Continuing to dig into the performance of the Nikon D3, the files it creates, and processing with Nikon Capture NX, one thing that has struck me is the very nice level of shadow recovery that is possible with Nikon’s newest flagship.
In the above composite, what we have on the left is an image shot at ISO 3200, 1/500, and f/3.2 that was grossly underexposed at capture. This frame was shot as the first song ended and a spotlight on Marilyn Manson first fires up.
Judging from another final frame that followed, it only took one second for the light source to warm up, but the change in brightness was effective a three-stop difference.
Examining the file, I wanted to see how far the D3‘s files could be pushed. Using Nikon Capture NX, I pushed the ISO 3200 file at full-stop increments, with the following results (click for the full-resolution crops):
In viewing the above composite of crops, one should note that the image at +2EV is still about a stop underexposed, pushed to an effective ISO 12800.
While this example isn’t definitive by any means, I thought it was an interesting example of how the D3‘s files stand up to some relatively basic but strong manipulations.
As I continue to use the Nikon D3, I’ll be posting more samples like this, so stay tuned.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, February 20th, 2008 at 10:11 pm and is filed under Photography Gear and tagged with concert photography, d3, marilyn manson, nikon d3, pushing. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Welcome to ishootshows.com, your source for music photography featuring daily concert coverage, portrait features, and photo advice from professional music photographer Todd Owyoung.
Support this site by purchasing your photo equipment through my affiliate links to B&H Photo Video or Amazon.com
Learn more about how you can support the features of ishootshows.com.
Shooting Caitlin Rose and band before the Old 97s was a fantastic warm up, and a nice way to dust of…
Here’s a little preview from a recent shoot with my friends Option Control toward the end of l…
Today Adobe has released the beta version of Lightroom4, the successor to their popular image manage…
You’ve seen it before – weird, colored blobs in your photographs radiating outward from some…
About that time when I said about the megapixel war being over with the release of the Nikon D4 and …
cheers for this Todd. I’ve seen some results on one of these when Cypress Hill was playing in Sydney at the Enmore Theatre. Truly amazing piece of equipment, and for the first time i find myself questioning Canon’s performance.
Joel,
Do you have a link to those Cypress Hill shots? I’d be interested in seeing them.
The D3 has been very nice so far. After two years of admiring the Canon 5D’s performance, and then that of the 1Dmk3, Nikon finally delivered.
I was just looking through my Manon shots and saw this very underexposed shot, and thought I’d play around and see what was possible.
Wow Todd, that is really impressive – I always knew that a good exposure is key to clean images at high ISO’s but this is really interesting seeing how the D3 handles being pushed. I wouldn’t like to try doing that with previous cameras like the D200 / D2x, even at ISO 400…
Another good thing about this post is that it gives some hope to the rest of us – turns out your exposures aren’t *always* perfect! :-p
Hey Stephen,
I think good exposure still has a very definite place in the making of technically solid images, but you’re right, it’s interesting to see how the D3 handles pushing.
Just as a rough estimate, this is probably close to pushing a D2x file between ISO 400 and 800 +2ev.
The one thing in this image that’s important to note is that the blacks are clipped, so they really didn’t kick up a lot of noise — at least, not as much as they could have.
Ha, I don’t normally push files this far. It’s difficult shooting manual mode during gigs with fast changing lights — a fraction of a second later, the spotlight illuminating Marilyn Manson was fully warmed up and a full three-stops brighter (with perfect exposure, I should add). ;-)
Impressive. Did you use any noise reduction in the final pushed image?
Hey Riny,
I’ve got to check on that – it’s possible I ran some light NR, but one thing that contributes to the smoothness is the shallow depth of field (due to the angle) and make up that Manson is wearing.
I’ll post up another shot with no NR if that’s the case.
In the meantime, the composite of 100% crops of Manson’s face do not have any secondary NR beyond the normal applied to the RAW in processing, so that should give you an idea of the D3‘s images as well.
I never use RAW. I’d rather to work with layers, results are not better, but there are more possibilities – even ALL THE EARTH says “RAW contains more informations”.
Ha, Rod. I’ll have to send you a file to see what magic you can work in Photoshop, as now I’m really curious. I always shoot RAW, 100% of the time.
Send me a JPG file without any transformation :) I’ll see I can do with it :) And I’ll send you result :)
@Rod: Shooting RAW doesn’t preclude you from using Photoshop layers — it just gives you more data to manipulate in Photoshop… if you’re post-processing your images at all, the only really good reason I can think of NOT to shoot RAW is to save memory /disk space. And I think that’s a really poor reason if you’re a pro. It makes sense to invest in the equipment that does the job.
@Todd: WOW! I would have hit delete immediately if that happened on my D80 — no rescuing that at ANY ISO setting. =)
I’m impressed. *gear lust*
One of the most difficult things for me is to manage my cash flow… I always want another lens, or better computer equipment, or … A D3! Then I remember, I have to eat, too… patience, Eric! ;)
BTW, I ordered a computer upgrade about an hour ago… ;)
Eric, look at this : Shoot with a Canon 350d …
http://www.hiboox.com/lang-fr/image.php?img=rmlei1co.jpg
NO RAW. Only JPG files and layers … so excuse me if I think RAW has no sense for me.
Eric: You know, I would have normally done that as well. And actually, after seeing what was possible with this image, I went back into the trash and looked for other images that were severely underexposed, but didn’t see any others quite this bad.
There are more interesting shots of Manson, but this one proved to be the perfect example for this time of experiment.
What did you upgrade on your computer?
Rod: Ha, you know what? Maybe I should send you a high quality JPG from the untweaked RAW file and see what you can do with it ;-)
Then we’ll get a straight comparison your layers magic and Nikon Capture NX. What do you think?
I’m OK :) Let’s go !!! Maybe I’ll change my mind about my layout technique vs RAW :) you know my email, I’ll wait your pic ! :)