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!

D90 Hi ISO vs. D200 Hi ISO PART 2 REVISED

Discussion in 'Nikon DX DSLR Forum' started by timkoo, Sep 12, 2008.

  1. timkoo

    timkoo

    304
    Oct 9, 2007
    Chicago
    Performed test again in M with identical shutter speeds and similar WB set via Kelvin (5600K D200, 5560K D90)
    Shot with 50mm f/1.8D @ 2.2

    Just shot in JPEG this time so I could avoid the raw conversion (another variable because I used LR for D200 and ViewNX for the D90)

    In camera NR turned off and JPEG mode set to "Standard/Normal"

    Links to full-res are available below each picture

    D90 @ ISO 800 1/50
    [​IMG]
    http://timkoo.smugmug.com/photos/371072431_KEvhm-O.jpg

    D200 @ ISO 800 1/50
    [​IMG]
    http://timkoo.smugmug.com/photos/371072637_wJZLQ-O.jpg

    D90 @ ISO 1600 1/100
    [​IMG]
    http://timkoo.smugmug.com/photos/371072439_NwpaK-O.jpg

    CROP
    [​IMG]
    http://timkoo.smugmug.com/photos/371076758_u4Ea7-O.jpg

    D200 @ ISO 1600 1/100
    [​IMG]
    http://timkoo.smugmug.com/photos/371072670_mBAYf-O.jpg

    CROP
    [​IMG]
    http://timkoo.smugmug.com/photos/371076712_sXR9d-O.jpg

    D90 @ ISO 3200 1/200
    [​IMG]
    http://timkoo.smugmug.com/photos/371072573_NzdgJ-O.jpg

    CROP
    [​IMG]
    http://timkoo.smugmug.com/photos/371076753_UQsHk-O.jpg

    D200 @ ISO 3200 1/200
    [​IMG]
    http://timkoo.smugmug.com/photos/371072744_SQUs2-O.jpg

    CROP
    [​IMG]
    http://timkoo.smugmug.com/photos/371076710_XQcYo-O.jpg

    D90 @ ISO 6400 1/400
    [​IMG]
    http://timkoo.smugmug.com/photos/371072538_EibPp-O.jpg
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 12, 2008
  2. Johnny Yuma

    Johnny Yuma

    372
    Jun 27, 2007
    SE MI
    You used a different shutter speed.


    Referring to original post.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 12, 2008
  3. Johnny Yuma

    Johnny Yuma

    372
    Jun 27, 2007
    SE MI
    Removed by J_Y after revision.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 12, 2008
  4. vinman

    vinman

    Nov 15, 2006
    Upstate SC

    You ARE just kidding when noting the 1/50 vs 1/60 shutter speed, right? Same ISO, same aperture. Shutter speed wouldn't make any difference in noise with shots like this - especially with only 1/10 second difference!
     
  5. The shutter speed does make a difference, as the D200 image is slightly underexposed. Underexposure makes noise more evident.

    Tim is doing us a great service here by doing these tests and posting the results. Dare we ask for one more test with both cameras in "M" mode and shutter speed and aperture set the same?

    It is interesting that this example confirms your earlier one that the D90 seems to be getting the exposure more accurately.
     
  6. Something is bonkers with your test, Tim. The exposure values and white balances differ dramatically. This wasn't the case in Part 1. I think your RAW conversion software may have retained some of the cameras settings, which differed from the d200 to the d90.
     
  7. timkoo

    timkoo

    304
    Oct 9, 2007
    Chicago
    Will retest

    Setting White Bal via Kelvin and in Manual using the same shutter speeds
    I simply used aperture to see how the D90 matrix meter would do
    seems to do better than the D200

    Will retest and post in a bit
     
  8. MikeG76

    MikeG76

    950
    Jun 11, 2008
    Middletown, NY
    Thanks again for this service Tim. One question though, which white balance would you say is more accurate?
     
  9. timkoo

    timkoo

    304
    Oct 9, 2007
    Chicago
    As I noted in the first post, the D200 was left on Auto WB (forgot to change)
    and the D90 was set on Kelvin at ~5600K)

    Uploading the results of the new test now
     
  10. Make sure to check the exposure compensation settings, too.
     
  11. ...shouldn't be active in "M" mode.
     
  12. True, unless he's in auto iso mode.
     
  13. MikeG76

    MikeG76

    950
    Jun 11, 2008
    Middletown, NY
    Sorry, what I mean is, when WB is set to auto on both, which produces the closer image to what your eyes see. Granted, it can be corrected easy enough in post, I'm just trying to cut down my post time.
     
  14. timkoo

    timkoo

    304
    Oct 9, 2007
    Chicago
    EV were both set to 0... Only difference it'd make in M mode is that the needle would be +/- a stop or so.

    No auto ISO here.....heck, we're testing ISO :) 

    BTW, New test was posted above, just scrapped the old one entirely
     
  15. Again, kudos to Tim for undertaking this comparison and posting the results for all to see. I know how difficult it is to control all the variables in tests like this.

    I studied the most recently posted images at iso1600, as I don't think I would ever consider going beyond that. Again, there are subtle differences in exposure, probably due to changes in ambient light, and both are about 1/3-stop underexposed.

    After downloading the files and adjusting them in Capture NX2 so that both have identical right endpoints on the RGB histograms, I find very, very little difference between the D200 and D90 images. Thus if I am going to seriously consider a D90, it will have to be for reasons other than high-iso.

    But there are quite a few of those other reasons! :wink:
     
  16. thrdprophet

    thrdprophet

    684
    May 13, 2007
    Modesto, CA
    Why is there even a test...? The D90 is clearly better at high ISO than the almost 4 year old D200... It is like telling us how bad Nikon was in high ISO's in the early to mid 00's.
     
  17. Did you bother to look at Tim's pictures? I don't see any significant difference between D200 and D90 at iso1600.

    BTW, the D200 was announced in October, 2005. That's three years by my mathematics.
     
  18. MikeG76

    MikeG76

    950
    Jun 11, 2008
    Middletown, NY
    I agree. These examples point towards the lower noise capability being more of a function of software than the sensor at ISO's of 1600 or less. For those of us that normally don't need higher ISO's, the ISO performance is not a compelling sell.
     
  19. timkoo

    timkoo

    304
    Oct 9, 2007
    Chicago
    These pictures are just here for comparison not to refute Nikon's claim that Hi ISO would be better.

    IMO ISO 1600 is cleaner on the D90 and would probably shine with NR on and a bit of post. I had a hard time shooting with my D200 at ISO 1600 and tried to avoid it. I was typically shooting in dimly lit gyms and auditoriums (sports and church services) where a fast shutter speed was necessary. I guess the true test would be if I can shoot in this venues without worries of noise with the D90.

    Plus, the video mode's pretty cool too :) 
     
  20. thrdprophet

    thrdprophet

    684
    May 13, 2007
    Modesto, CA
    I did look at the pics everyone of them, sorry if I can tell the difference between the two greatly, YMMV.

    3 years is correct, I know it was announced in 10/05 I just said 4 because it feels more like 4 years old and in terms of digital years it would be more like 27 years old, but that doesn't mean anything.
     
  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.