1. Reminder: Please user our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

Nikon D610 Image thread

Discussion in 'Nikon DSLR Forum' started by val, Jan 6, 2015.

  1. val

    val SC Regular

    177
    Jan 2, 2014
    Some of you probably have seen my photos over in the Fujifilm and M43 image threads but Nikon have loaned me a D610 for a couple of months to shoot with and so I've put aside my usual gear and I've been shooting with the D610 for a few weeks now.

    Here are some that I've taken, you will probably notice they're all wide angle. My widest lens is 24mm so to have an 18mm has definitely been a treat. I'll eventually buy a UWA for my M43.

    I think it's great. I definitely appreciate the cleaner noise, higher dynamic range and resolution but I wouldn't buy one simply because it's too big and I like EVFs!

    16026310677_fd022fa103_b. wide by William Solis, on Flickr

    16132666296_e14a271747_b. Happy New Year by William Solis, on Flickr

    16141108522_948149aecd_b. Fisherman by William Solis, on Flickr

    My fiancee.
    15875027648_66c8776ae0_b. Nikon D610 with the 18-35mm by William Solis, on Flickr

    15412652624_12872d1ba7_b. Nothing's going to change my world by William Solis, on Flickr

    15816849597_7ee35c2e6f_b. Ultra Wide Goodness!!! by William Solis, on Flickr

    15931598417_230c01acfb_b. La mama by William Solis, on Flickr

    16218183312_a32d2a10bb_b. An hour before new year by William Solis, on Flickr
     
    • Like Like x 12
  2. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    Nice images Val. It's a great camera and the bargain of the year since the D750 was introduced. It's largely the same camera without quite the AF performance (so the AF is merely great, rather than spectacularly great), the tilt screen, or the same level of video. The JPEGs are a bit better in the new model but the sensor is essentially the same, so raw shooters can save a lot of money on a great camera. I had one for a month and ultimately bought a Df instead (slightly different high ISO / DR tradeoffs). I thought I was going back to mirrorless too but I ended up selling all of my mirrorless gear because I just got too spoiled by the full frame sensors and the processing latitude they have. And I mostly shoot with small lenses so I'm fine with the size... Be careful! :biggrin:

    -Ray
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. BillN

    BillN SC Hall of Famer

    Aug 25, 2010
    S W France
    Bill
    Any idea what the noise levels are like on large crops at say ISO800 and above

    fisherman is nice
     
  4. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    Incredibly good. Second only to Sony A7S and Nikon D4/D4S/Df, which have slightly better noise and better high ISO DR and color fidelity. The D610 has the same basic sensor as the Sony A7 /RX1 and Nikon D750 - it's stupendously good for lower ISO, both DR and detail, And merely incredibly good at higher ISO. Notably better than any APS chip out there and second only to full frame chips that tradeoff a bit of base ISO DR and detail for the best high ISO. I was really happy with the D610 up to 6400 and found it useable to 10,000' maybe 12,800 in a pinch. I can't imagine anyone not being thrilled with it at 800-1600. The Df is about on par with it by 400 and notably better above that, but not much difference until above about 3200. These sensors are SO good it's a little scary. The DPR reviewers were gushing about the D750 sensor being almost magical and they're not prone to that sort of thing - that was in regard to DR at lower ISO. And the D750 has the same basic sensor as the D610 with a better processor / JPEG engine. But for raw, basically the same almost magical performance. Insanely great at base ISO and merely great at high ISO.

    -Ray
     
    • Like Like x 2
  5. val

    val SC Regular

    177
    Jan 2, 2014
    As Ray said.

    I'll get around to posting a sample or two but as of now there should be an abundance of ISO 800+ shots on the internet.
    I have no worry about shooting at ISO 1600 and above. I simply haven't found a need to yet.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. BillN

    BillN SC Hall of Famer

    Aug 25, 2010
    S W France
    Bill
    Thanks

    It is just that with lots of my "bird" shots I crop really small and even at ISO 400 with the D7100 or D700 I do get noise especially in the shadows …….. been thinking about the D750 or D810
    I have all the glass I need to resolve these sensors - Nikon 300 f2.8VR, Nikon 600mm f4, Nikon 105 f2.8VR and Nikon 70 200 f2.8VR etc., but I am still always fighting noise even at ISO 400 with small birds at a distance
     
  7. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    From hanging out a bit on Nikon specific forums, it seems birders are somewhat split between the D810 or D750 (for max resolution and cropping ability) and the D4S, for the ability to get away with higher ISO. The higher res 24 and 36mp sensors aren't as good about controlling noise in the shadows as the D4s/Df sensor, but when you take downsampling into account, they acquit themselves very very well still. But if you're primary interest is in extreme cropping, you lose a lot of that downsampling so you may see some limited noise in shadows, although I'd wager it's still a pretty good improvement over the D7100. I think it's kind of two different routes to the same place - more cropping with a bit more noise, or the ability to use longer and somewhat slower lenses at higher ISO but with less ability to crop...

    The D4s has the same amazing AF as the D810 and D750, with significantly faster burst rates and incredible noise performance at higher ISO, but then you have less than half the resolution of the D810, so you can't crop nearly as much. I'm not a birder but I've played around with the Df shooting birds, just for the sport of it, and even that AF (same as the D610) does incredibly well tracking in decent light, but it does seem to fall off tracking action in low light - it still handles single point AF on relatively static subjects sublimely well in low light, but action in low light is where I guess you see the difference. The D750 / D810 / D4s AF is pretty much state of the art for PDAF (Canon may match it with a model or two also - I'm a lot less familiar with their options) and is said to still handle action tracking really well even in low light. That's beyond my needs or wants, but if it matters for your uses, that's where the D750 really distinguishes itself from the D610...

    I can't imagine you wouldn't be very happy with the noise performance with the D750 or D810 at ISO 400, even with extreme cropping. You might start seeing a bit more at 800, but frankly they're incredibly good there too. It's when you start heading north of 800-1600 where the D4S / Df sensor really starts to show it's biggest advantage, and it's not all that much in terms of noise, but mostly in terms of DR and color fidelity/depth at those higher ISO values. At a certain point you're gonna get some noise, but I can't imagine you'd see anything objectionable even at ISO 800, let alone 400 with the higher res sensors.

    -Ray
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. BillN

    BillN SC Hall of Famer

    Aug 25, 2010
    S W France
    Bill

    Ray why would the noise performance be better on the D610/D750 versus the D7100 or D700, particularly when using RAW

    D7100 = 24MP = DX
    D610/D740 = 24MP = FX

    bigger pixel density per inch on D7100

    I can understand why with jpegs could be better because of the (new) better engine … but with RAW I do not understand why, as any noise reduction should be the same "in camera" (is there any - don't think so) or in specialist software.

    same comments with the D700

    I crop a lot - use spot, (single cell), focus and spot exposure - generally with bird photography

    AF tracking does not concern me too much .. as I am OK with BIF with the D7100 or D700
     
  9. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    Bill, I don't pretend to be a sensor scientist, so my only honest answer is I don't know WHY. But between my own eyes and DXO Mark scores, I believe the results. I haven't shot with a D7100 but I have a fair amount of experience with files from a Sony A6000 and Nex 6, which are very similar if not the same - I think the A6000 and D7100 share the same sensor. And the D610 just does notably better at higher ISOs than those smaller sensor cameras. I can see that in my own shooting and processing. DR at base ISO isn't all that far apart between these camera - all of them are better than my Df here but the Df quickly overtakes them as the ISO rises. And color depth I only get an impression of - I can't make any specific experiential claims there. And DXO has them pretty close there anyway. But in terms of high ISO performance, DXO shows them as not at all close - the D610 sensor ranks about 2900 to the D7100 at about 1250, with the D700 (which I haven't used) in the middle at about 2300.

