D700 versus Fuji S5

Is there anybody who owns the new Nikon D700 and the Fuji S5? I would like to know how the dynamic range of both

cameras compare with each other in "real life". (Please do *not* post about real 12MP versus interpolated 12MP,

FX versus DX, noise at high ISO, or the niche of each camera, e.g. wedding versus sports). Specifically, can I

get from the D700 (with D-Lighting or raw processing) files the same dynamic range as with the S5? Thanks for

helping!

Here a D700 sample processed form RAW<div></div>

Also consider how lens selection of each system matches your requirements.

"Also consider how lens selection of each system matches your requirements."

 

Huh? Isn't the S5 also an F-mount camera?

 

----

 

I don't have direct experience here. But, I remembered Thom Hogan making some relevant comment in his D3 review (same sensor/processor as the D700). He wrote that: "At the base ISO, easily nine stops of usable dynamic range are produced by the D3. Moreover, it has a Fujifilm S5 Pro-like ability to have a little latitude in exposure. I can usually bring back in a stop of highlights on raw files, when necessary, so I don't fear pushing my channel values a bit."

 

Here: http://www.bythom.com/nikond3review.htm

Alright, so Thom contradicts himself (at least a little) on this page: http://www.bythom.com/d3ord300.htm

 

He writes in comparing the D3 and D300: "And the relative of noise is dynamic range. The D3 simply has a deeper electron well than the D300. That ought to translate into slightly more usable dynamic range, especially at higher ISO values where the dynamic range tends to get clipped due to increases in noise. But we're not talking about S5-level increases, but rather modest boosts that are probably less than a stop. Still, the FX camera is going to have better dynamic range handling than the DX camera, all else equal."

 

Oh well, so much for my trying to be helpful.

Dear Ian,

Thanks for your *helpful* contributions. I picked up on your idea of comparing D3 with S5, jumped to dpreview, and I found there (in the D3 review):

 

"The D3's rather contrasty default tone curve, combined with the hardware advantage offered by those huge pixels, means that there's rather more than a stop of headroom in ISO 200 shots, giving the D3 an usually wide exposure latitude, able to pull back both shadow and highlight detail if your exposure goes awry in the press scrum or when trying to follow the action at 9 frames per second. As the example below shows the ability to pull back color information is impressive, and though you can't expect miracles these are some of the most pliable RAW files we've yet seen. It's not quite Fujifilm S5 Pro level, but with careful processing it's not far off."

 

Well, the last phrase suggests that the S5 still seems to have an advantage...

Just did a little bit more read-&-compare in dpreview (CameraRawResults):

 

For S5: "The most we could achieve using Adobe Camera RAW was a total dynamic range of 12.1 EV", and for D300/D3

they wrote that "we measured the result to have exactly 12 stops of dynamic range".

Incredible - a number of answers, but none directly answering MS Keil's question.<br /><br />

 

I own the D3, D700, and S5 Pro (2 of each). Right now, the S5 Pro beats the D700 for<br />

"people photos". I'm seeing "gray highlights" with the D700 - not sure why it's not happening<br />

with the D3, because both systems are supposed to be the same [versus speed mostly].<br /><br />

 

As far as DR goes, the S5 beats the D700 / D3, but the D700 and D3 beats the S5 with<br />

respect to low-light, high ISO capabilities.

mj t, your response means that you get less blown out highlights and better shadow detail with S5, that is not

only for people photos? And: Does this hold for JPEG, RAWs or both?

@MS Keil said, "mj t, your response means that you get less blown out highlights<br />

and better shadow detail with S5, that is not only for people photos? And: Does this<br />

hold for JPEG, RAWs or both?"<br /><br />

 

To answer the first part of your question, "yes". The S5 Pro is notoriously<br />

known for its ability to recover highlights. I spend less time "tweaking" S5<br />

images, compared to tweaking images from the D700/D3/etc. Every camera<br />

requires some level of tweaking (DSLRs, that is). Tweaking photos, that is. As<br />

ridiculous as it sounds, I spend less time with S5 RAFs than I do with NEFs. <br />

Additionally, the out-of-camera JPGs from the S5 are "ready to go"<br /><br />

 

Dont get me rwong - I wouldnt trade a Nikon body for anything else, but when<br />

it comes to people photos, the S5 has the upper edge for "out of the camera" images<br />

(with less work). And the DR on the S5 is unbeatable.<br /><br />

 

However, please consider your photographic genre. For me, the S5 excels<br />

with events such as weddings and similar events. The Nikon's excel at everything else.

