D800/D4 Test Shots Posted at Imaging Resource Site

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by elliot|1, Mar 16, 2012.

  1. High ISO images are impressive for both cameras. (Obviously the D4 does better than the D800 as it should). What is most impressive perhaps are the base ISO images for the D800 - WOW!
    There doesn't seem to be much of an improvement in IQ at the extreme (high) ISOs when comparing the D3S to the D4, especially above ISO 6400, although considering you have a higher pixel count, that is an improvement in itself.
    Another pleasant surprise as expected - the D800 seems to do a bit better at high ISO compared to the D700.
    FWIW: I like to use the test image at the very bottom of the groups as it has a variety of interesting areas of detail and the entire ISO range.
    Here is a link the the Comparometer at the Imaging Resource site:
    For those of you not familiar with the site, once you select the camera body, a series of test images will appear. Click on the image once to bring up a small view of it. Click on the image a 2nd time to see it at 100%. Bring up one image on the left and a 2nd on the right and you can compare them.
  2. Web site is jammed up at present - but thanks for the heads up!! Keen to see D700 vs D800.
  3. I am not having any trouble getting to the site. Try:
    and then navigate to the Comparometer by selecting COMPARE IMAGES under the CAMERAS tab.
  4. IMO the dpreview.com D4 ISO 6400 samples show a remarkable improvement in detail compared to D3s and there doesn't seem to be too much difference in SNR (per area).
    I would like to get a D4 for situations where image quality with the D3/D700 have been marginal, e.g. in candle light, in concert lighting. I can make do by using really wide apertures but the exposure has to be really spot on, and the quality can suffer because of slight focusing errors and also because of aberrations in the lenses. In situations where I have had to use ISO 6400, f/1.4, 1/80s, for example, I'd like to be able to stop down to f/2 or f/2.8, and shoot at 1/200s. This would mean increasing ISO to 25600, which is a tough call for any camera. Unfortunately, I cannot at this point afford a D4. The D800 is obviously excellent for daylight photography but comes with increased storage expenses. But it does afford some additional flexibility in the use of the images.
  5. Thanks Elliot, that route works for me.
    The D700 appears to expose maybe 1/3 of a stop higher than the D800 in the still life tests @ISO 3200 and above ......curious......
  6. These test results are subjective. I don't see much in the way of improved detail or NR in the D4 over the D3s, but I may not be seeing what Illka is seeing. Keep in mind that the D4 image is enlarged because of the higher pixel count as compared to the D3S (as is the D800's compared to all others) which makes it kind of difficult to accurately compare and may give the appearance of increased detail. After post processing, I suspect the differences would almost indistinguishable at higher ISOs.
    I look forward to seeing DXOMark's results (and others) as to dynamic range and ISO rating of the D4. I doubt there will be a huge difference from the D3S.
  7. The D800 look as good as the D700 at higher ISO's, and that's all I needed to know. Definitely on the "must get" list now.
    In fact, the D800 looks markedly better in the shadows.
    BTW, Elliot, our comments are subjective, but the test results are not. They are merely test images.
  8. Dan, you are quite correct (my subjective opinion) on your analysis of the D800 vs the D700 and you are absolutely correct about my comment - I should have written "Interpretation of the test results is subjective.".
    I too am extremely pleased with the high ISO results of the D800 although not surprised - I was fairly certain they would be very similar to or improved over the D7000 IQ, and thankfully they are - Nikon rarely disappoints.
  9. Dan, I think the D800 is a bit better at the highest ISOs than the D700 which starts to show some banding at the extended Hi-settings. And a bit sharper, too. However, I was hoping I could get a camera with a more significant improvement especially at ISO 6400-12800 than the D800 presents.
    For me the low ISOs were not really a problem at all - living in Finland a good part of the year is quite dark and the highest ISOs are used quite often. In the winter most events are indoors and there is little natural light, and in the summer there is a long period of soft light in the evening and early morning and this is all high ISO domain if one has a motion capable subject. Tomorrow in the late afternoon I am shooting a dance group outdoors and they're predicting cloudy weather, so it can be something like f/2-f/2.8, 1/100s, ISO 400 ... a tough situation. Getting most parts of the performance sharp would call for f/5.6 , so that's ISO 3200 right there. But the quality expectation is probably ISO 400 so ... time to pack lighting gear in the car. I guess I can mostly do static, planned shots with the lights and then accept a lower quality for the action shots. I am much more often in need of improved quality at high ISO than low ISO but nevertheless due to cost reasons I'm much more likely to buy a D800 than D4 in my current situation. The majority of my best shots (75%) have been made at ISO 400 or lower, but then there are key shots as part of a documentary coverage of an event which require very high ISOs and I would like to be as competitive there as possible, since those are the shots that few people can get yet they can add a lot to the mood of the whole.
