40d @ Iso 1600

[koffiejunkie]

One of my holiday snaps in a no-photography zone Didn't want to use flash and raise alarm, so I just knelt and steadied myself against the door frame. I'm happy with the results. In-camera NR, jpeg straight from the camera. I'll have a closer look and compare it the the RAW when I'm home:

 

[ldmelsa]

40d has good low light

 

[Snotkop]

Ag no man...... here I am eagerly waiting to see some pics in the 'no camera zone' of the 'Red Light District' in Amsterdam.....

Now you show us old pots and pans of Noah's kitchen..... he he

 

[ldmelsa]

Ag no man...... here I am eagerly waiting to see some pics in the 'no camera zone' of the 'Red Light District' in Amsterdam.....

Now you show us old pots and pans of Noah's kitchen..... he he

i don't think he takes his camera with him to the red light district

 

[zamicro]

i don't think he takes his camera with him to the red light district

Only stupid fools incriminate themselves.

 

[koffiejunkie]

Ag no man...... here I am eagerly waiting to see some pics in the 'no camera zone' of the 'Red Light District' in Amsterdam.....

Step 1: Go to Amsterdam's Red Light district.
Step 2: Have a look at the girls' "friends"
Step 3: Wisely choose no to take your camera.

BTW, I have posted an image of the Red Light district at night. Nothing juicy though.

 

[BigAl-sa]

Here is a Spotted Eagle Owl taken with a 40d at ISO 1600 (heavily overcast with drizzle)



(btw, your picture is no longer avaliable??)

 

[koffiejunkie]

Here is a Spotted Eagle Owl taken with a 40d at ISO 1600 (heavily overcast with drizzle)

Nice picture - can you make the big version available?

(btw, your picture is no longer avaliable??)

The small version seems to have had it's file name changed - might be because I worked on the description and made changes to my license/permission. Not sure - the big one is still in the same location so you can still click on it.

EDIT: fixed the small one.

 

[BigAl-sa]

Nice picture - can you make the big version available?

Tks! Have made the pic clickable. Only saved a 1000x666 on the Web unfortunately.

 

[koffiejunkie]

Tks! Have made the pic clickable. Only saved a 1000x666 on the Web unfortunately.

I find scaling down hides most noise anyway.

 

[ldmelsa]

Nikon D3 at ISO6400
Eish!

Eish, get it?

 

[koffiejunkie]

I wanna see the full size ones. Straight from the camera

 

[ldmelsa]

I wanna see the full size ones. Straight from the camera

Okay:

Original 7.3MB file shot in Fine JPG.

 

[bwana]

Okay:

Original 7.3MB file shot in Fine JPG.

No unprocessed RAW? I'd love to see what sort of in-camera NR is being done - it must be hectic.

 

[koffiejunkie]

Okay:

Original 7.3MB file shot in Fine JPG.

Pretty decent. Very grainy but it's more like film grain than noise - me likes...

Something else - it's this kind of perspective that the short lenses give that I really like. According to the EXIF this was shot at 14mm

 

[xrapidx]

Eish, get it?

 

[koffiejunkie]

I'm wondering which Canon camera the D3 would best compare to. It's more expensive than the 1D Mk III, but cheaper than the 1Ds Mk III. I'd say the 5D and 1D MkIII are closer competitors. The 5D is pretty old, so it's not a good comparison. I wonder how the 1D MkIII compares in terms of high-ISO/low-light and noise?

 

[ldmelsa]

No unprocessed RAW? I'd love to see what sort of in-camera NR is being done - it must be hectic.

It was shot in jpeg. Everybody I know, that shoot d3/d300, shoot in jpeg. raw developers have not been able to match what Nikon have done with the d3/d300 in-camera.

Pretty decent. Very grainy but it's more like film grain than noise - me likes...
Something else - it's this kind of perspective that the short lenses give that I really like. According to the EXIF this was shot at 14mm

Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 AF-S at 14mm
Photographer: http://www.daveblackphotography.com/

I'm wondering which Canon camera the D3 would best compare to. It's more expensive than the 1D Mk III, but cheaper than the 1Ds Mk III. I'd say the 5D and 1D MkIII are closer competitors. The 5D is pretty old, so it's not a good comparison. I wonder how the 1D MkIII compares in terms of high-ISO/low-light and noise?

The 5d is sharper than the d3, but does not have it's speed or lowlight.
The 1dmk3 is pointless if you can go for a d3 (remember, the d3 is full frame & the 1dmk3 is 1.3x crop - so the d3 can use wider lenses - and lowlight is better)
The 1dsmk3 is the sharpest camera before you go medium format

But, in all honesty, just get the D300. (if you are not a sports/news photographer)
If you want to do landscape, the 5D is good for that. 1dsmk3 is sharper, but... ja.

 

[koffiejunkie]

The 5d is sharper than the d3, but does not have it's speed or lowlight.

Amusing. With the same number of pixels and 3 years extra in technology development, I would have expected the D3 to be nothing less than as sharp as the 5D?

The 1dmk3 is pointless if you can go for a d3

Unless you want the 10 fps. But I seriously don't see any justification for that. Unless you're trying to get the perfect shot of a hummingbird.

But, in all honesty, just get the D300.

I damn near did. The £400 extra (at the time) was a deal breaker for me though.

(if you are not a sports/news photographer)

I am neither

If you want to do landscape, the 5D is good for that. 1dsmk3 is sharper, but... ja.

The 40D's landscape abilities far exceed my landscape skill - good enough for me for now (and probably the next 5-10 years

 

[ldmelsa]

The 40D's landscape abilities far exceed my landscape skill - good enough for me for now (and probably the next 5-10 years

Try some Fuji Velvia 50.
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/professional_films/color_reversalfilms/velvia_50/index.html

This stuff blows that 1dsmk3 out of the water, for landscape.