ISO 6400 Nikon D3s, Drool!

[roger767]

wow ISO 6400 looks amazing. No color noise only grain and sharpness and detail is preserved.
Lets hope Canon can match it with the 1D4 next week.

http://chsvimg.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/digitalcamera/slr/d3s/img/pic_001b.jpg

[virsago_mk2]

Yeah, I must say that even at ISO 6400 & 12800, the shots are absolutely amazing. Very-very-very fine grain.

Nikon really nails this one down.

[Skippy29]

(yawn)

[korrektor]

For the price it should at least be amazing in bed :)

[FlyingPhotog]

For the price it should at least be amazing in bed :)

...and then turn into a Pizza and a Six Pack!

[downhillnews]

For the price it should at least be amazing in bed :)
Same range a 1D mark IV will be right?

[AdamJL]

Yep, that is an utterly amazing picture. The noise is perfect. The best sensor just got better.

[foxesamu]

For the price it should at least be amazing in bed :)
:rolleyes: The D3 was $4,999 when it came out so I don't see why everyone is bothered by this.

[Anke]

...1D4 next week.
...

Eh?!

[kevindar]

Looks very nice. cleaner than my 5d2, although I would be interested in Exif. I find that in daylight, with good exposure, 5d2 does very well

[CAL Imagery]

EXIF's included.

[kevindar]

EXIF's included.
1/1600 sec @2.8 = Good light. I would be interested to see some images in poor light, esp in incandescent light.

[blackshadow]

(yawn)

x10

[adrian5127]

Eh?!

Where have you been meant to be a big announcement 20th October;)

[korrektor]

But even with this camera being almost a night vision device, it wont make anyone a better photographer. Its time to stop obsessing about the gear and start obsessing about new ideas, unique composition, innovative angles... I think people got it all wrong. Lets cure the desease!:)

[Anke]

Where have you been meant to be a big announcement 20th October;)

I keep getting lost in all these rumours, there seems to be a "big announcement" every week. The last one was a photocopier :confused:

[AngryCorgi]

Call me crazy, but it barely looks any better at 6400 or 12800 than my old D700. I'm not so sure ISO102400 is going to be useful for more than tiny prints or web images.

[mosesport]

Still an AWESOME image :)

[gkarris]

(yawn)

x10

Oh boy, another cool camera I CAN'T afford...

Sort of like each time a new Macintosh Computer comes out... :eek:

[JeffreyG]

But even with this camera being almost a night vision device, it wont make anyone a better photographer. Its time to stop obsessing about the gear and start obsessing about new ideas, unique composition, innovative angles... I think people got it all wrong. Lets cure the desease!:)

People always say this and yet for some reason their gear list is not a 2003 Fuji FinePix E510.

Sometimes it would be nice to shoot low light situations and actually be able to stop down and have the DOF I want. A camera that has no upper limit on ISO relative to grain is a tool that enhances "unique composition" isn't it?

Wouldn't it be nice to be able to make decisions about DOF and compostion for yourself instead of having them dictated to you by the available light and the highest ISO you are willing to use?

[Tumeg]

Eh?!

October 20th, to be exact... According to Canon's latest invite with a dark teaser photo of a 1D series camera :)

[JeffreyG]

October 20th, to be exact... According to Canon's latest invite with a dark teaser photo of a 1D series camera :)

Every farking time Canon launches a new 'major' release I'm off traveling in Europe. I was in Germany when the 5D II was launched and I'm going to be in Germany on the 20th.

I come home and the POTN threads are clogged and done.

[Guapo]

Every farking time Canon launches a new 'major' release I'm off traveling in Europe. I was in Germany when the 5D II was launched and I'm going to be in Germany on the 20th.

I come home and the POTN threads are clogged and done.

Please excuse me for not feeling sorry for you having to travel Europe. :)

[DonJuanMair]

The iso performance on those images from the D3S were really impressive

[kenwood33]

ok how much is it?

[korrektor]

$8000

[tkbslc]

1/1600 sec @2.8 = Good light. I would be interested to see some images in poor light, esp in incandescent light.

Yeah, that could have easily been 1/100 at ISO 400. Can't blame them for marketing, but I always like to wait for the real world shots. Like you are shooting in a club at ISO 6400 and f2 and you can barely get 1/80. Nobody is going to use ISO 6400 when it gives them 1/1600 shutter speed.

[telles75]

ISO 102K shot:

http://i38.tinypic.com/2dahysn.jpg

[telles75]

$8000

Wrong..it will be $5,200

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Digital-Capability-Body-Only/dp/B002SQKVD0

[korrektor]

ooooops sorry, so its ALMOST at the price of a compact (car)...

[DonJuanMair]

ISO 102K shot:

http://i38.tinypic.com/2dahysn.jpg


Totally usable! :)

[telles75]

Totally usable! :)

Sorry that was ISO 12,800 here's 102K:

http://i34.tinypic.com/1zxy6uh.jpg

I think is still usable after using Noise Ninja :)

[DonJuanMair]

Lol id like to see it before and after

[telles75]

ISO 102K Out of Camera:

http://i34.tinypic.com/1zxy6uh.jpg

After Noise Ninja applied:

http://i37.tinypic.com/23sxcuv.jpg

[korrektor]

lol... put a smiley in once in a while or I will start believing this ;)

[DonJuanMair]

Lol awesome

[telles75]

Hahaha.. oh well at least I bet I made you laugh guys :)

[korrektor]

iso 102K will be great for finding a flashlight when power goes down
;)

[AdamJL]

ISO 102K Out of Camera:

http://i34.tinypic.com/1zxy6uh.jpg

After Noise Ninja applied:

http://i37.tinypic.com/23sxcuv.jpg

:) :lol: :lol: bw!

[samurairx7]

lol

[radiohead]

ooooops sorry, so its ALMOST at the price of a compact (car)...

What do you think a 1D IV will cost?

[DonJuanMair]

Lol awesome

[bomboman]

It's stunning how excellent image quality of D3s is ..... cool but I am still using my old gear anyway.

[Croasdail]

(yawn)

Your freaking kidding me right?

Sometimes it would be nice to shoot low light situations and actually be able to stop down and have the DOF I want. A camera that has no upper limit on ISO relative to grain is a tool that enhances "unique composition" isn't it?

Wouldn't it be nice to be able to make decisions about DOF and compostion for yourself instead of having them dictated to you by the available light and the highest ISO you are willing to use?

Well said. I could give a crap about what name is in the camera, the camera companies aren't loyal to me, I am not loyal to them. It's just a tool, and I'll use the most capable I can afford regardless of brand. I used to be part of the ISO doesn't matter much, but the new cameras are really taking it to new levels and opening new doors. I am loving it.

[digitalh3lix]

hell if noise ninja was that good id be getting top notch images with my point and shoot.

[foxesamu]

12,800 is blowing my mind.

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/2776/isorugby.jpg

LOL @ the owl thing...

[AdamJL]

12,800 is blowing my mind.

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/2776/isorugby.jpg

LOL @ the owl thing...

Good lord... very very impressive

[foxesamu]

Oh and an actual 102,400 ISO sample! :shock:

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/3319/pic003d.jpg

I guess it was necessary because this was the 400/2.8 VR wide open at 1/500. Love Puffins!

[DonJuanMair]

Wow nikon are really nailing the iso performance.
I hope canon has something up their sleeves!

[Visuals]

Yeah, I must say that even at ISO 6400 & 12800, the shots are absolutely amazing. Very-very-very fine grain.

Nikon really nails this one down.

They always nail it.... I was tempted when I saw the Canon 7D because I shoot a D300... But then I thought to myself... What the hell are you thinking.. It's only a matter of time before Nikon puts that ISO capability of the D700 and D3 into the D300 series bodies... Especially with competition from Canon..

So I kept my glass and I continue to shoot!
Great stuff nikon

[roger767]

They always nail it.... I was tempted when I saw the Canon 7D because I shoot a D300... But then I thought to myself... What the hell are you thinking.. It's only a matter of time before Nikon puts that ISO capability of the D700 and D3 into the D300 series bodies... Especially with competition from Canon..

So I kept my glass and I continue to shoot!
Great stuff nikon


You could be right seeing that Nikon keeps their Cameras at 12mp. But the D300s isn't that much better than the D300 in ISO which is a missed opportunity.

[foxesamu]

You could be right seeing that Nikon keeps their Cameras at 12mp. But the D300s isn't that much better than the D300 in ISO which is a missed opportunity.
The D300s doesn't have a new sensor though... It's the D400 that will get the improved noise performance.

[markol]

The high ISO performance of these new cameras is simply O_O

[iLifephotography]

got 2 on order and i think there is more excitement about the "s" than there was for the "3" , it puts the 1d4 to shame and proves nikon right in the pixel wars, it not always about how many but what you do with them, Nikon are Defo back on top now.....:lol:

http://www.ilifephotography.co.uk

[JeffreyG]

got 2 on order and i think there is more excitement about the "s" than there was for the "3" , it puts the 1d4 to shame and proves nikon right in the pixel wars, it not always about how many but what you do with them, Nikon are Defo back on top now.....:lol:

http://www.ilifephotography.co.uk

I think the d3S looks fabulous, but at this point nobody knows how the 1D4 is going to perform. It's quite possible that they will be very close in noise, in which case they will be almost exactly matched.

[noodle_snacks]

D3S doesn't have the pixel density to be as useful as a 1D4 for birding.

[AdamJL]

got 2 on order and i think there is more excitement about the "s" than there was for the "3" , it puts the 1d4 to shame and proves nikon right in the pixel wars, it not always about how many but what you do with them, Nikon are Defo back on top now.....:lol:

http://www.ilifephotography.co.uk

you are as bad as the Canon fanboys who are prolific on the internet.

[foxesamu]

D3S doesn't have the pixel density to be as useful as a 1D4 for birding.
True.

1D4 doesn't have the sensor size to be as useful as the D3s for landscapes.

They both have their advantages... although in most cases they are remarkably similar.

[alessandro2009]

Oh and an actual 102,400 ISO sample! :shock:
...
I guess it was necessary because this was the 400/2.8 VR wide open at 1/500. Love Puffins!

I don't think was really necessary because these birds was quite so probably could shoot even less then 1/500, for example 1/400 or perhpas less.

Yes even for me Nikon produces good camera but these example are few significant because there is too much light.

I would like see a shoot (with the possibilities to download the raw or at least have a link to a full resolution image) at one static subject taken using a tripod at:
6400 iso
1/60 (to simulate a time usable even free hand)
2.8
focal length: between 24-85

[radiohead]

Handhold a 400mm at 1/60s?

[alessandro2009]

Handhold a 400mm at 1/60s?
Funny. :lol:

That lens was VR (the equivalent of IS in Canon) so 2 less stop is possible. ;)

Clearly don't 1/60. Ah ah ah.

[radiohead]

Some more samples, including comparisons with the D3

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-10045-10329

[AdamJL]

Looks good

[Croasdail]

What kind of bugs me about all of this is while I am a big D3 fan, all the chatter is only focusing on one issue that happens when you go high ISO. Yes, noise is an issue. But equally is dynamic compression which leads to a bunch of issues. The sample images above are of such a high contrast subjects, it tells you nothing of how well detail is preserved in the color itself. No noise with crushed colors is better, but still.

I want, no, I need good dynamic range so I am not having to pick between recovering highlights or loosing shadow detail. This camera may be getting there, but I haven't seen any examples of it yet.

[alessandro2009]

...
I want, no, I need good dynamic range so I am not having to pick between recovering highlights or loosing shadow detail. This camera may be getting there, but I haven't seen any examples of it yet.
And you never see in the next future a similar camera because if you want a great dynamic range you should put drastic change on the sensor.

Do you known that the fuji S5 Pro have a better dynamic range then even FF? Despite is only an aps-c camera developer some years ago?

But that sensor cost a lot of money, so in the past they think about try to develop a new sensor (organic) with even better but less expensive, unfortunately, despite some years on development, they quite for "producing" reflex camera (their body was nikon).

I don't see any producer that have the willingness to invest in this direction for years for develop something really new. :rolleyes:

[Karl Johnston]

http://ftp.robgalbraith.com/public_files/D3S_ISO102400_Up_Down.jpg
Wow, that kicks the hell out of the 1d4

[alessandro2009]

The composition is good but if you see the exif:
iso: 102.400
1/1000 (means there was a ton of light)
f/8 (with a focal length of 24 mm)
you understand that the photographer is a dog.

Him don't understand the:
Depth of Field
if he use a 24 mm at f/4
the Depth of field extends from 8 m to infinite
while if his set infinite on his len the Depth of field extends from
2.41 m to infinity

Also he set 1/1000.
I don't was really necessary.

Despite that ton of light the result isn't sufficient even for small image on the web.

canon 1d4 go even worse. ok.

But I'm more interested at the final usable result rather a warrior between canon vs nikon.

[djharmonix]

ISO 102K Out of Camera:

http://i34.tinypic.com/1zxy6uh.jpg

After Noise Ninja applied:

http://i37.tinypic.com/23sxcuv.jpg

OMG you cracked me up big time

ROFL!!!!!!!!

[Thalagyrt]

The composition is good but if you see the exif:
iso: 102.400
1/1000 (means there was a ton of light)
f/8 (with a focal length of 24 mm)
you understand that the photographer is a dog.

Him don't understand the:
Depth of Field
if he use a 24 mm at f/4
the Depth of field extends from 8 m to infinite
while if his set infinite on his len the Depth of field extends from
2.41 m to infinity

Also he set 1/1000.
I don't was really necessary.

Despite that ton of light the result isn't sufficient even for small image on the web.

canon 1d4 go even worse. ok.

But I'm more interested at the final usable result rather a warrior between canon vs nikon.

You do realize he was doing this as a demo of what it looks like at 102400, right? How else would you suggest he get that shot at 102400 to demonstrate what it looks like, other than high shutter speed and stopping down? Note the subject: A first look at Nikon D3s High ISO image quality.

Of course he could have shot that wide open with a slower shutter speed at say 6400 or so. That would defeat the purpose of creating a 102400 sample image though, wouldn't it?

[AdamJL]

Wow, that kicks the hell out of the 1d4

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[alessandro2009]

How else would you suggest he get that shot at 102400 to demonstrate what it looks like, other than high shutter speed and stopping down? ...
static object
Tripod
1/60
focal length 24-85
f/4
102400
If the light is too strong you could move that light (without change direction) because more the light is distant more became low.
So the keyword is distance.
If you haven't space put some candlelight (because only 1 is too limited even for a 102.400 iso) until it is sufficient to take the time to shoot with that ISO, with that shutter speed with that diaphragm.
So no tricks.

There is always an huge difference when you take a shoot in presence of a ton of light while you take the same shoot with few light.
With the difference that in the first case you obtain a fake shoot while in the second is real.

Note:
The example of the candlelight is a little extreme, it's sufficient cover the light with something sufficient dark that you put in front of the light until you reach the desired brightness for the object.

[radiohead]

So you think he had the freedom to do all of that in a circus rehearsal?

[djharmonix]

I'm torn now,
I need a pro body with FullFrame soon, I cant spend 8G's so the D3 is more and more appealing to me.

The only problem is parting out with my 85L and 17TS-e... Nikon has nothing comparable. Why is life so hard on me lol

[Croasdail]

Have you even tried the Nikon 85mm f/1.4D IF AF or the PC-E 24? Not the same, but not sure you would not be able to get the job done with them. Worth a look.

