The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

D3 at 6400 ISO

David K

Workshop Member
This is the sort of capture that I have been trying to get with the M8 and Noctilux but just couldn't get the focus nailed in such dim light. The D3 at Iso 6400... the blind man's Noctilux :)
 

David K

Workshop Member
One more from the same party... Guy, if this looks at all familiar it's the same house I had my Bday party at.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Yes it does look familiar, nice house too. 6400 who would have thought this 15 years ago we were happy with no noise at ISO 25. Come a long way.

BTW just wait till you get your 85mm it is pretty darn sweet. I hope the Zeiss works for me because if not going right back to the Nikon
 

gogopix

Subscriber
David
Not you too!!!:eek:

What's with this Nikon stuff. I must say the high ISO work is impressive, but the images (likely the glass) is depressive.

I wonder how long this will last?

I still think the Leica files are way better. They have a life I just don't see in the Nikon (and actually, Nikkor is what I used for 20 years first)

I am sure there are professional reasons for Guy, But I am curious what drove David and Kurt to the Nokin platform.

...and of course, it just delays the inevitable...


Medium Format, Duh!

regards
Voictor
 

Terry

New member
This is the sort of capture that I have been trying to get with the M8 and Noctilux but just couldn't get the focus nailed in such dim light. The D3 at Iso 6400... the blind man's Noctilux :)
I like this shot but I have to say on my screen the area to the right of the woman's head at the stairs and then behind on the wall does not look like grain but a maize pattern on my screen. Whoops the quote didn't get the picture but it is the top one.
 

gogopix

Subscriber
I will likely be accused of 'flaming' (but how can you flame at -5 C in the snow :D

Here's what the Leica can do at 1250, ambient light, 1/30 28mm I think at 2.0

Now, shall I point out the presence, and depth felling? Maybe they will only see it over in the M section :ROTFL:

Victor
 
Last edited:

neils

New member
Well 1250 from an M8 looks like 4000 from a D3 ;-). No really I am almost completely serious.

IMO to complain about whether or not an image at 6400 is perfect or not (see my recording photos post at 12,800) is crazy. We are in territory where no film has gone before and it is far far better. I've shot TMZ and way back Kodak recording film at 6400) Complain? Not me.

I ADD grain to ISO 3200 shots now from the D3 on occasion. My Thanksgiving low light take with an M8 w/75lux vs my Xmas take with D3 and 50 1.4 and 85 1.8, well no comparison. ISO 3200 with D3 CRUSHES the M8 at 640. And 1 in 50 shots is OOF from the D3. The focus vs keeper rate with eh M8 is nowhere near that good.

I like the M8. I just wish it was the low light king the M used to be over an SLR in the film days.

The M's advantages are huge in many ways, I have M's for almost 30yrs now.

It is sad the the real advantage any rangefinder has over an SLR is often the most unreliable or I should say inconsistant area of the M8 and that is focusing. I will never argue that Nikon lenses compare to M's.

All that is for another forum. I will say you have to make prints from these 3200/6400/12,800 files to really get how very very far we've come.

Considering how super super warm the light is in these shots which really brings out noise/grain they are even more impressive. 6400 in something closer to daylight is even better.

Neil
 

gogopix

Subscriber
Actually, I was referring to ALL Nikon shots.

If you "lika' Leica" look, then you are usually unsatisfied with Conikon looks. I only pointed out that the M can do a reasonable job at 1250, for candid shots.

For large prints, we have seen many examples of the LL up to 20x30 inches. However, non Laica glass has a different look (even from Zeiss, which to me seems a 'cool' look.

Maybe it is not 'better' just different. However, I have never seen someone say :
" Look at this Nikkor image; really excitibg, lots of life-Leica glass never looks like this..."

I must say the D3 D300 images are impressive at high ISO.

but I find myself saying "They look good, for a Nikon..." (with due apologies to the girls in the crowd!) :angel:

Regards
Victor
 

neils

New member
Ow Jeez Vitcor so now I'm a girl? ;-) Joking , joking.

Trust me. I want an M8 to be able to shoot at 6400 and I want it to look good. I want the focus issues sorted too but I could live with just great hi ISO.

The lenses are different. I could always and I'm counting thousands of rolls of film, always tell even looking at wet TX whether that was a Leica roll or a Nikon roll.

Until I went digital capture my Nikons were dust magnets and the M's got used. No point in arguing the glass, but I can argue where I can now shoot and with what success rate.

Girl
 

gogopix

Subscriber
Sorry, guess I am old and UN-PC

I was referring to sayings like (eg in baseball)

"that was a nice hit, for a girl...!"
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
I will likely be accused of 'flaming' (but how can you flame at -5 C in the snow :D

Here's what the Leica can do at 1250, ambient light, 1/30 28mm I think at 2.0

Now, shall I point out the presence, and depth felling? Maybe they will only see it over in the M section :ROTFL:

Victor
Hey isn t that Vail? The same guy was there a month ago when I was shooting.
 

gogopix

Subscriber
yup
painting goes slowly 'pleine aire' esp in the snow!

Gives new meaning to the phrase 'sign painter' though:ROTFL:
 

David K

Workshop Member
Victor,
You'll get no argument from me about the Leica files being better than the Nikon... but an in focus Nikon shot beats an OOF Leica shot by a wide margin. One of my high priorities when moving to the Leica M8 was a desire to be able to capture those magical wide open low light shots with the Luxes. It's frustrating that I'm not able to obtain those shots due to an inability (most times mine, less frequently the lens) to focus accurately. Nikon to the rescue with it's astounding high ISO and low light focusing abilities. And just for the record... these ain't no girlie girl cameras :) (With my apologies for this politically incorrect comment to the many extremely competent female photographers among us.)
 

jlm

Workshop Member
Guy has some impressive portaits with his girlie 105 nikkor in the sharpness setting thread. hard to criticize those for missing any glow, they are impressive
 

KurtKamka

Subscriber Member
No doubt, many, many Leica M and R lenses are superlative. But, you can close the gap by picking the right Nikon lenses and pairing them with a camera that eases your ability to make the capture.

