the noise may look clean as a whole image..
have u tried to do a 100% crop and see how the noise perform?
maybe it will help as a guideline for your printing.
D4 sensor - High ISO Performance and other factors
- Thread starter diediealsomustdive
- Start date
the noise may look clean as a whole image..
have u tried to do a 100% crop and see how the noise perform?
maybe it will help as a guideline for your printing.
iam curious if u have tried the AF in low light between 1Dx and D4 with similar lens/lenses and the ISO performance? Thanks.I'd agree with most posters.. Having owned every current camera for every system, I have to say that the D4 is hard to beat. The 1Dx has it's advantages, but I find that on a whole, the D4 is the best DSLR currently on the market. I take into consideration a number of points, more then half of which are subjective. For example (subjective): I like 16mp files, I feel for weddings it's EXACTLY enough. I like how the camera feels in the hand, it's the most comfortable to hold for 10-15 hour days. I like the ergonomics (where the buttons are placed, and what they do), it's the fastest camera to navigate on the fly. I feel that ISO 6400 provides me with enough color and detail information, if I need it in a pinch, and 3200 gives me just the right amount of noise, that it looks cool, but isn't distracting (mainly use 3200, but have needed to push it two stops [12,800] and have been ok with it). I like the skin tones from the D4 And a sample of non subjective points: The camera focuses fast and accurately in low light The face detection autofocus, when needed, is reliable. The flash system is amazingly advanced, if you know what you're doing. The sensor is very ISO competitive (it meets todays standards for good high iso) The sensor shoots very clean low ISO files. The sensor has great colors, tones and good dynamic range. Some of these things are available in the DF, but the overall shooting experience changes. You have to ask yourself somethings: Do you like/want a smaller body? Does the DF feel comfortable in the hands? Are all the AF/internal technologies the same (a camera is more then it's sensor)? Do you feel the dials are easier to use then buttons? A lot of really hands on things need to be taken into consideration before making a purchase, but if you just want to look like a hipster, then get a DF camera and learn to live with it. Obviously Nikon feels its more important to impress the cool kids with disposable income, then to focus on making improvements to their professional gear (I don't mean the D4, that's great, I'm talking a few lenses really need refreshments, although to be fair I am pleased from what I've seen of the 58mm). Anyway, I am selling a D4 and a bunch of lenses (not my only D4, but my only one for sale sold a bunch off already).. Though I wouldn't sell any of them, if it wasn't for my need to go back to MFD cameras :| But you don't have to believe what I wrote, you're welcome to think it's a sales pitch
Last edited:
To be honest, I only ever use prime lenses.. So using the 1Dx w/50L or 85L II leaves something to be desired AF wise (and those are the lenses I used mainly [actually the 50L was the most used lens]). I'm sure if I used the 1Dx w/70-200 IS II (or 135L or one of there fast focusing 300mm+ primes) I'd probably have gotten better results from the 1Dx then I did. Not to say that the 1Dx isn't good, it's just to say that for the focal length I was shooting (lenses I was using), there really wasn't much of an advantage to the camera over the D4 (although it still had its advantages).
My above opinion also has a lot to do with button ergonomics, and how the camera feels in the hand. I feel that's probably one of the most important aspects when shooting 10 - 15 hour days. Especially when you need to change settings on the fly, and really need a camera you can be comfortable with (and I was shooting with Canon for 10 years before switching to Nikon, and Nikon has always felt natural in the hand, despite my long history with Canon). I think the keeper rate would have be ever higher with the 1Dx, given the right lenses (and it was already slightly higher, but nothing that defines the camera as die die better).
A LITTIE BIT OF A RANT (but useful information if you don't already know):
You also have to understand something about ISO and Canon. Canon is a very sneaky company. First the ISO ratings of Canon aren't exactly standard. As in, they're about 1/3 a stop behind in brightness on some of there camera bodies. Also, (and the 50L is the worst for this) even though lenses will say 1.2 and 1.4 etc, Canon actually uses physics to there advantage here.. What I mean is, they create a lens with a 1.2 f-stop, by the mathematical laws of physics, thus the lens is by right a 1.2 lens (bokeh/DOF). BUT, the lens isn't actually letting the light in of a 1.2 lens.. It's actually losing a lot of light from transmission, so the lens is really a 1.4-1.8 as far as light gathering is concern (T-stops). So what canon does, is internally they raise the ISO without telling anyone when certain lenses that are connected to there camera (for instance, if the 50L is connected to the camera, Canon tells you, you're shooting on 1.2 @ iso 800, but really you're running on iso 1250, and the difference is split between iso and shutter speed). They do this to try and keep shutter speeds more in line with other prime lenses of similar speeds.
