Nikon D300: low noise or "pleasing" noise reduction?

[Wesan]

The images of the Nikon D300 at high ISO do look good. Though, I have tried to look a little closer and compared an image taken by the Nikon D300 with the same image taken by a Canon EOS 40D at ISO 3200. It seems to me, that the 40D keeps more detail at ISO 3200 than the D300. But the image looks "nicer" from the D300. So...does the D300 really have such great high ISO performance? Or is the nice image quality the result of a, to the eye, more pleasing in-camera noise reduction?

Take a look at these two images. They are from the tests of the two cameras done by the Swedish online store cyberphoto.se. Both at ISO 3200. The links take you to the full size images. Look at the blue reel, for instance.

EOS 40D:
http://www.cyberphoto.se/bildexempel/40d/IMG_0336.JPG

D300:
http://www.cyberphoto.se/bildexempel/d300/DSC_0005.JPG

[Prospero]

You can't really compare them from these samples, in my opinion. They are taken at different focal lengths and the framing is completely different.
The Canon may have more detail, but the reason for that is more because every object of this test scene is considerably larger than in the Nikon picture than anything else.

The Nikon probably does apply some noise-reduction. There is hardly any chrominance noise in the picture. However, it is not to the extend that there is a serious loss of detail.
In the end both cameras are capable of very good performances in low light.

[Rooz]

these sort of topics should go to dpreview forums where they belong.

[Turn]

I don't think its comparable.

[Wesan]

My intention with this thread was not to criticize the Nikon D300 or do a serious comparison with the Canon EOS 40D. What I intended to do, was to start a serious discussion about the high ISO performance and the in-camera noise reduction of the Nikon D300. Sorry if I didn't express myself clearly enough.

Maybe it's not possible to compare the Nikon D300 with any present Canon DSLR, since the D300 is in between the EOS 40D and EOS 1D Mk III price wise. And the D300 has higher resolution than both Canon cameras. The sizes of the sensors are also slightly different between the cameras.

Yes, as Prospero mentioned, there is hardly any chrominance noise from the D300. I think you can still notice effects from noise reduction, however. So maybe I can rephrase my original question like this, to make it a little clearer what I meant:
Is Nikon maybe using a noise reduction system that takes better care of chrominance noise than Canon and other brands, and therefore making it look like there's less noise ("pleasing noise reduction", as I put it)? And does this system perhaps result in more loss of details?
Maybe it's better in this case just to compare images taken at different ISO values with the D300 only? And through these different images try to figure out how the Nikon D300's ISO performance and noise reduction is working?

I'm no expert and I don't have any own experience with DSLR cameras. And I don't know all the correct technical terms, so sometimes I use the words I think describe what I try to say. But I'm trying to learn, so I have to ask some "stupid questions" sometimes. :o

Here are the ISO test images of the Nikon D300 from the Swedish site. Is it possible to compare them and figure out how the ISO performance and noise reduction works with the Nikon camera? If so - what are your thoughts? Again, I personally think it's easiest to tell the difference by looking at the blue reel.

D300 at ISO 200:
http://www.cyberphoto.se/bildexempel/d300/DSC_0001.JPG

D300 at ISO 400:
http://www.cyberphoto.se/bildexempel/d300/DSC_0002.JPG

D300 at ISO 800:
http://www.cyberphoto.se/bildexempel/d300/DSC_0003.JPG

D300 at ISO 1600:
http://www.cyberphoto.se/bildexempel/d300/DSC_0004.JPG

D300 at ISO 3200:
http://www.cyberphoto.se/bildexempel/d300/DSC_0005.JPG

Again, I just wanted a serious discussion and try to learn something about noise reduction systems. Sorry if I hurt any Nikon owner's feelings... ;)

[Rooz]

Wesan, trust me you didn't hurt my feelings. i'm quite happy with what i use. i'm not left wanting anything. (well apart from a flip screen LV mode like the E3 but thats a different story...)

the topic, imo, is pointless and to have a serious discussion about noise perfomance and to figure out why the d300 produces hi quality images in hi iso is pretty irrelevant to photographers. maybe its important to pixel peepers and techno heads, i don't know. it just strikes me as such a dpreview sorta topic where a pack of pixel peeping morons sit there comparing and picking holes in the performance of one camera or another for no reason related to the image or photography itself.

what i find funny is that people say, "yeah the image looks great at iso1600 BUT thats becasue of blah blah blah." my answer to that is who gives a shit why its good ? if the image looks good then really, who cares why. isnt the image itself evidence enough and proof enough ?? isnt that what we as photographers are interested in ?

i've never seen a topic about why a certain lens performs better with the same qualifying statements. ie: "images that come from lens A look great BUT thats because of blah blah blah." or lets even use any image taken with a camera. do we say "yeah the image from cam A look good, but thats becasue of blah blah blah." why is hi-iso performance any different from any oher image parameter and why does it cause such hysteria ? and more to the point...how many of the highest quality images that you have seen in this site in any of the manufacturer forums taken at 1600+? 1% ? 2% 5% so really, if we only use hi-iso for a MINIMAL amount of our high quality shots, why do we spend so much time talking about it ?

these are the facts of the matter so i set you straight since you're interested. aside from the MkIII and D3 which set new standards, the iso performance of current medium-top level dslr's is excellent. anyone who says they picked a nikon d300 over a 40d becasue of better hi-iso, (or vice versa), is either ignorant or an idiot. :)

[cdifoto]

I think pixel peeping sucks. Discussing noise characteristics between cameras?


*snore*


Let's see images. You know...photos that don't make my eyes bleed.

[Visual Reality]

Why compare noise reduction? That doesn't tell you anything about the camera's sensor performance. The noise reduction can be turned off. Compare them both off.

[Rooz]

apparently even in raw, nikon and sony both apply some NR regardless of whether its turned off or not. dont know if thats true, nor do i really care. lol

[ghost]

I call this measurebating. And it should only be done in private.

[Wesan]

OK OK! You can stop it now! I get it! This was not a topic that you guys here liked or wanted to talk about.

Even if I didn't learn that much about the noise reduction system of different cameras, at least I learned something about myself - I'm a "measurebating pixel peeping ignorant moron idiot, who posts pointless topics that suck".

Thanks. Feels good to know...

[kev.]

OK OK! You can stop it now! I get it! This was not a topic that you guys here liked or wanted to talk about.

Even if I didn't learn that much about the noise reduction system of different cameras, at least I learned something about myself - I'm a "measurebating pixel peeping ignorant moron idiot, who posts pointless topics that suck".

Thanks. Feels good to know...

Wesan, I think you ask a very relevant thread. It's not a waste at all, as well as the point that I have often wondered what is going on inside of my dslr, maybe we aren't allowed to ask questions like this to upset "the above the minions crowd". I've been coming to this site for about twelve months now & thought it to be really neat & down to earth, I've had a look at a few & the elitism scorched me, this place always seemed good to go for me, the big boys occasionally played with the poor family next door & you got to have a look at their next good thing, a real down to earth sort of thing, ah well, 'Such Is Life'.;)

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

"who posts pointless topics that suck".


Says one of the few old school who managed to start a popular sticky.:D

Just because a bunch of posters weren't interested in a topic doesn't mean others wont yet comment on it and show an interest.