Sensitivity of the new generation camera's.

Hello Reader,

At the moment I am still a happy user of the D70.
For most aspects I do not need an improvement.
But I would like more sensitivity.

With the D70 I am very happy with the quality of a 6 Mp picture taken at iso
400.
I try to refrain from iso value's above iso 800.

The D7000 offers more pixels and more sensitivity. Suppose the picture is
downsized to 6 Mp (from 16 Mp). At which iso settings can I get a result
similar to the D70 iso 400 settings?
The actual question is how much more sensitive is the D7000?



I do realise that the D7000 offers a lot more than just the sensitivity, but
for me the sensitivity is by far the most important aspect.

Thanks for your time and attention.
Ben Brugman

On 2010-12-13 06:29:22 -0800, "ben brugman" said:

Hello Reader,

At the moment I am still a happy user of the D70.
For most aspects I do not need an improvement.
But I would like more sensitivity.

With the D70 I am very happy with the quality of a 6 Mp picture taken at iso
400.
I try to refrain from iso value's above iso 800.

The D7000 offers more pixels and more sensitivity. Suppose the picture is
downsized to 6 Mp (from 16 Mp). At which iso settings can I get a result
similar to the D70 iso 400 settings?
The actual question is how much more sensitive is the D7000?



I do realise that the D7000 offers a lot more than just the sensitivity, but
for me the sensitivity is by far the most important aspect.

Thanks for your time and attention.
Ben Brugman

Much more sensitive.

I still have my D70 and it has served me well, but the shift to a D300s
removed all doubt that the D70 cannot match the newer Nikon APS-C
DSLR's when it comes to reduction of high, or higher than ISO 400 in
your case, noise. The D90/D300s showed this improvement.
All reports on the D7000 indicate that even with a 16MP CMOS sensor the
high ISO performance is acceptable to very good at ISO 1600-3200. At
ISO 6400 it is marginal, at ISO 12800 it is an exercise in silliness.

The D7000 is going to exceed the performance of the D70 across the ISO
spectrum, but for web posting and prints up to around 8 x 12 you will
probably not notice any difference in quality for most D70 shots at
ISO400 and lower.

All of that said, if you upgrade to a D7000, I see no reason to try to
emulate the D70. Just buy plenty of memory and enjoy all that is new
with the D7000. It will out perform the venerable D70.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

Savageduck wrote:
ben brugman said:

At the moment I am still a happy user of the D70.
For most aspects I do not need an improvement.
But I would like more sensitivity.

With the D70 I am very happy with the quality of a 6 Mp picture taken
at iso 400.
I try to refrain from iso value's above iso 800.

The D7000 offers more pixels and more sensitivity. Suppose the picture is
downsized to 6 Mp (from 16 Mp). At which iso settings can I get a result
similar to the D70 iso 400 settings?
The actual question is how much more sensitive is the D7000?

I do realise that the D7000 offers a lot more than just the
sensitivity, but
for me the sensitivity is by far the most important aspect.

Much more sensitive.

I still have my D70 and it has served me well, but the shift to a D300s
removed all doubt that the D70 cannot match the newer Nikon APS-C DSLR's
when it comes to reduction of high, or higher than ISO 400 in your case,
noise. The D90/D300s showed this improvement.
All reports on the D7000 indicate that even with a 16MP CMOS sensor the
high ISO performance is acceptable to very good at ISO 1600-3200. At ISO
6400 it is marginal, at ISO 12800 it is an exercise in silliness.

The D7000 is going to exceed the performance of the D70 across the ISO
spectrum, but for web posting and prints up to around 8 x 12 you will
probably not notice any difference in quality for most D70 shots at
ISO400 and lower.

All of that said, if you upgrade to a D7000, I see no reason to try to
emulate the D70. Just buy plenty of memory and enjoy all that is new
with the D7000. It will out perform the venerable D70.

The increase in megapixels can make editing slower on an older computer
and necessitate buying a new hard drive pretty quickly.

I had a D70 and really noticed the ISO improvement stepping up to a
D200. I would expect dramatic improvement, especially if downsizing to 6MP.

On this page it looks like ISO 400 on the D70 compares with about ISO
700 on the D7000 and ISO 1800 on a D700 if you study the [SNR 18%] tab:
http://dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/%28appareil1%29/197|0/%28appareil2%29/680|0/%28appareil3%29/441|0/%28onglet%29/0/%28brand%29/Nikon/%28brand2%29/Nikon/%28brand3%29/Nikon
But I believe that's a pixel level measurement, not image level so
reducing to 6MP should improve things significantly.

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 18:51:01 -0800, Paul Furman wrote:
: Savageduck wrote:
: ben brugman said:
:
: At the moment I am still a happy user of the D70.
: For most aspects I do not need an improvement.
: But I would like more sensitivity.
:
: With the D70 I am very happy with the quality of a 6 Mp picture taken
: at iso 400.
: I try to refrain from iso value's above iso 800.
:
: The D7000 offers more pixels and more sensitivity. Suppose the picture is
: downsized to 6 Mp (from 16 Mp). At which iso settings can I get a result
: similar to the D70 iso 400 settings?
: The actual question is how much more sensitive is the D7000?
:
: I do realise that the D7000 offers a lot more than just the
: sensitivity, but
: for me the sensitivity is by far the most important aspect.
:
: Much more sensitive.
:
: I still have my D70 and it has served me well, but the shift to a D300s
: removed all doubt that the D70 cannot match the newer Nikon APS-C DSLR's
: when it comes to reduction of high, or higher than ISO 400 in your case,
: noise. The D90/D300s showed this improvement.
: All reports on the D7000 indicate that even with a 16MP CMOS sensor the
: high ISO performance is acceptable to very good at ISO 1600-3200. At ISO
: 6400 it is marginal, at ISO 12800 it is an exercise in silliness.
:
: The D7000 is going to exceed the performance of the D70 across the ISO
: spectrum, but for web posting and prints up to around 8 x 12 you will
: probably not notice any difference in quality for most D70 shots at
: ISO400 and lower.
:
: All of that said, if you upgrade to a D7000, I see no reason to try to
: emulate the D70. Just buy plenty of memory and enjoy all that is new
: with the D7000. It will out perform the venerable D70.
:
: The increase in megapixels can make editing slower on an older computer
: and necessitate buying a new hard drive pretty quickly.
:
: I had a D70 and really noticed the ISO improvement stepping up to a
: D200. I would expect dramatic improvement, especially if downsizing to 6MP.
:
: On this page it looks like ISO 400 on the D70 compares with about ISO
: 700 on the D7000 and ISO 1800 on a D700 if you study the [SNR 18%] tab:
: http://dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/%28appareil1%29/197|0/%28appareil2%29/680|0/%28appareil3%29/441|0/%28onglet%29/0/%28brand%29/Nikon/%28brand2%29/Nikon/%28brand3%29/Nikon
: But I believe that's a pixel level measurement, not image level so
: reducing to 6MP should improve things significantly.

Maybe, depending on how the reduction is done, according to an algorithm
that's entirely beyond the user's control. My advice would be to always shoot
RAW mode. If you need to save space, you can compare the reduced image with
the original before burning any bridges.

Bob

Robert Coe wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
: Savageduck wrote:
: ben brugman said:
:
: At the moment I am still a happy user of the D70.
: For most aspects I do not need an improvement.
: But I would like more sensitivity.
:
: With the D70 I am very happy with the quality of a 6 Mp picture taken
: at iso 400.
:
: All of that said, if you upgrade to a D7000, I see no reason to try to
: emulate the D70. Just buy plenty of memory and enjoy all that is new
: with the D7000. It will out perform the venerable D70.
:
: The increase in megapixels can make editing slower on an older computer
: and necessitate buying a new hard drive pretty quickly.

Maybe, depending on how the reduction is done, according to an algorithm
that's entirely beyond the user's control. My advice would be to always shoot
RAW mode. If you need to save space, you can compare the reduced image with
the original before burning any bridges.

Yes, if you really really didn't want more than 6MP, it would still be
wise to shoot raw and batch those to jpegs then throw out the raw files
(except the occasional extraordinary ones).

On 10-12-13 9:29 , ben brugman wrote:
Hello Reader,

At the moment I am still a happy user of the D70.
For most aspects I do not need an improvement.
But I would like more sensitivity.

With the D70 I am very happy with the quality of a 6 Mp picture taken at iso
400.
I try to refrain from iso value's above iso 800.

