Is D300 better at high ISO than D70?

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

12/08/2007 11:21:41 PM · #1

Here are my tests....

D70 at ISO 1600

D300 at ISO 1600

MattO

Nikon D4

12/08/2007 11:30:49 PM · #2

You know I've been told by a few people that have the D300 that without noise reduction on there is little to no difference between the 2 cameras. And they claim that the noise reduction kills alot of detail. Is this what you are finding as well? I have a friend who keeps going back and forth rather to upgrade the D80 to the D300

MattO

Neil

Fujifilm X-T30

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

12/08/2007 11:42:39 PM · #3

Nick - thanks for posting those.

I was excited to hear that Nikon was adopting CMOS sensors, and that they were offering such high ISOs!

However, while the camera shots at lower ISO definitely beat the D70, I'd say the higher ISO's are still pretty unusable. You can see, even when there's more noise, the shots have more usable detail.

But for the price of the D300, it looks like someone looking for high ISO would be much better off with the Canon 5D. At least, until Nikon makes some more strides. I believe it took Canon quite a while to refine their CMOS technology to get it as good as it is.

But perhaps this isn't a "representative" scene, and maybe the noise wouldn't be so obvious . I'd like to see a head to head comparison of noise on the D300 (or D3) and the 5D.

Anyway, I know it's still a great camera, and I hope you enjoy it. I know you'll be taking some great shots with it!

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

12/08/2007 11:47:43 PM · #4

I think this is the worst case scenario. Gray areas are always problematic. I chose my gray walls on purpose and setup light to show all the shades of grey.

So far I'm very happy with D300.

Neil

Fujifilm X-T30

12/08/2007 11:51:55 PM · #5

Yes, I was still looking at them, and I thought I should clarify that my "unusable" label pretty much applied to 3200 and 6400. Well, usable for emergencies I guess.

Up to 1600, it's definitely better than the D70. Still a bit noisier than I expected, but usable.

I am noticing though too that the light seems more "even" in the D300, and brighter overall as well. Perhaps it's also more sensitive? Were the exposures comparable?

option

Nikon D200

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

12/08/2007 11:56:29 PM · #6

With the amount of detail retained and higher overall resolution in the D300 shot, you could NR it as much as you want, and it would still have more detail than the D70 shots at ISO200...

Message edited by author 2007-12-08 23:57:07.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

12/08/2007 11:57:16 PM · #7

Originally posted by nshapiro:

... Were the exposures comparable?

I actually shot on P mode so they maybe off a bit. You may have to find same shade of gray to compare. WB looked different too. Once I set both on tungsten D300 was more yellow so I set in on K2500.

MattO

Nikon D4

12/09/2007 12:04:08 AM · #8

The noise in these shots from the D300 remind me of the noise characteristics of my original 4mp 1D camera.

MattO

MQuinn

Olympus OM-D E-M1

Olympus 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 Zuiko Digital Zoom

12/09/2007 12:10:45 AM · #9

Originally posted by MattO:

The noise in these shots from the D300 remind me of the noise characteristics of my original 4mp 1D camera.

MattO

They remind me of a E500 at 1600 with a long exposure... OMG not acceptable even at 100% cropped... Man was I so lied too, people saying Nikon cameras could do high iso so much better...

Olyuzi

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

12/09/2007 01:19:38 AM · #10

Same sensor size in both cameras with similar noise characteristics at iso 1600(sorry couldn't view the larger files since I'm on dialup) but double the MPs in the D300 and probably half the pixel pitch and you don't think they have advanced noise wise? Are you viewing prints at all? The noise may not even be noticeable in a print. The noise to me looks a lot dirtier in the D70 but that may be due to the different exposures.

Also, if the D300 is as noisy as you say at isos 3200 and 6400 and unusable, it may be that Nikon put them there not to shoot in caves, but for sports photographers in outdoor settings who need to maintain high shutter speeds. They may be perfectly usable in those conditions. For caves you have access to VR lenses.

Message edited by author 2007-12-09 01:23:22.

salmiakki

Sony Alpha a7R III

Sony Sonnar T* 35mm F2.8 ZA

12/09/2007 02:52:30 AM · #11

I was "playing" with the ISO settings on my new D300 the other evening on the way home from work to see how bad the noise really was. I don't have any comparison shots from the D70, as this was really a spur of the moment thing, but I think in general @ 1600 this was not too bad. 3200 and 6400 were not good, but I think the 1600 is usable. Certainly WAY better than the D70.

ben4345

Nikon D700

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

12/09/2007 04:47:22 AM · #12

Try this:
auto sharpening or use maximum of 1 <-- most important
Auto contrast
brightness -1
AWB 0
auto saturation
adobeRGB
ISO NR: low

Message edited by author 2007-12-09 04:47:58.

Morgan

Nikon D800

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED

12/09/2007 08:27:44 AM · #13

Two friends of mine and I conducted a casual shoot out yesterday in a coffee shop, so it was not the least bit scientific, but an observation was made that surprised us all. We used the same lens in the following cameras: D40, D50, D300, and D3.

One person took the exact same shot with each camera in close succession. All settings were duplicated. The images came out differently.

So, we then repeated the process permitting the Program mode automatics inherent within each camera to do their magic. Each camera made a different exposure setting for the same image with the same lens. Now this may not seem too startling to you. In fact, we expected the D3 to be different. But, we did not expect the three APS chip cameras to be so different from one another. Makes you go, Hmmm?

Apple iPhone 5

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

12/09/2007 09:56:50 AM · #14

Nikon probably changed the matrix metering algorithm between these models. They use a database of scene types to determine the best exposure

smurfguy

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

12/09/2007 10:48:50 AM · #15

Originally posted by nshapiro:

I'd like to see a head to head comparison of noise on the D300 (or D3) and the 5D.

Ken Rockwell just compared the Nikon D3 to the Canon 5D. The D3 is the clear winner in the very high ISO range (the 5D doesn't natively go above 3200). Of course, it better win at over 2X the price.

Last month he compared a number of models, including the D300, D200 and 5D, wherein the 5D was the clear winner. Not just because of noise control, but also detail retention.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

12/09/2007 11:50:33 AM · #16

Originally posted by smurfguy:

Originally posted by nshapiro:
I'd like to see a head to head comparison of noise on the D300 (or D3) and the 5D.

Ken Rockwell just compared the Nikon D3 to the Canon 5D. The D3 is the clear winner in the very high ISO range (the 5D doesn't natively go above 3200). Of course, it better win at over 2X the price.

Last month he compared a number of models, including the D300, D200 and 5D, wherein the 5D was the clear winner. Not just because of noise control, but also detail retention.

The only problem with his tests is he didn't turn off NR. So different cameras will give you different results based on firmware settings and not on quality of the original capture.

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

12/09/2007 12:02:33 PM · #17

Would be interested to see comparison shots of properly exposed scenes at high iso.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

12/09/2007 12:06:42 PM · #18

Originally posted by routerguy666:

Would be interested to see comparison shots of properly exposed scenes at high iso.

I'm about to send my D70 back for cleaning but if I have time I will try to match exposure on both cameras and take few shots before sending it out.

The best way to compare is just to find same shade of gray on both shots and look at those areas.

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

12/09/2007 12:21:54 PM · #19

I don't own or plan to own either camera, but I'm interested just from a geek perspective. Nasty noise in an underexposed shot is what it is. To me, the real difference is how they behave when you can properly expose a shot only if you crank up the iso.