    Maybe it's based more on pixel size than pixel density? But then by that measure the D700 should be the best of them, so technology improvements over time seem to factor in also? Hell, I don't pretend to know how this stuff works. But the differences at higher ISO are enough to see and experience.

    -Ray
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. BillN

    BillN SC Hall of Famer

    Aug 25, 2010
    S W France
    Bill
    Thanks Ray - I just do not want to upgrade the body for the sake of upgrading

    I mainly use 105mm f2.8VR, 70 200mm f2.8VR, 300mm f4, 300mm f2.8VR and 600mm f4 with TC's

    I was thinking about the D750, then the D810 and then I thought a used D800 …. for BIRD photography

    but Nikon have just released a new 300mm f4VR at about £1,800 in the UK, half the size and half the weight over the old AF-S model - it "looks" amazing ….. so I would rather spend my money on that as it is "supposed" to have a 4.5 stops advantage over the old model, because of the VR, (?)

    But I may succumb to the D750 ……… but I have been waiting around for a true replacement to the DX D300 …. I am really happy with the FX D700 and see no reason to upgrade that for general photography
     
  11. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    Yeah, I've seen stuff about that lens. It's not something I personally have any interest in, but it does look amazing. I just picked up a used 180 f2.8 for about $400 and the new 300 f4 is almost the identical size and weight. So it should be amazingly easy to handhold, which is not often the case for fast-ish lenses at these focal lengths. And, yeah, I consider f4 pretty fast with full frame - I was amazed how far I got with the 24-120 f4 shooting candids in low light over the holidays... Of course, that was with the Df which has it's own set of strengths and weaknesses.

    If you do decide to upgrade bodies, I'm not sure that the D750 gets you anything over or above the D610 if you're not taking advantage of all of the new AF tracking technology in the newer body. In decent light, the single point AF in the D610 should be just as good and I've found it fine for tracking in good light too. Tracking in low light is where the D750 sounds like it really starts to shine...

    -Ray
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Genster

    Genster SC Regular

    32
    Dec 8, 2014
    René
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Genster

    Genster SC Regular

    32
    Dec 8, 2014
    René
  14. RT Panther

    RT Panther SC All-Pro

    Dec 25, 2012
    LoL!
    No I on the other hand, have to have an OVF. I guess that explains why my bodies are an X100 along with my Dƒ :smile:

    Nice images as always! :smile:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Genster

    Genster SC Regular

    32
    Dec 8, 2014
    René
    • Like Like x 2
  16. Genster

    Genster SC Regular

    32
    Dec 8, 2014
    René
    • Like Like x 1
  17. val

    val SC Regular

    177
    Jan 2, 2014
    • Like Like x 4
  18. val

    val SC Regular

    177
    Jan 2, 2014
    After 3 months with the D610. The IQ it gives me is exactly what I wish M43 could deliver.

    M43 is AMAZING for close to midrange subjects like macro, food, still life even in low light like concerts or dinners. I find that it really shines in that regard and I would prefer using M43 for those things. Also far away subjects like animals that require a telephoto lens. Shots I've seen from the Oly 40-150mm F2.8 and Panasonic 100-300mm are just incredible.

    It's in landscape and large depth of field shots especially where there is bright lights and dark shadows where I find FF has an edge over M43. I've seen amazing M43 landscape shots but in my own results, I simply just see the difference.

    Also bokeh. I really prefer the look and separation that a 50mm F1.8 on FF gives as oppose to a 25mm F1.4 on M43 in regards to portraits.

    I won't lie, I am hoping that the next M43 sensor, organic or not, drastically improves in dynamic range and pixel quality with distant subjects.

    As of now. I'm simply going to wait for the next round of sensors from APSC/M43 because Sony FE mount with the lenses I want would be expensive and large.
     
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2015
    • Informative Informative x 1