-
Please use real names.
Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed
Firstname Lastname
Register
We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know! -
Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!
My corner of the world at ISO 25,600
- Thread starter ron_hiner
- Start date
Here is another one. Hand held. The sky is nearly pitch black now, but the camera sees color where my eyes do not....
1/30 @ 2.8. Iso 26,500. Original file here.
1/30 @ 2.8. Iso 26,500. Original file here.
Colleen Vermillion
pro member
Noise Removal
The high ISO capability of the D3 is nothing short of amazing. We've found that the Noise Ninja we've got in Bibble works well with the high ISO noise and RAW images. If you want to give it a try, we've got a "release candidate" version with D3 support in our Public Testing forum:
http://support.bibblelabs.com/webboard/viewtopic.php?t=9567
The D3 test images have caused a lot of "that was shot at what?!" around here... they are very usable images even at those insane ISOs
-Colleen
(Bibble Labs)
The high ISO capability of the D3 is nothing short of amazing. We've found that the Noise Ninja we've got in Bibble works well with the high ISO noise and RAW images. If you want to give it a try, we've got a "release candidate" version with D3 support in our Public Testing forum:
http://support.bibblelabs.com/webboard/viewtopic.php?t=9567
The D3 test images have caused a lot of "that was shot at what?!" around here... they are very usable images even at those insane ISOs
-Colleen
(Bibble Labs)
Thanks Colleen... I'm going to spend time learning the camera, rather than Bibble... but the originals are there for anyone else to try Bibble RC and repost.
I stand corrected on my message #2. I think the blue sky was caused by the Auto white balance -- it targeted the incandescent lights, and of course, that always causes the sky to go a deeper blue than reality.
Much to learn here.
Ron
I stand corrected on my message #2. I think the blue sky was caused by the Auto white balance -- it targeted the incandescent lights, and of course, that always causes the sky to go a deeper blue than reality.
Much to learn here.
Ron
nicolas claris
OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Hi Ron
interesting for the record, but such 'landscape' shots could be done with a tripod with lower ISO, longer exposure and better IQ… (see here)
It would be very much interesting to see some things/persons in movement shot at high ISO because you would have no other way to catch them…
Then we could see the sharpness/noise/details that the D3 can achieve… nice beast you have anyway!
interesting for the record, but such 'landscape' shots could be done with a tripod with lower ISO, longer exposure and better IQ… (see here)
It would be very much interesting to see some things/persons in movement shot at high ISO because you would have no other way to catch them…
Then we could see the sharpness/noise/details that the D3 can achieve… nice beast you have anyway!
Yes, of course. I'll venture out it the world with this camera, but first I have to charge the battery and read the manual! The first shot there was taken within minutes of the UPS driver's arrival. This landscape is simply the view from my deck. Gotta shoot something.
Ron
Last edited by a moderator:
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Ron,
I'm so impressed, happy for you, happy for Nikon and then also for Fuji if they get to use the same body!
Asher
I'm so impressed, happy for you, happy for Nikon and then also for Fuji if they get to use the same body!
Asher
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Wow...
1/800 F 14.
Straight from camera (D3), shot as JPG, resized by Photomechanic to 600px wide.
You will want to see the ugly full size pic...that's here. But you have to admit that when you downsample you get a usable shot!
Ron
This a wonderful window on the world that is going to be a useful tool. I am not at all concerned by the noise. Used on a tripod and with say 10 shots combined, the noise will go down!
Ron, I'm happy we have you here to bring to us this very important camera. This is so important for us all, as the vigor of each company prevents each competitor from holding back on their advances because there is no competition. Had the D3 been a gift to the Nikon world a year ago, then the Canon 1D Mark III would have been released last year and the 1Ds Mark III perhaps 7 months ago.
We look forward to much from Nikon and thanks for letting us into this important major world with, of course, Zeiss fine lenses to boot!!
I tested a D2H las year and I was blown away! The macro lenses and the flash unit behave like they were born together!
That's from a devoted and pretty darn loyal Canon users! I must have 10 Canon cameras film and digtial combined!
Asher
nicolas claris
OPF Co-founder/Administrator
LOL really ! was exactly the same story 3 days ago when I got my 1Ds3!
Not a really good pic, just a snap, but as you say: "Gotta shoot something."
Have a nice day (and nights!)
Last edited:
Thanks Asher...
I'm looking forward to using this camera for field sports -- I'll be able to use a teleconverter on a cloudy day and still get good shutter speeds. My favorite subject of all to shoot is dancers -- And of course they have lots of movement in low light situations. I'm trying to get a neighbor of mine to do some figure skating shots with me -- terrible light happens in any ice arena that is not lit for the NHL.
This camera opens up new creative possibilities in a way that no other camera I have used has done. Its not so much the obvious area -- low light -- but in normally lit scenes that can have a different perspective with a stopped down lens or a very fast shutter speed.
Ron
I'm looking forward to using this camera for field sports -- I'll be able to use a teleconverter on a cloudy day and still get good shutter speeds. My favorite subject of all to shoot is dancers -- And of course they have lots of movement in low light situations. I'm trying to get a neighbor of mine to do some figure skating shots with me -- terrible light happens in any ice arena that is not lit for the NHL.
This camera opens up new creative possibilities in a way that no other camera I have used has done. Its not so much the obvious area -- low light -- but in normally lit scenes that can have a different perspective with a stopped down lens or a very fast shutter speed.
Ron
Iso 6400 example
The toughest environment I can find close to home is the hallway of the local middle school just before the bell rings. I found some tough guys and had them stand under a florescent light. Auto white balance, ISO 6400. The colors are not bad for auto WB in bad light. They are standing below a small window on a heavy overcast day, so I'm getting a little daylight blended in with florescent light. 1/160 @ f 6.3.
Original here. This, by the way, is not normal attire for middle school in Connecticut... but its pretty close.
Ron
The toughest environment I can find close to home is the hallway of the local middle school just before the bell rings. I found some tough guys and had them stand under a florescent light. Auto white balance, ISO 6400. The colors are not bad for auto WB in bad light. They are standing below a small window on a heavy overcast day, so I'm getting a little daylight blended in with florescent light. 1/160 @ f 6.3.
Original here. This, by the way, is not normal attire for middle school in Connecticut... but its pretty close.
Ron
Joel Schochet
New member
Ron,
Just "Wow!" The D3 certainly shines. I'll have to try some low light, high ISO shots with my new D300, but I'm sure they won't be this good. The only thing I have against the D3 is the size. Once I got my first D200, I forgot about the D2x (which is probably going to end up as a door stop since I have the D300).
Congratulations and enjoy.
Joel
Just "Wow!" The D3 certainly shines. I'll have to try some low light, high ISO shots with my new D300, but I'm sure they won't be this good. The only thing I have against the D3 is the size. Once I got my first D200, I forgot about the D2x (which is probably going to end up as a door stop since I have the D300).
Congratulations and enjoy.
Joel
Edward Bussa
Member
Raw Files
Ron,
I'm excited for you! ISO 25,600 is so sensational!
The thing I am pleased by is the fine, even grain at that ISO. I even started to romanticize the look at 100%... There is no hideous color noise and enough detail there to have a painterly look...
Question: I am a Bibble user and would like to take advantage of the release candidate build Colleen refers to. Would you be willing to make a few raw files available for play?
Again, how exciting and I look forward to hearing and seeing more!
BTW -- The best image comparisons I've found so far are at Imaging Resource. They've got controlled, high-iso studio shots of the Mark III bodies and the D3 for comparison. By my eyes, the D3 has about a one stop high-iso advantage at this point???
Ron,
I'm excited for you! ISO 25,600 is so sensational!
The thing I am pleased by is the fine, even grain at that ISO. I even started to romanticize the look at 100%... There is no hideous color noise and enough detail there to have a painterly look...
Question: I am a Bibble user and would like to take advantage of the release candidate build Colleen refers to. Would you be willing to make a few raw files available for play?
Again, how exciting and I look forward to hearing and seeing more!
BTW -- The best image comparisons I've found so far are at Imaging Resource. They've got controlled, high-iso studio shots of the Mark III bodies and the D3 for comparison. By my eyes, the D3 has about a one stop high-iso advantage at this point???
I agree Ed -- the grain reminds me of when I used to shoot Tri-X and push it a few stops.
I've sent you a PM with links to a couple raw files. I'd be happy to do the same for any interested others.... PM me and I'll send you the links. I just don't need a million people downloading 13mg files from my server today.
Prior to your post, I had not set the camera to save raw files, so I'm interested to see what you get.
Please post your results.
Ron
I've sent you a PM with links to a couple raw files. I'd be happy to do the same for any interested others.... PM me and I'll send you the links. I just don't need a million people downloading 13mg files from my server today.
Prior to your post, I had not set the camera to save raw files, so I'm interested to see what you get.
Please post your results.
Ron
Edward Bussa
Member
thanks much, will do
John Sheehy
New member
The D3 has read noise at the pixel level almost as low as the mk3 cameras at high ISO (and lower than any other Canons), and has significantly less shot noise than the mk3 cameras because it collects a lot more photons. Because of this dual-source nature of noise, you can't simply say that one camera is noisier than another, because one may be noisier in the deepest shadows, while the other is noisier in the midtones. In the case of the D3 vs 1DSmk3 and 1Dmk3, you should expect the D3 to have less noise at the image level in the brighter shadows, midtones, and highlights, while 1DSmk3 should have much better deep shadows, and the 1Dmk3 marginally better deep shadows, especially for stuff like astrophotography, because Canon does not clip its RAW data at or near black; they leave enough of a positive bias in the RAW data that all of the noise, both positive and negative, is equally balanced and preserved near black, and is better for binning and stacking RAW images.
If the question, however, is what gives a more noise-free high ISO image when there aren't deep shadows of interest, then the D3 will give the lowest-noise images.
Uwe Steinmueller
New member
>and then also for Fuji if they get to use the same body!
Fuji normally uses their own sensors.
Uwe
Fuji normally uses their own sensors.
Uwe
Steve Saunders
New member
Nikon have done a great job of making what noise there is actually look like film grain instead of the coloured noise blobs we are used to seeing from previous Nikons. The real world shots I've seen from the D3 (btw I expect to have my D3 tomorrow) look cleaner in all areas (at high ISO) from shadow to highlight than the results from my 1DMkIII which is currently the best high ISO performer from Canon. No doubt about it in my mind, 2007 is the year when Canon and Nikon finally gave us quality pixels instead of just more of them.
Steve Saunders
New member
I'm not sure what two stops faster means when it comes to these levels of sensitivity... The only ISO scale that I have was printed in the late 70's when high film ISO meant 800. The scale just stops at 1200. The web-based calculators I've found don't seem any better.
I can tell you that my D3 shots taken at ISO 6400 at 1/640 at f 2.8 look vastly better than my D2x shots taken at ISO 800 at 1/40 at 2.8 under what I believe is identical light. I don't know if this equates to the same exposure value, but I'm thrilled with the results. In an addition to much better noise characteristics, I get much less motion blur (both from subject and me).
There is a subjective thing going on too... I'm going to have gather my thoughts on that.
Ron
I can tell you that my D3 shots taken at ISO 6400 at 1/640 at f 2.8 look vastly better than my D2x shots taken at ISO 800 at 1/40 at 2.8 under what I believe is identical light. I don't know if this equates to the same exposure value, but I'm thrilled with the results. In an addition to much better noise characteristics, I get much less motion blur (both from subject and me).
There is a subjective thing going on too... I'm going to have gather my thoughts on that.
Ron
Emil Martinec
New member
I downloaded a couple of the RAW files they made available (the ones with the GM chart). At the pixel level, the D3 collects almost twice as many photons as the 1Ds3 (7.7-7.8 e-/ADU at ISO 400 for the D3, 4.0 e-/ADU for the 1Ds3; I measured 5.1 e-/ADU for the 1D3). But if we scale by pixel area to get the noise per unit area of the image, the advantage largely disappears (figures here are electrons per ADU per square micron, at ISO 400; results scale inversely with ISO):
D3: 0.109
1Ds3: 0.097
1D3: 0.098
The D3 has a little over 10% advantage in light collecting ability, though at a cost of over 30% in resolution. Though with a D3x ...
Steve Saunders
New member
Photon numbers don't mean much to me, I'm more interested in real world images. I have the D3 (collected yesterday) and the 1DMkIII and at ISO3200 I believe the Nikon images look at least 2 stops cleaner than the ones from the 1DMkIII at ISO3200, not just 10% cleaner. In other words, the D3 ISO3200 images look to me to be the same as ones shot at ISO800 from the 1DMkIII. In fact they also contain noticeably more detail but I'm not sure how much of this is down to the lens used and I will need to do proper tests during the week when time allows.
There is no doubt that Canon did a remarkable job of high-ISO perfromance with the 1DMkIII, but the Nikon D3 is a clear winner in that area IMHO.
I'll be shooting some floodlit football games late in the week and I'll post sample images from both cameras then.
There is no doubt that Canon did a remarkable job of high-ISO perfromance with the 1DMkIII, but the Nikon D3 is a clear winner in that area IMHO.
I'll be shooting some floodlit football games late in the week and I'll post sample images from both cameras then.
Edward Bussa
Member
Thats great news Steve! I am really wondering about the dynamic range of the D3 - could you attempt to cover that in your testing?
Looking forward to your pics from the football games!
Looking forward to your pics from the football games!