Impressive ISO 25,600 ISO D7000

Phil Young

Phil Young

Messages
6,584
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
Yes
Only shot a couple of images at the D7000's highest expansion but tonight I was impressed.

Here's my shot:

UNTOUCHED.JPG


And touched up a bit...

RETOUCHED.jpg


I need to stop wanting to upgrade all the time!!
 
With high ISO performance like that, is there really a need to upgrade?

I've not pushed the ISO above 3200 on mine yet, but it's nice to know what its capabilities are.
 
HMansfield said:
With high ISO performance like that, is there really a need to upgrade?

I've not pushed the ISO above 3200 on mine yet, but it's nice to know what its capabilities are.
Click to expand...

I get chronic upgradeitis. Had 4 DSLR’s in 3 years and god knows how many lenses...its an illness... :(
 
Looks like you used flash! - on the other hand, looks a bit like a painting, bit unnatural looking. We have a very similar cat btw.

I'd rather take the time to get the cat near some natural light and get cleaner images.
 
Cagey75 said:
Looks like you used flash! - on the other hand, looks a bit like a painting, bit unnatural looking. We have a very similar cat btw.

I'd rather take the time to get the cat near some natural light and get cleaner images.
Click to expand...

I don't think you've seen my other cat images have you ;)

This was merely a test and although there is flash, I'm not sure that is a negative thing for the purpose of a test??? I wanted to see what kind of image I could get if I had to use this high ISO and I have to say, I would use it if I needed to now.
 
For images of the size you have posted unless your a pixel peeper to me they look very usable.
 
I must admit I try to stay below 1250 ish on my D300s as I think it get a bit noisy above this, and it gives me an excuse to put the 50mm f1.4 on :). I have just purchased a D7000 as a back up / second body so ill have to try pushing it up and making some comparisons after seeing these shots :thumbs:
 
Last edited:
Phil Young said:
I need longer than 200mm.

Or some balls.

This huge stag is quite protective.........
Click to expand...

The latter....:lol: Seriously you can get some nice images at 200mm but pay attention, if they don't like it it's very obvious. Also make sure they are aware of you being there.

But yes 300mm is better
 
maninsuitcase said:
The latter....:lol: Seriously you can get some nice images at 200mm but pay attention, if they don't like it it's very obvious. Also make sure they are aware of you being there.

But yes 300mm is better
Click to expand...

I was making noise so they don't think I'm creeping up on them. The stag kept herding the females together but I was very aware of this...if I felt I was being a threat I would first get lower than them which was working well but then if lose my nerve and want to get back once the male was moving...

What's the likelyhood of him going for me?
Missed my sigma 120-400mm today :(

Edit: also my 200mm wasn't even 200mm because it was my 18-200 so more like 170 or so.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
I'm on my phone, so I don't know if the exif i s available for your shot, Phil any chance you could post it?
Click to expand...

Graham,

I don't have the original image - I saved it to the memory card but formatted it shortly after when I realised I didn't need the images any more.

I can tell you from memory that it was f5, 25600 ISO, shutter speed can't be sure but I know I wanted it above 1/200th but think it was 1/320th...at a guess.

Sorry.
 
It's still attached to the image and not a bad guess I might add! :)

Exposure Bias Value: -3
Exposure Mode: Auto exposure
Exposure Program: Aperture priority
Exposure Time: 1 / 249
Flash: Flash fired, compulsory flash mode, return light detected
FlashPix Version: 1.0
FNumber: 5.6
Focal Length: 170
Focal Length In 35mm Film: 255
Gain Control: High gain up
ISO Speed Ratings: 25600
 
gad-westy said:
It's still attached to the image and not a bad guess I might add! :)

Exposure Bias Value: -3
Exposure Mode: Auto exposure
Exposure Program: Aperture priority
Exposure Time: 1 / 249
Flash: Flash fired, compulsory flash mode, return light detected
FlashPix Version: 1.0
FNumber: 5.6
Focal Length: 170
Focal Length In 35mm Film: 255
Gain Control: High gain up
ISO Speed Ratings: 25600
Click to expand...

Ha - well done detective ;)

Cheers!
 
Phil Young said:
I don't think you've seen my other cat images have you ;)

This was merely a test and although there is flash, I'm not sure that is a negative thing for the purpose of a test??? I wanted to see what kind of image I could get if I had to use this high ISO and I have to say, I would use it if I needed to now.
Click to expand...


