Go to a  "printer friendly" view of this message which allow an easy print Printer-friendly copy Go to the page which allows you to send this topic link and a message to a friend Email this topic to a friend
Forums Lobby GET TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA & MASTER IT Nikon D7100, D7000 (Public) topic #17997
View in linear mode

Subject: "800 ISO - useless" Previous topic | Next topic
dhmiller Silver Member Nikonian since 19th May 2009Mon 16-Apr-12 04:28 PM
750 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
"800 ISO - useless"


US
          

I am not at all happy with the noise level of my D7000 even at 800 ISO - here are two shots taken at 1/1000,f/6.3 with a Nikon 200-400 with the front filter removed on a tripod (sorry about the focus problem in shot 2). Doesn't look good to me.

Do other people agree this is not an acceptable level of noise at this ISO? I sent these shots to Nikon and they told me to "lower the ISO" and "open the shutter" to avoid noise... not very helpful comments.

Not surprisingly, my D700 is vastly superior to the D7000, but I really had expected better.
Any comments or suggestions?
Thanks for the input.
Dennis






Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)
Attachment #2, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Replies to this topic
Subject Author Message Date ID
Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
km6xz Moderator
16th Apr 2012
1
Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
dhmiller Silver Member
17th Apr 2012
7
Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
kentak Silver Member
17th Apr 2012
8
     Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
dhmiller Silver Member
17th Apr 2012
9
          Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
ChrisPlatt Silver Member
17th Apr 2012
10
          Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
dhmiller Silver Member
17th Apr 2012
12
          Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
elec164 Silver Member
17th Apr 2012
11
          Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
MotoMannequin Moderator
17th Apr 2012
13
               Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
dhmiller Silver Member
17th Apr 2012
14
                    Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
kentak Silver Member
17th Apr 2012
15
                    Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
dhmiller Silver Member
17th Apr 2012
16
                         Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
MotoMannequin Moderator
18th Apr 2012
18
                              Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
dhmiller Silver Member
18th Apr 2012
19
                              Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
ejinks4
18th Apr 2012
20
                    Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
richardd300 Silver Member
18th Apr 2012
22
                    Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
Omaha
18th Apr 2012
24
                    Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
Snappo Silver Member
23rd Apr 2012
33
Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
richardd300 Silver Member
18th Apr 2012
21
     Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
dhmiller Silver Member
18th Apr 2012
23
          Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
lautry Silver Member
20th Apr 2012
30
               Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
dhmiller Silver Member
20th Apr 2012
31
Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
Omaha
16th Apr 2012
2
Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
adcam Gold Member
16th Apr 2012
3
Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
kentak Silver Member
16th Apr 2012
4
Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
winclk
16th Apr 2012
5
     Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
kentak Silver Member
17th Apr 2012
6
Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
hawaii502160
17th Apr 2012
17
Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
nrothschild Silver Member
19th Apr 2012
25
Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
dhmiller Silver Member
19th Apr 2012
26
     Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
nrothschild Silver Member
19th Apr 2012
27
          Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
dhmiller Silver Member
19th Apr 2012
28
               Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
nrothschild Silver Member
20th Apr 2012
29
                    Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
km6xz Moderator
22nd Apr 2012
32
                         Reply message RE: 800 ISO - useless
dhmiller Silver Member
23rd Apr 2012
34

km6xz Moderator Awarded for his in-depth knowledge in various areas, including Portraits and Urban Photography Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2009Mon 16-Apr-12 05:34 PM
3292 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#1. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 0


St Petersburg, RU
          

How small of crops are these? They do not appear to be full 4928x3262 original images downsized, nor are they original aspect ratio so how many pixels across the subjects are there? Since they recognized the photos were underexposed, Nikon's advice was good. If you intended to crop a lot, spot metering on the subject would have selected more appropriate shutter and ISO if in any auto modes.
Can you post downsized original uncropped reversions. It appears that the bird in the top image is in deep shadows which will always be noisier than a brighter scene.

Are you getting any photos which you like from the D7000? If so, if you post one we can compare the conditions and settings that would make a difference.
Stan
St Petersburg Russia

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
dhmiller Silver Member Nikonian since 19th May 2009Tue 17-Apr-12 03:23 AM
750 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#7. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 1


US
          

Thanks for your note, Len. I see the other images in this thread and it seems that with excellent light, the D7000 is just fine (or better). But I don't tend to see that type of trade show lighting very often, so I do feel the camera is somewhat limited in the area of noise.
Of course, when cropped and/or underexposed like mine of the cardinal, it shows the camera at its worst.

