Jaw-dropping ISO Performance from D700

Just an little update for all who asked for Exif. Gary was kind enough to send me a screen dump while he was processing one of his shots. At least we know he WAS shooting at 10.000. But as PIX clearly explained it to us its a piece of cake with our dear Canons as well so no need to panic folks

Quote from Gary "The shots were shot at .3 EV over 6400 and then pushed another .3 EV in Capture NX. I've found that Capture NX gives the best quality output for my Nikon RAW files and I use it for any shots that matter to me. Here is a screen capture from one of the shots that night. Everything was shot wide open that night in aperture priority mode with spot metering hoping to hit a bright spot of clothing to boost my shutter speeds. You can see the as shot ISO on the left and the .3 EV push on the right. The barrel racing shots were captued at 1/250 sec if you are interested. I was shooting beside a 1DMK III that night but he didn't want to push his ISO to the level I was at."

1680 x 1050

EMBED PREVENTED, IMAGE TOO LARGE: http://www.sprowlsstud​ios.com/web/rodeosetti​ngs.jpg Click here to see our image rules.

Thanks for the added info.

I was about to say - get off the guy's case!!

Many people simply have NO understanding of high iso performance.

I shoot theatre at 6400 and higher all the time, and get vibrant, crisp shots all day long.

Rob

bohdank wrote in post #8262459
Not a comment about the D700 but when someone posts a B&W pic, even though downsizing masks a lot of noise, you KNOW it's usually because the chroma noise is really bad.

??? I have several B&W's because I felt they just looked better that way. Yes, there are some I've saved by using B&W, but it's rare.

In fact, I'd like to add the film noise back in... just haven't gotten to figuring out a good way yet.

Anyway, to the point, properly exposed, you can get some pretty nice results with high ISO.

Piece of cake, for sure!

Bollan wrote in post #8269515
Quote from Gary "The shots were shot at .3 EV over 6400 and then pushed another .3 EV in Capture NX. I've found that Capture NX gives the best quality output for my Nikon RAW files and I use it for any shots that matter to me. Here is a screen capture from one of the shots that night. Everything was shot wide open that night in aperture priority mode with spot metering hoping to hit a bright spot of clothing to boost my shutter speeds. You can see the as shot ISO on the left and the .3 EV push on the right. The barrel racing shots were captued at 1/250 sec if you are interested. I was shooting beside a 1DMK III that night but he didn't want to push his ISO to the level I was at."

My dear friend:

EDIT: You got wrong the ISo speed, Bollan. The scale is like this: ISo 6400, 8000 (+0.30ev), 10000 (+0.70) and 12,800 (+1.00ev). Your tiny/weenie shot up-there is ISo8000, which is even easier. This entire range is also supported, step by step, in FlexNR, btw.

Let us raise the standards in that little forum you keep going back and forth, as we will no longer accept 16.5% tiny/weensie samples.

From now on, we will do 50% and 100%, at any ISo speed we may want to capture. I do look forward the first volunteer from such forum , but, since we know exactly what we are talking about, here goes our contribution (a great capture at 700mm !!!, courtesy of the super-cool Sevan, and beautifully finished with FlexNR-v2.0):

ISo5000ec, EOS 1D MarkIII (I can already see their faces :cool:

http://www.pbase.com …/image/11431224​0/original <= whole frame, web-size
http://www.pbase.com …/image/11431224​1/original <= MICRO detail, 50%
http://www.pbase.com …/image/11431224​3/original <= MICRO detail, 100%

Remember: ask for 50% AND 100% views. Almost any current/modern camera is going to look great at 16% of viewing size (and sharp, btw).

Cheers,

PIX

the in camera +0.3ev is not a push on the ISO.. but merely a EC+/- in this case slowing down of the shutter speed to get closer to correct exposure - which is good because if he didnt do that he would have been having to push 2/3stop to get correct exposure - and if it could be done with SS then great.

My flower shot was shot at 0 EC but later in post found that it seemed underexposed by 1 stop as a starting point... which sucked for me because i was using a tripod and was a mistake... so my iso 6400 natural shot immediately became the 12800 iso shot... my 1 stop shot was my 2 stop push and the in camera 2 stop was an unattainable 3 stop push... i was wondering initially why it looked so bad... but the realised i was trying to push 3 stops (iso 512000)

You just reminded me that I have to buy NI Pro
I am a too good a procrastinator

This Nikon vs. Canon stuff really gets quite exhausting. So far as I am concerned the important comparison is digital vs. film. It wasn't so long ago that film had it. Now digital has taken over, whoever makes it.

