1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

D2X Test_ Low Light 1600 ISO

Discussion in 'Photojournalism, Candids and Street Photography' started by craigcappy, Aug 7, 2005.

  1. I wanted to test a D2X under low light conditions. I have debated for months on whether I should buy a D2HS or a D2X. I bought the D2X.

    The following football photos where shot with a Nikkor 200mm f/2G IF-ED AF-S VR lens. NR was on. I did not run these photos thru Neat Image. All shots where hand held. Exposure Time 1/400 of a second.

    These shots where taken at the most poorly lite football field in the county.

    What are your thoughts?


    This camera is much different than the D1X. Camera shake is unforgiving. The new sensor responses much diffrently than the D1X. I believe with much practice, I can get useful photos and not have to buy a D2Hs.
  2. Sorry there is no link to the pictures posted! :?
  3. Mike,

    I have them up now.....sorry!
  4. Nice jopb wow i am enviuos of the lens, sow hat apeture ere these shot at? They seem very clean indeed what level of NR in cam did you use.
  5. I shot these photos @2.0 aperture, I had NR at high. I will set it next time at Normal. Photo # 3 was not sharp, I need to see if shooting at normal corrects this. I will try to set camera sharping up a level or two and experiment. Numerous high action shots where to soft and I discarded them. I did have on VR turn on the lens with these shots. I will try it turned off. I more than likely will have to mono with this combo at night. I have alot of work ahead of me to find the perfect balance.
  6. Hi Craig

    Can you post a 1:1 crop that shows both the subject and some OOF background.

    Much appreciated.
  7. Rory,

    I failed to mention that I shot all these photographs using the High Speed crop mode.

    Here is a 1:1 shot:

  8. eng45ine


    May 11, 2005
    Chicago, IL
    Hey Craig,

    Between the qualities of the X and the f/2.0 lens, you certainly overcame the inadequate lighting of the football field. Being able to keep the exposure time a 1/400 sec. is great to be able to avoid blur due to movement. I like my H but I am not looing forward to shooting Friday night football with it. I need to buy a Noise Ninja plug-in for the PSE to deal with the anticipated digital noise issues.
  9. Frank,

    I agree, it is a nightmare shooting any night HS game. You spend more time removing noise than shooting! Work flow is a nightmare. The number of times that you have to touch a photograph to get something that is " semi-professional" is mind boggling.

    My only suggestion for what its worth is: Reduce the size of the photograph. I normally have Image Quality at Fine or Normal, and Image Size set at Small 1600X1064. I personally find it easier to get the noise out of a smaller image. The other option is to shoot your normal way and crop the photo before you remove the noise or sharpen in PS. This the way that I do it. You or others may have another technique that I would love to hear about.
  10. eng45ine


    May 11, 2005
    Chicago, IL
    Hey Craig,

    Quite honestly, digital imaging is so new to me. Something tells me that if I ever receive some solid training on how to use my camera options better and learn some good fundimentals on PSE...I could be doing a much better job with my photography. I see so many images posted on the Cafe that have that "POP"...and my images just lay there. That is why I spend so much time browsing through the Cafe...there is so much to learn here. I hope to take a PS course through the local Jr. college and get those fundimentals down...as far as camera options, I continue to read Thom Hogan's e-book and ask questions to anyone that can give me a good answer.
  11. Thanks - that is pretty good for ISO 1600. You can see the "plastic" look resulting from the NR at this magnification, but the saturation is good. I bet you can hardly notice it in a 8x10 print. I doubt I could do this well which I suspect is the quality of your lens!
  12. biggstr6


    Apr 26, 2005
    I dont know alot about digital workflow ,but in the 100% crop the noise reduction is starting to give that plasticy look, Maybe normal noise reduction will work better. Of course if you dont need a big photo may work fine like it is.
  13. twig


    May 23, 2005
    those images are amazing for a d2x at iso 1600
  14. Twig

    I agree. I will not be able to use the camera this weekend due to the fact that I will be out of town.

    I am biting at the bit to use this camera under the same conditions.

    There was a great article that I read regarding the D2X Multi-CAM 2000 Autofocus. Here is the link:

    I am looking foward using some of the settings that Darrell Young suggests.
  15. Steve S

    Steve S

    Feb 1, 2005
    SE Florida
    Seems I remember Carol S saying she turned in-NR off,

    Like you said these aren't bad, but you'll need to fine tune those NR settings. There's no apparent noise, but do lack in sharpness. I have to wonder if the evidence of a small amt of digital noise would even be noticable in prints?

    Granted my memory's not what it used to be, but it seens I remember Carol Steele saying she kept the in-cam NR off, then set it to a less than the prescribed Low amt in NC4 in post. This could be applied to all of the photos in a batch. Will probably need to get that monster 200 f2 on a mono too. Keep us posted with your continuing progress.
  16. JeffKohn


    Apr 21, 2005
    Houston, TX
    Does the in-camera high-ISO NR affect NEF's or is it just a tag for NC to use?
  17. I have not as of yet shot any photographs in NEF in any low light situation using a D2X. I can not give you and honest answer.
  18. twig


    May 23, 2005
    Ihave see nthat article, and I appreciate his work that went into it. A lot of the material is familiar as Thom Hogan goes through things pretty well in his books.

    Honestly, for the sports I have done lately (baseball and basketball) I find singel area AF works best because I am always shooting at F/2.8 and I have the proper lenses for very tight shots, so I know where the person's head is and I don;t want the dynamic AF to focus on a foot or swinging bat instead. I hope to find someone who can in person show me the benefits of the dynamic modes, but I have only used them with success for small critters like tiny birds darting around. I am sure with time I will find better applciations for them.
  19. Wilk


    Jul 28, 2005
    Hey Frank....

    Just something to consider... I've been using the NC NR pallet and I'm liking the results better than I'm getting from ninja. They seem to come out a lot sharper - the noise isn't quite as well eliminated as nn, but I think it's a great trade off.

    I know there are quite a few well founded complaints with respect to NC's speed using this pallet, but here's what I've found. Before applying the filter, I decide what level I'm going to use - I've done quite a few and end up being happy more times than not by just taking the ISO of the file, dropping the last digit and putting that in as a value for the level of noise reduction, and if the grain is really bad, walk the sharpness setting back to as low as 5, but for almost all shots set that at 8. The trick is, to keep the image view to "full image" [CTRL+0 (zero)]. If you keep it at that view, NC should work lickety split still. It's when you zoom into anything other than full view that NC slows to a virtual crawl, even on my dual xeon.

    Just some food for thought, but I've found nn almost always makes the photo far less sharp than I want it to be, as is the case with most noise reduction plugs.

    Just something to consider.
  20. Wilk


    Jul 28, 2005
    Most of the early gearhead conclusions are you're much better off not using in cam NR and doing NR in post processing. I have yet to shoot H1 or 2, but shoot auto ISO hand held at night quite a lot. As I said in an earlier thread, I used noise ninja, but I'm sold on the noise reduction capabilities in NC 4.3... MUCH improved in this iteration.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.