Some D3 night street shots

[Stuart Richardson]

The D3's high ISO performance still amazes me, several months on...the other evening I went out with a 50/1.4 and just started taking pictures. The combination of the high ISO performance, auto-iso and fast and sure autofocus really opens up a different world for hand held night photography on the street. I have done this sort of thing with the M8, but it gives up the ghost at anything over 640 ISO (for my tastes anyway). It's not that I mind grain -- grain is fine, muddiness is not. I have pretty good eyesight and quick reactions with a rangefinder, but there is absolutely no contest compared to the D3 AF -- I just set it on center point, place it on the subject, and it is in focus.

I have mostly been using the 50/1.4 AFD, which while ok, is certainly not the best fast lens I have used -- iffy bokeh, lots of vignetting (which I actually like at times), and a good deal of softness. On the plus side, it is small, light, cheap and focuses quickly. It does make me hope for some new AF primes at photokina. Just thinking of what the D3 could do with the 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH or a comparable lens attached is enough to start me drooling.

Anyway, here are a few shots, nothing special, just my neighborhood. All are shot between f/2.5 and f/1.4 (most at 1.8) and ISO 1400-3200 (most at 3200).

(yes, I know it is not focused on the person...that was intentional, ill-advised as it may have been)

That says "Save Domino" -- my neighborhood contains the old Domino Sugar factory, which is going to be knocked down for development. The people in that building are hoping to get it turned into a cultural center like the Tate Modern in London. It seems unlikely to happen.

The Kool Man ice cream trucks live down the street from me. If I was able, I would love to fire rocket launchers at them and watch them explode -- their saccharine music rings in my ears all summer long as they endlessly circle my block, fattening up construction workers (narry a schoolchild in sight around here).

Oven Fresh Shit is Coming! Truer words were never spoken.

To give an idea in the difference in clarity, here is the M8 at 640:

While I probably like that photo better than any of the others, technically it is no comparison to the D3 files, which are better at 3200 than the M8 at 640.

 

[nei1]

For what its worth stuart,for me the last shot has more atmosphere in its little finger....etc,etc.Just look at that background,you wont get that at 3200asa.Great photo.

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Thanks Neil, but its not about the atmosphere -- I know it is a better photo aesthetically, but technically it has major issues -- it required very heavy post-processing, the color balance was way off and uncorrectable in full, there were floating reflections from the IR filter that I had to clone stamp out, and viewed larger, it is soft and mushy because I had to shoot below 1/30th at f/1.4 and the focus was slightly off. The background may look nicer, but that is in spite of the M8, not because of it. I will grant that the 35/1.4 ASPH (which I used in that shot) is light years ahead of the 50/1.4 AFD, but had I had the D3 at the time, I am confident that it would have made a photo that was better both aesthetically AND technically.

 

[nei1]

Food for thought Stuart,thanks.

 

[Terry]

Hi Stuart,
A lot of really nice shots. Yes, the first night I took the D700 out on the street with the 58 f1.4 it was a truly shocking revelation in what I could shoot handheld and still get good exposures.

 

[TRSmith]

Really eye opening stuff there Stuart. I was imagining trying to duplicate the scenes you shot with my old Nikon F3 and any kind of slide film that might have been available 25 years ago and realized it wouldn't even come close. These are great examples of just how far camera technology has come.

Thanks for posting them, but I'm not sure I appreciate the potent "want one" factor that goes along with them. Do you think you might have had similar results with the D700?

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Thanks guys.

Tim -- I am sure results with the D700 would be identical. I would have bought one instead of the D3, but I bought the D3 before the D700 was available.

 

[helenhill]

LOVE the mood & shots 3,5, & 10

I don't know how you can carry the D3 around...its sooo heavy
but the results are lovely

Best-h

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Thanks Helen -- it is not too bad with a light prime like the 50/1.4. I just carry it over my shoulder like a purse. It's only when you put something beefy like the 24-70 that it really starts to get overly heavy.

 

[Terry]

Thanks Helen -- it is not too bad with a light prime like the 50/1.4. I just carry it over my shoulder like a purse. It's only when you put something beefy like the 24-70 that it really starts to get overly heavy.

Even the D700 with the 24-70 is a BIG combo and makes Helen's RD1 feel like a little compact P&S.

 

[nei1]

Its beginning to look that if you actually want the "atmosphere"of the leica shot your going to be taking a few serious ND filters with you,even on a night shoot!

 

[Stuart Richardson]

What is the "atmosphere" that you are seeing Neil? Banding? Grain? I don't really see it. If you want banding and grain, just use the D3 at ISO 12800 or above. Also, it is always easier to add grain in post processing than it is to take it away later -- I would rather start with a good file than do heroics to save a poor one. Any atmosphere in that photo is from the scene, not the camera.

 

[nei1]

Im talking about previsualising the photograph and taking it in camera and not being so dependent on photoshop.However Im beginning to realise that these days photshop is in fact a large part of the camera and that deciding how you want the photo to look can be left until later,the object now is to get as pure a file as possible and then go over to the artists desk.Its more or less the same with analogue I suppose,forgive me for the confusion.The fact that you had to do so much post processing on the leica shot is because of faults in the camera ,the atmosphere is as you say in the scene not in the camera but part of that atmosphere has been created by the limitations of the camera and by accident or design has increased its depth and feeling.And yes I do mean taking that foto at 25000 asa if that is what it takes(maybe you need ND filter)then clean it up all you like in photoshop,for me having the idea first and not later in front of a tv screen is important.But I think its me that has to change and slowly I think I am but its slow progress.Once again great photo,kind regards,Neil.