Better sharpness, or better high iso performance?

Kellynikon

I just saw this thread on dpreview and its question really interested me: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3806135#forum-post-55388507
Would a sharper lens give better results on a worse body at high iso? Now the thread above talk about samsung id like to talk about nikon instead so im altering the question. Ignoring reach, but only taking sharpness into account, what combo would give better results at ISO 3200:
- Nikon D7100/7200 with the Nikon 70-200 VR1
- Nikon D750 with the Sigma 70-200 OS

So bottom line is, what makes a picture better? iso performance or better sharpness?

sevencrossing

So bottom line is, what makes a picture better?

It's not what it's who
the answer. The better photographer will make the picture better
Be be serious, when it comes to High ISO performance FX wins
but most people may not notice much difference

spraynpray

Yes. What sevencrossing said.

Msmoto

Oh my, the disadvantages in being a -5 GMT.....

The issues of sharpness looking at ISO vs lens resolution has no answer. The variables are so great, even on a purely technical basis one would have to ask for a direct comparison. For example, at ISO 12,800 could the D750 and Sigma 70-200 OS produce an image better than a D7200 with Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VRII shot at ISO 100? Or, any of a million other combinations.

I appreciate the query, it most likely will lead to a thread with a bunch of opinions of one combo or another, but, the idea of a better image.... gosh, the 100 greatest photos ever taken are demonstration that in so many cases it is the right place, right time, and the ability to capture the image which is important. There are many images which are not technically perfect, yet the content is powerful enough to bring home the message.

Thus, the equipment is the second most important element in image capture. And, as one who wants to grab a moment in time for a living creature, it is the inclusion of our fellow travelers on Spaceship Earth that really counts.

IMO..... ;;)

Kellynikon

I know its the photgrapher and opportunity and not the equipment. its purely a hyphotetical question.

and regarding high iso, it does impact the quality of the image. so with that said, what hurts more? slightly worse iso or slightly worse sharpness?

Msmoto

OK, here is ISO 12,800, shot on D4 with an ancient (Late 1980's) 28.0-85.0 mm f/3.5-4.5 Nikkor. Looks blistering share to me and this was a kit lens if I am not mistaken.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/13018650424/sizes/o/

Same subject, D4, 105mm f/2.8 VR Micr Nikkor at ISO 1100

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/12437343684/sizes/o/

Not a lot of difference. But, one might expect the

and at 3600 ISO

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/12437357624/sizes/o/

Or, D70s, maybe a 24-120 f/4?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/6810914228/sizes/o/

I cannot see much difference in all these, not much help, but it may demonstrate the question is possibly more academic as unless we are going way out, even a D70s works for a lot of stuff.

WestEndFoto

The main issue with high ISO is that usable sharpness degrades. There are other issues like colour.

When I shoot my d800 at ISO 3,200, my complaint isn't the noise "per se". It is that eyelashes are no longer sharp.

Sure, it is caused by the noise, but the degradation is sharpness is the real issue. Printed small, ISO 3,200 looks fine.

Ironheart

A different but related question is which is easier to fix in post, high ISO noise, or lack of sharpness. I think noise is easier to deal with.

Pistnbroke

The D750 and the Nikon lens

heartyfisher

The better lense is always better .. in 3-5 years time you will be changing cameras but keeping the lense..