Noisy D7100 images

[Quiet Eye]

I recently added a d7100 body to my d700, and in comparison I am finding what I consider excessive noise in the images. Is anyone else finding this to be a problem.

 

[photolizard]

It has twice the pixels in less real estate. So, yes, it does have more noise than the D700. But, the noise is most noticeable at 100% and it cleans up quite nicely in LR4 up to ISO 800, OK at ISO 1600. Jpegs out of the camera appear to be useable at slightly higher ISOs. The D7100 is NOT a lowlight, high ISO camera. High ISO can be used in good light for higher shutter speeds, though.

 

[Retief]

In general I agree with the Lizard, but I have zero issues up to ISO 3200, although I always prefer to stay under 2000.

Post an image, show us what you mean.

 

[West]

No worries here. This one's at ISO-3600

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

Soweto Kinch (8) by PR - IMAGES, on Flickr

 

[Retief]

UPDATE: What a Bozo I am. I really shoudl read more carefully, as I thought I was responding to the OP.

Oops, sorry.

Thanks.

You are at ISO 3600, was this shot B&W or converted? If converted, how? I am guessing you are concerned with the curtains behind the performer? This is certainly easily cleaned up, what other processing did you do? Since I can't see any EXIF exposure info, I am going to assume that you were not underexposed and then trying to pull up the exposure?

I can certainly tell you that when I compare to my D800, the D7100 is a stop to a stop and a half "worse", which still makes it pretty darned good I think.

 

[West]

Flickr likes to strip exif.
Converted to BW through paint program, with no PP other than crop.

A - F8
1/250
135 mm
WB=auto

Pretty much ALL camera with me catching the moment. Using a $400 lens

 

[Panther]

Flickr likes to strip exif.

Here is the EXIF data on that B&W shot
-> http://www.flickr.com/photos/westcoast_1/9118131130/meta/

 

[Randy]

I need to see an image that hasn't had NR SW applied to it and the exif

I have not seen anything unusual, even at 3200
But I never look at 100%

 

[MikeG76]

The D7100 will be more noisey in the shadows than the D700 is, simply because of the size of the photosites a full frame sensor has. Do some night time long exposures and its painfully obvious. The D7100 and D700 may look pretty similar at comparable ISO's when it comes to shooting in good light.

 

[DolbyDan]

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

DSC_2170 by Daniel Mendez Photography, on Flickr

ISO6400

 

[Mr Baz]

Noise is less visible in print, for fun I added tons of noise to an image I printed once..yet it wasn't really that noisy in print (and I mean a lot of noise added)

 

[Steiner]

I think, that noise is often OK in B & W, but not in color pictures.

 

[Steiner]

The D7100 will be more noisey in the shadows than the D700 is, simply because of the size of the photosites a full frame sensor has. Do some night time long exposures and its painfully obvious. The D7100 and D700 may look pretty similar at comparable ISO's when it comes to shooting in good light.

"Do some night time long exposures and its painfully obvious."


Mike, are you sure, have you testet it with D7100 ? ? I have just ordered D7100 one hour ago, and I will use it for long exposures at iso 100 at night, and I mailed Thom Hogan exactly about this question,

....and that would not be the problem, he wrote ( a long scientific explanation - Nikon D7100 vs. D600), of course it could show up depended about how long the exposure was, but we were talking l o n g exposures), but I could get banding easier - with long exposures - than if I bought a D600.

Of course turn OFF ADL, and shoot RAW/NEF


Thanks


----

 

[Tigris]

I find posts like this quite absurd. Underexpose at almost any ISO above say 500 or even less and you're gonna find noise in dark areas. This is a problem with not understanding the very basics of how to properly expose an image, nothing to do with the camera.

 

[Steiner]

I find posts like this quite absurd. Underexpose at almost any ISO above say 500 or even less and you're gonna find noise in dark areas. This is a problem with not understanding the very basics of how to properly expose an image, nothing to do with the camera.

What post are you referring to ?

...............The last post is about iso 100.

But I agree, that you will find noise above iso 400 if you look for it.

 

[Tigris]

The original post. No details, no sample images, no information. Just "noisy images" being blamed on a perfectly capable camera.

 

[Steiner]

The original post. No details, no sample images, no information. Just "noisy images" being blamed on a perfectly capable camera.

Yes, it would be fine to see some pictures.

I am not afraid of higher "iso-noise" in this camera= Just ordered it.

--

I hope MikeG76 will chime in for my question (iso 100 and long exposures at night, that means a lot more for me - I was in doubt about D600 vs. D7100 for this kind of shooting, but not after writing with Thom Hogan, see my post).

By the way: He will make a review about the D7100 soon = I like his tests and reviews = Always balanced and he knows what he is talking about.

 

[MikeG76]

Yes, it would be fine to see some pictures.

I am not afraid of higher "iso-noise" in this camera= Just ordered it.

--

I hope MikeG76 will chime in for my question (iso 100 and long exposures at night, that means a lot more for me - I was in doubt about D600 vs. D7100 for this kind of shooting, but not after writing with Thom Hogan, see my post).

How long of an exposure are you talking about? I was mainly doing 3200 and 6400 ISO 20s or so captures. I haven't done any with star trails in years. I will test and post the results if you like.

 

[Steiner]

How long of an exposure are you talking about? I was mainly doing 3200 and 6400 ISO 20s or so captures. I haven't done any with star trails in years. I will test and post the results if you like.

Thank you very much for your offer, Mike, but let me try to be clear

I was torn betw. D600 and D7100 because I knew, that D600 is better in the iso-performance- department (the photons can gather more light), but I did not know if it also was better in the low iso-performance, when shooting long exposures at iso 100.

Then I asked Thom Hogan, and his answer was as mentioned shortly, but it is complicated to give a clear answer

When you wrote what you wrote, I was afraid that I had taken the wrong descision, and I was in a hurry, because the place I buy my gear (Internet) there is a man, employee, who always test for me, what I buy, before he send it, and he has done that for me the last 5 years, but he is fired by the owners from the 31. July because of higher competition because Nikon and as I understand also Canon has changed their system about net-sellers and real stores.

I will not shoot star trails but long exposures at iso 100 - do not know how long, mostly minutes, not hours, certainly not as long as star trails.

When I read what you write here I think I am OK, but you are very welcome to try it out - FF vs. APS-C for... let us say 3-4 minutes.

I would say: NR off, ADL off, but perhaps long exposure NR on ? (even it doubles the time), do you not agree ?
.... and because he will test it for me (AF OK, no black pixels, none dust or oil-particles and generel OK), it will take about a week - perhaps more, before I get it, because he does it, when he has some spare time,

THANKS

 

[Pa]

I recently added a d7100 body to my d700, and in comparison I am finding what I consider excessive noise in the images. Is anyone else finding this to be a problem.

Worth reading:

Contrary to conventional wisdom, higher resolution actually compensates for noise