ISO 102,400

No need to be scared of the dark anymore!
http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Digital-SLR/25466/D3S.html
Again you got to love Nikon for pushing the envelope.
I don't see that more MP is the future but high ISO without noise is exciting me.
12MP is good enough for me as I don't print very much and when I do it's 30 inches max, which I have done with a 5MP camera and it was fine.
My D700 goes from 100iso to 25,600iso that's 9 stops now with the D3s they have added 2stops.
I guess that the last two stops would be grainy but it does mean that 25,600iso will be useable and 1600iso will look like 200iso on lesser cameras.
As this gets better and better the use of auto ISO will be so useful as one will pick aperture and shutter speed to taste and let the auto ISO adjust to give correct exposure.
Just think you could have your camera set to 1/500sec and f8 for a sun lit scene then walk inside and still be shooting at those settings and not have mucked up.
Also this is most important when added to the video mode of these cameras. As you will know, most video cams are rubbish indooors as movement starts to get blurred and jumpy as the camera drops its shutter speeds.
As someone once said; "The futures so bright you'll have to wear shades". I've got my Ray-Bans on now!

Nikon has seen the light

I wonder how useful is 102.400 will be but if this effort results in lower noise at iso 1.600 to iso 6.400 this would be great!
(don't worry i won't switch systems for this. But i must say if i had to decide for a system today...it probably will be Nikon)

Best regards,


Rob

Well I have a bit of experience of this having the D700.
I have no problems using iso 4,000 as the noise is almost invisible please see my other post "just showing off". Once you have seen it ask me what the kicker is!
ISO 102,400 will be a only if you have to speed and then convert to B/W.
But if the D700 is anything to go by, if you drop 2 stops on the D3s to 25,600it will look great and have very little noise, less than a G7 at 400iso.

Very nice Simon,

I can't compare it with my 5DmkII because i never shot it at iso 4.000 but i think, after some carefull noise surpression the 5DmkII will come close to it.

And the kicker is...?

So glad you asked.
The kicker is this image is zoomed at 100%.
Heres the full image.

I am a bit smug to say the least. But this is a very nice camera.
The Canon is a horse of a different colour as it is THE landscape camera. The D700 will not touch it for that!

Oh dear...., Ohhhh Dear!!!

My Canon EOS 5DmkII will lose this match, The D700 is the king of low noise!

A pity that i hardly use my 5DmkII for landscape photography, its abused for wildlife lately.
I should let it shine on macrophotography but first i have to sort the wildlife pictures from our visit to South Africa and Swaziland last september. from 1.800 down to 1.000 already.

Best regards,


Rob

Hello guys

Yes its amazing what Nikon has done with noise. I looked at pics I did with my 350D digital ages ago. My G7 was my next camera. I can remember those days the D70 and the 20D competed and then the Canon was a unmatched winner.....

Nikon were always in the shade of Canon until the D300....or did it start happening with the D80, I am not sure?

The D700 seems to have perfected this leading pace of development Nikon showed the world with their cameras.

As you know my son use the D300 intensively and I asked him how he finds the high ISO performance of his. He said the main weakness he sees is a significant loss of detail at high ISO. He refrain going above ISO 400 when taking pics on contract.

Does anybody know how the new 7D of Canon performs on high iso...?

Siegfried

Hi Siegfried,

Despite being smaller pixels (Canon did it again ) i think there is about one stop advantage noise wise in favour of the 7D , amazing. The EOS 5DmkII is still winning with at least 1, possible 2 stops.
Still, Canon can't overrule the laws of physics so the effects of diffraction will kick in sooner in case of the 7D (i think already at f6.8, 50D at f7.6, 5DmkII at f 10.3)
Pricing of the 7D is rather high, at this moment one could buy 2 50D cameras for the price of one 7D and there will be still money left in your pocket.

My resources in this case are: imaging-resource.com and the-digital-picture.com

Best regards,


Rob

The D80 was a noisy beast after 800iso as was the D200 and D2x, so Nikon only really stood-up against Canon with the D300 and D3/D700 sensors. The D90 is a stripped-out D300 so has the same sensor and ISO range.
Nikon I am sure buy in sensors from Sony then trick them out with their amps/software. So it must be what Nikon does to the sensor after it leaves Sony because I hear that the A900 is a great camera but its not known for its lack of noise.
Like I said before I headed out to get a D300 but ended up with a D700. I now have a lack of lenses to hang on it luckily I have a few primes that are keeping me happy, and a 28-300 Tamron that' s soft everywhere even stopped down.
My old fathful 70-210 is ok but vignettes at all lengths, never noticed this on DX or film.
So the big problem with a FX camera is its too good and one needs top lenses to get the most out of it. Rob, Have you noticed this?
So I now have two kits a DX with the D70 and its 11-16 Tokina & 17-50 Tamron.
FX D700 with 24mm 35mm 50mm 135mm and the above zooms. I need a standard zoom to tide me over till I make up my mind to sell the Tokina and Tamron, and put the proceeds towards a 24-70 f2.8 nikkor or a 17-35mm. Of course I will get them secondhand, as usual.

Hi Simon,

As a "macro" guy the problem of demanding FX sensors isn't that big at all. My new EF100-2.8L IS macro lens is comparable with the "old" EF 100-2.8 USM macro lens (which i still own as well) Both are excellent performers on FX sensors (as most other (super) telelenses.)
When shooting wildlife my 100-400 and 70-200 4.0L IS lenses are quite capable to produce sharp images (at least to my opinion sharp enough).
The problem lies in the usage of wide angle lenses which i don't use that often. My 17-40 lens was a wonderfull performer at my crop cameras but at the 5DmkII the corners are (even stopped down) soft. Even the 24-105 4.0L is a nice performer but not top notch.
At this moment i am thinking of selling both (or at least the 17-40 lens) and to buy the new TSE 24-3.5L mkII instead. (not second hand available yet.) This lens is excellent right into the corners even wide open. The only problem is it it's pricing (i would become the most expensive lens i ever owned!)
For travelling light and as a set for my wife i, she still owns a 450D with a 18-55 IS and 55-250 IS lens an ideal set with good optical quality.
Vignetting is no problem to me because DPP will cope with this (i even think it is possible "in camera" when shooting JPG but i always shoot RAW so i have to read the manual if this is correct. Still have to read the manual how to shoot video with the 5DmkII but i am not interested in video so i will probably never use this function on my 5DmkII).


Best regards,


Rob