D7100 ISO Performance

markyboy.1967

markyboy.1967

Suspended / Banned
Messages
8,171
Name
Mark Molloy
Edit My Images
Yes
Anyone using the D7100 tell me how the ISO performance is. I may at some point look at buying another crop frame body to replace my ageing D300. I would need something which is much better in the higher ISO stakes-- how would it compare to the D700 i already have where ISO is concerned?
 
I am led to believe they are one of the best crop body performers on iso there is, I will happily shoot 3200 all day long on my 60D and i believe it to be better than the 60D from dp's review in which they say it is "one" of the best if not the best so I imagine 6400 is potentially usable.
 
I will say, based on my D3200 (which will be very similar to the D7100) vs my D700 that I would much rather shoot with the D700 for low light. Much rather.

Don't get me wrong, the D3200 is very good considering the number of pixels etc but it all goes mushy pretty quickly at a pixel level. Of course, at normal size prints you won't see this.
 
Thanks. I will be keeping the D700 for a little while longer and may go for the D800 to replace that but I need to sit down and think hard about that one for a while. The D7100 may replace the D300 I have but it would need to be a good bit better in ISO performance and close to that of the D700 before I would swap, hence asking if the ISO was much much better.
 
Ah well, the D300 has the same sensor as my old D90 and I would say that the D3200 is a lot better in every respect - ISO, dynamic range, shadow noise etc - and if you view at full screen/print rather than at pixel level the IQ is very very good indeed.

edit: you could save yourself some cash and get a D7000 as that is very good too (not got the weather sealing of the D7100 though...).
 
Last edited:
Well I have it's predecessor, the D7000 and I have often used ISO3200 and been very pleased with the results. So, based on that I would surmise that the D7100 is at least as good as the D7000, if not better.

I'll quickly dig out an example for you...Handheld at 1/20 ISO3200.


Isaacs by JonTaylor71, on Flickr
 
Basically, if you look at the pixel level you will probably be disappointed - especially compared to the D700 - but if you look at the actual image you will be happy.

Part of the reason I got the D3200 was to find this out for myself - I never really wanted more MP than the 12 on my D700 but figured it was about time I tried to see what it offers.

Overall it's a bit of a :shrug: as I still don't really want more than 12mp but the image quality of the D3200 is undeniably good.
 
I thought the high ISO was slightly worse on the D7100 than the D7000, when I tried it. Certainly more noise than my D700
 
OldCarlos said:
I thought the high ISO was slightly worse on the D7100 than the D7000, when I tried it. Certainly more noise than my D700
Click to expand...

The problem with this type of comparison is that it's over simplified.

I've owned both the D7000 and the D700 and hands-down the D700 has to be the best camera I've ever owned. Low light performance was nothing short of amazing in its day.

However the difference in sensor sizes between the D700 and the D7100 will also affect how noisy they look in 'real life'. What I mean by that is, if you take the same shot with both cameras then view on screen at 100% magnification I'd bet the D700 image would look cleaner.

Resize the D7100 image to match the resolution of the D700 (after the fact) and it would be a completely different story in my opinion. The D7100 would look much cleaner.

It would be the same if you printed the two images.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top