If I were to keep the entire image as shot and downsize to the requirements, I don't think you would much see the noise, the subject being so small. Having just bought the 200-400, I thought I would be able to get decent shots when cropping, but I imagine my D700 will be a better match for the 200-400, so I'll try that (with cropping in the computer) and see how things look before posting again.
Best.
Dennis

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
kentak Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd Jul 2010Tue 17-Apr-12 11:54 AM
918 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#8. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 7


US
          

Hey Dennis,

Just a couple of observations. Remember, you started the thread by impugning the performance of the D7000 as being "useless at ISO 800." Those of us who responded have found that is definitely not the case. I think it is important that anyone considering the purchase of a D7000 not be left with the impression that the camera is hampered by poor low light performance. It's not.

As for trade show lighting, how bad was the lighting for your bird shots? An exposure value (EV) chart I looked up gave an EV value of 12 for "heavy overcast" conditions. Brightly floodlit interior lighting for the likes of stage and ice shows was pegged at 8-9 EV. And, I did not consider the lighting at that car show to be all that great.

It would be interesting to see how your D700 would have handled the same bird shots under the same conditions, and then cropped to give the same subject size. Whatever advantage the D700 would have in lower noise might have been negated by lower resolution. Remember, the cropped (DX) portion of the D700 sensor has about 5 MP compared to the D7000's 16 MP.

Don't give up on your D7000 yet. Give your subjects good exposure and reasonable cropping, and I think you'll view its capability much more favorably.

Happy shooting!

Kent

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
dhmiller Silver Member Nikonian since 19th May 2009Tue 17-Apr-12 12:17 PM
750 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#9. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 8


US
          

Thanks, Kent. It was a frustrating day - recently purchased the 200-400 (plus Sidekick and new Gitzo, and I removed the filter on front of 200-400) and was really hoping to get some great bird shots. I understand there is no magic here and that unless I can fill a fair amount of the frame with the subject, I am going to need to crop a good amount, and of course the cardinal shot was underexposed. But with the D7000 at only 800 I was hoping for better results.

Definitely going to work on my technique and try to improve some of the variables. And always happy for suggestions.
Dennis

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
ChrisPlatt Silver Member Nikonian since 04th Jun 2011Tue 17-Apr-12 12:40 PM
515 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#10. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 9
Tue 17-Apr-12 12:45 PM by ChrisPlatt

US
          

It might be helpful to discuss some of your concerns with the bird shots in the wildlife forum - you can get a lot of help there with getting good shots of birds.

However, IMO the purpose of using a super telephoto lens is to avoid cropping. If you can't fill the the frame without cropping, or with only minor cropping, consider not taking the shot as you are apt to be dissapointed. Cropping magnifies every defect in an image. Getting closer is better than cropping. Sorry, that is advice that should be given in the wildlife forum, but I think it is the root of your problem. Small birds are very frustrating because it is so difficult to fill the frame with them - even with a long lens. You picked a very tough subject.

Visit my gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
dhmiller Silver Member Nikonian since 19th May 2009Tue 17-Apr-12 01:08 PM
750 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#12. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 10


US
          

Good points, all. I will look at the other forums for info on this type of subject as I want to improve my keeper rate.
Thanks for the feedback.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
elec164 Silver Member Nikonian since 15th Jan 2009Tue 17-Apr-12 12:57 PM
1966 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#11. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 9


US
          

>unless I can fill a fair amount of the frame with the subject,
>I am going to need to crop a good amount, and of course the
>cardinal shot was underexposed. But with the D7000 at only 800
>I was hoping for better results.
>


As already stated by others, I feel there is more going on here than noise issues. The images are rather small to really get a good sense of quality. Are these 100% crops? As already noted, if you intended to do severe crops then all your ducks need to be in a perfect row, otherwise you’re not going to get good results. After all you already are starting off with the DX crop factor, cropping even further is only going to worsen things if everything isn’t perfect.

And as to your comment about trade show lighting, Kent brings up a good point. I have this example taken a few days ago and if I calculate the EV properly it’s only an EV of 3. This image was a grab shot that by all accounts should not have come out so well. I saw this little fellow eating on my neighbor’s lawn when I was putting my recycle bin out at the curb a few nights ago. He didn’t seem to spook easy so I ran in and quickly mounted my Bigma and ran outside. It was late dusk and the light was failing quickly so I only had a small window to get any shots. The scenario had everything going against it with quickly failing light which made focusing a challenge, high ISO, slow shutter speed with a long focal length, a wide open lens and my being in a rush.

