D5 High ISO shots

[Aglet]

some camera display images of D5 jpgs are posted from 208k to 3.2M ISO

http://nikonrumors.com/2016/01/09/nikon-d5-high-iso-sample-lcd-screenshots-only.aspx/

 

[zim]

I guess it's wrong to draw any real conclusions from this after all what photographed the camera screen? but Hi-1 does look amazing

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

ISO 204,800 seems quite acceptable for photojournalism.

 

[privatebydesign]

Funny, all I see is horrific banding and extreme blotchy colour noise, hmm, where are all the posters that have said that same thing about Canon files for years? Where is this "I can lift Nikon files by 5 stops and it is pure cleanness but I can't lift a Canon file one stop" bullshit now?

 

[pedro]

Hi-3 (ISO 819,200 equivalent) looks quite like ISO 102400 on my late 5D3...although, it is a JPEG and a screen shot only...

 

[rfdesigner]

ISO 204,800 seems quite acceptable for photojournalism.

Yup. I'm trying to find some good URLs of D4s/1DX at high ISO and found this:
http://www.juzaphoto.com/article.php?l=en&article=113

Based on that, I'd give the D5 at least a 2 stop, if not more, improvement.

Can't wait for some of the regular testers to get their hands on one so that it is possible to do proper like for like comparisons.

good link. Agree with others, on the face of it, maybe a 2stop advantage.

That could be achieved with Back Illumination and ADC/column readout. The /column would probably be necessary for 4k, fingers crossed Canon introduce this on the whole 1DX/5D/6D range.

 

[Reality Merely Illusion]

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57069027

some d500 high ISO there

 

[NorbR]

Yup. I'm trying to find some good URLs of D4s/1DX at high ISO and found this:
http://www.juzaphoto.com/article.php?l=en&article=113

Based on that, I'd give the D5 at least a 2 stop, if not more, improvement.

So now we're comparing images converted from RAW without any noise reduction to screenshots of in-camera JPEGs, with unknown noise reduction, on the camera rear screen?

Seriously?

 

[Loswr]

Yup. I'm trying to find some good URLs of D4s/1DX at high ISO and found this:
http://www.juzaphoto.com/article.php?l=en&article=113

Based on that, I'd give the D5 at least a 2 stop, if not more, improvement.

So now we're comparing images converted from RAW without any noise reduction to screenshots of in-camera JPEGs, with unknown noise reduction, on the camera rear screen?

Seriously?

It's a perfectly valid comparison – in dilbertland. :

 

[0003f]

Remember that you are looking at denoised images on an XGA screen, on my computer, its about 1:3 down sampled compare to the original image.

 

[unfocused]

Yup. I'm trying to find some good URLs of D4s/1DX at high ISO and found this:
http://www.juzaphoto.com/article.php?l=en&article=113

Based on that, I'd give the D5 at least a 2 stop, if not more, improvement.

So now we're comparing images converted from RAW without any noise reduction to screenshots of in-camera JPEGs, with unknown noise reduction, on the camera rear screen?

Seriously?

It seems you missed my last sentence that acknowledges the limitations of what's been presented.

Looks good but we have to wait and see the real results.

I'm sorry, but these look worse than what I get with my 7DII at 3200.