Dear mj t, well, I am especially interested in the dynamic range, thanks for responding. The S5, as you

mentioned, is normally considered for shooting people. Well, I´ll perhaps do that too. I am also aware that the

S5 should be considered as a high-resolution 6MP camera rather than a state-of-the-art 12MP camera (according to

dpreview). Perhaps you would not mind giving me some more infos. According to to dpreview (D3 vs. S5) the

dynamic range of D3 equals 12 stops, and the S5 has 12.1 stops. If we assume that D3 and D700 have a similar DR,

then the difference of the results after tweaking etc. should not be such big.

 

So, here another question: From tweaking the Nikon raws, can you get similar results as with the S5 (leaving

apart for the moment that right from the camera the S5 results are better). Thanks for responding.

I can't make the comparison directly since I've not used the D3 or D700, but.. re the Fuji S5

 

I routinely recover up to 2 full stops of blown highlights quite easily.

(which capture full detail and minimal difference in contrast or colour, compared to a 'properly' exposed shot)

I'm not sure the Nikons can do this (well Thom Hogan alludes that he recovers 1-stop, but in his Fuji review, he says he thinks he can get 3-stops beyond 255 with the S5).

 

I'm not completely familiar with testing by Dpreview, but perhaps the Nikon's have more range on the lower end of the spectrum, and the Fuji's R-pixels are basically extending DR on the right end of the spectrum?

Thanks Sampson! I think a strong point is that colors do not change much with exposure...I think KenRock also mentioned that.

Where to begin?

 

I use both, the S5 (since it came out... 1.5 yrs?) and the D700 for close to... three weeks?

 

There is a difference, a pretty big difference between the two cameras in operation and capture. BUT, when it comes to

the final image, there's not a lot of difference, except that the resolution of the D700 is far superior to the S5.

 

Are you familiar with film?

 

Shooting the S5 is the closest you will come to shooting your favorite color negative film. Shooting the D700 is like

shooting the best color slide film available with perfect exposure (exposed for digital post...). If you understand that, you

understand the difference between these two cameras.

 

The S5 file is rich, thick, has great DR and color. It leans to magenta. The D700 file doesn't have the

DR depth of the S5 but will easily hold 2 stops if exposed in the 'right' direction. Color leans to yellow in my opinion.

Color wise both are easily correctable. The S5's leaning to magenta makes it feel more friendly. But the magenta can be

slightly problematic to remove.

 

I tend to space out on the technical aspects of the camera when I get interested in a subject. Obviously this is

dangerous. It's amazing what I have been able to save with the S5. 3 stops over, 2 stops under... easily. Beyond that

problems begin. The D700 is nowhere near as forgiving. BUT, resolution is much higher, high ISO performance is silly

good, and when it comes to making a print, there will be few instances in which you will be able to tell the difference

between the two cameras. That said, I haven't made a lot of BW conversions yet with the D700. BW images out of the S5 are amazing

and look just like film.

 

I was so disappointed with the D700 when I got it I felt I had made a $3000 mistake. I did tests and comparisons and my

opinion has changed. The S5 looks great out of the camera, but with a little work the D700 easily matches the output

and has become my daily camera. There are still a few instances I experience where I wonder if the S5 would not be better, but that

moment is pretty rare, and pulling all the S5 file has to offer out in those instances can be equally challenging. The new burn tool in LR2

could be very helpful here...

 

The S5 is a wonderful camera. I shoot a lot of available light and find the D700 great too. Spend some time at the Fuji

S5 forum over at DPReview (good people, good forum) if you have any more questions. I'm there all the time and hope to

post some of my findings one of these days...

 

Did that answer your question? No it did not.

 

Here is your answer: NO, the D700 will not match the S5 in DR. But, the DR is decent on the D700. Decent enough to

think about exposing your files properly and taking advantage of all the other bonuses the D700 offers. Now that I have

the D700, I'm considering selling one of my two S5's... what's that tell you? I shoot people. Events and portraits in a PJ

style (which I used to be). I do all my post with LR2.

 

Remember the film analogy above. THAT is your answer.

 

Dennis

Hi Dennis,

 

This was very detailed information, thank you very much! Usually when you mention S5 people shake their head right away...but speed is not everything to a camera. I do all kind of shooting, and in the case I get a S5 I will use it not (only) for portraits, but to produce HDR-like images. The S5 is rather inexpensive in Europe at the moment.

The S5 is a fantastic camera. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. It does have a few foibles but they don't affect image

quality. I shot some scenics today with the D700 and clouds in the sky started flashing (blown highlight display), this

wouldn't have happened with the S5. I leave my DR on 400% all the time.

 

Yeah, prices on the S5 are great right now if you can find them. I really can't decide if I will sell one of mine or not, it's that

good. If the D700 were not Full Frame, I would still be shooting with the S5 as my daily kick around... gladly. But I have

really missed full frame. If only Fuji would produce one of these for us... HEAVEN.

MS Keil,

 

Nice images, looking at them I think you would enjoy the Fuji S5 very much. I see you like richly lit and colorful scenics

along with people in both BW and color. The S5 totally rocks at this stuff. It does fall a little short in the high res category if

that's really important to you. That said, some of the guys on the Fuji forum have really perfected sharpening techniques wit the S5.

There's also some great work over there, check it out.

 

Dennis

One final thought, I was out today with the D700 shooting in a corn field maze. I like to shoot towards the sun and I do it

a lot. I certainly lost a lot of detail in the sky today. Simply nothing there in the white clouds. I'm not going to say this

doesn't happen with the Fuji, but I will say that it doesn't happen at this level. I will certainly need to rethink my

exposures again with this D700. Really wish I had taken the S5 along today for more comparison work. But boy was it

nice to use my old 28/2 today...

 

Good luck,

 

Dennis

Hi Dennis,

 

thanks again, also for taking a look at my modest portfolio :-)

 

Anyway, I would use the S5 only at 6MegaPixels, in dpreview they mentioned that it excels at this resolution, would be interesting to see how it compares to my old D70s in this respect.

I am disappointed to learn that even with FF the D3/D700 does not match the Fuji S5 in DR. I've used my S5 in some very extreme conditions in SE Asia where the sun can be cruel at times. The S5 has performed extremely well for portreits landscape and architecture. Black and white conversions and high ISO imaging has just keeps on amazing me evewn after 15 months of use. I have been able to pruduce sharp exhibition qualty prints up to 20x16 both on the S5 and my old S2.

 

I really want a FF fast camera. Maybe D700 would have been ideal; but reading the above comments I'm not so sure.

MS Keil, Don't let that 6MP stuff fool you, I believe you'll want to take advantage of all that great DR and that happens at

12MP. Do some testing. I doubt you'll go down to 6...

 

Dave Perkes,

 

I bought the D700 because I've been crying for FF since digital began. I'm not sorry I bought it, but it is different. The

next gen of D700 will be special, probably with video like the 5D. If you can wait for the next generation it might not be

such a bad idea. I couldn't, and I'm not disappointed. As a matter of fact I'll probably be in line for the next generation

when it does arrive. Took the S5 into the city today. Haven't seen the files on the big screen yet, but I'm sure they'll look

great. But, focus was slow (now that I'm getting used to speed again) and I could have used a little more ISO a few

times.

 

Went to ICP and saw some Cornell Capa and W. Eugene Smith original prints. Man, we've got a long way to go with this

digital stuff.

I like the D700 for its ISO performance...to have video of course would be nice, but I prefer good ISO

performance over 21 Megapixels. Before I shoot a lot of TMAX/ILFORD3200...but the results from the D700 at high

ISO are simply stunning compared to film.

 

Did you see the sample shot which I posted as second contribution at the top of the list? Although camera

metering made the sky not blown out and left the rest of the photo a little bit dark, it was easy to recover the

darker regions by post-processing of the 14 bit raw/nef. But, and this should be admitted, the camera could not

deliver such a result as JPEG in this situation. I read in a forum at dpreview that the FUJI & D700 are not so

far apart in terms of absolute DR, but S5 is good at recovering highlights, whereas D700 is good at recovering

shadows (but fragile at highlights).

Just looked at your picture, looks great.

 

I've read that too, the difference between the S5 & D700 being not so great but in different directions. I'm still shooting

the D700 similar to how I shot the S5, exposing more for the mid tone or even shadow and then pulling the highlight back

in post. This just isn't working with the D700 and I need to change.

 

That said, I don't think the latitude of the D700 to pull detail out of the shadow is so much greater than the Fuji to do the

same. I think the S5 is very good at that too. It's just seldom used because the files come out of the camera much

flatter, or less contrasty. On the other hand, there is no comparison on the high end. The S5 just wins hands down.

 

The difference comes in handling of the cameras themselves. The S5 can be shot on auto and practically everything is

salvageable in post. In my experience so far. The D700 needs to be exposed more for the highlights if you want to save

them, and then hope for a scene that is not to broad in spectrum. The D700 as you experienced does seem to be able to

hold it's shadow detail.

 

I'm still in the experimentation stage with the D700 myself, and exposure is a big factor. Time will tell. I like the camera.

 

Do you have a D700 now? Or were you just playing with one for that shot above. Looks like a pretty idilic place.

Hi dennis - the answer to your question is yes...the place is indeed idilic, if things go well I will get married there next year :-)

 

Yes, if you pull out shadow details then this is usually associated with loss of contrast. But in case of our visual system we do not seem to have a similar trade-off...would be interesting to have an algorithm which mimicks what´s going on in the brain...