[djharmonix]

worked with the 85 1.4 and there is a world of difference...

also 24mm is not 17mm thats why i didnt buy the 24 ts-e instead .. Already own a 24-70L... I need wider.

I'm gonna give another year to Canon to come out with a pro body for 5G's with fullframe and if they don't I will re-evaluate the situation. Right now, I think the glass advantage is worth it over the camera advantage.

[MR do little]

worked with the 85 1.4 and there is a world of difference...


Interesting, please do elaborate....

[radiohead]

Interesting, please do elaborate....

Indeed - because I don't see it.

[djharmonix]

I worked with both and between F1.2 and 2.8 the 85L is sharper, better contrast, colors, the bokeh is smoother kinda like on the 200mm f2.

The images from it, un-touched, have a certain feel to them that sets the 85L apart from any other 85mm primes I had the chance to use.

Just like, to me, there is a world of differences between the 85L and the EF85 1.8. The nikkor being superior to the 85 1.8 of course.

[alessandro2009]

So you think he had the freedom to do all of that in a circus rehearsal?

I merely do a very simple system, that does not cost anything, for real test the true potential of a camera in really critical low light.

If you haven't freedom to do serious shoot then only result are fake shoot as the one that he take and you can't never based an opinion of a camera based on a fake shoot.


If you haven't convinced try to make a test with your camera.
In one test don't change the light.
Subsequently do other shoot as i said above (where you low the light and high the Iso without touch anything other) and you will see an huge difference about the same shoot.

[ChrissMellon]

I have a great experiences with My device.
I captured eight snaps one after another immediately and then also, there was no any noise reguarding image quality.

[radiohead]

I merely do a very simple system, that does not cost anything, for real test the true potential of a camera in really critical low light.

If you haven't freedom to do serious shoot then only result are fake shoot as the one that he take and you can't never based an opinion of a camera based on a fake shoot.


If you haven't convinced try to make a test with your camera.
In one test don't change the light.
Subsequently do other shoot as i said above (where you low the light and high the Iso without touch anything other) and you will see an huge difference about the same shoot.

I spend my life shooting in really low light. But there's no way you could do what you're suggesting in the shots above.

[alessandro2009]

I spend my life shooting in really low light. But there's no way you could do what you're suggesting in the shots above.

I haven't say the contrary.
I said if the condition don't permit serious test, you simply don't must "force" the shoot because you obtain fake shoot.
Simple and clear. I don't see space for misunderstandings.

[radiohead]

He took some high ISO shots - that's all.

[MR do little]

I worked with both and between F1.2 and 2.8 the 85L is sharper, better contrast, colors, the bokeh is smoother kinda like on the 200mm f2.


Interesting opinions/observations.

One thing i know for sure our definition of the expression "world diffrence" must be... well worlds apart..:lol:


Sharpness
Where ? corner, center ? edge to edge ? At what distance? Most people familar with the Nikkor 85/1,4D knows is optimized for close distance, so naturally the performance @ F/1,4 to F/2,8 medium to long isnt its strong suite. However comparing the lenses at overlapping apertures you will still have a hard time telling people that one is vastly superior then the other from F/1,4-F/2,8.

Contrast
Neither has excellent contrast at wider apertures, edge to Canon though

Colors
Subjective, and a moot point unless you compared the lenses on the same canon body. With that said im not to keen about the cooler color of the Nikkor 85/1,4D (compared to other Nikkors) Then again both Canons are cooler then the Zeiss 85.

Bokeh
Highly subjective, dont confuse subject isolation and oof areas though. So comparing them at overlapping apertures there really is no world diffrence to talk about, even though the Canon F/1,2 have the edge. This depending on your preference of course. After seeing direct comparison (100% crops)from Zeiss/Canon/Nikon ill prefer the Zeiss





The images from it, un-touched, have a certain feel to them that sets the 85L apart from any other 85mm primes I had the chance to use.
Unless you tested all those 85's on the same Canon body there are way to many factors playing in that effects the final raw image.

