DontShoot wrote:
If those are unprocessed, then OMG
Can't wait to get mine... I'll compare it to my Df and post my findings
Well, they're processed in camera. And I'm waiting for the RAW high-ISO comparisons with the D610, D810, Df and D4s, along with comparisons to Canon's FF cameras and to the A7. Clean high-ISO performance that provides manipulable files is the name of the game.
SGallant wrote:
Yeah I would say your observations are correct. JPG to JPG the D4 got beat by the D750.
This could depend on different in-camera processing.
My feeling is that D750's pictures at 12800 ISO have a more aggressive noise reduction applied. Actually, I prefer D4 images, where I can detect more detail.
BTW, to make a meaningful comparison of noise and amount of detail/acuity at high ISOs, one should look at raw files.
As Thom Hogan stated properly (here): " ... we’re hearing anecdotal reports about 'improved high ISO capabilities'. These are due to the changes of processing in the EXPEED4 chip, not the sensor. In other words, Nikon has further tweaked the noise reduction applied to JPEG images from previous iterations. It remains to be seen what that really means. Noise reduction is always a trade off with edge acuity. I don’t know anyone that’s managed to find a way around that. So more noise reduction generally is going to mean edges that are tougher to sharpen. Raw shooters shouldn’t expect any real changes from the D610."
Ripolini wrote:
This could depend on different in-camera processing.
My feeling is that D750's pictures at 12800 ISO have a more aggressive noise reduction applied. Actually, I prefer D4 images, where I can detect more detail.
BTW, to make a meaningful comparison of noise and amount of detail/acuity at high ISOs, one should look at raw files.
As Thom Hogan stated properly (here): " ... we’re hearing anecdotal reports about 'improved high ISO capabilities'. These are due to the changes of processing in the EXPEED4 chip, not the sensor. In other words, Nikon has further tweaked the noise reduction applied to JPEG images from previous iterations. It remains to be seen what that really means. Noise reduction is always a trade off with edge acuity. I don’t know anyone that’s managed to find a way around that. So more noise reduction generally is going to mean edges that are tougher to sharpen. Raw shooters shouldn’t expect any real changes from the D610." ...Show more →
So straight up, it's not a meant to be some Tom Hogan comparison. All images were shot handheld without a tripod. I would agree that the D750 is bit softer as a result of in camera noise reduction. Certainly not something I would have an issue living with. I also went ahead and pulled both RAW files into Nikon's software and with Noise reduction set to default they look just like you see in the JPG. When I turn it off, they both have a comparable amount of noise and sharpness. It may no longer best a D4, but it still is on par and rivals it.
I have taken some shots of my dog in a very dark room with one light. It was pretty amazing. I am going to do much more testing today. I will post pics later.
Reasonable discourse without vitriol or sniping . . . Real world experience with clear explanations . . . I'm sorry, is this still the internet? Thanks for the time you guys have taken to post. I foolishly gave up a d600 (another story) and taking a look at the 750 and this helps clarify my thinking.
glassartist wrote:
Reasonable discourse without vitriol or sniping . . . Real world experience with clear explanations . . . I'm sorry, is this still the internet? …..
Wait for it. The perpetually displeasured discoursers and vitriolic snipers will be along soon enough.
Ripolini wrote:
This could depend on different in-camera processing.
My feeling is that D750's pictures at 12800 ISO have a more aggressive noise reduction applied. Actually, I prefer D4 images, where I can detect more detail.
BTW, to make a meaningful comparison of noise and amount of detail/acuity at high ISOs, one should look at raw files.
As Thom Hogan stated properly (here): " ... we’re hearing anecdotal reports about 'improved high ISO capabilities'. These are due to the changes of processing in the EXPEED4 chip, not the sensor. In other words, Nikon has further tweaked the noise reduction applied to JPEG images from previous iterations. It remains to be seen what that really means. Noise reduction is always a trade off with edge acuity. I don’t know anyone that’s managed to find a way around that. So more noise reduction generally is going to mean edges that are tougher to sharpen. Raw shooters shouldn’t expect any real changes from the D610." ...Show more →
Yes, makes sense. I definitely note more detail in the D4 images, but less noise in the D750. I'd rather handle that kind of "processing" in PP where I can do selective noise reduction.
Interesting...now I am really wondering if I want to get the D750 or stick with picking up a used D3s. Buffer size is still going be an issue on the D750 shooting continuous RAW. But that is honestly the only drawback I can find right now if the low-light ISO is close to or on par with the D3s/D4.
For what it's worth. I have to try this camera at a wedding or two to be sure. But so far I have a strong thought about selling my D4 and picking up a second. Straight up though the buffer is a bit limited, gets me about 20 RAW images D4 is way more, seems like it is about 60. But for how I shoot I wouldn't ever get near a D750 buffer.
Well I am going from the D7100 buffer which I can get 6 continuous shots at 12-bit RAW. If I got to 20 images RAW with the D750 then my problems are solved and I don't need to buy CF cards...and I just saved close to 1k + the cost of new CF cards and batteries. It may pan out to be close with the battery grip included though =/
