Time for an upgrade?

Emja

Emja

Messages
3,250
Name
Emma
Edit My Images
Yes
Spent a great afternoon at the BWC today, but horrible noisy shots of the squirrels in bright shade made me realise I really do need to start thinking about an upgrade of either camera or lens from my d3200 and tamron 70-300 combo for these type of shots. From what I read the d7200 wouldn't make that huge a difference in performance at high ISO (althoughit can be pushed much higher), the d750 seems like a huge extravagance for a hobbyist like me and the price of long lenses with wider aperture terrifies me too! The squirrels were shot at 4.5 or 5.6, 1/320, ISO 1600. Any advice gratefully accepted!

bwc small (1 of 5).jpg bwc small (2 of 5).jpg bwc small (3 of 5).jpg bwc small (4 of 4).jpg bwc small (4 of 5).jpg
 
Sweet set Em.
Love that first shot.
 
I think this set does have some standout nice shots, and it may be more a metering/exposure issue rather than an ISO one? The last red squirrel shot I cannot see any ISO distortion at any rate, and thre third martin (?) shot shows you can get sharp pics with good colour with what you've already got, so perhaps try some different WB settings out in combination with altering the shutter speed and/or aperature? Are you shooting on manual or another mode? (sorry for all they questions, just trying to help as I've just been in the same boat as you, upgraded my camera body after 9 years to get better low light performance ^-^ )
 
KJRPhotos said:
I think this set does have some standout nice shots, and it may be more a metering/exposure issue rather than an ISO one? The last red squirrel shot I cannot see any ISO distortion at any rate, and thre third martin (?) shot shows you can get sharp pics with good colour with what you've already got, so perhaps try some different WB settings out in combination with altering the shutter speed and/or aperature? Are you shooting on manual or another mode? (sorry for all they questions, just trying to help as I've just been in the same boat as you, upgraded my camera body after 9 years to get better low light performance ^-^ )
Click to expand...
Hi Kelly - thanks for the reply. The pine martens were taken in better light at lower ISOs and in fact you're right I could have gone for a lower shutter speed here, but I'm not too bothered about any noise in these.
The squirrels were shot at the widest aperture the Tamron lens would give. The shutter speed was around 1/320 for both and I wouldn't have wanted to go any lower - they were moving fast! Both were ISO 1600 so my settings were pretty maxed out.
What did you upgrade to - and was it worth it?
 
You could probably get just as much improvement in noise by shooting RAW and reducing your noise in post processing by using one of the good specialised noise reduction facilities. Cheaper too! You can try some of them out on free trials to see if you think it worth it. A bit more bother than the simple standard workflow, but not really a bother if it's only the occasional image that needs the special treatment. I'm still happily using the free demo version of Neat Image. Not as good as the paid up version, a bit more hassle, and no longer the best, but still a good enough boost for my noisy old camera in dim light that it's quenched all desire to upgrade to a newer less noisy model.
 
Emja said:
Hi Kelly - thanks for the reply. The pine martens were taken in better light at lower ISOs and in fact you're right I could have gone for a lower shutter speed here, but I'm not too bothered about any noise in these.
The squirrels were shot at the widest aperture the Tamron lens would give. The shutter speed was around 1/320 for both and I wouldn't have wanted to go any lower - they were moving fast! Both were ISO 1600 so my settings were pretty maxed out.
What did you upgrade to - and was it worth it?
Click to expand...

wow the sharpness on the squirrels is impressive at 1/320, they are so twitchy even when they are technically sitting still!

