D600 @ iso 6400

[zollo]

purchased the d600 today :-)
some shots from inside the shop all taken at iso 6400, nothing pretty.
performed pretty well i thought.

here's a link to the small set
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zollo13/sets/72157631564090377/
exif should be intact and original files are available
first two are with 24-85 af-s kit lens
last three are with my 70-200 vr2
photos have not been processed in any way

[Wayne]

Very good for ISO6400 I think.
this could be the Nikon many have been waiting for.

[ricktas]

very nice. Its a tidy little unit. I had a play with one today as well. Looks good at 6400.

[I @ M]

Looks perfectly acceptable performance and I think their marketing got it right having the 24-85 as a realistic option as a "kit" purchase with the body.

[Film Street]

That's impressive. (Repeat mantra = I want one)

[Sifor]

I'll be interested to see how it compares to the D800's ISO performance and dynamic range...

[ricktas]

I'll be interested to see how it compares to the D800's ISO performance and dynamic range...

dynamic range is supposed to be about 1 stop down from the D800. ISO performance on the D600 should be slightly better 24MP vs 36MP for the D800 on same physically sized sensor

[zollo]

Also curious to know, especially dynamic range. iso performance I'm very happy with


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[swifty]

It should be very interesting re:D600 vs D800. I think they'll be incredibly close in regards to high ISO and DR.
For high ISO maybe within 1/3EV on a global scale (not pixel level) but better detail from the D800.
For DR, since they're both Sony sensors (not confirmed in the D600 but very likely), then essentially the same shadow pulling characteristics.
All in all probably insignificant differences.
What'll also be very interesting is how it'll stack up against the aging D3X 24mp sensor.

[zollo]

It should be very interesting re:D600 vs D800. I think they'll be incredibly close in regards to high ISO and DR.
For high ISO maybe within 1/3EV on a global scale (not pixel level) but better detail from the D800.
For DR, since they're both Sony sensors (not confirmed in the D600 but very likely), then essentially the same shadow pulling characteristics.
All in all probably insignificant differences.
What'll also be very interesting is how it'll stack up against the aging D3X 24mp sensor.

Well I own the d3x as well and iso wise the d600 is at least 2 stops better. Haven't done testing yet but at base setting the detail seems to be about on par. I am also sure the dynamic range on the 600 is better, but once again, I haven't done any testing or processing of the same scene etc


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Wayne]

I would like to see some 100% crops, because even the D800 at fairly high ISO looks great scaled to the sizes we normally upload, but when viewing all those 36mp, you can see a great deal more noise at 1:1.

[swifty]

Well I own the d3x as well and iso wise the d600 is at least 2 stops better. Haven't done testing yet but at base setting the detail seems to be about on par. I am also sure the dynamic range on the 600 is better, but once again, I haven't done any testing or processing of the same scene etc


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Hmm.. Interesting observations. I know the D3x sensor's a Sony non-exmor design so at least a generation older but I wouldn't have expected that big a difference.
Not doubting your experiences at all since I don't own a D3x.
But given a D3/D700's probably on par with the D3X up to ISO 1600 where the D3/D700 pulls ahead. The D3s and D4 are both probably around 1 stop better in the upper ISO regions than the D700/D3, I'm not sure a D600 can be more than 2 stops ahead, especially considering the D800 (a current Sony exmor design) is not as good as the D3s/D4 in high ISO. U'd need to beat the D3s/D4 comfortably to be at least 2stops better than a D3x and the D4's already state of the art in efficiency.
Maybe u're referring to jpegs currently?

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not referring to pixel level noise btw, but the image as a whole (whatever the display/print size).
But for a D600 vs D3x, I guess u could compare at pixel level since they have the same pixel count.

[I @ M]

Hmm.. Interesting observations. I know the D3x sensor's a Sony non-exmor design so at least a generation older but I wouldn't have expected that big a difference.
Not doubting your experiences at all since I don't own a D3x.
But given a D3/D700's probably on par with the D3X up to ISO 1600 where the D3/D700 pulls ahead. The D3s and D4 are both probably around 1 stop better in the upper ISO regions than the D700/D3, I'm not sure a D600 can be more than 2 stops ahead, especially considering the D800 (a current Sony exmor design) is not as good as the D3s/D4 in high ISO. U'd need to beat the D3s/D4 comfortably to be at least 2stops better than a D3x and the D4's already state of the art in efficiency.
Maybe u're referring to jpegs currently?

Swifty, with all due respect mate, I feel that you are getting a little hung up on "specs" and I have no doubt that the D600 is going to produce some great shots but there are far more to the ways a camera deals with a picture ( lens not withstanding ) and the D3x has always had a certain quality to its files that don't seem to be reproduced by other models in much the same way as the D700 did in comparison to earlier cameras and now as the D800 does compared to other models.

Nikon would have sold out every D3x that they could have produced based on low ISO IQ except for the fact that it was about 50% overpriced.
I see the proof in that when Zollo is happy to go out and buy a camera that will probably deliver 95% of a D3x at around 1/4 of the price.

[zollo]

I would like to see some 100% crops, because even the D800 at fairly high ISO looks great scaled to the sizes we normally upload, but when viewing all those 36mp, you can see a great deal more noise at 1:1.

Wayne the link in the first post has full size images that you can download and have a look at. There definitely is noise at 6400 x 100% but it is not very intrusive


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[swifty]

Not hung up about specs at all, Andrew. Just an observation that's all.
I find it difficult to comprehend a 2-stop high ISO improvement so just qualifying whether we're referring to pixel-level noise, jpegs etc.

Not degrading the D3x in any ways but as tech matches on, its interesting to compare what Sony's done one generation onwards.
The D3x sensor appeared in the then Sony flagship A900 (minus Nikon's low pass filter) and now this new sensor appears in Sony's new flagship A99 (but with a translucent mirror now). But otherwise a pretty good like for like comparison.

[zollo]

Not hung up about specs at all, Andrew. Just an observation that's all.
I find it difficult to comprehend a 2-stop high ISO improvement so just qualifying whether we're referring to pixel-level noise, jpegs etc.

Not degrading the D3x in any ways but as tech matches on, its interesting to compare what Sony's done one generation onwards.
The D3x sensor appeared in the then Sony flagship A900 (minus Nikon's low pass filter) and now this new sensor appears in Sony's new flagship A99 (but with a translucent mirror now). But otherwise a pretty good like for like comparison.

Swiftly at this time I am comparing jpeg fine large setting of both cameras set to same high iso reduction of normal. The files from d3x @ 1600 look very much like those from the d600 @ 6400. Sorry I can't do more accurate testing than that for you, but I'll leave it up to those with the proper equipment to do so anyway.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD