NEW DATA Is the D750 still the low ISO champion???

[Ilkka Nissilä]

Yeah. there needs to be a technology innovation to adjust the slope. But you get my point.

There can not be such an advancement. The number of photons detected dictates the maximum SNR that can be achieved and that in turns sets a cap on dynamic range as well. Bill Claff's site give the Ideal FX sensor curve which is the theoretical maximum that can be achieved.

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Ideal%20FF/FX,Nikon%20D5,Nikon%20D750,Nikon%20D850

I guess if the color filter array is removed and a monochrome sensor is made then there can be further improvement.

[Frank Fremerey]

There can not be such an advancement. The number of photons detected dictates the maximum SNR that can be achieved and that in turns sets a cap on dynamic range as well. Bill Claff's site give the Ideal FX sensor curve which is the theoretical maximum that can be achieved.

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Ideal%20FF/FX,Nikon%20D5,Nikon%20D750,Nikon%20D850

I guess if the color filter array is removed and a monochrome sensor is made then there can be further improvement.

Hyvää iltaa, Ilkka!

Interesting chart you quote there ... meaning the D5 starts to be the ideal camera at ISO 2546 ... but the D750 still rules from ISO50 to ISO400 which was what I said from the beginning.

Or, in other words, Theory meets practice here: It is harder to meet the ideal in low ISO performance than it is to reach it in high ISO performance.

Näkemiin

Frank

[JKoerner007]

My view is the view of the Author of Photon to Photos William J. Claff.. He writes:

DxOMark Investigations and DxOMark Derived Data (Ball (magenta)interactive charts Ball (cyan) interactive tables Ball (blue)articles). Data is derived from data available at DxOMark. In general these results are less reliable than those actually measured and presented in the previous Investigations section.

In opposition to what you say, Bill's own investigation seems more trustworthy to him than the DXO-Data!

Of course Bill trusts his own investigation more than DxO Mark; otherwise, why even have a website?

Trouble is, Bill's quote doesn't really square with his own disclaimer (which he himself puts in red): Preliminary data are actual measurements from raw files but not those taken under the usual controlled conditions.

One has to wonder why have an all-red disclaimer, and why the link to DxO, if he truly believes his results are better?
(I don't see DxO Mark presenting a similar red disclaimer or pointing to Bill's site as a better solution ... )

To me, that's the difference.

Point aside, at the end of the day, both graphs are fairly-close and both cameras are very nice.

But let's consider the rest of the world and every other website: I have never seen any site compare the D750 to "ultra-clean, medium format Base ISO DR" ... like I have seen every site compare the D810 and (now) the D850 to medium format.

If anything, the general consensus is the D750 only eclipsed the D810 at higher ISOs, which it does not do with the D850.

So I guess we will just have to agree to disagree as to which site is more conclusive.

[JKoerner007]

but the D750 still rules from ISO50 to ISO400 which was what I said from the beginning.

Again, he's quoting the non-standardized chart (the page with the red disclaimer).

I know you prefer Bill Claff's unrefined data, but here's the link Bill's own site points to for more refined data: "see DxOMark Photographic Dynamic Range Chart."

I guess it boils down to "what you choose to believe," and in both cases they're very close.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

The disclaimer only applies to the cameras marked with (p). Where final data is available he seems to prefer it to use instead of dxomark derived data.

[Frank Fremerey]

Thank you Ilkka

[Michael Erlewine]

I don't car (much) about the high ISO range. For my work, only the lower ISO range is important. Lloyd Chambers recently points out the with the D850, not only is the ISO 64 of the D850 equal to that on the D810, but that with the D850 (when used carefully), the ISO 31 is better than the the IS 64. I have yet to verify that, but I will check it out soon.

[Frank Fremerey]

Michael: the Color rendition of the D850 is much better than anything we have seen before. That is especially true for low ISO. I am looking forward to using her in the field with my Sinar and the Schneider APO Digitar!!!

Our academic discussion here is about the Dynamic Range. In a controlled lighting environment like your Studio PDR is not so important

[JKoerner007]

The disclaimer only applies to the cameras marked with (p). Where final data is available he seems to prefer it to use instead of dxomark derived data.

Okay, fair enough. But, while he may trust his own methods, it doesn't make them correct.

When two different results obtain, one has to then look at all the other evidence. Again, DxO Mark says, "(the D850's) outstanding color (Portrait score) and dynamic range (Landscape score) at base ISO where it again ranks as the number one among all commercially available cameras we’ve tested for these attributes."

Virtually every other reviewer on the planet agrees the D850 is the benchmark.

• I think this is the most detailed image of its kind (bristlecone) that I have ever made (as of Oct 2017). The detail that it includes in the wood grain is quite incredible considering the near foreground all the way to the end of the tree trunk at top left. I credit the Nikon D850 45-megapixel sensor with getting this image to a level I have not yet seen out of any DSLR, resolving extremely fine wood grain detail. Of course, the world class performande of the Zeiss Milvus 35/1.4 did its part. The extra resolution along with the pixel quality is stunning.
  ~ Diglloyd, publicly-posted

• "Instead of going for a Sony-developed sensor, Nikon decided to design the sensor for the D850 on its own and have it produced by a different manufacturer, as it has done a number of times in the past in cameras like Nikon D3 and D700.
  "... the Nikon D850 shows yet again class-leading performance in sensor performance, which is exciting to see.
  "... the D850 is the best Nikon DSLR we have tested to date."
  Photography Life

I have never seen any statements like this, regarding the D750, from any other reviewing site, ever.

In fact, Nikon Corporation itself chose the D850 as its celebrated 100 year iconic release, even making a video announcement of its capabilities ... before it was quite there ... while the release of the D750 carried no such fanfare.

If you look at the D850's product page, Nikon boasts, "The lowest base ISO (ISO 64) of any DSLR or mirrorless camera," while there is no such hyperbole on the D750's product page.

Nikon is comparing its own D850 to every DSLR or mirrorless camera on earth, yet makes no such comparison with the D750.

Does it really make sense to believe Nikon itself does not know which camera to push forward as its own "Champion" with respect to the lowest/best base ISO scores?

I guess the question thus becomes: is everyone in the parade out of step with Bill's graph, or is Bill's graph out of step with everyone else in the parade, including the manufacturer?

As before, we all are free to choose what to believe, and I choose to believe the latter.

[David H. Hartman]

Concerning the control set the D500 and D850 both would be very acceptable to me. The D750 while a very nice camera lacks one button I'd need for run and gun type shooting. I'll also note that I find the "game pad" multi-selector frustrating when I need to move the focus point quickly. I bird sit for a friend and while do this I photograph her large cockatoo. The bird is constantly moving it's head and focus must be on the eye. It's very difficult to keep the focus point where it's needed. DoF is to small and head movement to frequent to use focus and recompose. Anything thing that would cut a fraction of a second in placing the focus point would help. The D500 and D850 would seem ideal with the dedicated focus point joystick.

I'm quite sure the control set of the D500 and D850 would be a welcome relief.
The control set of the D800 is quite good for me.
The control set of the D750 would cause more frustrations.

In the end the D850 would probably be a great advancement for me. I can't afford one at this time.

Dave Hartman

[David H. Hartman]

How is the color moiré of the Nikon D850? If color moiré troubling with my D800.

Dave Hartman

[Frank Fremerey]

In the bird case the D500 would give you more freedom to compose. She has focus points up to the borders

Concerning the control set the D500 and D850 both would be very acceptable to me. The D750 while a very nice camera lacks one button I'd need for run and gun type shooting. I'll also note that I find the "game pad" multi-selector frustrating when I need to move the focus point quickly. I bird sit for a friend and while do this I photograph her large cockatoo. The bird is constantly moving it's head and focus must be on the eye. It's very difficult to keep the focus point where it's needed. DoF is to small and head movement to frequent to use focus and recompose. Anything thing that would cut a fraction of a second in placing the focus point would help. The D500 and D850 would seem ideal with the dedicated focus point joystick.

I'm quite sure the control set of the D500 and D850 would be a welcome relief.
The control set of the D800 is quite good for me.
The control set of the D750 would cause more frustrations.

In the end the D850 would probably be a great advancement for me. I can't afford one at this time.

Dave Hartman

[Peter Connan]

Concerning the control set the D500 and D850 both would be very acceptable to me. The D750 while a very nice camera lacks one button I'd need for run and gun type shooting. I'll also note that I find the "game pad" multi-selector frustrating when I need to move the focus point quickly. I bird sit for a friend and while do this I photograph her large cockatoo. The bird is constantly moving it's head and focus must be on the eye. It's very difficult to keep the focus point where it's needed. DoF is to small and head movement to frequent to use focus and recompose. Anything thing that would cut a fraction of a second in placing the focus point would help.

Surely 3-D tracking would be just about perfect in this situation?

[Ilkka Nissilä]

I bird sit for a friend and while do this I photograph her large cockatoo. The bird is constantly moving it's head and focus must be on the eye. It's very difficult to keep the focus point where it's needed.

I actually use the multiselector instead of the joystick when shooting horizontals but obviously use the joystick for verticals. I guess it is a question of habit/familiarity but I also ... like the gamepad because with it is easier to avoid accidentally pressing the button in (which has a different function). But I don't know how other people find it, perhaps it is seen advantageous. If I switched the joystick press to no function then maybe I could use it more easily.

I would try D9 on the Multi-CAM 20k cameras for this kind of scenario that you describe and instead of moving the focus point around, and follow the bird's eye with the primary selected AF point by moving the lens. The camera should then use the assisting points to keep focusing on the bird for those short periods of time where the primary point is not on the eye. D9 is available on the D5 and D850.

I don't continuously move the focus point around when shooting; I prefer to set it for a desired composition and then shoot until the point has to be moved to continue shooting. Then I adjust the framing in post if necessary. I would not feel comfortable frequently trying to adjust the position of the selected point while shooting.

[bclaff]

DXO give engineering DR and SNR for 18% gray. From these to get the "photographing DR" (using threshold SNR = 20) I believe some kind of modeling / interpolation may have to be used, so presenting PDR from DXO data is an approximation. That doesn't invalidate the data DXO presented by DxO themselves (they're just different measures).

I believe Bill Claff's site marks those cameras which are estimated from images that were not shot in a controlled way using a symbol such as (e) or (p). Initially the D850 had one of those letters behind it in the legend, but then those were replaced by new data which is apparently measured using a controlled procedure and that symbol indicating estimated or preliminary data was dropped. However, I don't know how controlled the procedure is; I would think a company such as DXO which do all the measurements and analysis in house can control the process to be more precisely the same for all cameras.  But any measurement procedures over long term can be subject to human error and variability in conditions. I do believe each site make their best effort to provide valuable data.

Also it is good to remember that there are differences which are not measured by these procedures. For example the D800 strongly clips blacks at high ISO, leading to problems in its use for astrophotography (where averaging is commonly used to image faint objects). In the D810 this issue was greatly alleviated. This is discussed in Jim Kasson's blog in depth, it is worth reading. I remember also seeing comparisons that show that the D750 handles long exposures at high ISO really well, but I don't remember which web site it was.  Some other cameras are reported to produce increased noise after being used for longer exposures.

I would not recommend using a single source of sensor data to make camera-buying decisions. Study multiple sources of information, and consider also the feature set, not just numerical data. For most people the feature set is probably more important than small differences in sensor image quality. And for those special applications where the differences in sensors do matter, one would be best off to test the cameras in the application itself to be sure.

Excellent response. You understand PhotonsToPhotos as well as DxOMark quite well.