d750 low ISO noise as compared to d7200?

bayareaphoto · Feb 23, 2016

Underexposures happen when shooting action, no matter how hard one tries.

With the d7200 even at low ISO's a 0.33 stop underexposure produces noise in out-of-focus areas, such as the sky. Would the d750 show a significant* improvement in the above scenario?

*in the sense of no longer having to apply noise reduction in RAW post-processing.

scokill · Feb 23, 2016

bayareaphoto said:
Underexposures happen when shooting action, no matter how hard one tries.

With the d7200 even at low ISO's a 0.33 stop underexposure produces noise in out-of-focus areas, such as the sky. Would the d750 show a significant* improvement in the above scenario?

*in the sense of no longer having to apply noise reduction in RAW post-processing.

significant is relative, but you will still have noise with underexposure but it would be less with d750 compared to d7200

bayareaphoto · Feb 23, 2016

Thanks, that's why I have defined 'significant' more specifically: would a 1/3rd stop underexposure on the d750 produce visible noise necessitating noise reduction in post-processing?

bayareaphoto · Feb 23, 2016

I would also qualify that one doesn't need to own the d7200 in order to be able to answer my question, because the question is not posed in relative terms to that camera. A personal experience/ownership of the d750 would suffice.

Dyun27 · Feb 23, 2016

bayareaphoto said:
Thanks, that's why I have defined 'significant' more specifically: would a 1/3rd stop underexposure on the d750 produce visible noise necessitating noise reduction in post-processing?

Can you post a 100% crop example of what too much noise is to you, where you would feel like you need to apply noise reduction? I think everyone has a different tolerance level. I need to see with my own eyes what "significant" means to you.

Obviously the D750 would have less noise at any ISO, I just can't tell without an example whether you would consider that significantly less.

You can play with the studio comparison tool here:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=nikon_d750&attr13_1=nikon_d7200&attr13_2=canon_eos5dmkii&attr13_3=canon_eos5dmkii&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=800&attr16_1=800&attr16_2=800&attr16_3=800&normalization=full&widget=1&x=-0.8920966538483612&y=0.13716557395771176

bayareaphoto · Feb 23, 2016

Thank you, that's a great idea and a valid point. Later in the day (PST timezone) I will post an example of what I consider shadow noise needing post processing.

Horshack · Feb 23, 2016

bayareaphoto said:
Thanks, that's why I have defined 'significant' more specifically: would a 1/3rd stop underexposure on the d750 produce visible noise necessitating noise reduction in post-processing?

The D750 will exhibit about 1 stop less noise than your D7200. If you want to see how that will look, shoot two images on your D7200, one at ISO 100 and another at ISO 200, using 2x the shutter speed on the latter.

bayareaphoto · Feb 23, 2016

I have read about the 1 stop difference before, but that was implicitly for properly exposed frames. Are you saying that this delta is maintained in the underexposed conditions I described in the original post?

Horshack · Feb 23, 2016

bayareaphoto said:
I have read about the 1 stop difference before, but that was implicitly for properly exposed frames. Are you saying that this delta is maintained in the underexposed conditions I described in the original post?

Yes. Noise is a function of exposure and both cameras' noise will scale higher equally with a lower exposure.

bayareaphoto · Feb 23, 2016

Interesting, thank you. I did not know that the noise scaled linearly when proper exposures are deviated from (such as underexposure).

DAVID MANZE · Feb 23, 2016

For what it's worth DXO gives the D7200 noise.... ISO 1333

and the D750 ...........ISO 2956

The D750 has about I.25 stops less noise than the D7200, which makes sense as the sensor has 2.25x the surface area......a crop factor of 1.5 squared!

Dave's clichés

Horshack · Feb 23, 2016

DAVID MANZE said:
For what it's worth DXO gives the D7200 noise.... ISO 1333

and the D750 ...........ISO 2956

The D750 has about I.25 stops less noise than the D7200, which makes sense as the sensor has 2.25x the surface area......a crop factor of 1.5 squared!

