D700 higher ISO shots from showroom...

Discussion in 'Nikon FX DSLR' started by Sandro Bravo, Jul 2, 2008.

  1. Sandro Bravo

    Sandro Bravo

    Nov 18, 2005
    Portugal
  2. vinman

    vinman

    Nov 15, 2006
    Upstate SC
    I looked at the high res shots. Looking at the last one I was thinking, "not bad for 1800". "Looks like 640-800 on my D200"...

    THEN I REALIZED I WAS LOOKING AT ISO 3600!!! :biggrin::eek: :biggrin:

    I SO hope my dealer can get me one sooner than later. This is going to totally change how I shoot architecture! :26:
     
  3. PeterRH

    PeterRH Guest

    Even if I were not on the hunt for an FX body, these high-ISO shots for my event assignments would have me convinced anyway.

    I was able to hold off on the D3.....don't think I stand any chance of that with the D700.
     
  4. Nuteshack

    Nuteshack Guest

    these files are something else ..that thing (3600iso file) was clipped pretty bad (ETTL). and after messing with it in pse (levels, seriously jacked contrast, usm etc) i was still amazed at the lack of noise....incredibly flexible file -> the prints from these d3/700's have to be awesome!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 2, 2008
  5. Thanks for posting this, Sandro. Iso 800 is as clean as a whistle!
     
  6. Triggaaar

    Triggaaar

    Jun 15, 2008
    England
    This seems like a sensible place to ask, rather than start a new thread:
    How many ISO stops better, is the D3 (D700) than the D300? (I'm thinking D3 6400, D300 1600/3200)
    About 1.5, or is it clearly 2 stops better?
     
  7. PWPhoto

    PWPhoto

    581
    Jul 21, 2006
    San Diego
    id say 2 stops.
     
  8. davewolfs

    davewolfs

    633
    May 23, 2006
    At least.
     
  9. Triggaaar

    Triggaaar

    Jun 15, 2008
    England
    Mmm, luuuust! 2 stops could be enough for me to pay the extra.

    I had a look at the dpreview of the D3, which compared high ISO shots to the D300 (amongst others), but the in camera noise reduction made it difficult to know how much there was in it:
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3/page18.asp
    Have a look at the D3 & D300 iso 1600 and 3200 - I'm not sure if it's just down to noise reduction, the grey looks decent on the D300. The black is a little better on the D3, and by iso 6400 the black is miles better. I assume the D300 has sacrificed more detail to keep the noise down (both were set to normal high iso NR), which you can see in the royal face, but that's not an easy image to compare as it even looks totally different at iso 200.

    Thanks for the replies - I'm annoyed with the search facility - doing an advanced search for 'ISO' in the title of the D3/D300 forum gets no hits, so I'm going to start a new post there too (feel free to ignore it, it will be the same as this one :) 
     
  10. Randy

    Randy

    May 11, 2006

    at 1200 the d300 starts to mush out some prob from uncontrolable in camera NR
    at 5k the d3 starts to show some grain
    the big diff is shadows...the d3 is amazing when you use d-lighting, there is rarely any noise waiting for you
     
  11. Triggaaar

    Triggaaar

    Jun 15, 2008
    England
    Sorry for the dumb question, is that in camera, or with software? Seems I'd better learn about D lighting.
     
  12. Randy

    Randy

    May 11, 2006
    both
    you can use active d-lighting in camera or d-lighting in PP...
    in CS2 it's called shadows/highlites
     
  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.