D7000 Ugly Noise

Joined
Oct 11, 2007
Messages
2,483
Location
Missouri
Man....lately, I have been regretting moving from the D90 to the D7000. When shooting stuff at high ISO (people up to 3200 or even 6400), I feel the camera is a dream. However at low iso....bleh....just not loving my stuff as much as I used to....especially my macro.

1st...sharpness....don't really know what to say. I shoot my macro's usually in the range of ISO 100-200, f/11-13, 1/160 - 1/200 ss, with flash for main lighting....doing this makes the flash freeze the motion blur I might get from handholding. Even still....shots don't seem as sharp as my D90.

2nd...low iso noise....it's just....bad. Even at base ISO's I'm getting some noise....I can handle noise, but it is a really ugly noise. I've included a sample below...but it's a nasty green color in the blurred sections with ugly noise. Don't know how else to explain...look for yourself.

3rd...settings. With the D90 I could shoot with f/11-f/13, ISO 200, 1/200th ss. I would always have my flash at 1/4 + 0.3 to 1/4 + 0.7 to get proper exposure/lighting. Using literally, the same exact settings with the D7000 and I'm needing more than 1/2 power....stuck shooting TTL since my SB-600 won't let me increment between 1/2 and full power.


Any help/tips, etc....would be greatly appreciated and curious if any others have had similar issues to any of mine.

D7000, f/11, 1/160th, ISO 100, Flash fired. Notice the ugly colors in the legs...especially the front left leg.
p1550343276-5.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
4,458
Location
San Jose, California
I don't think that's sensor noise. Those spider legs are probably semi transparent, and with your flash lighting, you're just seeing the liquid inside those legs, which looks extra ugly since its somewhat out of focus. If it were noise coming from the sensor I think it would not be restricted to the legs in the image.

As for your flash power, these cameras have different base ISO. You're writing in your post that you're shooting at base ISO, and the EXIF for your sample image indeed shows that ISO 100 for the D7000. You're also writing that you shot the D90 at its base ISO of 200, and use the exact same settings for the D7000? Perhaps you meant ISO 100, and then of course you need more flash power. But in any case, the D7000 has very little noise even at ISO 200, so I think you can just bump it up there so you can get work in your usual flash settings. I doubt you'll see the difference in the image between ISO 100 and 200.
 
Joined
Oct 11, 2007
Messages
2,483
Location
Missouri
This was shot at ISO 100 but what I was saying is that shooting the D7000 with ISO 200, f/13, 1/200th requires more flash power than shooting the D90 with ISO 200, f/13, 1/200th. With those settings on the D90 I would shoot with flash power about 1/4 + 0.3 to 1/4 + 0.7. With my D7000 I am at 1/2 flash power and not quite getting enough...a pain since my SB-600 doesn't allow increments between 1/2 and full power (which I find very odd).
 
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
4,458
Location
San Jose, California
This was shot at ISO 100 but what I was saying is that shooting the D7000 with ISO 200, f/13, 1/200th requires more flash power than shooting the D90 with ISO 200, f/13, 1/200th. With those settings on the D90 I would shoot with flash power about 1/4 + 0.3 to 1/4 + 0.7. With my D7000 I am at 1/2 flash power and not quite getting enough...a pain since my SB-600 doesn't allow increments between 1/2 and full power (which I find very odd).

I see. I've read somewhere (I think at Thom Hogan) that Nikon may be cheating a bit with their ISO values on some camera models, so that could be the case here. But you can probably go a bit higher than ISO 200 to compensate for that.
 
Joined
Jan 23, 2012
Messages
427
Location
Japan
This might not go down so well but I think the more recent CMOS sensors show a bit more noise at lower ISO values than the older CCD ones. I get very clean files off my old 6mp CCD at lower ISO levels (100-400). I did see more noise on the 12mp CMOS and 16mp CMOS at lower ISO.

The advantage at high ISO is obvious though, but hard to compare as it's pretty much CMOS 100% nowadays for APS-C and FF sensors
 
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
524
Location
Minneapolis
Claimed ISO and actual ISO are rarely the same; they aren't the same on the D7000, but they aren't the same on the D90 either, and can vary quite a bit from one camera model to the other. Also, at least per dxomark, the base ISO (100) on the D90 appears to be a pseudo value similar to ISO 200, whereas the two values on the D7000 are very different when measured, leading to a much larger exposure disparity between the two bodies at ISO 100 than at any ISO 200 and above.
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2008
Messages
950
Location
Middletown, NY
This might not go down so well but I think the more recent CMOS sensors show a bit more noise at lower ISO values than the older CCD ones. I get very clean files off my old 6mp CCD at lower ISO levels (100-400). I did see more noise on the 12mp CMOS and 16mp CMOS at lower ISO.

The advantage at high ISO is obvious though, but hard to compare as it's pretty much CMOS 100% nowadays for APS-C and FF sensors

I noticed this as well. I thought I was crazy at first. In his case though, they both use CMOS censors I believe.

Dxomark.com has measured the ISO values which may explain this partly:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Ca...brand)/Nikon/(appareil2)/439|0/(brand2)/Nikon

Click on the measurements tab.
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
382
Location
Tejaz
Haven't experienced this with my D7000 at all, Nate. As your macro work was some of the work that inspired me to get into macro, I'm quite surprised by this. I notice less noise at the base iso with my D7000 than my D90. My D7k handles shadows so much better as well. That's why after I have kids the only reason I'll be upgrading bodies is for a new AF... not because the sensor is failing me.
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
5,331
Location
New Mexico
Nah, I sure don't see any...D7K ISO200 f8 300 f4 w/TC-14E II

D7K_9996_zps71161fbe.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
9,081
Location
Oregon
The D7000 is clean maybe even cleaner than my D7100:

preview
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Onboard flash, ISO 160
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
382
Location
Tejaz
What glass are you using now, Nate? Maybe that has something to do with it. Although the Tamon 90 V2 and the Sigma 150 2.8 non-OS (with or without 1.4x TC) has been serving me well not giving any issues, maybe your glass has developed imprefections?

I will also tell you that the Sigma 105 non-OS does NOT preform as well on the D7k as it did on the D90. Sold it for that reason.
 
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
10,008
Location
Aberdeen, WA USA
What glass are you using now, Nate? Maybe that has something to do with it. Although the Tamon 90 V2 and the Sigma 150 2.8 non-OS (with or without 1.4x TC) has been serving me well not giving any issues, maybe your glass has developed imprefections?

I will also tell you that the Sigma 105 non-OS does NOT preform as well on the D7k as it did on the D90. Sold it for that reason.

That's a good point...

A lens that performs well on one model/brand of camera may not perform as well on another...

Here's a good example of the same lens on two different Nikon APS-C bodies... There are
differences in Vignetting, CA's and sharpness...

Micro Nikkor AF-S DX 85mm f/3.5 G ED VR (On D200)
http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/523-nikkorafsdx85vr?start=1

Micro Nikkor AF-S DX 85mm f/3.5 G ED VR (On D7000)
http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/636-nikkorafsdx85vr?start=1

Just one of the things to consider... :wink:
 
Joined
Oct 11, 2007
Messages
2,483
Location
Missouri
I am using my Tamron 180mm f3.5 macro. I actually have not noticed this problem in a long time and the problem was never exclusive to one lens. I noticed it on occasion with my Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and Sigma 50mm f1.4. I think part of it might have been editing/processing. I have noticed since I have had the D7000 that I have to process photos a lot different than I did with my D90 and I think since I have fine tuned my processing of these files it's gotten a lot better. I'm also using LR5 now (was on LR3 at the time of posting this) and LR5 handles shadows and highlights worlds better than 3 so that might be helping a lot too.
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
10,688
Location
Holyoke, MA USA
Haven't experienced this with my D7000 at all, Nate. As your macro work was some of the work that inspired me to get into macro, I'm quite surprised by this. I notice less noise at the base iso with my D7000 than my D90. My D7k handles shadows so much better as well. That's why after I have kids the only reason I'll be upgrading bodies is for a new AF... not because the sensor is failing me.

Actually, at low iso's the D7000 is the DX noise champ.....better than the D7100. At norm print or screen size I doubt you'd see any difference. I can't speak for the D90, but both are much cleaner than my D300 at iso200.
 

Latest threads

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom