# D5 not as iso invarient as other nikon dslrs



## jaomul (Mar 29, 2016)

Studio report: Nikon D5 has lowest base ISO dynamic range of any current FF Nikon DSLR


----------



## Overread (Mar 29, 2016)

Interestingly if you compare it to the Canon 80D on the same site the performance seems about similar - could it be Nikon has lost a contract to trade with Sony or somesuch? The performance does seem to be a big step backwards for them


----------



## jaomul (Mar 29, 2016)

It does seem that nikons flagship series cameras don't generally have as good dynamic range as there other fx cameras, but I'd say these charts don't really matter for the target audience these cameras are aimed at. I'm sure landscape guys will have a different model. It is strange that new isn't "New and improved" though


----------



## Braineack (Mar 29, 2016)

Where's the caveat you always see on new Canon test bodies "non-production test model, results will be better in a real model"??


----------



## Ysarex (Mar 29, 2016)

They're doing the low-light exposure latitude and ISO invariance tests using ACR. They should know better. That's a huge mistake. They'll get entirely different results if they do those tests with a different raw converter. There are some things (low light especially) where you don't want to standardize with Adobe. Do the tests with C1 or RT and you'll draw entirely different conclusions. Math precision in the raw converter matters. Adobe is optimized for speed over IQ and in low light it's a big deal.

Joe


----------



## astroNikon (Mar 29, 2016)

Doesn't Nikon use their own sensor on the upper end bodies
and use Sony for most everything else.


----------



## astroNikon (Mar 29, 2016)

So if you want the *best*, get a camera with a SONY sensor  lol  
==> List Of All Nikon DSLR Cameras And Their Sensor Manufacturer/designer | Nikon Rumors


----------



## robbins.photo (Mar 29, 2016)

I seriously doubt it will make much of a difference to the folks that will most likely be interested in a D5

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk


----------



## Derrel (Mar 29, 2016)

As the dPreview article mentions, the camera has been optimized for high ISO performance, and aimed at people who will not be planning on "underexposing then brightening" in post". This camera is aimed at the ISO 3200 and up people who will be using the camera the way most journalists will be using it: *actually setting the ISO values* very high, in-camera...and the ones who shoot for say, Reuters, will be required to submit SOOC JPEG files. Remember, this camera has stupid-high ISO limits. For people who want a camera with a high degree of ISO invariance, Nikon has the D610, D750, and D810. The F5 is aimed at people who want the insane battery life, fast firing, fast handling, and toughness and durability of a 1-digital Nikon camera.

I looked at the studio scene comparisons...it's pretty obvious, this camera is designed for use the old-school way. Want ISO 3,200? The you set the ISO to 3,200. Want ISO 6,400? Then set the ISO on the camera, so the rear LCD's image review will show what the actual JPEG file looks like: this is a camera that professional shooters will be buying, and most of them will want to see what the FINAL image looks like: this is not for people who want to shoot with the shutter cranked to a five- or six-stoop speed elevation, and who are willing to look  at a nearly black LCD image and say, "Yeah, I know the LCD image looks like a coal mine now--but once I get back to my computer and push-process the .NEFs, it'll brighten up just fine." Nope. D5 users will likely want to SEE the exposure's effect on the camera-generate JPEG files shot at higher ISO levels.

This flip side of the loss of ISO invariance is this, according to dPreview: " High ISO image quality, especially, has been a point of pride for Nikon in its flagship DSLRs since the D3, and as we'd expect, the D5 raises this already ridiculously high bar even further. "

Again--this is a camera that has ISO settings that reach stratospheric heights.


----------



## MartinCrabtree (Mar 29, 2016)

F5????? How Freudian. Especially when referring to battery life.


----------



## Solarflare (Mar 30, 2016)

Derrel said:


> The F5 is aimed at people who want the insane battery life, fast firing, fast handling, and toughness and durability of a 1-digital Nikon camera.


I just _had _to quote this sentence, these two errors are just too funny.

1. D5, not F5 ...

2. "One-digit DSLR", not "one-digital camera". Its not a Nikon 1 camera either !


----------



## Watchful (Mar 30, 2016)

I am happy with it myself.


----------



## calamityjane (Mar 30, 2016)

Watchful said:


> I am happy with it myself.


