Talking about image quality is like talking about a spherical horse in a vacuum, since image quality is a complex and often very subjective factor.
Nikon FX Camera Image Quality
Basically, you can evaluate the image quality by: noise level (Low-Light ISO), color depth (Color Depth) and dynamic range (Dynamic Range) of the camera. The higher these settings, the better the image quality.
There is a special project dxomark.com, who professionally tests cameras on these parameters, in fact, from there I took some of the data. Having experience with different cameras, I can say that with the help of dxomark.com you can very quickly estimate the capabilities of the technology. Information from DxO labs is used, for example, in snapsort.com, which can compare two cameras very quickly and efficiently, for example Nikon D4 and D600.
According to D the camera with the best sensor is Nikon D810.
In the table below, the best indicators are highlighted in green:
| Max ISO | Max ISO HI | Color Depth | Dynamic Range | Low Light ISO | Overall Score | |
| D3 | 6400 | 25600 | 23,5 | 12,2 | 2290 | 81 |
| D3s | 12800 | 102400 | 23,5 | 12 | 3253 | 82 |
| D3x | 1600 | 6400 | 24,7 | 13,7 | 1992 | 88 |
| D700 | 6400 | 25600 | 23,5 | 12,2 | 2303 | 80 |
| D600 | 6400 | 25600 | 25,1 | 14,2 | 2980 | 94 |
| D610 | 6400 | 25600 | 25,1 | 14,4 | 2925 | 94 |
| D800 | 6400 | 25600 | 25,3 | 14,4 | 2853 | 95 |
| D800E | 6400 | 25600 | 25,6 | 14,3 | 2979 | 96 |
| D810 | 12800 | 51200 | 25,7 | 14,8 | 2853 | 97 |
| Df | 12800 | 204800 | 24,6 | 13,1 | 3279 | 89 |
| D4 | 12800 | 204800 | 24,7 | 13,1 | 2965 | 89 |
| D4s | 25600 | 409600 | 24,4 | 13,3 | 3074 | 89 |
| D750 | 12800 | 51200 | 24,8 | 14,5 | 2956 | 93 |
The “Overall Score” is responsible for the overall sensor rating.
Conclusions:
Different full-frame Nikon cameras have different uses, and therefore each camera separately has its own strengths and weaknesses in some criteria for judging image quality. The camera was very surprised by its performance Nikon D810 and Nikon Df.
Thank you for attention. Arkady Shapoval.
Happy New Year!!!!! :) I wish Radozhive development!)))
Thank you.
We have a NEW YEAR in Kazakhstan! Congratulations! )))
Good evening. Happy New Year. Thanks for the great articles. I look forward to new ones.
Small wipe:
"Conclusions:
Various Nikon full-frame cameras ... ”
All the best!
Happy New Year! I wish the development of this blog and good health to its founder, as well as creative success and the constant presence of inspiration and muse!
Happy New Year!!! This is for you and Radozhiva - http://s01.yapfiles.ru/files/518535/novogodnee_pozdravlenie_zmei.swf
Thank you, I just returned from the filming of this same New Year.
I congratulate everyone on the coming 2013 year, the year of the Snake, they say that money :) I wish everyone good health, great happiness and a lot of money this year !!!
HAPPY NEW YEAR
With New Rock all_ (:
“Different Nikon Full Frame Cameras Have Different Purposes” - “P” Full Frame
Small in volume, but very large in the power of knowledge article. Perhaps for some it is a reference point, but for someone it is a starting point in such an immense world of photographic equipment. For a long time I myself have been thinking about the image quality of cameras. I want to glue my "5 kopecks" to the article. In cameras Nikon, Canon and other manufacturers of DX and FX DSLRs, important indicators are (as Arkady has repeatedly said in your articles and reviews): the speed of continuous shooting (and here is the buffer capacity), the speed and accuracy of autofocus, the exposure metering system, etc. a number of other parameters. I think that the FX format (namely, the 24-36 mm matrix) today is a kind of golden mean in terms of accessibility, image quality and usability. Burst shooting at 8-10 frames per second, fast autofocus in FX (and DX) formats clearly indicate a significant bias (sharpening) of these cameras towards reportage shooting. The image quality of FX cameras (especially when using high-end high-aperture lenses) is close to ideal in detail and other indicators. It turns out when they ask: “What DX or FX camera to buy?”, It means (although not obviously of course) that it has already been determined that mostly dynamic subjects will be filmed plus portrait, landscape, etc. Thus, FX and DX cameras successfully compete with medium format cameras (maybe Nikon will throw at least a 60x45mm matrix to its fans someday?). Indeed, for mega-quality (detail and other parameters) portraits, landscapes, etc. cameras are used with matrices several times larger than the FX format. It's a pity that these cameras require a tripod, bulky, slow burst and fabulously expensive!
Nikon is hiding plans for the medium format.
thanks for the test!
p / s, we are not waiting for your review of the D600
I don’t know whether it is possible to trust the above tables. More precisely, the values from them. For example, the same project says that the Pentax K5II has a higher DD than 5d2. Logically, this is impossible. But the site says just that. How much they do not calculate quite clear
Although not only a nickel, but also a greater number of both the flagships of Nikon and Kenon, and simpler FF models
It is quite real, especially with regard to DD.
Thank you, the article really helps to put everything in their place!
Good day to all! I changed nikon d60 to nikon d600 ... enjoy it. D600 is very, in my opinion, easy to use, much more convenient than d700.
Can you describe why the Nikon D600 is more convenient in your opinion for the Nikon D700
Hello, Arkady.
The D600 camera was very interested, I would like to see a review from you. I plan in the near future to replace the camera. My first DSLR was the Nikon D5100 and now it’s not enough for me. I think in half a year I’ll mature to a more advanced camera. So far, the choice is only limited between the D7000, D600 or even the D700. Changing the D5100 to the D7000 will not be entirely rational, the D700 is not always found on the market, but the D600 is of interest as a more recent and new Nikon product. What do you think? Support for non-motorized lenses is just as important.
Of the budget options for the full frame, there are no other alternatives.
Arkady will not write about the d600, which is a pity because his point of view is important to me and Kakusha did not explain everything ...
Thank you very much, very accessible and explain on the fingers, a real joy for those who have not fully entered, but there is a desire) Thank you very much!
Based on this table, the D700 is out of date.
If you are chasing dry numbers, then yes, it is outdated, but, in my opinion, this whole race for numbers, naked marketing, Arkady still shoots masterpieces on the D40 camera, the best camera in all comparisons cannot help make masterpieces if the photographer doesn’t know how to shoot, thanks for watching
:) I also shoot at 350D) ancient for d40)))
stop advertising it G. YOU are not the marketing department. The d600 is an unsuccessful model in many respects. d800 is a good camera before that its place was taken by d700…. and d600 is amateur squalor in full flame performance
You probably know everything, and whoever can be deprived of that pragmatism as the stench of cattle from the entrance. You come in, and there are no other smells worse than the stench ... but there were people who specially came to FIT "
This is me about the author of the previous post and
Fart ("Farting") is a word used in English, usually used in relation to flatulence. The word "fart" is usually considered obscene in official communication and is considered vulgar. Fart can be a noun or a verb [1]. The roots of this word come from the medieval English words ferten, feortan and farten, which are related to the old Germanic word ferzan. Single-root words are found in Old Norse, Slavic, Greek and Sanskrit.
Yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
Well, it’s not a matter of G. But the fact that a little time should be devoted to a CHICNY THESIS article Although the article could turn out to be huge in the hands of real pros. Where it would be possible to go all over the cohort of these chic devices.
But because of these feathers ***** in WE were still satisfied with the CHIC miniature article.
I’ll omit the technical side of the question for further
I read reviews on the net as a whole, a question for the author, you didn’t notice dust getting on the mirror during the test and they say a lot of it there, oil on the mirror, and they also say that the lenses play in the camera’s mount, I want to purchase, before that I own D90 frame, d700 do not sell, and 800 are a little expensive for me. dispel my fears))))
Of course!
Thanks for this site. For not having abandoned him. And thanks for the subjective notes, articles and time spent on them. I choose the full format. The article set the direction of the search. Thanks again.
The lenses do not play, but the oil splashes, I clean the matrix every 1000 frames. This issue has been fixed in model 610.
Dear Arkady! How to adjust exposure metering of a light-shadow pattern in D610
Arkady, how do you transfer the numbers to a real picture? Well, for example, the dynamic range is 12,2 and 14,4 - how will this affect the receipt of a beautiful picture? There are many stories on the Internet about DD and its comparison with DD of the eye, monitor, etc. But what about real practice? For example, we will shoot the same wedding on the D700 and D800. How different will the picture be in terms of the dynamic range? and what exactly will the narrower DD of XNUMX cut?
