D5 not as iso invarient as other nikon dslrs

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 :(
 
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.

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.
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
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
 
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
 
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.......)
 
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
 
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.

keep-calm-and-untwist-knickers.jpg
 

Most reactions

Back
Top