Nikon D850 - sensor no better than D810. EEEK!
- Thread starter Mikehit
- Start date
Why does the Low Light score suck?
2995 - Canon 5D Mark IV
2956 - Nikon D750
2862 - Canon 6D Mark II
2853 - Nikon D810
2660 - Nikon D850
After ISO 800 D850 has less DR, Tonal Range, and Color Sensitivity than 5DIV on the Screen measurements (it scores better on a bunch of Print measurements).
If the price of more megapixels is worse low ISO at a range that's practically useful for me, I'll stay with a lower megapixel count than the 40's, thanks.
2995 - Canon 5D Mark IV
2956 - Nikon D750
2862 - Canon 6D Mark II
2853 - Nikon D810
2660 - Nikon D850
After ISO 800 D850 has less DR, Tonal Range, and Color Sensitivity than 5DIV on the Screen measurements (it scores better on a bunch of Print measurements).
If the price of more megapixels is worse low ISO at a range that's practically useful for me, I'll stay with a lower megapixel count than the 40's, thanks.
Upvote
0
Seems DXO disagrees....EEEK!
The ability to get those pristine clean images with huge tonal and DR depth at the lower ISOs is why you buy this camera, at least the main reason anyway because it beats everything else from any competitor save medium format completely. Yes you can, use it as a high ISO 9fps machine, but if that is what you do most often as you cannot control your situation to shoot at base, then you're not going to really extract the main benefit. That is not to say you're better off with something else. You still get the full width 4K, modern codec, touch screen with swivel, etc, and the ability to tap those deep low ISOs when you can.
As always, it is up to what you shoot and what your demands are. If you can get away with near base ISO most times, then nothing else comes close. nothing. It is off course the best all-around full frame camera ever made IMO, for my personal needs anyway. YMMV.
high MP.
nobody really cares about DR at high ISO because it is so limited compared at the base ISO which is THE reason people buy this type of camera. Most people avoid going that high in ISO if they care about DR. The entire reason landcape and studio folks who either have full control of the light (studio) or shoot on tripods (landscape) at near base ISO love the DR is PRECISELY because they don't want to even dare move away from base ISO and slide down the DR scale.
The ability to get those pristine clean images with huge tonal and DR depth at the lower ISOs is why you buy this camera, at least the main reason anyway because it beats everything else from any competitor save medium format completely. Yes you can, use it as a high ISO 9fps machine, but if that is what you do most often as you cannot control your situation to shoot at base, then you're not going to really extract the main benefit. That is not to say you're better off with something else. You still get the full width 4K, modern codec, touch screen with swivel, etc, and the ability to tap those deep low ISOs when you can.
As always, it is up to what you shoot and what your demands are. If you can get away with near base ISO most times, then nothing else comes close. nothing. It is off course the best all-around full frame camera ever made IMO, for my personal needs anyway. YMMV.
Upvote
0
https://www.dxomark.com/nikon-d810-sensor-review-new-dxomark-leader
According to the DXO Mark score, the D810 is only 3% worse.
They’re practically indistinguishable.
The D500 at even higher pixel density has better high ISO while losing nothing on the low ISO, Nikon skipped “something” when they made the D850.
According to the DXO Mark score, the D810 is only 3% worse.
They’re practically indistinguishable.
The D500 at even higher pixel density has better high ISO while losing nothing on the low ISO, Nikon skipped “something” when they made the D850.
Upvote
0
psolberg said:
But then, why does the Sony A7RII sensor, which is nearly the same MP, score 1000 points higher? (3400+). More to my point, I think the 25-30% higher ISO score should be worth more than the 7% additional EV of dynamic range for most photographers.
I am not saying that the D850 doesn't have a great sensor -- I just think that from DXO's numbers, the Sony A7RII sensor should score better than it, if you're trying to rank them on the basis of which will likely produce better photos on a variety of subjects. It doesn't make much sense to me.
Neither is perfect, but the A7RII's makes better compromises.
Upvote
0
You look at both the A7R II and the D500 and they seem to point to the same thing, low ISO DR(not just because of the D850's ISO 64 base either) is traded off for improved noise performance.
You are of course talking relatively minor differences here but honestly Nikon to me seems like they have a better idea of their market than Sony do.
You are of course talking relatively minor differences here but honestly Nikon to me seems like they have a better idea of their market than Sony do.
Upvote
0
https://www.dpreview.com/news/4939144988/nikon-d500-studio-and-dynamic-range-tests-published
The thing is the D500 doesn’t give up any DR, the D5 does and it records just 12-13 stops of DR, but the crop version in the D500 is just as clean as anything else throughout the entire ISO range.
There is something funny going on with that camera in particular.
The thing is the D500 doesn’t give up any DR, the D5 does and it records just 12-13 stops of DR, but the crop version in the D500 is just as clean as anything else throughout the entire ISO range.
There is something funny going on with that camera in particular.
Upvote
0
