available light digital photography

paupatto · Jul 30, 2011

I own a Nikon D200 camera and would like to improve my ability to take photos under low light level conditions without the use of flash. I have heard that there have been considerable improvements in sensor technology since the D200, allowing use of much higher iso levels without serious noise problems. Can someone fill me in on the details of this? Is it time to buy a new camera body? I believe Nikon's current counterpart to the D200 is the D300s. How does it compare for available light low light level photography? If I keep my current camera, can I achieve reasonable improvements using noise reduction software? If so, what software do you recommend? How does this option compare with that of a new camera body? Is the difference still highly substantial?
-Paul Patton

joealcantar · Jul 30, 2011

I own a couple of D200's and they are not the best as far as low light without a flash. I shoot with the D700 now but kind of pricey. You may want to ask about the capabilities of the D300s and D7000 hear they do okay.
-
Shoot well, Joe

KmH · Jul 30, 2011

Why would you want to limit yourself to only available light, unless you are shooting night action sports? Only using available light puts a real serious crimp on the possibilities for creativity, and for low light work requires buying expensive wide aperture lenses to retain shutter speed.

At any rate image sensor performance can be compared at DXO Mark. DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

If you want low light performance, the best currently available on planet Earth is the Nikon D3s.

if you check the D200 specifications you see it has a CCD image sensor. Checking the D300s specifications shows it has a CMOS image sensor. Further checking reveals the advantages/disadvantages of each sensor type. Image sensor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You should also note in the specifications the base ISO of the D200 is 100, while the base ISO of the D300s is 200.

Garbz · Jul 30, 2011

Checking the type of sensor will not give you a good indication of how technology has changed over the last 5 years. Fact remains CCDs are still awesome low-noise devices when designed in such a way. Just didn't work too well in digital cameras where CMOS ended up being cheaper to extract more noise free photos.

Anyway yes I'm in your boat too. I shoot with the D200 and it's not ideal in terms of high ISO performance, and even in its day it wasn't the king of the pack in this area. Fast forward 5 years the D300s and D7000 have vastly improved sensor performance. The D700 has a physically larger sensor which for the same resolution equates to better light capturing ability and thus lower noise. Any of these cameras would be an upgrade in terms of noise as well as focusing ability, video, and some other recent features. The D7000 however would be a downgrade in usability and durability. They are plastic bodies rather than the magnesium D300s and D700.

Personally I haven't justified the upgrade to the D700 because I have taken the approach of creating my own light using flashes for my shots, but depending on your requirements and your budgets look at one of the three options listed.

cnutco · Jul 30, 2011

With good glass, the D300 does ok. Not sure about the D300s though...

On the other hand, my D90 does better in low light then my D300.

FX is where it is at for when low light shooting is needed. That is what my next step will be.