Ok, here's another little game we played! We all love to compare the noise levels at different ISO ratings. So, I've already compared the D2X to the new D3... and, well, there really is no comparison there. So I thought I'd take it up a notch. I asked Jeremy to bring in his Canon 5D, Amber to bring her Nikon D200 as she was in town shooting with me at my wedding yesterday (on a side note, the D3 performed remarkably at the wedding and I'm excited to share pictures very soon... and by the way, I never shot any LESS than 1600 ISO!!), and I asked my friend Parker to come over and bring his new Canon Mark III. Now we're talking! Let's see how they turned out...

Here's the basic shot, with the detail shots being 100% crops.



Again, I'm not some scientific scrutinizer here, but these tests are still fairly controlled. All are out-of-the-camera jpeg images using sRGB color space, auto white balance, on a tripod, all at f-1,8 at 50mm on a fixed-focal-length lens, in manual mode, with matrix metering. We let the cameras center the meter needle, which is what determined the shutter speed. All we did was change the ISO, then the shutter speed accordingly.

Immediately we can see that the D3's white balance is truer than that of the D2X. And obviously the noise levels are absurd... the D3 at 25,600 ISO rivals the D2X at only 3200! Dramatic difference.







To view these images, as well as the comparison shots from the Mark III, 5D, and D200, please visit my blog here.

Let me know what you think!!

Corey

Nice comparison Corey!

Although your url is mis-typed - it finishes ".cpm" instead of ".com". Took me a minute to work that out

Joel.

What, no Digital Rebel for all the Uncle Bob's out there?

Thanks, Eric... you can bring your Rebel anytime!Thanks Joel! You're fast... I fixed that before you even posted! You're on it. I appreciate it though.Corey

left blog lurve, thanks for sharing your find!

Corey....thank you so much for doing this and doing this so quickly...it's great!

I would like to see a 5D or 1D Mark III at around 2500 compared to the D3 at 6400...this would be a little more "fair." The Nikon has a 1 stop higher base ISO, so it is boosting the signal less to get to 3200. Also, Canon's ISO specs are about a third of a stop low...(800 ISO is actually around 1000 ISO).

At any rate, the tests are great and really help a lot!

This was SO much fun to be a part of this weekend. I have to say that the D3 is a photographers dream camera. There were times at Saturday's wedding where I could barely shoot at 1600, 1/20th less of a second, and get enough light to have a good exposure. Those images are well exposed, but grainy as heck (aka, will need to be proofed in B&W for sure!). Corey on the other hand was able to bump the heck out of his ISO, and didn't even have to hold his breath while shooting! Nice fast shutters, nice sharp images.

<----------------- Jealous.

Thanks for taking the time to put this comparison together!

Cool to see the comparisons, especially on the Canon side. Were there any advantages that the Mark III had over the D3?

Thanks for sharing!

Of course not

Honest Amber

I am Nikon shooter, Yeah!!!

Now things are getting interesting. Who benefits? US!!! No matter if we shoot Canon or Nikon, we can be sure we are for very interesting times.

I was surprised that there was as much of a difference in the auto white balances. The colors were indeed farther apart than we expected. The Canons were the closest to being true we think, though a couple of people here voted that the D3 was closer. In any case, the D2X's color was too cool, and the D200's, well.... nuf said.CoreyI was surprised that there was as much of a difference in the auto white balances. The colors were indeed farther apart than we expected. The Canons were the closest to being true we think, though a couple of people here voted that the D3 was closer. In any case, the D2X's color was too cool, and the D200's, well.... nuf said.Corey

Is it just my eyes or do the D2X images look better, more true to a granny smith and similar noise from what I can see?

I am looking at it on a 30" mac screen, on here and on the blog and I like the D2X better.

Or is God shielding my eyes so that I still love my 3 D2X's and I don't commit financial suicide trying to replace them?????

Thanks for taking the time to do all of those comparisons.

I was glad that you matched some of the ISO's side by side....

and that you were comparing apples to apples (sorry...couldn't resist the pun).

being a 5D user, I'll have to stick up for it...being 2 years old (and one chip generation earlier than the D3) it held it's ground very well.

I can't wait for the 5D replacement!

It's your eyes....

I honestly wanted to throw my D2X in the trash after my wedding Saturday. Of course, that said, I've loved my two D2Xs for years. It's all relative, I guess.

You're right that the D2X color is indeed closer to the the granny smith.... too bad those weren't granny smiths!

Corey

where they yellow delicious?

if that's the case then there is a strong color issue with the d2x verses th d3.

Colon just posted some images from Japan that are all handheld, no flash hi iso with his D3 and they really show it's ability to shine.

From Mike Colon's blog....

"This is a groundbreaking camera that is going to change the way I shoot forever."


That's a pretty big statement from a somewhat ( ) respected guy.

yah it is.

I 100% concur! I'll be posting some pics from my wedding on Saturday... the D3 blew me away!

I'm still waiting for someone to make that kind of statement about the D300. And I wish they'd do it soon.

*twiddling my thumbs*

On Saturday, we shot in a cave. It was insanely dark. The noise outta the D3 was non-existent... I can't wait for him to show you guys this stuff!