• 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 / Nikon D5 — dark field histograms at low ISO settings

Nikon D5 — dark field histograms at low ISO settings

March 29, 2016 JimK 1 Comment

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

Now we’re going to look at the histograms of a 200×200 pixel central patch in a series of dark field images made with the D5 at various ISO settings. Because the noise behavior in the preceding post was so interesting and curious, we’re going to look at more of these than I usually show.

ISO 100
ISO 100

I am used to seeing gaps in the red and green raw histograms with Nikons, becasue of the digital white balance prescaling, but I’m not used to seeing gaps in green channels. Even with the eye, you can see that the green channels are tighter than the red and blue.

ISO 125
ISO 125

ISO 125 has the same input referred read noise as ISO 100. It is apparent that there is some digital processing at this ISO setting. Is it possible that all the gain from 100 to 125 is digitally created?

ISO 160
ISO 160

ISO 160 also has the same input referred read noise as ISO 100 and 125.

ISO 200
ISO 200

At ISO 200, the read noise actually drops compared to ISO 160. The histograms also look less processed.

ISO 250
ISO 250

These histograms look cleaner than the ISO 125 ones. The input-referred read noise at ISO 200 and ISO 250 is identical.

ISO 320
ISO 320

Looks a lot like ISO 160, doesn’t it?

ISO 400
ISO 400

Again, the read noise drops with increasing ISO.

ISO 500
ISO 500

The input-referred read noise at ISO 400 and ISO 500 is the same.

ISO 640
ISO 640

The read noise drops as you go from ISO 500 to ISO 640, breaking the one-stop periodic pattern that we’ve seen up to now.

ISO 800
ISO 800

Same input-referred read noise as ISO 640.

ISO 1000
ISO 1000

Also same input referred read noise.

ISO 1260
ISO 1260

At ISO 1250, the read noise drops again.

USI 1600
USI 1600

ISO 1600 has the same input referred read noise as ISO 1250/

ISO 2000
ISO 2000

ISO 2000, 1600, and 1250 all have the same input-referred read noise.

It’s hard for me to tell what kind of processing Nikon is doing. If you look at the progression of the bottoms of the sawteeth, the noise doesn’t rise with ISO setting anywhere near as fast as you’d expect it to in a modern Nikon camera.

 

The Last Word

← Nikon D5 — read noise vs ISO setting Nikon D5 — dark field histograms at high ISO settings →

Trackbacks

  1. Nikon D850 histograms vs ISO setting says:
    October 30, 2017 at 2:57 pm

    […] This is very nice performance, without a lot of the weirdness of the D5 equivalent test. […]

    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.