Nikon D700 - What am I doing wrong?

wakarimasen

wakarimasen

Messages
283
Name
Roy
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello Folks,

I've been a Nikon film and Canon digital users for some years. Every so often, I consider concentrating on one system, and never do. Last week, I bought a D700, in order to finally scratch the itch. Today I compared a few images taken with the D700 and my Canon 5D - both using the same lens (a Nikon Ai 50mm F1.8) and using the same settings (ISO, shutter speed and aperture). All images were taken RAW and run through Photoshop CC, with auto 'brightness' and nothing else.

I was surprised by the results, to say the least: it looks (at least to me) as if the Canon has the better image quality - at least at the higher ISO value, which I was not expecting!

Did I miss something?

Canon 5D ISO 200
Canon-5D-200.jpg

Nikon D700 ISO 200
Nikon-D700-200.jpg

Canon 5D ISO 1600
Canon-5D-1600.jpg

Nikon D700 ISO 1600
Nikon-D700-1600.jpg

All comments welcome. Note this is not intended as a 'lets bash Canon/ Nikon thread.'

:canon: :nikon:
 
Last edited:
I'm no PP expert but looking at the histogram of the D700 as Steven says they are underexposed, do you have the exif for the image as It has been stripped from your post. What was the metering mode used ? spot / C weighted or evaluative
 
I used the Canon first, and then duplicated the settings on the Nikon
 
Looking at the sliders in the ISO1600 shots, the Nikon one has been boosted into what looks like the 60s while the Canon is in single figures. Boosting exposures in PP will always result in more noise.
 
Yes - I performed an 'auto brightness' adjustment in CC Photoshop, because the Nikons image at ISO 1600 - using the same settings as the Canon - was darker, and it made the comparison unfair. I'm not sure why the Nikon should be darker, when using the same settings as the Canon.
 
Do the same experiment, using the Nikon first, then duplicate the settings on the canon and see what the differences are then.
 
wakarimasen said:
I'm not sure why the Nikon should be darker, when using the same settings as the Canon.
Click to expand...
Several possible reasons... One could be ISO differences, the same number may not be (probably isn't) the same "true sensitivity"/output. But I suspect the aperture was knocked/shifted or something similar.
 
sk66 said:
But I suspect the aperture was knocked/shifted or something similar.
Click to expand...
Just checked, and the Nikon data shows F1.8 and the same shutter speeds as the Canon. Curiously, the RAW, unedited images look more similar at the lower ISO setting, but differ more at the upper setting. The Canon also looks more consistent between the two ISO settings.

From top to bottom:
  • Canon ISO 200
  • Canon ISO 1600
  • Nikon ISO 200
  • Nikon ISO 1600

Screen-Shot-2016-02-28-at-17.54.53.jpg
 
Last edited:
Its due to the images being underexposed. This will always create extra noise. If you expose the images correctly and then compare the images you'll have a fairer test.
Lets be honest, If you do decide to use the Nikon you're not going to meter using the Canon first are you.
 
Mark G said:
Lets be honest, If you do decide to use the Nikon you're not going to meter using the Canon first are you.
Click to expand...

Fair point! :agree: Perhaps I was too intent on making it a like for like comparison. I'll have another bash tomorrow.
 
Regardless of what it reported, I don't think it was at the same aperture... as that is the most probable difference issue when using an old manual lens. Because something isn't quite making sense.
I don't see enough difference in the ISO's to account for all of it.
At 200 reported the Nikon is at 162 and the Canon is at 181. At 1600 reported Nikon 1277, Canon 1369. It's also possible that one (or both) is using "digital ISO" differently (processing).
 
Hello Steven,

I take your point - the difference is marked. I'm pretty confident that the Nikon reported correctly, as I'd registered the lens in the set-up menu. I think trying to use identical settings is the problem, as Mark suggested. I'll try again tomorrow.
 
OK - much better today! I spotted a firmware upgrade for the Nikon, which included a fix for 'An issue that, in some very rare cases, caused images to be extremely under-exposed...'

I applied it this morning, and then repeated the test: this time in Av, with the lens wide open and using centre-weighted metering. Top to bottom is as follows:
  • Nikon ISO 200
  • Nikon ISO 1600
  • Canon ISO 200
  • Canon ISO 1600
Screen-Shot-2016-02-29-at-19.35.07.jpg

As can be seen from the thumbnails, these look much more alike: indeed both cameras exposed identically for the 1600 version.

Even now, the old Canon does not look too bad against the Nikon, although the nod would have to be given to the latter.

Thanks for all of the help in sorting this out.
 
The D700 is pretty much my favourite body ever, Canon or Nikon. I had the 5D and loved it, had two actually, but the D700, had three, is a better body IMO. Keep at it. It's definitely worth the effort. I'd have another in a shot.
 
Nod said:
Looking at the sliders in the ISO1600 shots, the Nikon one has been boosted into what looks like the 60s while the Canon is in single figures. Boosting exposures in PP will always result in more noise.
Click to expand...
I never knew that,thanks,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top