what camera is good for ISO and has the low pass filter removed?

[Mashburn]

has anyone shot with the 810 for astrophotography? at what ISO could you go to without wanting to flip a lid because of to much noise?

 

[jsecordphoto]

thanks everyone for mentioning the d750. but it is not for me. I like the removal of the low pass filter from my 7000 to 7200. BUT I will try my friends 750 and see how it is in comparrison to my 7200 in terms of sharpness.

I do have a friend who has the d750. so I will put me d7200 up against it the best possible way. but I do know my 7000 vs 7200 is a big difference in sharpness

Well, I owned both, and have since sold the d7200. The d7200 images were a touch sharper OOC in good light, but after sharpening in post you couldn't really tell the difference.

but sharpen the 7200 in post as much as you did the 750, and you will still see a difference

In regards to sharpening, you really could barely tell the difference between the two cameras after they were sharpened in post. Comparing the d7000 to the d7200 and saying the 7200 was way sharper simply because of no low pass filter is neglecting other sensor developments over the course of nearly six years. I think you're getting way too caught up on something that isn't going to make a significant difference for you. How big are you even printing? Do you have knowledge of sharpening for print (and not "export from LR with the sharpening presets")

We shot the 750 and 810 side by side at night before my buddy got sent the d810a to try out, and the 750 was cleaner at high ISO by about a stop, but with knowledge of noise reduction techniques and processing it seriously won't make a huge difference. Many of the top astrophotographers (landscape astrophotography that is) in the world are using the d810 and getting amazing images. With good technique in post you can get nice images at iso10k no problem

 

[shadowlands]

D750 is nice, but I don't like the build, size, grip, etc... spoiled by the D300, D700, D800 types. I will not touch a D3 or D4 because I would fall in love.

 

[IronMaskDuval]

Looking at your Flickr, it seems that you have a problem nailing focus more so than your camera being sharp. The shots that you do nail focus, the photos are plenty sharp for the lens that you are using, but there are few of those. If I were you, I would invest money in better lenses and perhaps join a photography group to improve yourself as a photographer. I see that you shot the Falcons (they need to be shot, literally). If you are in Atlanta, there is a group called the Meet and Shoot that is filled with talented photographers that can show you the ropes. Additionally, we have Aperturent and KEH here, both of which can rent or sell you gear for you to try out. I promise you, better gear only makes taking photos easier, but it won't make you a better photographer. I'm not posting this to negatively criticize you. I think you are a bit more concerned about gear than you should be. If you are in Atlanta, I'm always looking for people to go out and do street photography with if you ever need an opportunity to shoot. I love learning from this forum, and its members have made me a better photographer.

Toodles!

Oh, and this is one of the sharpest photos that I have ever taken. It was taken with a D7100 and a Nikkor 60mm. You can download the full size and zoom 100% into her eyes. It'll cut ya. My Sony A7 can do just as good, and it has an AA filter.

Andy and Steph

 

[goodguy]

I too checked your Flickr, it seems you are using a very old lens, its not a bad lens but this is first thing I saw as a problem, lens will be SIGNIFICANTLY more important then D810 or D750
Using on one of these cameras this lens and expect to get same results!
Its not a bad lens but its not 70-200mm 2.8 VRII

Another issue of the D7000 is AF which is less efficient then the one on the D7200/D750/D810
Another potential issue is that the D7000 are known to have back focusing issues, I bought a D7000 new years ago and it always had back focusing issues and many of my pictures came out soft, I tried every trick in the book, at the end I got rid of it and got the D7100, the improvement was instantaneous!! and I mean in a BIG way!!!
It was not the the sensor or lack of AA filter on the D7100 but the back focusing problem on my old D7000

You are mentally stuck on this AA filter like its the cause of all bad in sharpness but it aint, its effect is negligible!!!
If you want to get the D810 then thats fine, its an AMAZING camera but be sure to get it for the right reasons!
D810 with a cheap lens vs D750 with good lens and the D810 will produce inferior results, both cameras with good lenses the D810 might have sharper images but this will be negligible!!!

 

[Trever1t]

the D750 is a consumer camera and lacks the shutter speed (it's limited to 1/4000) and other options a Professional body like the D800/810 has.

Also, as mentioned, do not compare apples to oranges. Normalize the D810 file size to 24MP and YOU tell me which has better iso response....has there been a dxo test for that?

 

[Solarflare]

Dude, DxOMark (of course) already does that. They downsize everyone to 8 Megapixel before they rate their ISO. They are not THAT incompetent.

The ISO ratings of DxOMark arent that helpful anyway. They just state the camera has to archieve 3 measurements. They dont rate if the camera develops banding, what type of noise the camera has in low light, etc.



And about old lenses - what the frak ? Using an old lens just means you dont get the newest features. It doesnt mean the lens is any bad.

Heck Nikon still has current production AI lenses. Like Galen Rowells famous AI 24mm f2.8. Yes, that one is still current production ! Street prices are bit lower, and used prices are a LOT lower (just check eBay etc). Lens design hasnt improved much in recent decades.

 

[goodguy]

Dude, DxOMark (of course) already does that. They downsize everyone to 8 Megapixel before they rate their ISO. They are not THAT incompetent.

The ISO ratings of DxOMark arent that helpful anyway. They just state the camera has to archieve 3 measurements. They dont rate if the camera develops banding, what type of noise the camera has in low light, etc.



And about old lenses - what the frak ? Using an old lens just means you dont get the newest features. It doesnt mean the lens is any bad.

Heck Nikon still has current production AI lenses. Like Galen Rowells famous AI 24mm f2.8. Yes, that one is still current production ! Street prices are bit lower, and used prices are a LOT lower (just check eBay etc). Lens design hasnt improved much in recent decades.

Agree with everything you say.

As for old lenses, some of Nikon's old lenses are still very good, some are good but not as good and sharp as modern lenses, its a lens by lens case.

 

[astroNikon]

you use the old Nikon 80-200 f/4.5-5.6 AF-D ?
I tried that one once
I use the 80-200/2.8 AF-D
The two lenses are not comparable at all IMHO.
And I don't recommend the 80-200/2.8 for anyone with a crop 24mp sensor or >24mp FF sensor.
It seems to not be able to resolve well for those densities.
I would think your lens has the same issue for detail.

I used to have a 75-300 lens. It was really sharp on my d7000. On the d600 . ouch .. I sold it. It just wasn't a good match it was like everything had a slight haze to it.

 

[IronMaskDuval]

Dude, DxOMark (of course) already does that. They downsize everyone to 8 Megapixel before they rate their ISO. They are not THAT incompetent.

The ISO ratings of DxOMark arent that helpful anyway. They just state the camera has to archieve 3 measurements. They dont rate if the camera develops banding, what type of noise the camera has in low light, etc.



And about old lenses - what the frak ? Using an old lens just means you dont get the newest features. It doesnt mean the lens is any bad.

Heck Nikon still has current production AI lenses. Like Galen Rowells famous AI 24mm f2.8. Yes, that one is still current production ! Street prices are bit lower, and used prices are a LOT lower (just check eBay etc). Lens design hasnt improved much in recent decades.

Agree with everything you say.

As for old lenses, some of Nikon's old lenses are still very good, some are good but not as good and sharp as modern lenses, its a lens by lens case.

Old or modern, the same applies. Some lenses are great. Some lenses are terrible. Additionally, the great lenses are not all created equal, as you can get a great copy of a great lens, but you can also get a not so great copy of a great lens. Modern additions only help you in "getting the shot." However, if you weren't able to get the shot in the first place, no modern equipment is going to help you. I shoot with an A7, and a C/Y Carl Zeiss 50 1.4 Planar as my everyday lens now. The A7 does not have IBIS. The Zeiss does not have AF or OIS. I can capture pictures that are just as sharp coming out of a camera that doesn't have an AA filter or IBIS/OIS under the right conditions. Not sure why the AA filter is such a big deal.

 

[goodguy]

Old or modern, the same applies. Some lenses are great. Some lenses are terrible. Additionally, the great lenses are not all created equal, as you can get a great copy of a great lens, but you can also get a not so great copy of a great lens. Modern additions only help you in "getting the shot." However, if you weren't able to get the shot in the first place, no modern equipment is going to help you. I shoot with an A7, and a C/Y Carl Zeiss 50 1.4 Planar as my everyday lens now. The A7 does not have IBIS. The Zeiss does not have AF or OIS. I can capture pictures that are just as sharp coming out of a camera that doesn't have an AA filter or IBIS/OIS under the right conditions. Not sure why the AA filter is such a big deal.

Yep, exactly what I am saying, lenses should be judges on a case by case, some old ones are good and some bad and so does new lenses but in general I think new lenses is using new technology thus in many cases will be superior to older versions.
And the AA really is not a big deal!!!

 

[goodguy]

this camera is very good for ISO))
Nikon D5 with ISO 3280000​

Oh boy another TROL!

 

[ruifo]

has anyone shot with the 810 for astrophotography? at what ISO could you go to without wanting to flip a lid because of to much noise?

ISO 6400, easily. Several samples of mine in here: Astrophotography

 

[astroNikon]

Even my d600 I go to 6400 ISO with no real issues.

I think people get obsessed with thinking crop cameras are getting better and better all the time without realizing that FullFrame is also getting better and better all the time too. Matter of fact the new technology usually comes out in the top end bodies first, then trickles down to the rest of the systems.

 

[goodguy]

Even my d600 I go to 6400 ISO with no real issues.

I think people get obsessed with thinking crop cameras are getting better and better all the time without realizing that FullFrame is also getting better and better all the time too. Matter of fact the new technology usually comes out in the top end bodies first, then trickles down to the rest of the systems.

Actually the D600/610 always had better low light berformance then the D800, I think it still outperforms the D810 in this area though not in a big way.