Fair expectations from D750 about noise below ISO 6400

[rahullele]

Hi Brian, 

i'm just curious about D750's performance at low light. I mainly purchased this camera due to supposedly top class performance (at that price point) against noise.

Recently i was forced to shoot in the low light (than i usually prefer.) example Nikhil 2, and i'm not sure whether

1. This is expected performance at that ISO and i need to take this dose of reality in and get better

or 2. This is equipment thing? Whether i got defective piece

or  3. Am i doing something wrong, technique wise, need to do few adjustments to get better out of equipment ?

Appreciate your valuable input. 

 

[Brian]

That light in that photo is really crappy. You aren't giving your camera a chance. That's typical. I should show you noise from my D200. Images "Fell Apart" at ISO 640. 800 was terrible and 1600 was unbearable with that camera. If you are looking for "clean" images at 4000 or 6400, like you would at 200 or 400, that's not the case. ISO 4000 is still 4000.

This gives me an idea of a project. I see many people complain about noisy photos, they have no idea just how good modern equipment is.

As for the photo, I don't see much noise. I see a soft photo and I'm not sure that is from noise reduction by you or the camera. I turn my camera's High ISO Automatic Noise Reduction to off, or set it really high, to apply like at 256000. (Which I'm never at.) I want to control my noise reduction, not have my camera guess on what is good for the photo.

[rahullele]

Thank you Brian, I’ve to check what setting i kept in camera. I think i kept on for high iso noise reduction. + I went excess on noise removal in raw processing. (Where Damien had to pull me in correct direction.) 

I see gear syndrome in me taking over. I was hoping you’d say 850 will solve my problem. ??

Thanks as always. 

[Brian]

It's under the shooting menu, or camera icon. Look for "Long exposure NR" and "High ISO NR" or something along those lines. Both are set to OFF on my camera. I want to control noise reduction.

G.A.S. or N.A.S. is a slippery slope. Honestly, for the current Lord of the Darkness is the Nikon D5, though a D850 isn't bad. Wanna spend $6500?

[rahullele]

16 minutes ago, Brian said:

Wanna spend $6500?

Nope.  

Thank god i don't have that kind of money.

Even if i'll have, Priority will go to

1. 14-24

2. Macro lens with more than 150 MM preferably with VR if i can get one. ( I returned 200 mm macro .. but i'm debating whether i should bring it back. I'll share few pictures shortly. That is insane lens Sir ... )

3. D500 so i can extend reach of my 70-200 naturally with additional frames per second so i can go after some birds something like Parakeets 5. 

Let me know if the order seems natural. 

Sorry for this question on the ISO 4000 .. This is my first serious camera .. did not know how others deal with it. But thats why i'm putting question to you and @Damien Symonds .

 You guys seen ton of pictures, from way more cameras i can imagine, so this discussion helps a lot to know where i need to focus to improve. 

Edited September 6, 2018 by rahullele
punctuation.

[Brian]

1.  Good choice. Keep in mind a 24-70 could also serve as a landscape lens. 

2. Nikon is rumored to be coming out with a new macro with a focal length beyond 105. Probably 150-200. I would hold off for just a bit more. 

3. A D500 with its angle of view change will help with reach. So will a D850 put in crop mode. So maybe me recommending a D850 isn’t off the table. Basically with a D850, you have two cameras built into one. See if your D750 has a DX Mode  you might already have that reach without spending a dime. Granted, the edges of the sensor get turned off so you will have less MP, but even if we cut that in half, 12MP is completely do-able  Dig through you manual and try a few test shots  it’s digital, you can afford to experiment.

4. Realistic Expectations when it comes to noise. It’s more about nailing your exposure than anything. Photographing someone in crappy light isn’t going to make them look good, even if you have $10,000 in camera gear; crappy light is crappy light. If you make your camera struggle, you will see it in the photos. 

Also, the more pixels you cram into the same physical area on the sensor, the less likely the pixels can soak up light, which helps produce noise. Keep in mind there is a thing called sensor grain and that “noise” you might be seeing isn’t truly noise. 

[rahullele]

Thank you as always sir !!! 

[Brian]

If I had to make an educated guess on the Macro Lens that Nikon will replace / update, it's the AF 200mm f/4 D Macro Lens. Of course this is just a rumor. NikonRumors.com will be the source of info for this possible rumored lens replacement. Oh here is a YouTube Video with a review of this lens.

[rahullele]

i hope so. if i'd have been US citizen, i'd rather sue TSA than return that 200 mm f/4 micro lens back to store. (which i returned and they gave me back my money. ) or just keep it with me forever in the lead container to contain possible radiation. 

If you are focusing on Ant ... then most likely Ant would be on next leaf by the time focus will reach on to the leaf ant was on ... (This literally happened with me .. and i was laughing about it and people were wondering why i was laughing about .. )  But .. if and when the focus would reach .... and ant would be there .. that would be THE ANT picture. 

Anyways .. when i'll settle, wherever i'll settle, this is the first item i'm going to buy before anything else. But ... If Nikon can come up with updated version, that might be mistake, but i'm ordering that lens before anything else and hope there won't be thorium oxide in it. 

[Brian]

That lens I just linked to, the AF Micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4D IF-ED was produced from 1993 to present is not radioactive. It's the much older versions that have those radioactive lens elements. 

[rahullele]

ohhh i returned it for no reason ? i had AF Micro - Nikkor 200 MM f/4D IF -ED .. ?

i can go back to store and double check ... Is there any way in US to go and check these things ? or go to TSA and get it approved ? i'll pay that price .. I've no clue about US legal things. Appreciate any help i can get it here. 

Edited September 7, 2018 by rahullele

[Brian]

What year? That lens has been around for awhile. You want the "current" version. If the guy mentioned it was radioactive, then it probably was. Even though I don't recommend KR, here is some info on that lens:

https://kenrockwell.com/nikon/200mm-micro.htm

[rahullele]

I'll go and double check in the store. That salesman would probably curse me ... but that lens is totally worth it in my opinion. If its produced in 1993 or onwards then it is safe right ? 

Or i can continue waiting for hope that nikon would release VR version of it soon.

i really wish there would have been easy way to find whether this would set off alarms on airport .. (without going to jail) 

[Brian]

4 minutes ago, rahullele said:

If its produced in 1993 or onwards then it is safe right ? 

Yes.

It needs to Autofocus using an internal motor. If it's 100% manual focusing, do not buy it. I swiped this screenshot from Ken Rockwell's site. The lens you should buy will have this ID Plate.

[rahullele]

Thank you Brian. I’ll contact store again. The one  i got, had autofocus. 

I’ll also check if anyone knows anyone (from relatives or friends)  who could get this lens tested at airport for me. Or if there is any formal procedure related to it. 

When i talked to them, store owner was going to contact nikon to get those elements removed if there were any.

 

[Brian]

The radioactive ones are lenses from like the 1950’s / 1960’s and even up to the middle 1970’s. If this was a modern lens, it’s shouldn't be an issue. 

There is a list floating around of Radioactive Lenses. One of the original Nikon 35mm f/1.4 lenses, the AIS version, way before AF-D and AF-S contained Thorium Elements, but that seems to be the one of the few. Kodak has a bunch of radioactive lenses. 

If it’s the AF “D” version, made from 1993 to present, you are fine. Like I said, look at the lens’ ID plate. 

[rahullele]

On 9/5/2018 at 7:31 AM, Brian said:

I see a soft photo and I'm not sure that is from noise reduction by you or the camera. I turn my camera's High ISO Automatic Noise Reduction to off,

Hi Brian, 

I finally got chance to shoot at low light after turning off that High ISO automatic noise reduction set to off. I don't know if i'd touch day or i was off from my form or something but things felt a bit worse than earlier. That i kind of felt the best shot of the bunch.

Misericordia Fall party 1 

 

 

[Brian]

What are you expecting? This is normal noise or “sensor grain.” ISO 2500 is still ISO 2500.

#realisticexpectations. 

I’m thinking the only way you are going to be happy is if you purchase a D5 for $6500. LOL. 

Im thinking the next step is to use a tripod and remote / cable release. Let’s take your technique out of the equation in case it needs work. Were you using VR? What Mode was it in? 

Oh, the more MP you have, the better technique you need to have. Maybe you are jamming on the shutter and not squeezing the button? Elbows locked against your body? 

Plus this is a photo with glasses...glasses are tough. It takes LOTS of practice. If you aren’t positioned correctly and the glasses are at any sort of angle, as they are here, that eyeball isn’t going to be 100% in focus. This is due to distortion created by the glass lenses in the frame. She is also moving. I would be at 1/500th for this shot. 

[Brian]

I’ve been shooting since 1986. Started with film. It takes years and lots of blown shots. Heck, I blew my youngest son’s graduation photo because I stood in the wrong spot. Good thing there was an “official” one. 

[rahullele]

6 minutes ago, Brian said:

What are you expecting? This is normal noise or “sensor grain.”

i guess, i was kind of putting too much pressure on me to get those shots to perfect. i want to print those pictures and give them as holiday gifts. 

7 minutes ago, Brian said:

I’m thinking the only way you are going to be happy is if you purchase a D5 for $6500. LOL.

Nope. Far worse. There is party coming at Misericordia home and i'm going to take 2 profoto B1X, one with Beauty dish and one octa. Brought them home and did practice shoot. I've wayyyyy long to go but video's you provided with zach arias helped. 

Also rented them and got a pair at home for practice shoot. Asked friend to pose. Here is example (This is kind of first shot. Didn't get angle right.) 

Susana 1

I was going to frame that question to you next. What optimum light i can take there. (At party hall) i talked to organizers. They did photo booth set up there (had kind of compact camera paired with instant printer. ) 

I'm going to take proper backdrop there and couple of friends to guard the lights. Any input is much appreciated. 

[Brian]

What you are seeing is normal. That’s sensor grain. It’s not noise. I really need to pull out my D200 at ISO 1600. Noise, I can show you noise. 

[rahullele]

Naive Question. Why do they pair lights with same power ?

After using it for first time (I rented 2 B1X 3" beauty dish as key set at around 8.5 and 3" octa set at around 7 to 7.5 at a bit different nights) I was kind of thinking, 1 B1X as key light 1 B10 enough for low power fill light, and even flash would do at the background for separation ? 

Is this line of thinking stupid ? Why the kits they make are of same power lights ? BTW, i could use some suggestions for low budget portable options. Profoto is wayyyyy tooooo much expensive. 

[Brian]

Party halls are tough. I shoot wedding receptions. It takes practice and technique. And having realistic expectations. I think you are putting way too much emphasis on gear and fancy lights. 

What do I use? SB-910 and a a Rogue Flashbender modifier thing. Or the diffuser cap that came with the flash. I also use a “Rig” from ProMediaGear to get my flash a little higher. 

[rahullele]

2 minutes ago, Brian said:

What you are seeing is normal.

Thank you Brian, i'll stop complaining about the gear and noise. I got the point. I need to set realistic expectations and figure out some other means if i want to take better pictures in similar lights.

Please let me know if any simple addition of gear would help. I'm definitely going full on for that party with totally un compromised gear. . 

[Brian]

18 minutes ago, rahullele said:

I'm definitely going full on for that party with totally un compromised gear. . 

My Gawd Man...you love jumping into the deep end of the pool!

Profoto B1X lights are really nice lights. Why do they put two lights of the same power? Because if you are shooting Profoto, you should already know why. What's missing from your thinking is education & experience, not gear. You need to know lighting ratios, lighting methods, how the inverse square law plays a role. How the whole Aperture to Flash relationship works along with the Shutter Speed and how it relates to ambient light. Plus, how lighting modifiers work, which modifiers to use, what size modifier do you need and when, how they affect the light falling on your subject how they eat light and how to compensate for that, etc. The holiday's are right around the corner and in my humble opinion you aren't giving yourself a chance. I foresee frustration in your future and no amount of fancy gear will help that.

As far as gear, if you want to add something to your pile, it would be a hand-held meter and a large 8-in-1 reflector. Like a Sekonic L-358. Why do you need a light meter? Because your camera's built in meter is COMPLETELY WORTHLESS if you are shooting with Off Camera flash  that is Non-TTL. TTL Metering, or "Through The Lens" metering is your camera's voodoo taking a reading from the ambient light and using pre-determined algorithms to set the flash power just before you take the photo. Most of the time it works well, other times...it completely misses. So if you are using your camera's meter thinking it will help you with Profoto OCF, think again. It's not. 

How do you use a Light Meter? What you do is set the ISO and Shutter Speed, let's say 1/200th and you put the meter just in front of the subject's face and point the white dome towards your key light, fire the flash, and take a reading. The L-358 will tell you what Aperture to be at. Let's say you put Profoto Key Light to 8.0 and it reads f/11 on the meter. You then set your second light to 7.0 and you fire off that flash and it reads f/8. That is a one-stop difference or a 2:1 Lighting Ratio. Since your Key Light is reading f/11, if you set  your camera to f/11, it should create a proper exposure based on your Key Light. The second light, or fill light will create a little more depth and shadow since it's at a lower power. If you set your camera to f/8, your fill light would be properly exposed, but your main light would blow out your shot by one stop. (Lot's of blinkies on the histogram review screen.) Make sense?

Some Common Lighting Ratios:

• 1:1
• 2:1
• 3:1
• 4:1
• 8:1

There are more, but those you learn first. 2:1 & 3:1 works well for most women, and that's the Classic 2 Light Portrait Setup. 2:1 works well if you want a softer look, 4:1 is for when you want more detail emphasized, like a portrait of a old guy with a crazy awesome looking beard or wrinkles on his face. 8:1 is when you turn day into night for those really dramatic portraits. Generally 2:1 (One Stop) or 3:1 (One and a Half Stops) works well for the majority of people. That's why when you look at lighting diagrams, you'll see aperture values for each light. Some might be the same, others might be different and that tells you the lighting ratio that's used.

In addition, the most flattering lighting pattern that works for the majority of people is known as "Loop Lighting," as the shadow that extends from the nose looks like a solid little loop. Here is the list of the 6 Most Common Lighting Patterns. Google "Loop Lighting" and study-study-study. Master Loop Lighting first. Then work on the others. Oh, here is an old tip that I was taught years ago: Never broad-light a broad. Broad-Light is meant for skinny people only as it adds pounds to your subject.

Oh, one side-affect to using a hand-held meter, is that it will show you if your camera's built in meter is correct or not. If you find that your camera consistently under/overexposes, a hand-held meter is a good way to check. For example, my Nikon D700 when using Matrix Mode always seemed to over-expose things. So I took out my L-358 and did a few test shots. It turns out I was right and I found a menu to tweak the Matrix Metering. I set my D700 to -2/6 (1/3rd of a stop lower) and my exposures while using the Matrix Meter were spot on. The other two modes, Center and Spot didn't need to be adjusted. That said, we are getting a head of ourselves. I think your D750 is fine in this dept.

I'd skip using the beauty dish for now. Softboxes and Umbrellas are where you start. Since you already rented a Octa, I'd use  with the Octa and a large reflector. Start with ONE LIGHT. You can do A LOT with just one light and a reflector. I know of several headshot photographers who have built careers on one light and a reflector. Heck, Zack Arias started with a Sunpak Flash and a pack of AA Batteries. After you figure out how to shoot with one light, THEN add a 2nd light. Then a third, then a fourth, etc.
 

Quote

“First learn stand, then learn fly. Nature rule Daniel son, not mine...”

- Mr. Miyagi

If you are serious about taking a sharp portrait, a tripod is in order. If you do use a tripod and the lens has VR (Vibration Reduction) turn VR OFF. I can recommend a couple of tripods, depending on budget if you don't have one.

At this point, I think you need to practice before lugging all that "un-compromised gear" and shooting away. So start reading, you have a lot to cram in the next few weeks.

Enjoy the ride!