• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / Nikon Z6/7 / Z6 and Z7 shadow noise at nosebleed ISOs

Z6 and Z7 shadow noise at nosebleed ISOs

April 10, 2019 JimK 3 Comments

This is one in a series of posts on the Nikon Z6 and Z7. You should be able to find all the posts about that camera in the Category List on the right sidebar, below the Articles widget. There’s a drop-down menu there that you can use to get to all the posts in this series; just look for “Nikon Z6/7”.

There has recently been some controversy about the relative noise behavior of the Nikon Z6 and Z7 in deep shadows. I am addressing those differences in a series of posts which will include both quantitative results and visual ones. The series starts here.

There are people who think the Z6 has better shadow noise performance than the Z7 because the native ISO settings on the Z6 go a stop higher than those on the Z7. I consider this a variant of “goes to eleven” thinking, but I ran a test at ISO 51200 for the Z6 and and Hi 1.0 for the Z& (for some strange reason, setting the Z7 to that ISO requires that you turn off EFCS and the electronic shutter) anyway.

I made exposures at f/11 and 1/8000 seconds of the Macbeth patch set, lit with a Westcott 1×2 foot LED panel behind a Westcott softbox at 30% brightness and 5500K, with the two cameras. I developed the images in Lightroom, with Adobe Standard profile, sharpening set to the default except the amount was dialed back to 20. I turned off the noise reduction, and left the white balance As Shot, since the images were too noisy to get the eyedropper to work. I gave a 0.5 EV Exposure push to the Z6 image and a 0.67 EV push to the Z7 one.

Here are two crops at 1:1 for both cameras.

 

Z6 1:1

 

Z7 1:1

To level the playing field that is tilted by the two cameras having different resolution, I exported both images from Lightroom at 1600 pixels high, then re-imported them and cropped. They are seen here at about 250% magnification.

Z6 resampled

 

Z7 Resampled

The Z7 has a tiny bit more noise — as is predicted by the PDR curves — but I don’t consider the difference significant. And I don’t consider either of these images usable for other than documentary purposes.

Here are the above captures with the Lightroom Color denoise set to 25, which is the default setting; First at 1:1:

Z6 Chroma denoise = 25

 

Z7 Chroma denoise = 25

And now downrezzed to 1600 pixels high and magnified to 250% or so:

Z6 Normalized, Chroma denoise = 25

 

Z7 Normalized, Chroma denoise = 25

 

 

Nikon Z6/7

← Nikon Z6 and Z7 shadow noise — conclusions From PTCs to normalized SNRs →

Comments

  1. roglic says

    April 11, 2019 at 12:25 am

    I see Z6 = lower noise, Z7 = high noise.

    So what is conclusion? For Nikon users, if you shoot at high ISO, buy Z6. If you shoot at ISO 100 only, buy Z7. For everyone else, buy A7RIII.

    Reply
    • JimK says

      April 11, 2019 at 7:18 am

      I think that is a superficial and erroneous analysis, but you are welcome to your opinion.

      Reply
      • Seb Fornpost says

        April 11, 2019 at 7:32 am

        You should perhaps distuingish between opinion and rubbish.
        To litter public places (even the internet) may not be considered ‘freedom of opinion’.
        /irony off

        Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.