Dave's clichés

That figure is based on a composite of metrics, all at higher ISO. In the type of low ISO noise the OP is referring to, DxO measured the D750 at about 7/8 stop better than the D7200.

rhlpetrus · Feb 23, 2016

bayareaphoto said:
Interesting, thank you. I did not know that the noise scaled linearly when proper exposures are deviated from (such as underexposure).

It depends on sensor/ADC characteristics, but D750 and D7200 use similr technologies, both show a linear behavior as ISO goes up, thus this tesult. When comparing D4s to D7200, then one cannot use such a test.

bayareaphoto · Feb 23, 2016

Following up on your suggestion to post a sample.

Here's an example of a 1/3rd of a stop underexposed background (blue). Shot on the d7200 at ISO500. 100% unresized crop, converted from RAW, no adjustments. I find this level of noise needing NR in post-processing.

Dyun27 · Feb 23, 2016

bayareaphoto said:
Following up on your suggestion to post a sample.

Here's an example of a 1/3rd of a stop underexposed background (blue). Shot on the d7200 at ISO500. 100% unresized crop, converted from RAW, no adjustments. I find this level of noise needing NR in post-processing.

To see what the D750 would look like at ISO 500, shoot your D7200 with the same settings, lens and subject at ISO 250. That's the amount of noise you can expect from the D750 at ISO 500 under these same conditions. It would be 1 stop better.

For example here's a 100% crop from a D7200 and D750 at ISO 400:

Here's the same crop, except now the D7200 is still 400 and the D750 is at ISO 800:

--

Dream Source Studio

Explore Dream Source Studio’s 2,110 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

500px

500px.com

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------

bayareaphoto · Feb 23, 2016

This is impressive. Thank you very much. I might just pick up the d750.

Ironically, as I write this someone in the Nikon DX forum is claiming that: "The D7200 is an amazingly good camera I got a refurb for $899 a month or two ago to compliment my D750... i can't tell any difference in image quality." (http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57329514 ).

Having looked at the dpreview's studio shots you provided, I find that person's claim hard to believe.

Dyun27 · Feb 23, 2016

bayareaphoto said:
This is impressive. Thank you very much. I might just pick up the d750.

Ironically, as I write this someone in the Nikon DX forum is claiming that: "The D7200 is an amazingly good camera I got a refurb for $899 a month or two ago to compliment my D750... i can't tell any difference in image quality." (http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57329514 ).

Having looked at the dpreview's studio shots you provided, I find that person's claim hard to believe.

I saw that.

Pixel-peeping and shooting at higher ISO, you'll see a difference. Someone else shooting JPEGs with noise reduction applied and never looking too closely (for example) might not really care about the small difference.

It's all about how much perfection you're looking for. Noise at lower ISO is why I moved up to full frame. I frequently shoot at ISO 400 to 800 in daylight and I needed a camera that wouldn't ruin fine details with noise. The D600/D610/D750 did that for me.

bayareaphoto · Feb 23, 2016

Dyun27 said:
Noise at lower ISO is why I moved up to full frame. I frequently shoot at ISO 400 to 800 in daylight and I needed a camera that wouldn't ruin fine details with noise. The D600/D610/D750 did that for me.

That's exactly what is important for me too - low ISO noise makes itself very apparent in BIF and wildlife shooting. Especially so in the sky and shadows, and especially when pulling underexposed images. For me this is more important than high ISO noise.

ASR45 · Feb 23, 2016

scokill said:
bayareaphoto said:

Underexposures happen when shooting action, no matter how hard one tries.

With the d7200 even at low ISO's a 0.33 stop underexposure produces noise in out-of-focus areas, such as the sky. Would the d750 show a significant* improvement in the above scenario?

*in the sense of no longer having to apply noise reduction in RAW post-processing.

Click to expand...

significant is relative, but you will still have noise with underexposure but it would be less with d750 compared to d7200

Agreed, having had the D7200 the D750 is a lot better at handling noise.

calson · Feb 25, 2016

Owning both cameras the difference in noise level is trivial and more a function of the subject or scene and the correctness of the exposure. Not at that surprising as the D7200 is much like the D810 in pixel density and not too many people complain about noise with the D810.

d750 low ISO noise as compared to d7200?

Well-known member

Veteran Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts