Its a stadium in Foley,Al. It actually has 8 sets of lights. A couple of years ago ESPN televised a game when Julio Jones, a receiver with Alabama currently, was playing for Foley HS. I think they kept some of the upgrades.
Gotta admit I'm a Canon shooter (1dmkIII) but I LOVE the images I see out of the D700. Great stuff!
I think the d700 is a great all around pj camera. Without the grip, it is fairly compact and great for covering events. If you need more speed for sports add the battery pack. The 70-200 on full frame gets a bad rap for corner softness and vignetting, but it is my bread and butter along with a 17-35.
I'm a Canon shooter but those images were very good shots. Seems like very good noise control.....
It has the same sensor as the D3 so it does have good noise control. Like anything though, it isn't magic and the better the exposure is, the better noise is under control.
It has the same sensor as the D3 so it does have good noise control. Like anything though, it isn't magic and the better the exposure is, the better noise is under control.
Canon shooter here too, and I think I will be unhappy with your answer, but have you applied any NR to these?
Canon shooter here too, and I think I will be unhappy with your answer, but have you applied any NR to these?
These were processed in batch using DXO processing which I used for cropping, toning, and sharpening. DXO applied the module for the D700/70-200 combo and whatever formula it uses for noise reduction was applied to these pics which were shot in jpg.
Out of the camera, the noise at 6400 for the d700 looks like 1600 with a D300, but detail is much better with the D700 as the D300 tends to smooth things out.
Here is a shot straight out of the camera with no processing done if you want to see what 6400 ISO looks like.
Here is a shot straight out of the camera with no processing done if you want to see what 6400 ISO looks like.
...
And edited for comparison...
Okay. That settles it. My D300 has to go as soon as I get funds for a D700. The faster focus acquisition and the better high ISO call to me. Of course, a D3 would be even nicer <g>.
Okay. That settles it. My D300 has to go as soon as I get funds for a D700. The faster focus acquisition and the better high ISO call to me. Of course, a D3 would be even nicer <g>.
I lied to you a little bit. I was incorrect on the ISO setting of one of the pics.The first shot is 6400 as I took auto ISO off.
The second set of pictures of the catch attempt was ISO 5000 which auto ISO chose.
</g>
I lied to you a little bit. I was incorrect on the ISO setting of one of the pics.The first shot is 6400 as I took auto ISO off.
The second set of pictures of the catch attempt was ISO 5000 which auto ISO chose.
</g>
Having seen ISO 3200 on the D300 (which I can PP to make it look okay, but not great), even the ISO 5000 stuff you posted blows it away.
And the slow focus acquisition on the D300 drives me insane sometimes. I used to be able to manually focus faster and better than that good back in the early 80's (of course, the viewfinders were nice and bright back then to allow that too). That's another D300 thing that drives me crazy. The viewfinder for sports is good but not great. Would much rather be looking through the brighter D700 or D3 viewfinder.
Having seen ISO 3200 on the D300 (which I can PP to make it look okay, but not great), even the ISO 5000 stuff you posted blows it away.
And the slow focus acquisition on the D300 drives me insane sometimes. I used to be able to manually focus faster and better than that good back in the early 80's (of course, the viewfinders were nice and bright back then to allow that too). That's another D300 thing that drives me crazy. The viewfinder for sports is good but not great. Would much rather be looking through the brighter D700 or D3 viewfinder.
I have the D300 and I haven't used it for nighttime sports since I bought the D700. I really like the D300 for daytime sports, but I just don't like the ISO performance of the D300 because it smooths out detail.
I did shoot a band jamboree at night this week and I used the D300 and 70-200 for that. While daytime focus is almost as good as the D700, I did notice more hunting and pecking with the D300/70-200 than the D700 with the same lens.
All in all I am glad I bought the D300/D700 combo instead of the D3 by itself. I get the best DX camera and the IQ of the D3. If I could only have one camera though, it would be the D700 or D3.
I have the D300 and I haven't used it for nighttime sports since I bought the D700. I really like the D300 for daytime sports, but I just don't like the ISO performance of the D300 because it smooths out detail.
I did shoot a band jamboree at night this week and I used the D300 and 70-200 for that. While daytime focus is almost as good as the D700, I did notice more hunting and pecking with the D300/70-200 than the D700 with the same lens.