I've done extensive testing on this, and it's really easy to do if you don't believe me.. Get yourself a sony NEX with multiple adapters, tripod it. Then get yourself a bunch of 50mm lenses, ranging from f/0.95 (if you have a noct) to f/2. Put your lens on max aperture, and switch you NEX to a fixed ISO, point at a bunch of random stuff (keeping the camera the same on tripod) and mount and dismount every lens, and check the shutter speed. You'll start to notice that just because a lens is 1 stop faster then another, doesn't mean that there's one full stop of shutter speed difference between them. (T-stops, are light, F-stops are just physics numbers.. Thats one of the reasons why you pay through the nose for cinema lenses).
I don't know what is it, maybe the coatings Canon uses, but I've noticed that almost all there lenses rate 1/3 of a stop or more slower then Zeiss, Leica, and Nikon lenses.
Anyway, at the end of the day, all flagship cameras are great.. They're the best you can get for a given system, hence the price tag. And just because the D800 is slightly newer, doesn't make it better.. It just makes it a part of a different product line.. Nikon knew it was making a D800 well before the D4 came out, it wasn't like they made the D4 then magically were like WOW we can make something better for half the price.
I don't mind the D800's high MP for some applications (not events/weddings/corporate portraits, no need for such high MP), but I had one twice, once it lasted two weeks and I sold it off... The other time it lasted a week and was gone.. I just don't like the sensor in the D800, it doesn't jive with me. I'm wondering if sony will make better use of it in there A7r.
Hope this helps Turbonetics
Thanks for the hands on report. Always appreciate some in depth user report.
To be fair to Canon, they aren't the only culprits when it comes to overstating their ISO setting. My Olympus EM-5's pretty poor when it comes to this, overstating by around 1 full stop. I don't know if it does any boosting to get comparable shutter speeds though, haven't done any testing in this regard.
Yea, I also wish manufacturers tell us the t-stops. Interestingly most Cine lenses are rated by T-stops.
Last edited:
Thanks for your detailed information.
Iam surprise with the ISO ratings.
I was thinking if it could be the lens coating issue as mentioned by u or the sensor issue?
As for the D4 against the D800(E),i can understand what u mean..both are different camera to be compare directly.
Iam surprise with the ISO ratings.
I was thinking if it could be the lens coating issue as mentioned by u or the sensor issue?
As for the D4 against the D800(E),i can understand what u mean..both are different camera to be compare directly.
Depends on usage... if you are talking pure static shots, like products, still life, the D800 might interest you more.
If you are talking about several other factors, then the D4 might come into play.
I was actually using the 1Dx and wanted to see how it fare against the D4 so I asked someone who had used both before for a more exact information. Personally I feel that for pure static shots,most DSLR should be able to do the job neatly even entry level ones.
Last edited:
Yeah, cine lenses have to be rated for T-stops, you can't have variation between scenes.. Imagine the same lighting, and then all a sudden a wide shot cuts to a tight shot and it's one stop under.. haha, would be troublesome for cinematographers to have to keep track of light transmission if the numbers were all funny f-stops?! More important to keep track of light, then DOF in cinema, since most movies are shot at around f/4, there's quite a bit of leeway to get the DOF required.
So cine lenses end up getting T-stop ratings. And other things, like focus breathing, it's limited on cine lenses as much as possible, as it would also be weird if you're watching a movie and focus goes from the fellow in front to the fellow in back smoking, and all of a sudden the crop gets tighter or looser.. Would be very distracting.
Also lenses are geared, irises don't have click stops, and other stuff..
So cine lenses end up getting T-stop ratings. And other things, like focus breathing, it's limited on cine lenses as much as possible, as it would also be weird if you're watching a movie and focus goes from the fellow in front to the fellow in back smoking, and all of a sudden the crop gets tighter or looser.. Would be very distracting.
Also lenses are geared, irises don't have click stops, and other stuff..
There goes another victim of nostalgia. :cry:
Hope you enjoy it!
To each his own. If you can't see it pass nostalgia as what the camera is no one can help you. It is a mini D4. :cry:
Yes I should, if it is worthwhile to get a mini D4?
To each his own. If you can't see it pass nostalgia as what the camera is no one can help you. It is a mini D4. :cry:
Yes I should, if it is worthwhile to get a mini D4?
Haha, as long as one enjoys what he buys, what matter is it of others?
Just like my friend who buys a $6000 headphones, who am I to say he is wasting money or not putting it to better use or if it is worthwhile?
If you can't get past your own 'barrier' then don't buy, else just do it.
Am in Japan and was hoping to get to play with the Df at Yodobashi, alas it is not to be. 28 Nov 2013 is the date. Not cheap here.
How much was it at Yodobashi?
On Kakaku, most retailers are quoting just over ¥250000 which is around $3120 SGD which is less than US pricing.
Similar threads
