• 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 / The Last Word / D810 live view heating effects at 30 second exposures

D810 live view heating effects at 30 second exposures

February 27, 2015 JimK 6 Comments

A few days ago, I posted some graphs that indicated that using live view on the D810 had no material effect on dark-field noise at 1/2000 second shutter speeds. Yesterday, I repeated the tests at 1/30 second and 1 second shutter speeds, with similar results.

I’ve received a request to do more testing at really long shutter speeds. 30 second is as long as the D810 will do without special tricks, so that’s what I picked.

Here’s the protocol. In a 68-degree F (20 degrees Celsius) room, I set a D810 up in manual mode, with 14 bit raw file precision. I set the ISO to 800, which is the highest ISO on the D810 where there is no clipping of dark-field images. I set the shutter to EFCS at 30 seconds, the aperture to f/16, the shutter mode to single shot, and the exposure delay to 0. With the lens cap on, I made a series of several exposures with live view off, starting each exposure immediately after the preceding one ended. I shut the camera off for half an hour, then I made another series about a minute apart with live view on. Thus, in the second series, live view was on for 30 seconds, then the shutter was open for 30 seconds.

I analysed the files in RawDigger, both for almost the entire frame, and for a 200×200 central area, averaging the standard deviation of the captures for all four raw channels.

The results:

d810ISO800DFgraph30sec

d810ISO800DFgraph30secsmall2

 

The effect of the heating induced by the use of live view on the dark field noise is greater than at slower shutter speeds, but it is certainly not dramatic. In fact, I consider it fairly small.

There appears to be virtually no self-heating-induced increases in dark field noise from simply having the shutter open and the sensor collecting light for ling periods of time.

The Last Word

← D810 live view’s effect on dark-field noise, longer exposures Death Valley Days →

Comments

  1. Jean Pierre says

    February 27, 2015 at 8:48 am

    Many thanks Jim,
    It confirms my tests. With higher ISO you have to be careful, take in consideration. And with long exposure to think about for noise and detail affection.

    Reply
  2. Jeffrey Goggin says

    February 27, 2015 at 12:08 pm

    Thanks!

    JG

    Reply
  3. CarVac says

    February 28, 2015 at 8:12 am

    You should probably plot those with a logarithmic Y axis.

    Reply
    • Jim says

      November 10, 2015 at 8:13 am

      You are correct, but the range is so small it wouldn’t make much difference.

      Reply
  4. Shane says

    March 28, 2015 at 1:11 pm

    FYI – A minor typo in the following D810 posts
    http://blog.kasson.com/?p=8940
    http://blog.kasson.com/?p=8977
    http://blog.kasson.com/?p=8985
    “I set a D810 up in manual mode, with 14 bit raw file precision. I set the ISO to 800, which is the highest ISO on the D800 where there is no clipping of dark-field images.”

    D810 in 1st sentence changes to D800 in 2nd sentence.

    Keep up the good work.

    Reply
    • Jim says

      March 30, 2015 at 8:09 am

      Fixed. Thanks!

      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

  • 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
  • Ivo de Man 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.