    Elliot, now that you questioned what I said I have to say that I don't see that much difference either. ;-) Sometimes the test sites make a mistake and replace the material with corrected images and data, and right now I see something different than what I saw looking at the images a couple of days aog. Often the different parts of the image show that the focus is on slightly different parts in the images made with different cameras, and this can cause problems. But I still think there is some difference in detail in favour of the D4, and comparable SNR, at ISO 6400. But there will be other sites and other tests in the near future. The one additional stop of AF sensitivity could be a significant advantage in light before all light fades. ;-)
  10. I wasn't interested in the D4; samples already appeared on DPreview. I was interested in comparing the previously industry-leading Sony NEX-7 with the D800. Based only on the I-R still-life, at low ISO the D800 images are bigger but not significantly better. However by ISO 6400 the NEX-7 smears the red yarn, and by ISO 12800 smears all yarn colors. Whereas the D800 holds up very well. Wow!
  11. Another interesting comparison: D800 vs Canon 5DMKIII. There is a clear difference between the two at very high ISO (ISO 6400 and above) and the results may be surprising to you. The Canon appears (to me) to be cleaner/sharper while the d800 has more noise but also has more detail.
  12. I see what you mean, but at low ISO the 5Dm3 is no better than the NEX-7, which has more pixels for slightly higher resolution. The D800 high ISO images probably give you more to work with in Lightroom (we shall see).
  13. I am not interested in the D800 but is good to know how this camera and the D4 should perform about ISO because probably the D400 ( which I hope will be out soon and I would like to get ) would be as good as those ones or perhaps, much, much better than the D300s or close to the D800 / D4.
    When you take a picture at high ISO, I do believe that you can see the effect between one setup and another, on the darkest areas instead the lighter ones, am I right ? If so, why should we completely trust on those pictures then ? My point is, I do believe we must wait for those two cameras to perform on the field, under different scenarios before we can come to any conclusion.
    I hope those cameras are better than the D700 / D3 so all of those in the line to buy them, would be happy but should not we wait for more testing and more real life results before assuming they are beating the D700 / D3 for a very large gap ?
  14. dont see too much difference between D3s and D4 at 3200-25,600. they appear to have different signatures: d3s is warmer with more realistic skin tones. D4 is cooler for sure. both look pretty good, but unless you want better video, no reason to switch if you have a D3s.
  15. Dont se any diference either. Invest on excelent lenses, photography books, and workshops. Care not too much about
    the newest camera.
  16. Just drinking my morning coffee and took the time to download both the D800 and D4, 12800 and 25600 iso pictures, opened them up on my two monitors side by side and zoomed the images to the same viewing size. Viewing the images at 100% or 200% does not give you a true comparison between any of the cameras in my mind due to the different MP of the cameras.
    When viewed at the same viewing size it appears that the D800 has slightly less noise that the D4 at iso 12800 and the D800 has more detail. At 25600 iso the D4 has slightly less noise but the D800 still retains slightly more detail (in this case the D800 noise is getting random, not just in the darker areas).
    So in using the imaging resource samples overall the ISO point where the D4 and D800 are the same appears to be around a 1/2 stop between 12,800 and 25,600
  17. Comparing the D800 to the D700 images at 25,600 and viewing at the same image size on my two monitors the D800 has substantially less noise than the D700 and quite a bit more detail.
  18. FWIW, here is a comparison of the D700 and the D800 at ISO 6400. The D700 cropped portion is on the left at 1:1. The D800 cropped portion is on the right and has been scaled to approximately match the D700's resolution. At a casual glance they look the same. It seems that the D800 doesn't suffer detail loss compared to the D700 at 6400.
  19. Here is a similar comparision, now at ISO 12,800. It seems that at this ISO, the D800 holds slightly more detail, even though its output looks yuckier at full size.

Share This Page