ISO12800 D750 - Took me by surprise

B

bigearl91

Suspended / Banned
Messages
214
Edit My Images
No
To start with, I have never really delved into the world of nature photography.

Went down the local park today, took a few shots of some squirrels for my TP52 and couldn't believe the quality at such a high ISO. I thought it would be pushing it a bit far (and on a couple of shots you can tell it's touch and go) but it coped very well.

Here are some shots with only a touch of luminance noise reduction (+10) and sharpening (+30) and the usual balancing of the histogram to personal preference. If you zoom to 100% you can see the noise however for all realistic usage I would say its pretty hard to spot.

I don't want to state something that goes without saying, however having owned both bodies I have to say the D750 blows the socks off the D7200 for low light stuff. I couldn't get above ISO 3200 on the D7200 before they became, for me, unusable. Really impressed with these shots.

Worth mentioning I shot these with the 70-300 VR at f/8 aperture priority. I have posted them full size, which I wouldn't normally just to let you see at 100% what it is like.

Thoughts:


NKN_0337 by ryan hollings, on Flickr
NKN_0329 by ryan hollings, on Flickr
NKN_0327 by ryan hollings, on Flickr
NKN_0293 by ryan hollings, on Flickr

Cheers
Earl
 
Good stuff.

I don't worry too much about the ISO for casual shots these days. I have a Sony A7 and Panasonic Micro Four Thirds cameras and I just leave them on auto ISO and don't worry too much. Even MFT is fine at ISO 25,600 after basic processing and downsizing.
 
I was always very apprehensive with the D7200 as I really wasn't impressed with its low light capabilities (the main reason I switched the FX). This really has given me confidence to just let Auto-ISO do its thing.

Cheers
Earl
 
The earlier D700 and its fatter brother D3 were known to be good for unavailable light photography! The D750 is a generation better.
 
Oliver Pohlmann said:
Try some night shots at 12800. I think the results might be very different. Daylight at 12800 isn't a very realistic test imo.
Click to expand...

For me the test is if it's a real world shot or not. I'm not interested in shooting at ISO 25,600 with a shutter speed of 1/8000 but at 1/100 it becomes much more real world and my own experience has been that a modicum but not too excessive NR and possibly backing off the exposure if it appears brighter than the scene actually was often results in a shot which is useable as a whole image, not as a 2m wide gallery shot but useable for screen viewing, social media or printing at reasonable sizes and viewing normally.
 
Oliver Pohlmann said:
Try some night shots at 12800. I think the results might be very different. Daylight at 12800 isn't a very realistic test imo.
Click to expand...

Would it not be the case that, if ISO 12800 is required (as it was) then it's realistic?

These were shot at the the longest shutter speed I could get away with and auto ISO set it to 12800. I had to use f8 as the 70-300 VR is unacceptably (personally) soft wide open at the long end.

Good point to try it out though, these settings in the dark wouldn't work at all. I would always take my fast lenses for night stuff but still, worth a try. I would expect similar results using a combination that required ISO12800 to obtain 'correct' even exposure even in dimmer light, illuminating the scene in the same way.

Would I be wrong in suggesting this?

E.g. Exactly the same scene with half as much light but using the lens at f/5.6?

Let me know your thoughts manny,

Earl.
 
Oliver Pohlmann said:
Try some night shots at 12800. I think the results might be very different. Daylight at 12800 isn't a very realistic test imo.
Click to expand...

Or are you suggesting a darker scene that is more challenging to expose evenly with deeper shadows and brighter highlights in it? Then adjusting the image to even out the exposure closer to if The light was more balanced? I'm sure if the limits of the dynamic range were breached it would result in washy highlights or grubby shadows.

Cheers
Earl
 
Last edited:
My point was, I can't imagine a scenario where using ISO 12800 during daylight would be required - even at a relatively narrow aperture. Plus the exposure of a daylight shot would hide the artefacts common with high ISO. Low light shots would shot the true performance of the ISO in my opinion.

That's not to say people don't shoot high ISO during daylight, it's just not what I would call a good test for the ISO performance.
 
Ahh sorry I see what you're saying yeah
:banana:

I maybe thought too specifically & technically about the point you were making there.

Not like me...
:eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top