John Navitsky
Well-known member
yah, i've heard good things about it. i don't have to mask that often, so i've been lazy learning
Z9 & HIGHEST USABLE ISO
- Thread starter PAUL50
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
yah, i've heard good things about it. i don't have to mask that often, so i've been lazy learning
Speaking for myself, I never go above 6400. I’ve tested pushing the iso up to 12800 and found the files very hard to clean up and if you crop much at all, they’re pretty bad.
I tried to find the short video I watched to learn, but could not find it. Here is a 5:09 minute video that I found. Many were in the ten to 25 minute range, but it just does not take that long to learn these easy to use masks.
\
I have shoot as high as 10,000 and recovered nicely after using Topaz Denoise AI
Thank you very much, Maljo!
Thank you very much, Paul!
Thank you very much, Ken!Love these shots from down under
I've been trying different ISO settings after reading all the responses to this thread and I've decided, at least with respect to song birds to stick with 6400 as well because regardless of how long a lens I use I seemingly have to crop, sometimes deeply, and as Steve points out in his video, the deeper I crop the worse the noise appears, and even where I can clean up the noise with Topaz, I lose image detail. I'm still experimenting but think with larger mammals or larger birds, and where I can get closer, I may be able to go to 10000 where I'm filling the frame.
That’s what I’m finding as well. If it’s filling the frame I’ll push it up to 10000 or so but even with topaz you start losing detail. I’ve found keeping it set at a maximum of 6400 will accommodate 95% of anything I shoot.
Chris K
Well-known member
I'm with Karen and others who just let the camera handle the ISO all the way up to its maximum.
My thinking is that if I can get focus, I'm going to take the shot. I've already determined the shutter speed and aperture, and ISO is going to end up at whatever it takes to properly expose the image without hand shake blur.
How much noise is acceptable is something I think about later, in post. I may or may not crop or go vertical. I may or may not need to do shadow recovery. The image in question may or may not be all that negatively-affected by noise (think race car versus furry creature). Or the image might be so compelling that I'd want it even if it were noisy.
Basically, I don't bother myself thinking about noise when shooting. That's unnecessary workload.
One way I do try to help myself out is to always start out at a safe shutter speed and shoot my fill. Then, if there's still opportunity I'll drop the shutter speed to "hail mary" levels and fire a few extra frames. Often those are junk frames. But sometimes I'll get a tack-sharp low ISO shot at dusk.
My thinking is that if I can get focus, I'm going to take the shot. I've already determined the shutter speed and aperture, and ISO is going to end up at whatever it takes to properly expose the image without hand shake blur.
How much noise is acceptable is something I think about later, in post. I may or may not crop or go vertical. I may or may not need to do shadow recovery. The image in question may or may not be all that negatively-affected by noise (think race car versus furry creature). Or the image might be so compelling that I'd want it even if it were noisy.
Basically, I don't bother myself thinking about noise when shooting. That's unnecessary workload.
One way I do try to help myself out is to always start out at a safe shutter speed and shoot my fill. Then, if there's still opportunity I'll drop the shutter speed to "hail mary" levels and fire a few extra frames. Often those are junk frames. But sometimes I'll get a tack-sharp low ISO shot at dusk.
You’ve given me a bunch to think about. Sincerely appreciate it. Thanks
NaturRosi
Active member
Well I use the ISO what is needed. When I got my Z9 in January I tested it side-by-side against my D5. Long story short. Downsampled there are more or less no noticeable differences. But sure a lower ISO delivers a better image quality. When I’m shooting badgers ISOs in the range of 10.000 to 14.400 are normal. Of course I would prefer lower ISOs, but than the motion blur would increase to much. I don’t worry about high ISO. A lot of my favorite captures were taken above ISO 6400. Yes on the D5, but as mentioned the Z9 is more or less equal. You can although see this between the Sony A1, Canon R3 and the Nikon Z9 here.
Beautiful images!There are many variables to consider and one of those is what you consider acceptable.
I've been very happy with the high ISO results from the Z9, certainly no worse then the D850 or Z7II. Run through with Topaz, the results are very acceptable, IMO.
Z9 + 500 f5.6 PF + 1.4x TCIII, 1/500s f/8.0 at 700.0mm iso11400
Z9 + 500 f5.6 PF + 1.4x TCIII, 1/320s f/8.0 at 700.0mm iso9000
Z9 + 500 f5.6 PF, 1/125s f/5.6 at 500.0mm iso7200
Lance , was there any post-processing of the images? Topaz?There are many variables to consider and one of those is what you consider acceptable.
I've been very happy with the high ISO results from the Z9, certainly no worse then the D850 or Z7II. Run through with Topaz, the results are very acceptable, IMO.
Z9 + 500 f5.6 PF + 1.4x TCIII, 1/500s f/8.0 at 700.0mm iso11400
Z9 + 500 f5.6 PF + 1.4x TCIII, 1/320s f/8.0 at 700.0mm iso9000
Z9 + 500 f5.6 PF, 1/125s f/5.6 at 500.0mm iso7200
Thanks for your comments and referral to the DXO review. I’ve read similar comments suggesting not to fear the higher ISOs where necessary to get a sharp shot and where time allows continued lowering of ss to lower ISOs in hopes of getting a sharp shot while risking motion blur. Makes sense to me especially since the IBIS within the Z9 and the z100-400mm lens is amazing. Thanks
Chris K
Well-known member
Another perspective on noise that might make your hard drive groan: back in the early DSLR days I did auto racing jobs at a local short track. They had horrible lighting, to the point that even with flash I had to shoot ISO 3200 on my 5D. If you aren’t familiar, the 5D at ISO 3200 looks like a gumball machine of chroma noise.
At the time the output format was 4x6’s, so it wasn’t the end of the world. It was better than the film cameras, anyway. But if I open one of those photos in Lightroom now, I can alter the process version to the newest and play with the current noise reduction algorithms, and get MUCH better results than I could get at the time. I’m sure Topaz et al would do even better.
I was getting paid to shoot these, so I had the noisy ISO 3200 images, but at the time I tended to simply not shoot ISO 3200 when shooting for myself due to a fear of the noise. I can only imagine how many great family candids I might have today if I had just sucked it up and lived with the noise.
Long story short, even if your images are noisier today than you’re comfortable with, some wündertechnology is likely to come along in a few years that will make your old photos shine.
At the time the output format was 4x6’s, so it wasn’t the end of the world. It was better than the film cameras, anyway. But if I open one of those photos in Lightroom now, I can alter the process version to the newest and play with the current noise reduction algorithms, and get MUCH better results than I could get at the time. I’m sure Topaz et al would do even better.
I was getting paid to shoot these, so I had the noisy ISO 3200 images, but at the time I tended to simply not shoot ISO 3200 when shooting for myself due to a fear of the noise. I can only imagine how many great family candids I might have today if I had just sucked it up and lived with the noise.
Long story short, even if your images are noisier today than you’re comfortable with, some wündertechnology is likely to come along in a few years that will make your old photos shine.
Yup ! Well said you describe what I do better than I do
Thanks for your comments. I’m growing increasingly convinced to increase the ceiling on my auto ISO setting to between 10000 and 12800. Your suggestion and earlier suggestions to just shoot for sharpness and worry about noise later makes sense to me. I started out at a limit of 6400 but I’m going to change it, get my safe shot, then start lowering SS with the hope I can still get sharp shots at those lower speeds. If it doesn’t work, I’ll slowly decrease the auto setting until I find that happy medium compromise.
Chris K
Well-known member
I think you're on the right track, Paul! It used to be that we needed both good light and lots of it. These days you can substitute "lots of it" for "software noise reduction".
Stop by and tell us your thoughts as you experiment; I think you're going to be impressed at how the Z9 performs at high ISO, so long as you're not heavily cropping or viewing at 20+ inches.
Stop by and tell us your thoughts as you experiment; I think you're going to be impressed at how the Z9 performs at high ISO, so long as you're not heavily cropping or viewing at 20+ inches.
DGettisNC
Well-known member
Not a good image or anything, but it is iso18,000 (uncropped) with just my normal lightroom adjustments (Z9 + 500PF)
As long as you dont zoom in too much (or have to crop too much), high iso's dont really scare me much.
As long as you dont zoom in too much (or have to crop too much), high iso's dont really scare me much.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Thanks. Will do!I think you're on the right track, Paul! It used to be that we needed both good light and lots of it. These days you can substitute "lots of it" for "software noise reduction".
Stop by and tell us your thoughts as you experiment; I think you're going to be impressed at how the Z9 performs at high ISO, so long as you're not heavily cropping or viewing at 20+ inches.
Thank you very much, Ralph!Beautiful images!
Yes, I did use Topaz but a very mild amount. The original images are quite clean. considering their high ISO.
NaturRosi
Active member
The Z9 preforms well even in low-light. Only the AF of a D5 is in such situation a bit faster. But to be fair more or less only with the center cross-type AF-Sensor.
ISO 8000, 1/20 sec, f/4, 560 mm, hand-hold
Developed only with Capture One Pro 22.
ISO 8000, 1/20 sec, f/4, 560 mm, hand-hold
Developed only with Capture One Pro 22.
- Status