I just upgraded last month from a nikon D200 to a D810 and even though I've only been out with it three times I love it, definately worth it for me given how it performed in the pouring rain last weekend at cotswold wildlife park. Previously I wan't happy with the results of shooting above ISO500 on the D200, now I can use up to ISO 3000 happily and have been told I can push it to at least 5000, although I want to see the results with my own eyes before I believe it! I think the advances in autofocus and tracking are also helping too. It is scary investing so much in a body but I thought to myself if it lasts me about 10 years like the last one then its not too bad to get my head around in terms of cost per year of use XD
 
chris malcolm said:
You could probably get just as much improvement in noise by shooting RAW and reducing your noise in post processing by using one of the good specialised noise reduction facilities. Cheaper too! You can try some of them out on free trials to see if you think it worth it. A bit more bother than the simple standard workflow, but not really a bother if it's only the occasional image that needs the special treatment. I'm still happily using the free demo version of Neat Image. Not as good as the paid up version, a bit more hassle, and no longer the best, but still a good enough boost for my noisy old camera in dim light that it's quenched all desire to upgrade to a newer less noisy model.
Click to expand...
Thanks Chris - I did a little noise reduction in Lightroom, but any more would have lost too much texture in the fur I think. I do have access to Photoshop too, but am completely clueless there - I could probably have masked areas in that?
 
KJRPhotos said:
wow the sharpness on the squirrels is impressive at 1/320, they are so twitchy even when they are technically sitting still!

I just upgraded last month from a nikon D200 to a D810 and even though I've only been out with it three times I love it, definately worth it for me given how it performed in the pouring rain last weekend at cotswold wildlife park. Previously I wan't happy with the results of shooting above ISO500 on the D200, now I can use up to ISO 3000 happily and have been told I can push it to at least 5000, although I want to see the results with my own eyes before I believe it! I think the advances in autofocus and tracking are also helping too. It is scary investing so much in a body but I thought to myself if it lasts me about 10 years like the last one then its not too bad to get my head around in terms of cost per year of use XD
Click to expand...
Haha...keep talking Kelly ;) I am seriously thinking about upgrading...but it's a serious bit of money so will need a lot more thinking :confused:
 
The last squirrel isnt to bad, Id almost suggest replacing the Tamron with a used Nikkor 70-300 if you use the length oftn enough.Dont look thta noisy to me.
 
Hertsman said:
The last squirrel isnt to bad, Id almost suggest replacing the Tamron with a used Nikkor 70-300 if you use the length oftn enough.Dont look thta noisy to me.
Click to expand...
Cheers Mark - I do like the last, but it is too noisy I think. I've just looked up the 70-300 but it's widest aperture is the same as the Tamron, so not sure it would solve this problem, although I'm sure it would be sharper overall.
 
Tough one to call...
If you are local to Tring Herts youd be welcome to try my 70-300, otherwise, its off to Lensforhire....

FWIW,maybe worth linking to a RAW file that others can manipulate - just to ensure its a HW problem....
 
Emja said:
Thanks Chris - I did a little noise reduction in Lightroom, but any more would have lost too much texture in the fur I think. I do have access to Photoshop too, but am completely clueless there - I could probably have masked areas in that?
Click to expand...

The point about very good specialised noise reduction algorithms is that they let you do more noise reduction over the whole image without losing detail or texture. At a rough guess you can get 2 stops extra, e.g. the equivalent of shooting at ISO 600 when shooting at ISO 2400. Masking so you can use different levels of noise reduction in different parts of the image is different, another useful technique. Rather like using manual exposure rather than auto, however, you do have to learn how to get the best from these more sophisticated ways of dealing with noise.
 
The problem with a cheap lens like the Tamron 70-300mm is - they are soft at the 300mm end

so maybe upgrade to a better lens for these type of shots

Les
 
chris malcolm said:
The point about very good specialised noise reduction algorithms is that they let you do more noise reduction over the whole image without losing detail or texture. At a rough guess you can get 2 stops extra, e.g. the equivalent of shooting at ISO 600 when shooting at ISO 2400. Masking so you can use different levels of noise reduction in different parts of the image is different, another useful technique. Rather like using manual exposure rather than auto, however, you do have to learn how to get the best from these more sophisticated ways of dealing with noise.
Click to expand...
Thanks Chris - I hadn't heard of this type of software - I've give it a look.
 
What about a secondhand D750 for higher iso and a sigma 150-600 for more reach. The sigma isn't fast but you can make up for that with higher iso ( hopefully noise free with D750).
However, the shots you posted look fine to me, unless you want to print large.
 
I don't think they're particularly noisy.

If you have access to Photoshop it should come with ACR (Adobe Camera Raw). If you open your raw files in that, you'll be able to use the noise reduction in there. But to be honest I don't think there's much need for it there. Rather than too much noise I'd say if anything they just lack a bit of fine detail which is due to the limitations of the lens. If you find the length OK and don't require any more, you could get a 300mm f4 (the one before the current version) which is really sharp and also f4 which will allow you to keep the ISO down more. You can get a second hand one for under £600 I think. I used one for years with a 1.4 teleconvertor before they were stolen. Really good combo and I've replaced it with the newer one now. The only thing is you're stuck at 300mm, but for wildlife this is a great lens.
 
Emja said:
Hi Kelly - thanks for the reply. The pine martens were taken in better light at lower ISOs and in fact you're right I could have gone for a lower shutter speed here, but I'm not too bothered about any noise in these.
The squirrels were shot at the widest aperture the Tamron lens would give. The shutter speed was around 1/320 for both and I wouldn't have wanted to go any lower - they were moving fast! Both were ISO 1600 so my settings were pretty maxed out.
What did you upgrade to - and was it worth it?
Click to expand...

They are polecats not pine martens.
I use both a D7100 and D7200 at 1600 iso with no problems, but can't see why you needed it in the squirrels on a sunny day ?
 
Gremlin said:
They are polecats not pine martens.
I use both a D7100 and D7200 at 1600 iso with no problems, but can't see why you needed it in the squirrels on a sunny day ?
Click to expand...
Oops...can't believe I typed that Ingrid - definitely not concentrating. You can see from my post to Ruth above that I do know they're polecats!
They were shot in sunlight at lower ISOs but the second squirrel was in reasonably heavy shade - it was after 4.30. The settings were pretty maxed out - the widest aperture I had and shutter speed down to 1/320, so 1600 was definitely needed. I think Lez is right about the softness of the first being down to the Tamron being at 300 (it was only 250 for the second shot, which is sharper). Having borrowed a friend's d7200 I do think it handles high ISOs better than the d3200.
 
Emma, could you have come down to say, 1/250 or 1/200 and still got a sharp image ? That may have eased ISO noise concerns, but Im not sure how twitchy the critters were.
 
Gremlin said:
They are polecats not pine martens.
I use both a D7100 and D7200 at 1600 iso with no problems, but can't see why you needed it in the squirrels on a sunny day ?
Click to expand...

Yeah I know, lots of people make the mistake though :)
TBH I don't think they are that noisy but the focus seems to be on the grass in front, rather then the squirrel.
Winter is better once the leaves are down, more light and longer tufts.
Not been over for a while, must go sometime soon
 
Emja said:
I'm thinking this might be the way to go, maybe second hand. What would you recommend?
Click to expand...

Maybe look out for a 2nd hand Sigma 150-500mm or a Tamron 150-600

I have the Tamron 15-600mm its a superb lens

Les
 
Lez325 said:
Maybe look out for a 2nd hand Sigma 150-500mm or a Tamron 150-600

I have the Tamron 15-600mm its a superb lens

Les
Click to expand...


Have to disagree with the sigma 150-500 Les, l had one on my d7100 and knowing how dark the squirrel enclosure can be, it
was a nightmare hunting for focus, cracking lens in good light.
 
Gremlin said:
Have to disagree with the sigma 150-500 Les, l had one on my d7100 and knowing how dark the squirrel enclosure can be, it
was a nightmare hunting for focus, cracking lens in good light.
Click to expand...

You are of course welcome to your opinion :D , I however would just push the ISO to get a faster shutter speed & bn use manual focus in low light

Les :)

heres one I shot @ 1/250th sec in low light

RS 1 by Les Moxon, on Flickr
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lez, that is a cracker of a shot !

Emma - having now seen these critters in the wild, I can undertsnad just how twitchy they are and why you tried to keep the shutter speed up.
If its any help, have a look at my pics on here - all shot with D300 and Nikkor 70-300.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top