You've received one already? Lucky you! Are you in the UK or elsewhere? I'm still waiting for mine, with no date estimation of when it will arrive - and that's being on the NPS list. Personally, this test is irrelevant for me, as I do performing arts production photography and it's the high ISO I need it for (and faster AF wouldn't go amiss either!). Deliberately underexposing at ISO100 and then pushing it several stops is not something that I'd need to do - having seen this test, if I did need to, I'd try it with my D810. I'm finding lower and lower levels of lighting in productions, particularly contemporary dance - for instance, last week I photographed a ballet where I was shooting no lower than 6,400 and a lot of the time at 12,800, with no higher shutter speed than 1/250th (not fast enough to stop a dancer at speed!) and some of the time I resorted to 1/30th. If the D5 had already arrived, I'd have had no qualms about pushing the ISO high enough to get a decent shutter speed - I currently use the D3s but tried the D4s in Aug 2014 and it was a game changer then, so I can only imagine how much better the improved ISO of the D5 is!


----------



## Derrel (Mar 30, 2016)

Solarflare said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > The F5 is aimed at people who want the insane battery life, fast firing, fast handling, and toughness and durability of a 1-digital Nikon camera.
> ...



Yeah..my diabetes was flaring up and my blood sugar level was making my eyes not focus too well. Go ahead... f***ing laugh it up at my expense.


----------



## Overread (Mar 30, 2016)

EVERYONE CHILL

Take a deep breath - and relax - its just a forum


----------



## Vtec44 (Mar 30, 2016)

Decision decision, Pentax 645z or Nikon D5


----------



## robbins.photo (Mar 30, 2016)

Vtec44 said:


> Decision decision, Pentax 645z or Nikon D5


Heck with it.  Buy both.

Send the one you don't like as much to me.  I'm there for you friend.

Lol

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk


----------



## Derrel (Mar 30, 2016)

Vtec44 said:
			
		

> Decision decision, Pentax 645z or Nikon D5



Pentax. The D5 could be replaced by a number of cameras.


----------



## Vtec44 (Mar 30, 2016)

Derrel said:


> Pentax. The D5 could be replaced by a number of cameras.



But have you seen the D5 at 1,000,000 ISO??   BTW, I'm waiting for Watchful to hit the disagree button on your post! LOL


----------



## Derrel (Mar 30, 2016)

Here, I made this for you and the rest of the TPF crew:








Vtec44 said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Pentax. The D5 could be replaced by a number of cameras.
> ...



lol, indeed. I have not seen the D5 at "*one millllllllion ISO!*", but I have seen the Sony sensor in the Pentax at 25k ISO, and the results are pretty good. I was just thinking about the Pentax for you as a sort of "differentiating factor" for your payed work.


----------



## jaomul (Mar 30, 2016)

For anyone interested.

A low light machine for sure, but the 7 figure iso stuff is not really usable for anything other than bragging rights

Hello, ISO 3,280,000... Nikon D5 studio test scene comparison published


----------



## MartinCrabtree (Mar 30, 2016)

Derrel said:


> Yeah..my diabetes was flaring up and my blood sugar level was making my eyes not focus too well. Go ahead... f***ing laugh it up at my expense.



First of all take better care of yourself. Secondly my comment was nothing more than humor.


----------



## Watchful (Mar 30, 2016)

Amazon has them if you are interested.


----------



## Braineack (Mar 30, 2016)

jaomul said:


> Hello, ISO 3,280,000... Nikon D5 studio test scene comparison published


i mean it's cute for sure...


----------



## Overread (Mar 30, 2016)

If high ISO keeps going this high we might well soon enter an age where aperture and shutter speed could almost, barring strong light as we don't have a lower ISO war yet, become totally dependant on creativity with the ISO doing all the light balancing. 

That camera appears to have great ISO 12500 performance; sure you can see it hitting the quality quite hard but still very useable and good overall.


----------



## bribrius (Mar 30, 2016)

i dunno but for 6500 bucks definitely over my budget  > I am sure the pros could put it to use though.


----------



## Derrel (Mar 30, 2016)

Braineack said:


> jaomul said:
> 
> 
> > Hello, ISO 3,280,000... Nikon D5 studio test scene comparison published
> ...



