PDA

View Full Version : D300 iso 3200 - 6400 ??? Sample



erichlund
09-25-2007, 11:32 AM
This thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=24962141) on DPReview has a D300 sample that is either iso 3200 or 6400, with the latter more likely. At first appearance, the sample does not appear all that great, until you realize the original photograph is overexposed. One of the posters on the thread applied some -EV in post, and it really popped.

To see the original photo, click on the top link in the first post in the thread. This takes you to a rapid share site. Follow the free link to the actual photo. It will look pretty grainy, but this is mostly due to overexposure. I suspect this guy was just trying to get a quick shot without getting caught. However, below is a link to an edited version. According to the poster, the only thing he changed was the curves (in levels and curves).

Here's the post with the modified version (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=24963500).

The D3 still kicks butt on this, but this is better than an unmodified D200 iso 1600 shot. Now, if that's really iso 6400, then the 2 stop advantage may be real. :eek: Note: I did say if, the point is still in question, but even so, it's at least a 1 - 1.5 stop advantage.

erichlund
09-26-2007, 12:55 PM
Some further information has come to light on this thread. This was definitely a stealth operation, these are not authorized photos. The shooter, AquariusGermany, was in a hurry and did not have time to properly set up the camera. The shot, as it turns out, is ISO 3200, with weak noise reduction and matrix metering. In addition, Active D-Lighting was turned on (which only affects jpegs, and this is a jpeg). The combination of these factors lead to too much brightening of the shadow areas and the appearance of overexposure. This of course, exposed a great deal of noise in the "shadow" areas.

All in all, there's certainly room to feel that progress has been made, but you also have to presume it would be best to wait for some photos where proper care was taken to get a good image before we can make proper judgements about the camera performance.

TheObiJuan
09-26-2007, 01:46 PM
thanks for the heads up; I can't wait to see the real lab tested results.:D

Rooz
09-26-2007, 02:36 PM
anything less than a 2 stop difference from a d200 would indeed be a very disappointing result. the d200 is, to put it bluntly, a poor hi-iso camera.

VTEC_EATER
09-28-2007, 07:19 AM
More ISO shots:

http://www.520dc.com/read.php?tid=13910

rawpaw18
09-30-2007, 05:39 AM
They look pretty good. Been nice to see the magazine shop at the higher ISO: 3200 & boost, instead of shots of the cup with no shadow areas to view.

phatkid77
09-30-2007, 06:28 AM
http://nikonwatch.com/

rawpaw18
09-30-2007, 06:35 AM
Hey Mals,

Been a while. Those are the ones VTEC posted a litttle earlier, the ones I was referencing. Gotta love all those on the sly shots out of the D300 & D3.
Are you in the market for either?