D300 - ISO range question

For most shooting situations, Andy's comments are on the money IF you get the exposure right and IF you have your

camera's picture controls set exactly the way you like them you should get a quality JPG image. Most DSLR

cameras are capable or producing stunning JPGS. Whether they do or not is probably up to the photographer (how

he/she has the camera set).

 

As software manufacturers make breakthroughs in their image processing software, their ability to 'correct' a

high ISO image can exceed the abilities of what is built into the camera, hence the importance of shooting RAW

comes into play. While I have found the D300 does a good job in reducing noise and maintaining detail up to ISO

1600 for many shooting situations, I also found that much of the time when I deemed it necessary, I could do a

slightly better job on my own. ISO 3200 from the D300 is also quite workable when using a RAW file and can

produce exceptional results when using 3rd party software.

 

In Andy's 2nd post, he comments that above ISO 400, noise starts to creep in with the D300. I agree.

But it is a non-issue as either through in-camera settings or post processing, the noise can easily be totally

eliminated and excellent detail maintained throughout the camera's available ISO range, even up to ISO 6400..

 

Both DX and FX will, at some point, be replaced by a superior format.

Although I use photoshop at times, I find it far more involved than I ever need. I try to capture as much of the final results

"in-camera" that I want as opposed to post production work. Sometimes, I even find the adjustments in iphoto to be

sufficient. It sounds like Lightroom 2 would be an excellent choice for me then.

<i>"Both DX and FX will, at some point, be replaced by a superior format."</i><p>

 

Elliot, what does that mean and how is it relevant to this topic?

OK, back from the Blue Angels (minus one) and ISO 1600. Once again, no serious problems with noise. That said, it was noticable with the image viewed at 100%. However, a little NR adjustment in NX2 was all it took.

 

Of course, the greater the crop, the more limiting the noise reduction. Also, deep shadows are difficult to bring out. But on balance, an easy way to increase shutter speed without sacrificing much quality.

 

Here's one where it was easy to get noise out of the sky but the plane shadows just have to stay.<div></div>

Bruce, is it really necessary to go all the way to ISO 1600 under broad daylight?

 

I do have the advantage of having some f4 super-teles so that I typically use f4 under such circumstances. Sunny 16 means I can easily have 1/3200 at the base ISO 200.

Shun, I often shoot at higher ISO in daylight to increase depth-of-field on moving subjects. Noise appears to be more of an issue, or at least in more apparent under low light conditions.

 

Lex, I was referring to Andy and Shun's comments about the future of DX vs FX and I guess it is not relevant to the OP's question.

Bruce - nice picture.

Fair question, Shun. I will explain but please remember, this was my first time photographing an airshow and wasn't sure what to expect. BTW, the PN turorial on airshows was nice but much of it didn't apply in this case.

 

First, it wasn't braod daylight. It was more cloudy, something that can be seen in many of the other shots.

 

Second, I took some shots at f/5.6, others at f/8. Was f/8 really necessary? Maybe not but again, I was experimenting and didn't know which would work out best.

 

Third, most of the shots were at 1/4000. Did they have to be that fast? Maybe not but that sure did freeze the action, sometimes too much.

 

Fourth, I did not set the D300 for ISO 1600. Indeed, many of my shots were around ISO 900 or so. I used Auto ISO and given the extreme DOF (f/8) and extreme shutter speed (1/4000), the camera went to 1600.

 

Apologies for this thread going OT. I learned some things and now have lots of questions, too. Perhaps it will be better if I begin a new thread just dealing with airshows. I would appreciate your comments and thoughts from your experiences, Shun.

One of the tricks to high ISO shooting is treating chroma and luminance noise individually. Most good noise reduction software lets you tackle each separately and tweak them just enough to retain good detail and color fidelity.

 

My D2H is atrocious at 1600 or higher compared with more recent dSLRs, but using Noise Ninja or other comparable software to tweak each type of noise separately helps. With a little work and grayscale conversion, the results are comparable to Delta 3200 or T-Max 3200 at the Hi-1 and Hi-2 settings. And as noisy as the D2H is at 1600, the color photos are still better than any 800-1600 color film I've tried. But the D2H is very definitely old tech and far surpassed even by a D50.

 

High ISO digital photography is like push processing b&w film, which I've done for many years. It's a great tool when used appropriately, but definitely not to everyone's taste. For some photographers, getting a photo - any photo - is the priority. Other photographers would rather pass up a shot than risk compromising ultimate image quality. Both are valid within their contexts.

Bruce, all I can see is a mainly blue sky with some clouds and pretty good light on the airplane in your one image.

Since

airplanes in flight are typically close to infinity, I don't worry about any depth of field issues. (Birds in flight is different

as they are typically much closer and it is hard to get everything sharp from wing tip to wing tip. I focus on the eye(s)

in those cases.) At least in my case, I trust my Nikon super-teles wide open at f4 and I'll probably use 1/1000 to

1/2000. I doubt that I would devicate from the base ISO or at most go to ISO 400.

 

For a moving subject, always leave some room in front, especially if you are using a zoom. I would rather waste a

few pixels in front than the risk of cutting something off. But I am sure you have figured that out already.

So I just bought a 70-200 f/2.8 (Nikon) to use on my D300 and was outside this evening taking pictures of my kids (portrait

style on the grass). I was shooting at ISO 2000 and higher and fixed at 2.8, with a speed around 60-100 and the shots

were very grainy. Truthfully, I was surprised to see the results like this. Any thoughts?

Josh, again, under-exposure is a major source of noise. If you under-expose, you can have serious noise at ISO 200.

 

Could you post a sample or two?

Josh, since you are using a Mac Pro, I would suggest you look at Aperture 2.1 which is a very user friendly but robust program for importing and post-processing your RAW D300 images. You'll be able to walk right into it as an extension of iPhoto. There is an Aperture users network for support and help. I find that my D300 does a nice job up to about iso 1600. Shun is very correct about more noise in shadows and under exposed images.

 

Nice Blue Angels shot Bruce! They put on a grand show over the bay in San Francisco last month. I got my best shots at about 1/2000, iso 200 to 400.

Shun, sorry, was away for a few days and missed your post. I will post a few samples of what I'm referring to.