Good day. In real conditions, this will affect the comfort of working with RAW, as well as image quality in JPEG. For example, where a 700t will have knocked out lights, an 800t will keep up.
This is understandable - 800 is well done against 700. The internet is full of such statements. The question is different in real practice, how much will DD 12 interfere with the 700, and how much will the gain of 14,4 against the 800 give? For example, the white dress of the bride and the thread of the dark jacket of the groom. They filmed such scenes on the D700 and everything was OK. Then the D800 appears - and that's it - the D700 is an old man and you can't take anything off except for shit! Only 5 years ago, the D700 was considered a good camera and people shot masterpieces on it. I have read your reviews on the D700 and D800 and I am very grateful to you for the complete objectivity of such reviews. Respect !! I have not seen the best. But I would like to clarify this nuance. Well, for example, if there is a slight haze in the sky, then both fotik will hide perfectly, but if the sun is bright, then the D700 will already take several pixels into the light (or into blackness). In what nuances of work will this difference in DD affect dramatically.
Here example from yesterday shooting... Lights are knocked out, shadows are dropped, although the camera was trying to compensate for both. This is an old woman d100 who simply does not have dd. Under the same conditions, the d700 will not even blink, and with ADL turned on, the shadows will be "translucent", and the highlights will be lowered and an excellent finished result will be immediately obtained. Due to the absence of dd in d100, a maximum of + -0.5 stop can be compensated, and even such overexposure, as shown, is no longer restored. Such overexposure in the d700 can be easily masked by any tool, for example, the same HighLight Recovery or any curve. The photo will be saved. In the case of the d800, during shooting, the scene will fit into its dd, and if it does not fit, then it will be easier to spin it. With d800 it is even very easy to spin the shdr, because almost 14 steps in dd can be decomposed into -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 and sewn together without any obvious loss of detail / color / highlights / shadows. It’s like this.
Arkady, and with the D100 this scene cannot be extended without external highlighting of shadows? For example, shooting in raw not with +1/3 exposure compensation, but, say, with -1/2 and then pulling the shadows ... Why does it seem to me that even in the case of the D100 everything is not so fatal.
You can do anything. But right away, the d100 will not succeed on this stage. It just does not fit in dd d100.
Yes, like many old cameras with an APS-C sensor and even not very old ones with a micro 4/3 sensor. The lights of the D100 do not work well, and the shadows are not bad for their time. And of course, the DD of the camera is very important, but, nevertheless, an amateur can live with a small DD. And cameras of the D3200 / D3300 level are not so bad in terms of DD as they are often said about.
Thank you!
Alexander:
Alexander, there are still a couple of nuances:
1) The exposure meter in the D800 is quite accurate and much more accurate than on the D700.
I didn't really like how the exposure meter on the D700 behaves in bright sun, in cloudy weather, and especially at dusk and in the evening / at night. At night - the camera sets shutter speeds faster than necessary and the frame turns out to be darker. But all this can be corrected if you track it in time.
2) Offtopic: the resolution on the D700 does not allow you to sprinkle the picture as much as on the D800.
PS> modern cameras with modern matrices allow you to think less and be distracted by leveling the shortcomings of a camera such as a narrow DD or a low working ISO.
Modern cameras are more convenient and easier to use than the old ones. The old men did not begin to shoot worse, but if there is free money, then why not buy a more convenient modern camera ...?
Thank you!
The numbers are difficult to transfer, because the limitations come out when the dynamic range of the real scene exceeds that which the camera can pull. And he, of course, is different for each scene. On a bright day, on the same camera, you can have both the sky blue and the forest green, or maybe a dark strip of forest above which there is a beaten out white strip of the sky. And it is not the numbers that are important, but the understanding of the limitations of your camera for DD, and the knowledge of how to fix it. With DD 10, technically suitable frames that do not rest against the DD limitation are made, it is simply more difficult to do it, it often requires more time for revision, and there are cases when you cannot correct it by any means or the corrected result still does not suit you. With DD, as with any other characteristic - if you want to get it right from the camera, get ready for big expenses. A compromise option is to learn how to work with the DD that is the existing camera, and only then think about changing it or not.
Thank you)