Hand held (was lying on ground with both elbows used as a tripod) Sigma 50-500 OS with OS on at 340mm, f/6.3, 1/20 and ISO 6400.




If you pixel peep you will certainly see the noise present and you might notice focus was a tad off. But processed for this web sized version (which would still make a nice 8x10); it looks fairly presentable to me. I guess it really comes down to your intended use and tolerance to image quality.

I never had the opportunity to use a D700, but I am willing to bet the high ISO performance is slightly better. But then again it costs substantially more than a D7000 for that small gain in ISO performance.

Pete


Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
MotoMannequin Moderator Awarded for his extraordinary skills in landscape and wildlife photography Nikonian since 11th Jan 2006Tue 17-Apr-12 06:49 PM
8582 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#13. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 9


Livermore, CA, US
          

>It was a frustrating day - recently purchased
>the 200-400 (plus Sidekick and new Gitzo, and I removed the
>filter on front of 200-400) and was really hoping to get some
>great bird shots.

>I understand there is no magic here and that
>unless I can fill a fair amount of the frame with the subject,
>I am going to need to crop a good amount, and of course the
>cardinal shot was underexposed. But with the D7000 at only 800
>I was hoping for better results.

Dennis, please don't take offense at what I have to say here. You're taking on easily one of the most difficult subjects in all of photography, and expecting fantastic results based on the amount of equipment you're throwing at it. There is an old saying in photography - little brown birds and surfers are why they make $10000 lenses!

Some of the things you've typed in this thread lead me to believe that you have ways to go in getting the most out of your equipment. That you would think an ISO 1800 shot must have had better lighting than your ISO 800 shot, and blaming the camera without realizing that underexposing is going to kill your noise performance, point to a lack of understanding in how to get the most out of the camera.

The reason the trade show pics look better than yours is not because of the quality of the lighting - it's because they are not cropped.

Cropping is always going to kill your performance, and the additional cropping you'd need to do on your D700 will kill that camera's performance even more so, which is why bird shooters moving from 12MP DX to 12MP FX found themselves trading in their 200-400 f/4 for a $12000 behemoth 600 f/4 (a decision that makes no sense whatsoever). You could go that route, if you really think D700 is a better choice for birds...

And regarding "removing the front filter" on your 200-400... what? That lens uses rear filters. The front element is considered a protective glass, but like the rear filter, it's also part of the optical formula. What made you decide to remove it? Was that recommended by someone? I'd leave it in place.

Ultimately the D7000 performs exceptionally at ISO 800, and the 200-400 is a killer lens. At the pixel level, the D7000 performs nearly identically to the D800, which has been tested by DxO as the highest performing sensor on the planet. Which is to say, if you're cropping smaller than DX anyway, you won't get higher performance than D7000 from any sensor on the planet.

That means, if you want better pictures, you'll need to exposure properly and get closer to your subject. That means practicing extreme patience, and becoming an expert in your subject's behavior. These are the skills that lead to fantastic wildlife photos. As to the equipment, you've got the best of the best. Time to stop blaming it for your results.

Larry - a Bay Area Nikonian
My Nikonians gallery

www.tempered-light.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
dhmiller Silver Member Nikonian since 19th May 2009Tue 17-Apr-12 07:13 PM
750 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#14. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 13


US
          

Thanks, Larry, I hear you. Maybe a bit impulsive on that Send button.
I did read that the rear filter is part of the optical formula but not the front filter, which as you state, is merely protective (I can ask Nikon about that).
And yes, patience is the word.
Got a few shots this am that are certainly better in every respect:





800 ISO on the cardinal and 640 on the robin.
Definitely going to work on this technique for some time to come.
Thanks again for the input.
Dennis

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)
Attachment #2, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
kentak Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd Jul 2010Tue 17-Apr-12 07:34 PM
918 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#15. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 14


US
          

WOW! Now you're rockin' it.

I can see that our work here is done. LOL.