Nope.

I think flash helps a lot, even with higher ISO. Somehow, I'm no techy, the flash helps keep things sharper and gives better contrast. Do a test with the high ISO flash on vs off.
 
Phil Young said:
It won't make a difference to the noise levels.
Click to expand...

I tried it and it does, I did the same shot with flash and without, but with the settings adjusted to maintain the exposure and the the non-flash shot was noticeably noisier. The fact that your subject was mainly light-coloured helped to mask a lot of the noise. Try the shot again without flash and you'll see what I mean...
 
So long as you expose your subject you shouldn't be worrying about noise.

Here's Ardie with ambient light and again touched up a little with some NR. Noise levels are still well controlled and I still consider it a usable image.

Straight out of RAW:
DSC_3450_copy.JPG


Touched up:
DSC_3450_copy2.jpg
 
Phil Young said:
So long as you expose your subject you shouldn't be worrying about noise.

Here's Ardie with ambient light and again touched up a little with some NR. Noise levels are still well controlled and I still consider it a usable image.

Straight out of RAW:

Touched up:
Click to expand...

Again, it depends in the level of the light (in this case the ambient) and the amount of black in the image/subject.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
Again, it depends in the level of the light (in this case the ambient) and the amount of black in the image/subject.
Click to expand...

Lol or shouldn't depend at all because that's why you'd use this ISO to get this exposure :) available light has zero to do with noise assuming the exposure is bang on.

...would you like me to do another test with less light???
 
Phil Young said:
Lol or shouldn't depend at all because that's why you'd use this ISO to get this exposure :) available light has zero to do with noise assuming the exposure is bang on.

...would you like me to do another test with less light???
Click to expand...

Well, in your first shot you had three stops of negative exposure adjustment, so you wouldn't really use that iso with those other settings to get a "correct" exposure ;)
 
Flash In The Pan said:
Well, in your first shot you had three stops of negative exposure adjustment, so you wouldn't really use that iso with those other settings to get a "correct" exposure ;)
Click to expand...

......it doesn't matter how you're getting the exposure, in that particular shot I wasn't going to faff around, I just wanted to see what that ISO could give me.

Anyway, weather you compensate it, adjust manually, spot meter etc...the end result is still a correctly exposed image, how you get it is your own preference...
 
Yes, the point is showing an image at 25,600 and agree it doesn't matter what was used to get it to prove the point. I think Jacob's picture actually shows the point better though.

I have only just started using 3200 as it is very useable but before was always wary of it for some reason. I now just use auto 3200 as I can rely on getting a good IQ in the times when 3200 is needed to keep other parameters as I want them.
 
Phil, light matters totally. Getting a decent image at high ISO in daylight is relatively easy compared to in a gloomy gig venue with lots of harsh lights and black. That is the acid test of your sensor not a shot of a cat in good light.

Oh, and flash makes a big difference. Every experienced photographer who uses it all the time knows this.
 
The23rdman said:
Phil, light matters totally. Getting a decent image at high ISO in daylight is relatively easy compared to in a gloomy gig venue with lots of harsh lights and black. That is the acid test of your sensor not a shot of a cat in good light.

Oh, and flash makes a big difference. Every experienced photographer who uses it all the time knows this.
Click to expand...

Dean we had this debate in another thread....abojt daylight and indoors...

The results of my shots were the same level of noise.

I can't see a difference in noise in any of these shots (including the other thread). Its either may eyes or the fact that if you expose correctly you will notice the same noise weather its daylight, ambient indoor light or flash.

I know "in theory" people will disagree...but yesterday I think I proved my point...
 
Well I can't see a difference in noise levels anyway and we've looked at daylight vs indoor and flash vs ambient.

I'm happy for someone to show me that noise changes based on lighting rather than exposure but until then I think its best to agree to disagree :-)
 
Phil Young said:
Well I can't see a difference in noise levels anyway and we've looked at daylight vs indoor and flash vs ambient.

I'm happy for someone to show me that noise changes based on lighting rather than exposure but until then I think its best to agree to disagree :-)
Click to expand...

If you can't grasp how light affects exposure then explaining it is going to be an uphill struggle :naughty:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top