Both Hand held, of the top of the wings of the SOH!
100% Crop

This is 1600 ISO , 1/10s, f/3.5

This is 800 ISO , 1/13s, f/3.5
1600 ISO vs 800 ISOModerators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
16 posts
• Page 1 of 1
1600 ISO vs 800 ISOHere are 2 shots Wendell asked me to post.
Both Hand held, of the top of the wings of the SOH! 100% Crop ![]() This is 1600 ISO , 1/10s, f/3.5 ![]() This is 800 ISO , 1/13s, f/3.5 D50 - AF-S NIKKOR 18-70mm 3.5-4.5G ED
It may be the fact that i've had a little bit too much to drink or it might be the fact that England have just narrowly won their opening game but i'm not sure what you're asking here Ad.
![]() Matt
can't believe it the d50 has better noise handling capabilities than the d2x
iso 800 is quite noisy on the d2x for low light situations
1/200 f2.8 ISO800 D2X 100% crop
medium intensity lighting from a spot ![]() however when the lighting is cranked up ISO 800 is o.k ![]() and at iso 1600 - low light ![]() Last edited by wendellt on Sun Jun 11, 2006 1:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
D2x shot is a little underexposed in comparison?
Yeah the D50 puts out great low noise - even in jpeg. The strong point about the D2x is it doesn't contain much chroma noise - like the D200. It just looks like grain. The D2x has less chroma noise at high ISO than Canon's flagships. And who really cares about screen display anyway. I have never noticed noise in any of my printed D2x shots. All you see is the stock (paper) fibres! It only bugs me if I look at it at 100% on screen! Isn't printing where it counts anyway? HB
I think this is for discussion purposes rather than arguments sake. Are we there yet?
heath i'm not complaining
just impressed with the new noise handling features of the new nikon cameras the D50 canon 1ds MarkII users can shoot comfortably at ISO 1200 with little noise i have seen the results when underexposed noise is more noticable
Most of the time when I see a noisy image I also find that I'm looking at an image that is somewhat underexposed. The first of the images that Wendell has posted here is exactly a case in point, whereas his second image - where he comments that the lighting "has been cranked up" is not underexposed.
In this case we have the equation of more light = more light for a better exposure. But I fail to see what the fuss is about anyway: if it's a case of noisy shot vs no shot, guess who gets to go home with the job completed? Michael, I'm going to have to steal that D200 for some shooting at The Empire, where the lighting is prodominately red, and thus makes available light shooting with the D70 a real PITA. g.
Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
He he, The D200 much to my durprise does handle reds very well! Are we there yet?
I find myself worrying about noise a little too much myself - but make myself feel better by saying "in my prints it is never a problem"! Here is where I got my information on Chroma noise: (from Phil Askey's review of the 5D, dpreview): "This is what I was The EOS 5D exhibited slightly lower chroma noise (colored speckles) than both the EOS-1Ds Mark II and EOS 20D, although couldn't match the D2X which has a more monochromatic appearance to noise." HB
Interesting comparison, while the D50 is oh so cheap right now... it's tempting to get one and then a D200 or something later on...
Blog: http://grevgrev.blogspot.com
Deviantart: http://grebbin.deviantart.com Nikon: D700 / D70 / AiS 28mm f2 / AiS 35mm f1.4 / AiS 50mm f1.2 / AiS 180mm f2.8 ED / AFD 85mm f1.4 / Sigma 50mm f1.4 / Sigma 24-70 f2.8 macro / Mamiya 80mm f1.9 x2 /Mamiya 120mm f4 macro
Previous topic • Next topic
16 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|