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 / Nikon D5 — dark field histograms at high ISO settings

Nikon D5 — dark field histograms at high ISO settings

March 29, 2016 JimK 2 Comments

This is part of a series of posts about the Nikon D5. The series starts here.

In the previous post we looks at short-exposure, dark-field histograms from the Nikon D5 at low (ish) ISOs. Now we’ll look at the higher ISOs.

ISO 2500
ISO 2500

At ISO 2500, the histogram tightens up again.

ISO 3200
ISO 3200

ISO 3200 has the same input-referred noise as ISO 2500.

ISO 4000
ISO 4000

ISO 4000 has the same input referred read noise as ISO 2500 and ISO 3200.

ISO 5000
ISO 5000

At ISO 5000, the read noise tightens up a bit.

ISO 6400
ISO 6400
ISO 8000
ISO 8000
ISO 10000
ISO 10000
ISO 12800
ISO 12800

From now on, the noise goes up without any of the sawteeth.

Let’s pause for a moment and admire the above ISO 12800 histogram. I don’t believe I’ve ever seen one that’s as nice as that. The dropouts are really no worse than the histogram at base ISO.

ISO 16000
ISO 16000
ISO 20000
ISO 20000

Now I’m going to have to change scale.

ISO 25600
ISO 25600
ISO 32000
ISO 32000
ISO 40000
ISO 40000
ISO 50K
ISO 50K

Changing scale again:

ISO 64K
ISO 64K
ISO 80L
ISO 80L
ISO 100K
ISO 100K

Now there’s something interesting! There’s clipping on the upper end of the histogram. Is the D5 like a TDI VW that knows it’s being tested?

ISO 125K
ISO 125K
ISO 200K
ISO 200K
ISO 250K
ISO 250K

From now on it’s obvious that all the gain is digital.

ISO 500K
ISO 400K
ISO 800K
ISO 800K
ISO 1.6M
ISO 1.6M
ISO 3M
ISO 3.2M

Until the ISO 250K, the histograms look pretty amazing. Can anyone tell if all the gain in the sawtooth sections is digital by looking at the combing?

 

 

 

 

The Last Word

← Nikon D5 — dark field histograms at low ISO settings Nikon D5 — dark-field noise vs shutter speed →

Comments

  1. kelly says

    March 30, 2016 at 3:51 pm

    you said—-From now on it’s obvious that all the gain is digital.

    how goddamn dumb are you? ISO is applied gain, its NEITHER exposure nor sensitivity

    ISO has nothing to with with native gain / time (shutter, aperture, photosite size)

    Reply
    • Jim says

      March 30, 2016 at 8:38 pm

      how goddamn dumb are you?

      Can we keep it civil here?

      ISO is applied gain, its NEITHER exposure nor sensitivity

      ISO has nothing to with with native gain / time (shutter, aperture, photosite size)

      I don’t know what you mean by “native gain”, or “applied gain”(precisely), for that matter. I agree that ISO setting and exposure are two different things.

      I have obviously made you mad, but I don’t know exactly how. Maybe you can explain in detail how you think I have erred.

      Jim

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

January 2023
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  
« Dec    

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 Picking a macro lens
  • Glenn Whorrall on Picking a macro lens
  • JimK on What pitch do you need to scan 6×6 TMax 100?
  • Hatzipavlis Peter on What pitch do you need to scan 6×6 TMax 100?
  • JeyB on Internal focusing 100ish macro lenses
  • JimK on How focus-bracketing systems work
  • Garry George on How focus-bracketing systems work
  • Rhonald on Format size and image quality
  • JimK on Internal focusing 100ish macro lenses
  • Darrel Crilley on Fuji 100-200/5.6 on GFX, Nikon 70-200/@2.8E, Apo-Sonnar 135 on Z7, revisited

Archives

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

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.