D3X noise

Specifically for the discussion of the A-mount DSLR range
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
David Kilpatrick
Site Admin
Posts: 6248
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
Location: Kelso, Scotland
Contact:

D3X noise

Unread postby David Kilpatrick » Sun Dec 28, 2008 3:11 am

I know that my own tests show the D3X to be better than the A900 for noise (mainly at high ISO) but I am seeing some fairly poor results from the D3X from users:

http://8jjyra.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pW6bytY3pGq3-HNiTLFqoOxG5-hF6UYMurWvEBdcYSLc4Y3HPu9UaE-kSAC7jq9M4P6T3b-n41Dk/D3X_ISO100_3.jpg

It's mainly blue sky/grey midtone/dark tone noise, and the A900 does not seem any worse in this respect - especially when this is at ISO 100 on the D3X. I took a decent run of pictures yesterday at ISO 100-1600, bracketed in many cases on the D3X, and I'm not seeing anything I could not get from the A900. I guess we will have to wait to see, the D3X has hit the northern hemisphere at a lousy time of year for getting good new images. At least the A900 got autumn :-)

David

David Kilpatrick
Site Admin
Posts: 6248
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
Location: Kelso, Scotland
Contact:

Re: D3X noise

Unread postby David Kilpatrick » Sun Dec 28, 2008 12:38 pm

Yes, I've seen Michael Reichmann's page on this when it went up. His conclusion is broadly correct - the A900 is fine to 800, compared to the others. He is not being honest about the Canon as it has an entirely different image structure to the Nikon, not 'equal'. The 5D MkII retains much more colour information up to 6400, but uses some very strong raw NR and sharpening routines (I don't know exactly how they manage this) which make smooth plain areas better, and at the same time emphasise fine detail.

There are some other interesting claims going round, one of which is that stabilisation systems do not work if the camera is aimed up or down, and that you can see the problems with lens-based systems but not with SSS. A lot of macro shots are taken aiming down.

I'm checking out galleries and posts from all three cameras to view as many pix as possible right now, and one thing is clear - no-one is trying to shoot high ISO with the A900. There are some fantastic image sets around from the A900, like this one:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1037&thread=30478881

Pure low ISO landscape exactly where the camera has its strength. In contrast, Nikon and Canon early users are keen to see whether the cameras match the D3, or better the 1Ds MkIII, or are better than each other. I only singled this shot out because it's only at ISO 100, supposedly the D3X native sensitivity, and no matter whether the sky is dark or the subject difficult, it's not looking as you would expect. I know for certain the Canon would not do this; I don't think the A900 would at ISO 100, but it might at 200 or 400. Even then, I would process the file to eliminate the problem; there is no need to have this amount of noise.

I don't think you would ever have a problem as I doubt you would even bother to photograph something as boring to start with!

David

User avatar
aster
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5668
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 2:33 pm

Re: D3X noise

Unread postby aster » Sun Dec 28, 2008 12:54 pm

Not boring at all! :D

Just looking over the intriguing landscape is exciting and up-lifting enough!...

Yildiz

David Kilpatrick
Site Admin
Posts: 6248
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
Location: Kelso, Scotland
Contact:

Re: D3X noise

Unread postby David Kilpatrick » Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:11 pm

I did not mean the Death Valley pix were boring - that was referring to the dark skyscrape shot on the D3X! I am sure Don would love to take a walk through Death Valley with a camera, particularly given the weather conditions in Illinois right now.

David

User avatar
aster
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5668
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 2:33 pm

Re: D3X noise

Unread postby aster » Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:24 pm

Oh, OK then! :D :D

Because those photos are healing enough to aptly be prescribed by doctors dealing with all kinds of depressions or diseases even.. :)

Yildiz

User avatar
Greg Beetham
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6155
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: D3X noise

Unread postby Greg Beetham » Sun Dec 28, 2008 3:20 pm

Great Death Valley shots those alright, who would have thought desolation could be so picturesque, it's almost misleading in a way, that maybe it isn't so harsh after all......and that would be a big mistake.
I never would have thought that you could get snow on a dune in Death Valley...fascinating.
Greg

ps. David there is plenty of (darn) sunlight here at the moment...too much actually, I have a couple of examples if you would like to see, unaltered except for the size reduction, about 400X200ish, the subject is an interesting palm tree in my sisters front yard, one photo is exposed for the subject and another photo of the subject exposed for the sky, well..sky less a couple of shutter stops...but there's still a huge difference in exposure between the two. (I didn't want to contaminate your D3X noise thread with irrelevances),

User avatar
bakubo
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5719
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Re: D3X noise

Unread postby bakubo » Sun Dec 28, 2008 5:56 pm

On one of our road trips my wife and I drove through Death Valley National Park several years ago. My recollection is that it was in early or mid October. but it was still very hot and dry. Before going in we stopped and got a couple gallons of water in case of car trouble or something. We stopped a few times so I could take some photos and I remember the light was so bright with the light colored landscape that it hurt my eyes when I removed my sunglasses to use the camera. :)


Return to “Alpha A-mount System”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

cron