Kent

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
dhmiller Silver Member Nikonian since 19th May 2009Tue 17-Apr-12 07:38 PM
750 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#16. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 15


US
          

;-)
My motto is: Listen and Learn!
Thanks again for the help
D.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                
MotoMannequin Moderator Awarded for his extraordinary skills in landscape and wildlife photography Nikonian since 11th Jan 2006Wed 18-Apr-12 12:00 AM
8582 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#18. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 16


Livermore, CA, US
          

Let me add... WOW! +100

The detail and sharpness in that Cardinal is really fantastic!

Larry - a Bay Area Nikonian
My Nikonians gallery

www.tempered-light.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                    
dhmiller Silver Member Nikonian since 19th May 2009Wed 18-Apr-12 12:53 AM
750 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#19. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 18


US
          

Thanks! Amazing what a little light (and patience) can do.

D.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                    
ejinks4 Registered since 07th Nov 2011Wed 18-Apr-12 12:41 PM
19 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#20. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 18


US
          

>Let me add... WOW! +100
>
>The detail and sharpness in that Cardinal is really
>fantastic!
>
>Larry - a Bay Area
>Nikonian

>My
>Nikonians gallery>

>
www.tempered-light.com

And great color, too.

-Ed

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
richardd300 Silver Member Nikonian since 19th Apr 2009Wed 18-Apr-12 03:56 PM
3291 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#22. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 14
Wed 18-Apr-12 03:59 PM by richardd300

Dyserth, GB
          

DhMiller <<Got a few shots this am that are certainly better in every respect>>

Although we have great bird life in the UK (sadly with inevitably often poor light)I do envy your wide choice of extremely colourful birds available across the pond. Great images, in fact terrific and we have Robin's of course, but they are not "hawk" looking as yours are

Richard

Visit my Nikonians gallery

Visit my website www.pixels4u.co.uk
The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing. Einstein

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
Omaha Registered since 07th Jan 2012Wed 18-Apr-12 05:19 PM
524 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#24. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 14


Omaha, US
          

There's some awesome shots, right there!!

Visit my Nikonians gallery
Most of my Nikon photos end up here.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
Snappo Silver Member Nikonian since 10th Apr 2004Mon 23-Apr-12 01:31 AM
262 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#33. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 14


Tulsa, US
          

Getting the reds right has always been one of my biggest challenges. Excellent detail on the Cardinal. Looks natural!

an old duffer with the time to have fun,
Jim

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
richardd300 Silver Member Nikonian since 19th Apr 2009Wed 18-Apr-12 03:50 PM
3291 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#21. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 1


Dyserth, GB
          

Stan has a very valid point. For distant subjects I try never to use my D7000 above ISO800 if I am going to forced to crop in excess of 50-75%, usually I use 400 - 600 max. A non or lightly cropped image (landscapes, architectural, reportage) is never a problem at up to about 1600 in my view and probably beyond. It is well known here that the D7000 is not my favourite Nikon, however it's my wildlife tool so it's all I have to work with. I had endless problems to the point where some got fed up with my moaning (and who could blame them), however many helped me and I stuck at it and realised that most of my problems were my technique. Success came eventually.

It is obvious you like wildlife photography as I do, but as said compared to most genres it comes at a price. That price is all to do with distance and light. Distance means that to achieve suitable shutter speeds the ISO has to increase and here we then start talking about diminishing returns. I've cracked it now with my D7000 and here are my rules. Get closer (so to reduce the crop or even better no crop at all), wait for good light and be patient. If I cannot guarantee the first two I leave the camera at home or if the subject is stationary use a tripod.

Please don't give up on the D7000. If it hadn't been for this forum I would have continued floundering and probably thrown my D7000 in a pond

Richard

Visit my Nikonians gallery

Visit my website www.pixels4u.co.uk
The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing. Einstein

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
dhmiller Silver Member Nikonian since 19th May 2009Wed 18-Apr-12 05:17 PM
750 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#23. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 21


US
          

Thanks Richard. Words of wisdom, to be sure. I do plan to spend a lot of time developing better technique for birding and expect the D7000 will be a good tool for the job. Definitely feeling better after grabbing a few nice shots this week.
Dennis

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
lautry Silver Member Nikonian since 02nd Oct 2011Fri 20-Apr-12 06:57 PM
99 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#30. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 23


Panama City Beach, US
          

I am an amateur with a newly purchased D7000. I recently took a team picture of a softball team which was of a "take it now or never" opportunity. When I got home and downloaded the picture, I discovered that I had left the camera on ISO 1600. Fearing the worst, I was pleasantly surprised after pp, the picture was acceptable and the moment saved, so I am saying the D7000 saved my buns. Here is the pic and another iso 1600 pic along with it. Both were hand held. The cruise ship dining room pic was almost completely dark, but the camera and the SB 700 flash saved the day. I just gotta love this D7000. I know the pics are amateur but I am proud of them.
Larry





Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)
Attachment #2, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
dhmiller Silver Member Nikonian since 19th May 2009Fri 20-Apr-12 07:00 PM
750 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#31. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 30


US
          

These definitely look fine here and glad to hear the same on your computer. That's one heck of a dining room!
DM

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Omaha Registered since 07th Jan 2012Mon 16-Apr-12 08:32 PM
524 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#2. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 0


Omaha, US
          

Funny you should mention that. I was just commenting to a friend that the thing I like the most about my D7000 is its ability to "see in the dark". This shot was taken at ISO 5000:


Sure, its a little noisy. I expected that. I just didn't expect it to have the overall IQ that it does.

Visit my Nikonians gallery
Most of my Nikon photos end up here.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

adcam Gold Member Nikonian since 31st Dec 2007Mon 16-Apr-12 09:39 PM
585 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#3. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 0


Portland, US
          

The second picture looks sharp. Not bad for ISO 800.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

kentak Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd Jul 2010Mon 16-Apr-12 10:31 PM
918 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#4. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 0


US
          

As pointed out by Stan, the first picture seems heavily cropped, so the noise is going to appear more noticeable. And, it does seem underexposed. Perhaps you tried to "reach" a little too far by cropping?

This picture is lightly cropped and was taken at ISO 1800.




Kent

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
winclk Registered since 15th Jan 2007Mon 16-Apr-12 11:58 PM
119 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#5. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 4


philadelphia, US
          

That is a sharp pic at Iso 1800

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
kentak Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd Jul 2010Tue 17-Apr-12 02:01 AM
918 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#6. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 5
Tue 17-Apr-12 02:04 AM by kentak

US
          

And, here's one at ISO 3200. Where's the noise? It's there, but not terrible if you don't crop and pixel peep. Some noise reduction was applied in post.

BTW, if you think you're seeing noise in the black bumper, that's the reflection of the plush carpeting.

He: "O...M...G!" She: "Oh look, there's a Prius!"

Kent

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

hawaii502160 Registered since 11th Feb 2011Tue 17-Apr-12 09:55 PM
183 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#17. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 0


Cleveland, US
          

I know it isn't the BEST photo, but for ISO6400 I am extremely impressed:

D7000
70-200mm VRII @155mm, f/2.8, 1/320, Manual Exposure Mode, Auto WB, "Standard" pic control, Matrix metering, AF-C, AF-Area=Single, VR-on

http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u280/1hawaii50/Family/DSC_3764.jpg

This is straight out of the camera, NO post processing whatsoever. Shot in RAW and converted to JPEG.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

nrothschild Silver Member Neil is an expert in several areas, including camera support Nikonian since 25th Jul 2004Thu 19-Apr-12 02:47 PM
10907 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#25. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 0
Thu 19-Apr-12 02:58 PM by nrothschild

US
          

Hi Dennis,

You seem to have sorted things out but I thought an example of ISO 800 from a D700 might help you to visualize what is happening here.

The first image is the entire frame, as shot, straight from camera with no noise reduction. The second image is a small 918x744 pixel crop, at 100% pixels of an underexposed area in the scene.

I was shooting flash, in full darkness, under an open gazebo with no way to bounce the flash and spread the light. I was probably using a Gary Fong diffuser on the SB-800. There was almost no ambient light in the scene and I almost didn't bother trying to shoot the scene, even with a speedlight, because of concerns over light falloff. It actually worked out better than I thought once I waited for better placement of people.


The area I cropped is a bit underexposed and may be similar in that way to your initial images. This is not the greatest picture I ever shot but just a casual snap at a party to test the lighting on that scene. I was looking for an example that might parallel yours, not knowing the particulars of your image for certain but seeing a similar underexposure and likely a very deep crop, maybe deeper than mine in many respects.

The crop is rather noisy!

In fact, if you and I shoot side by side with the same lens, my D700 in DX crop mode and your D7000 shooting the same DX field of view at the same focal length, we should get identical images in terms of noise if we then display our images here at the same final pixel dimensions. And that is true no matter how deeply we crop the images, as long as we both crop to the same field of view.

Your camera's noise performance is virtually identical to the D700 when compared that way. And in my opinion that is the fairest comparison.

The magic of a D700 (or any Nikon FX) happens when there is little or no cropping. The more I crop the closer I get to your image. But you have a pixel advantage over me, such that if we had stood side by side at that party then your image, cropped to the same composition here, would have 73% more pixels or would be about 1588 pixels wide vs my 918. If you displayed your image at 100% it would look 73% bigger, but noisier. But if you reduced it to my 918 pixels it would look about the same.

In the real world, if you and I were at that party shooting that scene we would be standing next to each other to get the same perspective but I would be shooting full FX and a 50% longer focal length to match your composition and in that case I win by one stop, by virtue of the larger sensor, no matter how we crop, as long as we crop to the same composition.

In a wildlife situation as you have here, with both of us shooting 400mm, we are probably both cropping. You down from DX and me down from DX. I can shoot FX but I'm just wasting disk space for my raw images with deeper relative crops. You get 73% more pixels across the tiny bird, and as long as you manage the exposure and control the noise then you have the edge there, which is why I showed a party image and not a wildlife image. Because of that, I shoot wildlife mostly on DX, with a D300.

In that wildlife situaiton we are now totally equalized, which is why FX is not a magic silver bullet in a reach limited wildlife situation. I can play all kinds of games with TC's and come down to a complicated series of compromises that leaves me always about even with you.

I hope this helps. If anything didn't make sense then let me know and I will try to clarify. You have good gear, and for wildlife it is arguably almost unimprovable at this time. And as your last set of images shows, you are working through this. No one ever said wildlife is easy.

D700 24-70 f/2.8 AFS @31mm
f/4 1/60s ISO 800

Uncropped;No noise reduction



918x744 pixel crop- 100% original pixels; no noise reduction





_________________________________
Neil


my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)
Attachment #2, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
dhmiller Silver Member Nikonian since 19th May 2009Thu 19-Apr-12 03:01 PM
750 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#26. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 25


US
          

Hey Neil. Looks like a fun party! Thanks for the thoughtful and helpful reply. I do feel better about the camera at this point and understand that some situations are just not going to produce good images.
I must confess that I am, however, thinking of buying a longer telephoto so I can get better "base" shots - just need to convince the wife of the value of that plan
In the meantime, planning to take more care with the shots and wait for better times to shoot when possible.
Thanks again for the feedback.
Dennis

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
nrothschild Silver Member Neil is an expert in several areas, including camera support Nikonian since 25th Jul 2004Thu 19-Apr-12 03:49 PM
10907 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#27. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 26
Thu 19-Apr-12 03:59 PM by nrothschild

US
          

Most long time birders are using 500/4 or 600/4 primes. My 500/4 AFS takes the TC14 really well (700mm) and the TC17 (850mm) works well when in desperation. I shoot my 500/4 70-90% of the time at 700 and the balance at 850. Rarely native for small birds.

I don't know the 200-400 well and I hear very inconsistent opinions on its performance with TC's. But especially with a TC it takes quite a zoom to outperform or even just equal a comparable prime.

No matter what the camera, the best images - the final keepers - will well fill the frame and it's tough to get around that. You can get closer or spend money.

Birding is truly a money pit. There are birders shooting $15-20K worth of gear, just for one setup, and then there are birders that want to be using that gear. There are no other classes of birders.

I have no advice for dealing with the wife!

Edit: I ran into an acquaintance the other day on the wildlife trail. See him at the park from time to time. He shoots a D300 I think, and an old manual focus 400/5.6 Nikkor on an Alloy Gitzo Series 3 and I guess an old Gitzo pan head. That's all he needs and he tells me that if he needs to crop deeply he doesn't bother with the shot. He's shooting songbirds, just like me. I've seen his images in his camera; he is not a liar.
That's the flip side. I have no idea how he does it and I've watched him work. He's been doing it for 30 years. He bought the MF Nikkor when it was a current model and did many years on film.

_________________________________
Neil


my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
dhmiller Silver Member Nikonian since 19th May 2009Thu 19-Apr-12 09:26 PM
750 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#28. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 27


US
          

Thanks Neil. I didn;t have any luck with the 2x (Nikon) on my 200-400, but...
Well we made the move - miraculous that my dealer found one so quickly, but I am now the proud owner of a 600mm f/4! So it's time to get to work
Dennis

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
nrothschild Silver Member Neil is an expert in several areas, including camera support Nikonian since 25th Jul 2004Fri 20-Apr-12 02:25 AM
10907 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#29. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 28
Fri 20-Apr-12 02:26 AM by nrothschild

US
          

Wow! I was laying out a long term plan. Not today's shopping list


Congratulations! You may want to stop by the support forum and talk about a tripod and gimbal for that thing

Just kidding... the Series 3 should be ok for that. You'll probably need a Wimberly, though, if you don't already have one.



_________________________________
Neil


my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
km6xz Moderator Awarded for his in-depth knowledge in various areas, including Portraits and Urban Photography Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2009Sun 22-Apr-12 07:26 AM
3292 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#32. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 29


St Petersburg, RU
          

Boy, you got the bird bug bad.....congratulations on the 600/4, wow!

One issue that has been raised but needs to be amplified is field craft.
If I want to learn about the habits and behavior of an animal, I do not ask a hunter, I ask successful photographer because they will have to know more about the habits, life activities, activity times, sensitivity to their environment, fear triggers etc more than someone who can accomplish their goal from any distance.
Getting close is not so much about equipment but subject knowledge. Field craft, how to find, approach and track animals and birds is the key to great photos. There is a trade off between close and light, nimble and reach, cumbersomeness, inflexibility. Getting too big of a rig, means set positions and more passive observation, while too light does give mobility it also demands getting really close.
Look at the famous animal and bird photographers and you will usually find them to be a small fraction photographer and large fraction of their skill set as a naturalist or animal psychologist, they get in positions to get shots the rest of us just marvel at in our living rooms.
Now you have the kit needed to match any of the pros, it is time to start studying your subject, without a camera if that helps mobility. Read up on them, not just the facts but food gathering habits, protection techniques, social behavior etc. That way you will know where to go and expect to find them to come along when conditions change to match your understanding of their habits. Why do some fishermen have so much better "luck" than the rest of us? Because it is not luck for them, it IS for us.
The same applies to all specialties in photography, the noteworthy shots are from people who are "lucky" a lot, by knowing their subject better than anyone else. Why are some highly skilled sports shooters so lucky being just in the right position for the big plays? They know the subject and predictable behavior of their subject that to us is a matter of luck. I was watching a wedding a few months ago where there was a shooter and a second, both with the same D700 cameras. You could tell quickly who was the experienced key photographer, he was always in a spot to get the right angle by anticipating what people would do, even in the reception were it is unscripted. Anticipating which direction the bride would move to greet a relative or at what moments she might relax her smile for an instant to reveal something other than the forced smile.
The second shooter was taking shots as they appear to him, which in most things, reacting versus anticipating is too late.
Get out in the field and become the expert in small bird behavior and your gear will start to really pay off.
By the way, the two shots posted later are really good! Exposure right on, considering the bright traces of sunlight and average shadow of the rest of the scene is more difficult a shot than where the subject is all in shadows or all in decent light, you and the metering did very well. Fill the frame with your subject and the D7000 is about as good an imaging device as exists. Sure some have slightly better specs in some areas but overall, in the things that count to perceived image quality it has it all. When shooting at low ISO only a couple cameras in the world do it better, slightly better.
Stan
St Petersburg Russia

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
dhmiller Silver Member Nikonian since 19th May 2009Mon 23-Apr-12 08:10 PM
750 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#34. "RE: 800 ISO - useless"
In response to Reply # 32


US
          

Thanks for the comments, Len. Very helpful as always. My wife and I are heading for retirement (though we may have to work an extra year to pay for the 600mm ;--), and we are trying to get our tools and techniques in order for the long haul. I definitely agree about learning all the aspects of one's craft.
Just a couple of shots from a shoot this weekend with the 200-400 +1.4 TC on the D7000. Definitely shots I can live with.
Thanks again for the advice.

Dennis







Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)
Attachment #2, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Forums Lobby GET TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA & MASTER IT Nikon D7100, D7000 (Public) topic #17997 Previous topic | Next topic


Take the Nikonians Tour and learn more about being a Nikonian Wiki /FAQ /Help Listen to our MP3 photography radio channels Find anything on Nikon and imaging technology - fast!

Copyright © Nikonians 2000, 2014
All Rights Reserved

Nikonians®, NikoScope® and NikoniansAcademy™ are trademarks owned by Nikonians.org.
Nikon®, Nikonos® and Nikkor® are registered trademarks of Nikon Corporation.