Bollan wrote in post #8262435
Ive been in the Canon camp for 25 years but when you see shots from the Nikon D700 at ISO10.000 it really makes you wonder.

Check this out http://photocamel.com …deo-d700-iso-10000-a.html

Can 5D MKII or 1D MKIII come near this?

Yes...the 5D mark II surpasses the noise control of the d700.

I can shoot 4000 with no noise

Bollan wrote in post #8262435
Ive been in the Canon camp for 25 years but when you see shots from the Nikon D700 at ISO10.000 it really makes you wonder.

Check this out http://photocamel.com …deo-d700-iso-10000-a.html

Can 5D MKII or 1D MKIII come near this?

That is pretty impressive.

westernminnguy wrote in post #8264218
I think some Canon user should invest:

[B]$2,400[B] for a D700(B&H photo with rebates)
$1,900 for a Nikon 70-200(B&H photovideo assuming this would work in a similar shot).

That person should then take a similar shot as shown in the OP's post....assuming the OP isn't a Nikon user trying to bait this group.

$4,300 in Nikon gear paid out from some dedicated Canon fan could settle this for us.

Oh...by the way....don't ask me to do this....I'm happy with Canon...and I use Nikon when I work for the local newspaper.

Sorry Nikon...not worth the extra $$$ over Canon.

Fixed... Add it to your cart. I don't know why B&H insist on putting the $2699 there when there is an extra rebate after you add it to your cart.

BTW, the 70-200 VR is still in stock at B&H, but it has been going out of stock at many other retailers. Rumors abound that it is about to be replaced by a version with less light falloff and, hopefully, an f4 VR companion. I think the current version is hideously overpriced (out of all of Nikon's lenses it has probably seen the most price increases), so... I can dream that the new model will be slightly less expensive.

Those images at Photo Camel are truly amazing. Can any product by Canon do that? I'm not about to jump ship because of my investment in lenses, but it's making me feel quite uneasy. High ISO performance is what I bought my 5D for, and what I was after all along.

Did you have a chance to...

peterbj7 wrote in post #8284066
Those images at Photo Camel are truly amazing. Can any product by Canon do that? I'm not about to jump ship because of my investment in lenses, but it's making me feel quite uneasy. High ISO performance is what I bought my 5D for, and what I was after all along.

...read the whole thread?... or you could only get to the first, opening post?

PIX

Huh?

I know it was discussed earlier in this thread so I was watching, during the Home Run Derby and All Star game, what cameras where there. I have a few shots of two groups of photogs. There were CLEARLY more Canon than Nikons there. I can try to post them later if anyone is interested. I would say 7 Canons to 3 Nikons or maybe even 8 to 2. Not that this really matters, I just remember it being discussed here and thought I would mention it. I do know though, that the Stl Cardinal's team photog switched (about 2 years ago) from Canon to Nikon. He had said it was due to the newest Nikon that had just came out at the time. For some reason he liked it better than what he was using at the time, but I don't know what the reason or reasons where.

peterbj7, in 35mm, a good DSLR will smite most hold B&W. Both depend on the PP.

Chevy, Ford, Chry. in me earlier years I like many had a few 1/8 mile and a 1/4 screamer. Everybody argued over who's car was best.

Canon, Nikon is the same way. Put either in the hands of someone that know's how to use them and they will get outstanding photographs. Can'erzz will make Canon Photographs Look better and Nik'erz will make Nikon photographs look better. You do the most with what you like the most. (unless you do the most with what you have) LMAO still no conclusive answer. If there was ever a conclusive answer, one or the other would be out of business by year's end.
Print them both. ( 20 x 30 ) stick them on the market and see which sell's, go with the one that sell's. ROFLMAO No two people see anything the same way. Somewhere one might sell better, somewhere else, the other may have the clear lead.
Who really care's? I like Canon. I have Canon, I use Canon.
If everybody used pin hole camera's someone would argue that mines better than yours cause I used a sharper pin, or I coated my pin with Teflon first.

Dirty Harry had the powerful production handgun made, when the films were made. Mines bigger NOW (s&w 500)= things change. "The More Things Change - The More Things Stay The Same"

Less time on who's is better, More Time on How did you do that!