Kindest

[djharmonix]

I might be an alien then.. I should have said: to me, there is a world of differences between the two lenses.

[christisdale]

@ kevindar: too many lenses, eh? I can take care of a few of em if theyre that much of a problem ;) lol

[Karl Johnston]

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
What? It really does ! Have you seen the 1d 4s crops? it looks like a joke...but honestly it depends on how you expose, of course. i've shot an outdoor portrait session this weekend at ISO 4000 and its showing me plenty of detail sharp and clean on the 5Dm2

[Croasdail]

I might be an alien then.. I should have said: to me, there is a world of differences between the two lenses.

You got any examples for the 17 where you have leveraged the t/s functionality? I have looked for good samples, but have yet to find any. They are very far and few between since the lens is so extremely rare. pBase doesn't even have a sample at all. Probably needs to be in another thread - so I will let this die here. But one thing I have seen I like about the lens is it retains good shadow detail. Again, I am not so much interested in going to extreme ISOs if you kill it with compression of tonal range and highlight/shadow detail - which is usually the case.

Share if you like

[djharmonix]

I've had the lens for only a few days and did very few archtecture/real estate yet.

this is the biggest thread/gallery I found online yet. I posted a few there.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=721282

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/119233920/original.jpg

[woos]

ISO 102K Out of Camera:

http://i34.tinypic.com/1zxy6uh.jpg

After Noise Ninja applied:

http://i37.tinypic.com/23sxcuv.jpg

Hahahahahahaha oh god I'm dying here, that's hilarious

[Croasdail]

Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 583
Re: ISO 6400 Nikon D3s, Drool!
I've had the lens for only a few days and did very few archtecture/real estate yet.

this is the biggest thread/gallery I found online yet. I posted a few there.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=721282

Cool - thanks

[Jethro790]

12,800 is blowing my mind.

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/2776/isorugby.jpg

LOL @ the owl thing...

Jebuz, this camera is as close to night vision as we have seen in the DSLR world. Amazing performance.

[m and m]

For the the price it better look that good. I'll stick with my canon evon though i think its behind nikon in the tecnology department.

[vpnd]

For the the price it better look that good. I'll stick with my canon evon though i think its behind nikon in the tecnology department.
bs.... you don't think the canon is going to be as good .....? really....?

[Wild Style]

bs.... you don't think the canon is going to be as good .....? really....?
from the high ISO pictures I have seen from the Canon 1D Mark IV at comparable ISOs to pictures taken on the D3s (at the same ISO), Nikon had the better IQ. I am not a groupie so I don't care who has the better IQ. What I do know is, which ever shows to be the better camera, that will be the one I am buying in Jan.

[J_TULLAR]

Ill admit too, D3S has cleaner high ISO then the 1D4 from what ive seen.

[AdamJL]

Beta firmware guys, keep that in mind ;)

No point in making comparisons between one camera that is JUST being shipped vs one that hasn't.

[Wild Style]

Beta firmware guys, keep that in mind ;)

No point in making comparisons between one camera that is JUST being shipped vs one that hasn't.
Indeed,

No need to jump the gun right now. Wait till they are both out and we can have real world, finalized hardware to compare.

[Stan Jones Photography]

... my 5D sucks =[

[J_TULLAR]

really then mail it to me :D

[PIXmantra]

...Sorry for raining BIG time in your quasi-private parade, but all I see, for now, in these D3s posts are colors lacking in density, poor acutance / little edge-contrast, and a coarsely-grouped noise pattern filled with "gray-pits", all over the place.

THIS is what color density and FINE grain and finer detail looks like, in my book (ISO4000ec to ISO10,000ec, courtesy of POTN fellow members):

http://www.pbase.com/feharmat/image/116407550/original.jpg

Nevertheless, your samples are GOOD examples in the context of on-board processing, though. That is (to me) unquestionable, and I do look forward to see how the twin DiGiC IVs perform on this front, with respect to Nikon's latest implementation.

Love,

PIX

[cankon]

It's always nice to go back and laugh at peoples responses...:p