I just made this screen capture, for educational purposes, you know....looks like it's better than other 20-24 MP cameras of APS-C and FX sensor sizes when exposed properly at ISO 25,600.

That was under artificial lighting, not daylight. Might be pretty good for night-time sports events, indoor sporting events. ISO 25,600 is way above the capabilities that I have in a Nikon or Canon body.


----------



## bribrius (Mar 30, 2016)

Derrel said:


> View attachment 118675
> 
> 
> Braineack said:
> ...


looks like it still has issues at 25,600 though by that capture. What is the usable range you think?


----------



## Vtec44 (Mar 30, 2016)

From what I see, I can probably push it to about 204,800 ISO before it becomes unusable.  Then again, event/wedding photography is very different compare to studio photography when it comes to technical requirements.


----------



## Derrel (Mar 30, 2016)

Usable range on newsprint/halftone? 100k or so, I think--for times when just getting "a picture", any picture, will be a big deal. 

Look at the D5 versus the $7999 Leica SL, the new, large, 24MP full-frame mirrorless camera Leica just premiered-wow, holy noise, Leica. Compare the D5's image appearance against the shot made by the Canon 7D Mark II, an action camera: MUCH better detail from the larger, better sensor in the D5.

The new Sony A7R Mark II has the highest megapixel count: its image if down-sized, might be less noisy than the D5's image, but the color out of the Sony looks very flat.

This is an ISO level that a few years ago would have been a pipe dream.


----------



## Vtec44 (Mar 30, 2016)

Pentax 645z it is.  Dang the whole setup is going to be like 10k. I'm going to wait and see if the tax is going to kill me again this year


----------



## gsgary (Mar 31, 2016)

Derrel said:


> View attachment 118676
> 
> Usable range on newsprint/halftone? 100k or so, I think--for times when just getting "a picture", any picture, will be a big deal.
> 
> ...


Most people shooting with an SL will be shooting in good light because that is where the best photographs are, there are wedding photographer using Microsoft and M 240 with no problems  they probably have better skills to shoot 
In low light 


Overread said:


> If high ISO keeps going this high we might well soon enter an age where aperture and shutter speed could almost, barring strong light as we don't have a lower ISO war yet, become totally dependant on creativity with the ISO doing all the light balancing.
> 
> That camera appears to have great ISO 12500 performance; sure you can see it hitting the quality quite hard but still very useable and good overall.




Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk


----------



## gsgary (Mar 31, 2016)

Vtec44 said:


> Pentax 645z it is.  Dang the whole setup is going to be like 10k. I'm going to wait and see if the tax is going to kill me again this year


I would take the Pentax over the D5 every day of the week but if I shot weddings it would be film all the way that is were the money is people are paying more for the film look

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk


----------



## Overread (Mar 31, 2016)

Aye gary most shoot in good light - but then again performance of the camera in ISO/ASA sensitivity partly defines good to poor to bad light so the advances in technology keep changing the goal posts. Go back a few years only and DSLR wise ISO 1600 was your limit. That might be fine for some things, but indoor sports in an arena would struggle in many cases. Heck I've been all the way to the limit on the 7D; been underexposing by at least a stop and been at 1/500sec and f2.8 and thus had no room at all (well aside from breaking out a slew of flashes to stick to the roof and stuff but they won't let me do that.......)


----------



## gsgary (Mar 31, 2016)

Overread said:


> Aye gary most shoot in good light - but then again performance of the camera in ISO/ASA sensitivity partly defines good to poor to bad light so the advances in technology keep changing the goal posts. Go back a few years only and DSLR wise ISO 1600 was your limit. That might be fine for some things, but indoor sports in an arena would struggle in many cases. Heck I've been all the way to the limit on the 7D; been underexposing by at least a stop and been at 1/500sec and f2.8 and thus had no room at all (well aside from breaking out a slew of flashes to stick to the roof and stuff but they won't let me do that.......)


Been there got the T shirt and for me now it is pointless unless you are making big money to pay for these cameras, give me lovely light any day

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk


----------



## MartinCrabtree (Apr 2, 2016)

Derrel said:


> Yeah..my diabetes was flaring up and my blood sugar level was making my eyes not focus too well. Go ahead... f***ing laugh it up at my expense.


----------

