D5 worse than D610 in ISO performance ??

Paperman

That is what I saw in DxO tests someone posted somewhere. Any opinions ???

Apologies if discussed previously ( the test is not new ) but couldn't see anything on NR.

Ironheart

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon D5,Nikon D610
If you look at charts like the one above, you will see that the D5 (and D500) are tuned to reach their peak performance at ISO 800-1600 rather than at base ISO. So yes, ISO 100-800 the D610 wins, after that the D5 wins. The D5/D500 are more geared towards action oriented photography than landscape. In practice, doesn't really matter much, unless you are milking every bit of DR out of a single shot at base ISO. Typically those would be HDR bracketed shots anyway, so meh.
DxO only gives one number, so it's hard to glean all of this out of their number. I think we discussed this a bunch on the D5 thread, but thats really all there is to know.

Paperman

I get the DR part but it is the High ISO number we are talking about . ISO2900-3000 where the quality starts to crumble, where the D610 supposedly beats D5. Let's not forget the D610 has 20%more pixels ...

D5 probably does a better job at ultra high ISOs like 12800-51200 but is that the typical range for a sports photographer ?

I own neither of the two so just questioning out of curiosity ....

Ironheart

For high ISO you can compare them for yourself at:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
To my eye, the D5 is already pulling ahead at ISO400, but clearly at ISO800, and after that no contest.

WestEndFoto

That is a handy site Ironheart for those that fret about high ISO performance.

paulr

Ironheart said:

For high ISO you can compare them for yourself at:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
To my eye, the D5 is already pulling ahead at ISO400, but clearly at ISO800, and after that no contest.

Very useful Link Ironheart Ive booked- marked,that one

CaMeRaQuEsT

There is a caveat to IR's comparometer: all images shown are OOC JPEGs, and in this case, D610 vs. D5, we are talking about image processors that are two generations and almost 4 development years apart. A comparison of NEF files will be much more telling of each cameras' raw (pun intended) sensor capabilities.

Ironheart

Your wish is my command:
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=nikon_d5&attr13_1=nikon_d610&attr13_2=canon_eos1dx&attr13_3=sony_a7sii&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=1600&attr16_1=1600&attr16_2=1600&attr16_3=1600&attr171_2=off&attr171_3=off&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.4139460193934902&y=0.7731947382945452

One caveat is that the raw converter is ACR, so while that's good for leveling the playing field it doesn't necessarily represent the best you can do (i.e. DxO PRIME)

Paperman

I still wish there was an explanation to why Dx0 gives ISO2925 for D610 & ISO2434 for D5 ...

Ironheart

Oh that? Just look at DxO's definition of what the "Sports (Low-Light ISO)" really is:

From http://www.dxomark.com/About/Sensor-scores/Use-Case-Scores
"An SNR value of 30dB means excellent image quality. Thus low-light ISO is the highest ISO setting for a camera that allows it to achieve an SNR of 30dB while keeping a good dynamic range of 9 EVs and a color depth of 18bits.
A difference in low-light ISO of 25% represents 1/3 EV and is only slightly noticeable."

First of all these numbers only differ by 17% (2925 vs 2434) therefore about 1/6 EV which is within the margin of error for actual shooting.
Second, the rating is trying to distill a whole curve into a single value. It's like saying "peak horsepower is at 4200 RPM" How does the engine perform at 4500 RPM 2500RPM? In the case of a digital camera you can look at the DR curves (which are based on SNR) and see how the sensor performs across a range of ISO values

Look at this:
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D5-versus-Nikon-D610___1062_915

Make sure you go beyond the "Scores" tab and look at the "measurements" one where all of the data points are presented. You can even toggle between "screen" and "print" the latter normalizes everything to 8MP so you can truly do an apples to apples comparison.

Even better is to look at actual photos and see for yourself, where you like to shoot (drive) and determine how its going to work for you. HTH.

MegapixelSchnitzel

The worst review of the D5 on B&H's website had a comment that read, "...has the dynamic range of a fax machine." That made me laugh for an hour. Stupid person: if you want wider dynamic range, get a real, commercial, color copier.

Photobug

Good comparison of the D5 and the canon eos 1D X Mark II.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/3640026683/flagships-compared-canon-eos-1d-x-mark-ii-versus-nikon-d5

CaMeRaQuEsT

MegapixelSchnitzel said:

The worst review of the D5 on B&H's website had a comment that read, "...has the dynamic range of a fax machine." That made me laugh for an hour. Stupid person: if you want wider dynamic range, get a real, commercial, color copier.

Preferably one from Canon, I'll say, and with OEM Canon consumables because those 3rd party toners and drums will put your ImageRunner all out of wack...

TriShooter

I read that negative Nikon D5 review on B&H and gave the reviewer high marks for knowing his craft. The reviewer nailed a major shortfall of the D5 for a significant segment of professionals and equally knowledgeable enthusiasts.

The D5 is not the all purpose FX camera we have gotten from Nikon in previous generations since the D3/D3S where the flagship cameras gave acceptable performance for almost any kind of shooting from weddings and portraits to wildlife and sports.

For those who want or need the high ISO imaging capabilities, incredible auto-focus speed and accuracy supported by its own processing cpu, high fps with a magnificent buffer, and a build quality that is worthy of the harshest conditions the D5 is without question the king of hill.

But recognize that the D5 is an editorial/sports/wildlife/battlefield camera. The D5 in its current configuration cannot give photographers the same exposure latitude and low noise shadow detail and recovery we have enjoyed with all Nikon FX bodies since the D3/D3S through the D600 and D800 series, including the D700 and D750 at the lower ISOs. This is a fact and it significantly impacts the camera's quality and flexibility for anyone who shoots at lower ISO settings like landscape, wedding and portrait photographers.

Understanding the impact of lower dynamic range and the reality that the D5 is not ISO Invariant and leaves a significant amount of shadow detail below the noise floor at lower ISOs is a fact and important for all of us to understand when choosing our equipment.

Landscape photographers and portrait photographers as well as wildlife photographers and others who shoot slow moving subjects will produce higher quality images with any of the other previously mentioned Nikon cameras other than the D5 at low ISO settings.

The D5 is a brilliant camera, but the negative B&H Photo reviewer knew what he was talking about for his type of shooting although his comments were over the top. Over the top because likely because he was not forewarned and therefore disappointed in the D5s performance which was not the D5's fault.

The D5 is not designed to produce sublime images in studio lighting or anywhere low ISOs can be used by a photographer to get the absolute best image quality. The D5 takes killer images where other cameras will be hard pressed to get an image in situations where lighting cannot be controlled and high shutter speeds are important to capture high speed subjects.

Pistnbroke

Brilliant post Trishooter ...which is why I bought another D7100 when I found they had biased the IQ at higher iso on the D7200...We must watch for this on future cameras.

Photobug

Pistnbroke said:

Brilliant post Trishooter ...which is why I bought another D7100 when I found they had biased the IQ at higher iso on the D7200...We must watch for this on future cameras.

+1 Pistnbroke & Trishooter.

TriShooter

Pistnbroke / Photobug: Thank you for the kind comments.

Pistnbroke, you are absolutely right about watching out for this apparent trend on future cameras.

BVS

Pistnbroke said:

Brilliant post Trishooter ...which is why I bought another D7100 when I found they had biased the IQ at higher iso on the D7200...We must watch for this on future cameras.

I'm not sure I follow. According to the DxO measurements, D7200 betters or equals the D7100 in SNR, Dynamic Range, Tonal Range, and Color Sensitivity at nearly all ISOs. Only at the very highest ISOs does D7100 start to beat D7200.

https://dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D7200-versus-Nikon-D7100___1020_865

Pistnbroke

BVS willing to be corrected but if I have it right in the old days the best IQ was at 100 iso ..above that it gets worse .... with the newer cameras they have arranged the software so the best IQ is at say 1600 iso and above and below it gets worse..now this may be fine if you shoot high ISO as in a D5 but most of my work is at iso 100 so I need to be carefull when I buy a camera..In truth we just want a camera that takes good pictures without all this technocrap to addle our brains. Its just done to make the high iso specs look good to aid sales....

Capt_Spaulding

Pistonbroke: It could well be that the technocrap has indeed addled my pate. Can you be specific as to what you mean by IQ. I don't mean to sound dense, but looking through DXO's measurements at things like SNR, dynamic range, tonal range, and color sensitivity the curves for the D7100, D7200, and D500 are really close until you get to point in the ISO range where the 7100 and 7200 are out of breath. To my unpracticed eye it looks like the differences may well be within measurement error.

The 810 and D4 curves are significantly separated (higher values for the high end cameras) from the DX cameras.

Edit: I went back and compared the D610, 810 and 4 and again the measurements are virtually indistinguishable in the ISO ranges where the cameras operate.

WTH?

Edit 2: Looking more closely at the Dynamic Range graph, the D610 outperforms both the D4 and D5 at low (100 manufacture rating) ISOs. In the case of the D5 the D610 outperforms it by over 2EV.

Yep. Technocrap has addled my brain.

