Official Nikon images from D3

[Steve Saunders]

The Nikon Watch site has some of the sample images that Nikon supplied. The ISO6400 shot of the band guy is especially impressive, as is the ISO3200 of the blonde girl;

http://nikonwatch.com/

I believe that Nikon have actually set a very high barrier now in terms of digital image quality.

[Joel Schochet]

Steve,

The ISO 3200 & 6400 shots are IMHO awesome! I've seen 1DIII images at 3200 which were wonderful, as well. I'm glad that Nikon shooters FINALLY get good high ISO performance.

I know this doesn't say anything about the noise from D300, but I hope I can get good ISO 3200 photos from it. It will make shooting wedding a lot easier by using the flash a lot less.

Of course, without the flash, I have to remember to bring my WhiBal! ;~)

Joel

[ron_hiner]

Whoa! -- I thought I was the only one around here that has heard of these 'Nikon' cameras.
Much to my surprise, there is a section for us misfits!

I'm torn between D3 and D300.

My dream camera is a D2x that is smaller and lighter, and produces great high-iso files.

The early word is that we have a winner on both criteria, but it's going to take two camera bodies to do it. (and some serious cash)

My concern with the d3 is that my various 200mm lenses won't be long enough. I came THIS CLOSE to buying a 200 f2 a month ago.... but now I'm thinking the 200-400 is a more versatile choice with a full frame high iso camera. And my concern with the d300 is that it won't a whole lot better than my D2x at high ISOs. Please prove me wrong Nikon!

Ron

[Steve Saunders]

High ISO shots from the D300 are not available yet, so I think that the D300 won't be as stunningly clean as the D3 in that area.

[Ben Rubinstein]

The iso 3200 image is horribly smoothened and plasticy, the 6400 is far better, not sure why.

[nyschulte]

I can see the interest in high ISO performance, but my concern is the 200 iso native sensitivity in Studio use. With the D200's ISO 100 i am already run some strobes at the minimum power level.

Until a review clarifies this issue i do not think that the D300 will be a go for me.

Nicolas

[Asher Kelman]

The iso 3200 image is horribly smoothened and plasticy, the 6400 is far better, not sure why.Hi Ben, are you referring to the RAW file or the camera generated JPG? Also what is the ISO limit at which the image is still good and shows no plastic-look degradation?

Asher

[Steve Saunders]

The iso 3200 image is horribly smoothened and plasticy, the 6400 is far better, not sure why.

That's right Ben. I thought it was just me, glad to see I'm not alone in thinking the ISO6400 shot is better.

[Ben Rubinstein]

I'm talking about the jpg files provided by Nikon as referrenced above Asher. The smearing in the iso 3200 file is typical nikon noise reduction as seen with the D200 (albeit at far smaller iso's!) the 6400 seems to be far better with noise reduction but no smearing. It would seem to me that a model with smooth skin and makeup is inviting the kind of smoothing seen here, the camera is seeing very litte detail and cannot diffrentiate between noise and obvious detail. The iso 6400 image has a far more rugged facial texture with loads of detail such as stubble, big pores etc and therefore the camera has been able to see the detail to leave in. If they were applying the lesser reduction to all iso's then they would be fine, the model in the 3200 image is ruined by that horrible plasticky effect. RAW anyone?

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

RAW anyone?

This article (http://kammagamma.com/articles/canon-eos-1d-mark-iii-image-quality-redefined.php) compares the similar (but different) approaches between the 'new generation' of noise reduction algorithms, and the differences between Raw and JPEG processing, by Nikon and Canon.

Bart

[Steve Saunders]

The latest D3 and D300 sample images are available from www.nikonwatch.com and interestingly the D3 uses NO on-chip noise reduction at all.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

... and interestingly the D3 uses NO on-chip noise reduction at all.

How did you arrive at that conclusion?

Bart

[Steve Saunders]

It's on the Nikon Watch site at www.nikonwatch.com

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

It's on the Nikon Watch site at www.nikonwatch.com

I looked at that link when you posted it earlier, but I couldn't find much more than some resulting images. I thought there was some kind of analysis to support the claim, but I couldn't find it.

Bart

[Steve Saunders]

I'll try and find where I read it later. So much info coming in that it's hard to remember where it all came from!

[Steve Saunders]

Actually Bart I just remembered it was DRP that I read this on, in this thread;

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=24898378

Note about half-way down the post where it says;

"According to Nikon engineer, there's NO on-chip noise reduction at all."

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Actually Bart I just remembered it was DRP that I read this on, in this thread;

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=24898378

Note about half-way down the post where it says;

"According to Nikon engineer, there's NO on-chip noise reduction at all."

Thanks, but I doubt that Nikon's, or Canon's or any other's, engineers are at liberty to make such statements in public. So we'll have to wait for some Raw files to dissect. We'll get to the truth, it just takes some patience. You can also bet on it that the Astrophotography buffs will be looking at these new generation camera outputs, as they did with earlier models.

These are great times.

Bart