the last word

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

  • site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge
You are here: Home / The Last Word / Is the D810 ISOless?

Is the D810 ISOless?

July 24, 2014 JimK Leave a Comment

Measuring read noise is useful, but by the time the image is so dark that you can see the read noise, the photon noise is usually pretty bad. For me, the photon noise is usually more important as a measure of practical image quality.

I did a variant of my usual test that shows the combined effects of photon and read noise as a function of the camera’s ISO setting.

I set up the camera aimed at a white card, and defocus the lens. The light source is a Fotodiox 5500K variable-output studio LED light, so that I am able to precisely control the light level and make series at various sensor averages. The lens is the Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO-Sonnar. I employ a Heliopan neutral density filter to reduce the light level. I start out at f/8, 1/250 second, and ISO 64, and adjust the light level to get the green channel about six stops down from full scale. I make 16 photographs of the out-of-focus card. Then I crank in a stop of attenuation with the ND filter and double the ISO setting. 16 more images. When I run out of attenuation on the ND filter, I cut the Fotodiox power in half as a I double the ISO. I stop atISO 8000.

As I said, I make 16 exposures for each data point, averaging the results from those exposures. As a side benefit of that approach, I can compute the standard deviation of the underlying single-exposure data for each data point, and plot that information on the graphs to give an idea of the possible sampling errors involved.

I bring one of the images into RawDigger, select a square in the middle that’s 200 pixels on a side, measure the mean and standard deviation of all four sets of pixels. I leave the selection where it was, and measure the same statistics for all the rest of the images. For each image, I compute the SNR; the mean is the signal, the standard deviation is the noise.

I normalize all of the data so that they are corrected for the actual exposure of the test images, as measured by the mean value of the pixels in the selection box.  This calibrates out exposure variations caused by inaccuracies in the shutter and the aperture, gain of the amplifiers in the camera, and variations in strobe brightness caused by power line variation and recycling interval.

Here’s the result:

d8105stop

You can see the shadow signal-to-noise ration (and six stops down from full scale is usually a deepish shadow) falling as the ISO is raised. In a system that’s limited by photon noise but ideal otherwise, the slope of this falloff would be half a stop of SNR lost for each stop of ISO gained. If we subtract that out, here’s what we get:

d8105stopcorr

You can see that we don’t get any improvement in corrected SNR by cranking up the ISO. In fact, we get a small loss.

This is different from what we saw looking at read noise two posts ago, where we got more than a stop of improvement by increasing the ISO setting.

What’s this all mean? It means that at normal scene dynamic ranges, there’s not much point in creasing the ISO from 64. You might as well push in post. In very wide dynamic range scenes, where read noise becomes important, turning up the ISO to as high as 5000 may help.

The Last Word

← Nikon D810 read noise vs shutter speed Nikon D810 push processing: ISO 2000 to 64 →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

March 2023
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
« Jan    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • Good 35-70 MF lens
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
  • 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 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 Fujifilm GFX 100S pixel shift, visuals
  • Sarmed Mirza on Fujifilm GFX 100S pixel shift, visuals
  • lancej on Two ways to improve the Q2 handling
  • JimK on Sony 135 STF on GFX-50R, sharpness
  • K on Sony 135 STF on GFX-50R, sharpness
  • Mal Paso on Christmas tree light bokeh with the XCD 38V on the X2D
  • Sebastian on More on tilted adapters
  • JimK on On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S
  • Kyle Krug on On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S
  • JimK on Hasselblad X2D electronic shutter scan time

Archives

Copyright © 2023 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.