BVS

Pistnbroke said:

BVS willing to be corrected but if I have it right in the old days the best IQ was at 100 iso ..above that it gets worse .... with the newer cameras they have arranged the software so the best IQ is at say 1600 iso and above and below it gets worse..now this may be fine if you shoot high ISO as in a D5 but most of my work is at iso 100 so I need to be carefull when I buy a camera..In truth we just want a camera that takes good pictures without all this technocrap to addle our brains. Its just done to make the high iso specs look good to aid sales....

I'm pretty sure that the best IQ a camera can deliver is still at ISO 100. The thing about the D5 is that Nikon sacrificed some low ISO IQ in order to improve high ISO IQ. That doesn't mean that the high ISO is better than the low ISO, just that the high ISO is a bit better than previous cameras (like the D4), and the low ISO is a bit worse than previous cameras.

Comparing the D5 to the D4 on DxO demonstrates this pretty well. If you click on the link below and go to Measurements -> Dynamic Range you see how the D5 is below the D4 at low ISO, but above it at high ISO. However, the highest point (best IQ) for both cameras is still ISO 100.

https://dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D5-versus-Nikon-D4___1062_767

donaldejose

There is nothing wrong with Nikon producing different cameras best adapted to different types of photography. There is no need to have a D5 for portraits or landscapes. You don't need the high ISO, fast AF and fps it offers. It has been a long time since all bodies had the same 12 megapixels. Let Nikon fill out its newly organized line-up this year and next year. We should be able to find the best tool for the job at hand in that new lineup and we should not expect the most expensive body to be the best at everything. We just might find the replacement for the D810 to be best for landscapes, the replacement for the D750 the best for portraits, the D5/D500 the best for sports and BIF, and we may find the new mirrorless with a silent shutter the best for wedding shooting during the service. It is great to have many "best" picks for different purposes. Thanks Nikon for tuning different bodies for different purposes.

Pistnbroke

Quote ... Dynamic Range you see how the D5 is below the D4 at low ISO, but above it at high ISO.

So there you have it

IanG

This is all very frustrating - I seem to be in a minority (of one) that is looking for real hi-ISO performance. I rarely use 100 or 200 ISO the I'm shooting concerts, circus events, outdoor (usually nighttime) spectacles - I don't have the luxury of being able to use flash (at weddings etc. - despite the denials, a huge number of wedding photographers can't live without flash) because it either blinds the artists of disturbs the paying public.

I'm most certainly not going to get drawn into this idiotic DxO argument - the proof is in the images, and I'm not complaining or waiting for the next iteration just because DxO say it's better.

I use Auto-ISO at 8000 and frankly Nikon seem to have mastered this beautifully - I admit I'm using a 12MP camera - so what - couldn't give a monkeys for 'higher' quality if 12MP gives me all I (and my clients) need.

Recently saw 26 of my festival shots blown up to 1m x 1m50 - and they looked wonderful.

I personally would never use this body in a studio - I've got 36MP bodies for that - horses for courses and all that...

Capt_Spaulding

Thanks. To this neophyte the subtleties of sensor characteristics raises a number of questions.

heartyfisher

For me the combination I have settled with is my D500 + D610 combo..

D500 for my main interests .. Macro, Wildlife, and also walk around (street and general)

D610 for portraits, Street portraits, Scenery, Wide ( I am not a wide angle person so 24mm is wide for me ;-) ), Pop-Up flash !! CLS Flash setups.

It sure seems to be that Nikon is "specializing" their cameras. Sensor Technology is reaching its limits .. so i guess it is only natural.

Sensor technology "advanced" quickly between 2000 to 2010. with huge jumps .. like 100%-200% performance improvements between the 4 year cycles. But if you look at the absolute energy transmission of the sensor it probably went from say 10% to 20% or later say 30% to 60%.. Nowadays the absolute transmission is close to 75% you will never get a 200% performance improvement again as that would be an impossible absolute transmission of 220% ! At most these days you will get another 5% increase in absolute transmission ie about 8% performance boost over the next generation. So schemes to optimize for High ISO or low ISO is logical. Also software techniques to "hide" the noise. and other improvements like Read speeds, "Silent" shutters, on-sensor AF, etc.. are all welcome. But absolute ISO Performance boost .. is really a thing of the past.

A couple of big ISO performance boost is "on the way" though. first is the rgbW matrix and other reconfigurations of the old rgb BAYER matrix. The second is the colour spliting technology as opposed to color filtering. at most these will gain 1 to 2 stops (100-200%) improvement and then it will be a dead end... in 10 or so years.