Nikon D90 at ISO 3200

**Grandpaw** · 07-23-2009, 07:04 PM

This was taken with my Nikon D90 at ISO 3200 with my Nikon 70-300VR zoom. This is a crop out of the center and you can see it has been blown up a lot also, so see what you think, Jeff

Taken handheld at these settings
f/5.3
ISO 3200
1/60 sec
Exposure bias -0.3
No flash
Metering spot
Focal length 220mm

**Frog** · 07-23-2009, 08:38 PM

I think I see a little noise in the bg but its so little I'm not even sure.
Sometimes it does pay to buy a body instead of a lens or better yet just buy both.

**Grandpaw** · 07-24-2009, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frog

I think I see a little noise in the bg but its so little I'm not even sure.
Sometimes it does pay to buy a body instead of a lens or better yet just buy both.

Frog, I was just walking through the room and took this snapshot. The part you are looking at is about 1/3 of the center of the original photo and then it was blown up several times. Last time when I posted the picture at ISO 2000 you ask what it would look like enlarged so I just went to the extreme on the first post. The crop alone would have made it 3 times bigger, then on top of that I enlarged the crop several times.

I will try and take some more examples when I get the chance. My parents are 87 and 89 years old and their medical problems has been keeping me fairly busy lately, Jeff

**Frog** · 07-24-2009, 05:27 AM

I like what you've been doing with the iso examples on both the d80 and d90.
Gives me and all real life examples.

**Franglais** · 07-24-2009, 05:30 AM

(Original post I started with a question = Did you use a tripod to do this shot? I'm going to assume that you didn't and you had the VR turned on.)

This is an example of how far cameras and lenses have come in the last 10 years:

1. You can't talk about "noise" any more. Noise was multicoloured speckles that I actually found not unpleasant but were obviously artificial. In this picture you can just see a slight effect of colourless grain in the darker parts of the background
2. You did this shot on the equivalent of a 330mm at 1/60s. Normally this long focal length would require a shutter speed of at least 1/350s to avoid camera shake (or a sturdy tripod). Your VR has allowed you to work almost 3 full shutter speeds below this.

BTW: I find the VR thing doesn't work all the time due to operator error. Sometimes I forget to squeeze the shutter release gently in low light and hit it like I'm playing a piano

jetrim · 07-24-2009, 05:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Franglais

This is an example of how far cameras and lenses have come in the last 10 years:

Absolutely, this shot is much cleaner at 3200 than my camera can produce at ISO 400

**Grandpaw** · 07-24-2009, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Franglais

(Original post I started with a question = Did you use a tripod to do this shot? I'm going to assume that you didn't and you had the VR turned on.)

Charles, I very seldom ever use one this was hand held without a tripod. I would like to start using a tripod more but even my night shots are usually taken without one. Out of about 13.000 pictures I have taken this past year I don't think that a tripod was used on over a 100 pictures, Jeff

**Old Timer** · 07-24-2009, 10:44 AM

Outstanding Jeff. This latest generation of sensors is just blowing me away.

Axle · 07-25-2009, 10:53 AM

I was using my D300 at ISO-3200 several times over the course of this past week (photos will come, I have 200+ to go through O_o), and the results were outstanding, as is this one.

**GB1** · 07-25-2009, 09:43 PM

Jeff - Very nice ... I have a D200, and the quality I get at 1200 ISO .. very bad. You would think there was a full generation time difference between the two cameras.

Good shot too, BTW

G

fidgety · 09-28-2009, 07:02 AM

Nice snap. Filled frame, nice color and sharp. Well done.

ViewFinder Photography Forum