominally at 600 (14-bit DNs).
Click to expand...
 
R Vaquero said:
Ramon Vaquero said:
R Vaquero said:
Of course NXD manages noise really great. But I find it too slow and unproductive for working with series of images.
--
http://www.ramonvaquero.com/en/
Click to expand...
I understand. I use a I9 processor plus moved my cache files to a different drive and allocated 4 gb on that drive within NX-D. It helped speed up my process time but may still not be fast enough for you. I only use NX-D to convert to jpeg with a few settings and finish in CS5.
Click to expand...
Shame that Nikon couldn't go on with Capture NX2. Best NEF converter ever IMHO.
--
http://www.ramonvaquero.com/en/
Click to expand...
You and a bunch of us agree. They should have bought the company that made it but too late now.
 
Zoran K said:
thelenspainter said:
Zoran K said:
Lab results are for reference. Since every shooter is unique in his experience, it is therefore not unreasonable to expect that different shooters will have different results.
Click to expand...
Que? We are talking about a silicon-based integrated circuit system here that behaves in a deterministic way. There is absolutely no way 'different shooters' have any bearing on the result. This is not like lenses where there is sample variation.
Click to expand...
We can agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
This is not a matter of debate. On one side there are facts and on the other side there is complete misinformation. Science is not a matter of opinion.
 
thelenspainter said:
Zoran K said:
thelenspainter said:
Zoran K said:
Lab results are for reference. Since every shooter is unique in his experience, it is therefore not unreasonable to expect that different shooters will have different results.
Click to expand...
Que? We are talking about a silicon-based integrated circuit system here that behaves in a deterministic way. There is absolutely no way 'different shooters' have any bearing on the result. This is not like lenses where there is sample variation.
Click to expand...
We can agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
This is not a matter of debate. On one side there are facts and on the other side there is complete misinformation. Science is not a matter of opinion.
Click to expand...
Science evolution is made up, among other things, of different opinions that lead to results. Misinformation is thinking that photography is only science and technique.
--

Entrada destacada en LensCulture < Ramon Vaquero - Fotografia

Ramon Vaquero - Fotografia
www.ramonvaquero.com www.ramonvaquero.com
 
R Vaquero said:
Ramon Vaquero said:
Zoran K said:
thelenspainter said:
Zoran K said:
Lab results are for reference. Since every shooter is unique in his experience, it is therefore not unreasonable to expect that different shooters will have different results.
Click to expand...
Que? We are talking about a silicon-based integrated circuit system here that behaves in a deterministic way. There is absolutely no way 'different shooters' have any bearing on the result. This is not like lenses where there is sample variation.
Click to expand...
We can agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
This is not a matter of debate. On one side there are facts and on the other side there is complete misinformation. Science is not a matter of opinion.
Click to expand...
Science evolution is made up, among other things, of different opinions that lead to results. Misinformation is thinking that photography is only science and technique.
--
http://www.ramonvaquero.com/en/
Click to expand...
Oh dear, we've well and truly left the surface of the planet and are now cruising the blissful skies of conjecture and opinion. Come back to me when you've done some reading about the scientific method. Until then, count me out!
 
Last edited:
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