The D7000 offers more pixels and more sensitivity. Suppose the picture is
downsized to 6 Mp (from 16 Mp). At which iso settings can I get a result
similar to the D70 iso 400 settings?
The actual question is how much more sensitive is the D7000?

The D70 has the same sensor as my Maxxum 7D. While that camera served
me quite well and produced marvelous images from ISO 100 to 400 (and 800
for that matter), it is an early generation sensor.

Newer DSLR sensors are a clear cut or 2 above and the D7000 is no
exception. Whether you use it at the whole resolution, 100% crops down
to 6 Mpix or downsampled to 6 Mpix, the results will be on net, better
than the D70 with respect to noise, saturation and detail separation -
this includes the benefit of the higher dynamic resolution of the D7000
(14 bits/pixel v. 12 for the D70 [which in itself is not "sensitivity"]

And all that above ISO 400 to boot.

--
gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.

Just a side issue, but improved noise control isn't increased sensitivity.
Sensitivity is the ability of the sensor to absorb light over a specific
time period, aside from perhaps better designed micro lenses, the D7000 is
likely no more efficient (sensitive) than the D70 sensor. In fact, the
increase in pixels probably means more light-blocking circuits on the
sensor which means a larger non-light absorbtive area on the whole sensor.
We should simply say (until a word comes along) the camera has less noise
at higher ISO's, about 2 stops.

Rich wrote:
Just a side issue, but improved noise control isn't increased sensitivity.

Improved noise control *is* increased sensitivity.

Sensitivity is the ability of the sensor to absorb light over a specific
time period, aside from perhaps better designed micro lenses, the D7000 is
likely no more efficient (sensitive) than the D70 sensor.

The D7000 sensor is significantly more efficient than
the D70 sensor.

Efficiency is the ability to collect and use photons.
Nikon cameras have been using progressively more
efficient sensors with each generation. However, the
D3S has a sensor that is at about 33% efficient, and
that has a number of ramifications. One is that another
10% increase won't mean much at all. The other is that
doubling the efficiency is in theory possible (to get
another stop of ISO sensitivity)... but it is simply not
going to happen that the same technology will be
improved enough to ever get another 2 stop improvement!

In fact, the
increase in pixels probably means more light-blocking circuits on the
sensor which means a larger non-light absorbtive area on the whole sensor.

One of the functions of the micro lenses is to counter
exactly that. The lenses channel light from the surface
to the sensor well more efficiently than the well can
collect light directly without the lens but with the
surrounding area partially blocked. The significance is
that a more efficient micro lens (for example one with a
shorter length, as with a "back light" design) might
have an effect, but a change in the percentage of the
surface that the well represents vs the surrounding
circuit area probably has very little effect.

We should simply say (until a word comes along) the camera has less noise
at higher ISO's, about 2 stops.

The camera has less noise only because the sensor is
collecting photons more efficiently. The actual
reduction in generation of read noise, for example,
hasn't been that much for several years now. What has
happened is that the character of the noise has been
changed to make it less obnoxous visibly (eliminating
banding, for example) and also it has been made more
suseptable to digital processing to remove it from the
final image.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

On 2010-12-16 01:20:13 -0800, Bruce said:

Rich wrote:

Just a side issue, but improved noise control isn't increased sensitivity.


Just a side issue, but what's with the apostrophe in the subject line?

Surely someone as well-educated as Rich should know that a plural
doesn't require an apostrophe? If it is meant to indicate the
possessive, what is he talking about? A camera's what?

I guess that since the OP originated in the Netherlands, English is not
a first language for Ben and he might have expressed himself clearer in
Dutch. He might have had a better idea of apostrophe usage. (Though I
have seen worse in this very forum from native English speakers!)
The best I can do for you is to say, it seems his concerns lie with the
low light/high ISO performance of the new generation of Nikon APS-C
DSLR cameras, specifically the D7000, as compared to his D70 at ISO400.

I thought as an obvious non-English speaker he made that much. Now get
off your picky high horse!

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 10-12-16 5:33 , Savageduck wrote:

Just a side issue, but what's with the apostrophe in the subject line?

Surely someone as well-educated as Rich should know that a plural
doesn't require an apostrophe? If it is meant to indicate the
possessive, what is he talking about? A camera's what?

Only dolts obsess over punctuation, grammar and spelling on usenet.

--
gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.