Any opinions on the Nikon 105 vs. Nikon 180 vs. 70-200? (sorry for the tangent David)

Kurt
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Well let's face a few facts. Nikon always made good glass , now they jumped over the edge and made even better glass. Frankly that 105 macro is priced to low for what you are getting. It is so sharp it does scare me. The 180 2.8 i have been shooting this is a 800 dollar lens and it is excellent. The 85 Nikon another 1k lens and excellent. If you get the right Nikon lenses there are just flat out damn good. Are they like the Leica glass, no they are not but you do go home with images. Now i will be really honest here. I just got back shooting a meeting here in town with some grip and grins thrown in the mix. The D300 is a charm to shoot in these situation. 3 in LCD that is good for reviewing , no waiting zooming, not a second delay here folks. Info button that turns the back LCD into the Shooting LCD on the top deck and no reading glasses . AF that hunts like a greyhound and nails everything in sight. Just move focus points around and even manual focus will confirm at any AF point. Now is this thing full of gimmicks , no freaking question but some of it is useful as hell too. I like simple too folks but i also like info available that I can use. Now is it a M8 no way and the M8 will produce a better files no question but for me not everything has to be that quality either but to be honest it is not in the least far behind it either. I am getting some pretty sweet results and you all know how damn picky I am about image quality. This is great for some things but not everything. Those shots of my son , speak volumes to me with the 85 and the 105 macro. Hard to deny it . I am still a Leica guy and that will never change totally but I am rethinking what each system will provide for me. I was totally dependent on the M8 to shoot everything , now I can back off that a little and readjust. I'm actually pretty happy.
 

vieri

Well-known member
Well let's face a few facts. Nikon always made good glass , now they jumped over the edge and made even better glass. Frankly that 105 macro is priced to low for what you are getting. It is so sharp it does scare me. The 180 2.8 i have been shooting this is a 800 dollar lens and it is excellent. The 85 Nikon another 1k lens and excellent. If you get the right Nikon lenses there are just flat out damn good. Are they like the Leica glass, no they are not but you do go home with images. Now i will be really honest here. I just got back shooting a meeting here in town with some grip and grins thrown in the mix. The D300 is a charm to shoot in these situation. 3 in LCD that is good for reviewing , no waiting zooming, not a second delay here folks. Info button that turns the back LCD into the Shooting LCD on the top deck and no reading glasses . AF that hunts like a greyhound and nails everything in sight. Just move focus points around and even manual focus will confirm at any AF point. Now is this thing full of gimmicks , no freaking question but some of it is useful as hell too. I like simple too folks but i also like info available that I can use. Now is it a M8 no way and the M8 will produce a better files no question but for me not everything has to be that quality either but to be honest it is not in the least far behind it either. I am getting some pretty sweet results and you all know how damn picky I am about image quality. This is great for some things but not everything. Those shots of my son , speak volumes to me with the 85 and the 105 macro. Hard to deny it . I am still a Leica guy and that will never change totally but I am rethinking what each system will provide for me. I was totally dependent on the M8 to shoot everything , now I can back off that a little and readjust. I'm actually pretty happy.
Guy, after a first "welcome" to the Nikon world, now that you started seeing what cam & glass can do I feel is time for a real "welcome" :D by the way, except the 105 macro VR, the 180 & the 85 aren't really new; 85 1.4 AF has been introduced in 1980, 180 f2.8 in 1986 (mark II, the actual version you got, in 1988): so we are talking a 20 yo and an almost 30 yo design, actually - they hold out pretty well :D I think that the Nikkor lineup at the moment is a formidable one, with maybe the lack of a fast WA (the 28 1.4 is now discontinued) and some somehow outdated and not too great primes wider than 35 (28, 24, 18 aren't fantastic lenses; 20mm is better but not great IMHO). Other than that, zoom are great both in the Pro & amateur format; primes from 35 & up are just fantastic, though they lack AF-s up to the 105 macro; flash system is wonderful; ergonomics on camera are great IMHO; now that high ISO has been tackled with the D3, FF has been offered with the D3, all they lack is a high-MP FF camera for those who need it. Me - I am a very happy camper with D300, D3, 14-24, 35 f2, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.4, 105 macro VR, 105 f2 DC (great lens!), 180, 70-200 VR. :D
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Well I just jumped into the fire pit. I know the lenses i have the 85 and 180 are past lenses the new 105 macro is awesome and I just bought a new 24mm shift and a new Zeiss 50 1.4. I should say i traded

So now I have the 17-35, Zeiss 50 1.4 , Zeiss 85 1.4, 105mm and the 180mm . Pretty damn good setup I think and hope. I just reworked my M8 setup a little with some glass. I sold my Nikon 85 to David K . He will love it , not sure the Zeiss will be better but I will try it and if not get the Nikon again. For the wide stuff I will use my M8 . Not much can touch Leica wides. i reworked my top end of the leica's sold my 50 lux ASPH, 75 Lux and 135 apo and got a 50 pre ASPH and a 75 cron. I should also say i traded.


So leica now is 12CV, Zeiss 18, Leica 21, Leica 28, 35 cron version IV , 50 pre asph and 75 cron. I am :cussing:crazy.
 
Top