All in all I am glad I bought the D300/D700 combo instead of the D3 by itself. I get the best DX camera and the IQ of the D3. If I could only have one camera though, it would be the D700 or D3.
Now, that's an interesting thought. Getting the D700 as the next body and keeping the D300 as a mostly daytime and perhaps less active subjects second body. My focus acquisition time (and, therefore, shot keep rate) certainly goes up in the daytime sports over nighttime sports, but I still find the D300's focus acquisition time slow for my tastes and suspect the D700 would be better even in the daytime. We'll see. It's all a matter of money at this point. New lens or new body? Oh, to have unlimited cash. <g>
Now, that's an interesting thought. Getting the D700 as the next body and keeping the D300 as a mostly daytime and perhaps less active subjects second body. My focus acquisition time (and, therefore, shot keep rate) certainly goes up in the daytime sports over nighttime sports, but I still find the D300's focus acquisition time slow for my tastes and suspect the D700 would be better even in the daytime. We'll see. It's all a matter of money at this point. New lens or new body? Oh, to have unlimited cash. <g>
The d700/d3 is the only camera I would recommend over getting a new lens if your current lens lineup is adequate, especially if you shoot nighttime sports. I have been using a sigma 120-300/D700 combo for a year for sports because of the full frame difference. The last two football games I have been using a 70-200/d700 for football and I still get the same keeper rates per game, it is just different because I am able to get some of the closer shots and I am more mobile with a lighter lens.
</g>
Comments
www.phabulousphotos.com
Sportsshooter.com Member
http://www.sportsshooter.com/members.html?id=10162
twin Mark IV's & a bunch of "L" glass
site ∙ facebook
twin Mark IV's & a bunch of "L" glass
site ∙ facebook
I think the d700 is a great all around pj camera. Without the grip, it is fairly compact and great for covering events. If you need more speed for sports add the battery pack. The 70-200 on full frame gets a bad rap for corner softness and vignetting, but it is my bread and butter along with a 17-35.
It has the same sensor as the D3 so it does have good noise control. Like anything though, it isn't magic and the better the exposure is, the better noise is under control.
__________________
www.browngreensports.com
http://browngreensports.smugmug.com
Out of the camera, the noise at 6400 for the d700 looks like 1600 with a D300, but detail is much better with the D700 as the D300 tends to smooth things out.
Here is a shot straight out of the camera with no processing done if you want to see what 6400 ISO looks like.
And edited for comparison
Okay. That settles it. My D300 has to go as soon as I get funds for a D700. The faster focus acquisition and the better high ISO call to me. Of course, a D3 would be even nicer <g>.
I love #4, 6, 7 & 9
Take Care,
Charles
Aperture Focus Photography
http://aperturefocus.com
I lied to you a little bit. I was incorrect on the ISO setting of one of the pics.The first shot is 6400 as I took auto ISO off.
The second set of pictures of the catch attempt was ISO 5000 which auto ISO chose.
</g>
Thanks!
Having seen ISO 3200 on the D300 (which I can PP to make it look okay, but not great), even the ISO 5000 stuff you posted blows it away.
And the slow focus acquisition on the D300 drives me insane sometimes. I used to be able to manually focus faster and better than that good back in the early 80's (of course, the viewfinders were nice and bright back then to allow that too). That's another D300 thing that drives me crazy. The viewfinder for sports is good but not great. Would much rather be looking through the brighter D700 or D3 viewfinder.
I have the D300 and I haven't used it for nighttime sports since I bought the D700. I really like the D300 for daytime sports, but I just don't like the ISO performance of the D300 because it smooths out detail.
I did shoot a band jamboree at night this week and I used the D300 and 70-200 for that. While daytime focus is almost as good as the D700, I did notice more hunting and pecking with the D300/70-200 than the D700 with the same lens.
All in all I am glad I bought the D300/D700 combo instead of the D3 by itself. I get the best DX camera and the IQ of the D3. If I could only have one camera though, it would be the D700 or D3.
Now, that's an interesting thought. Getting the D700 as the next body and keeping the D300 as a mostly daytime and perhaps less active subjects second body. My focus acquisition time (and, therefore, shot keep rate) certainly goes up in the daytime sports over nighttime sports, but I still find the D300's focus acquisition time slow for my tastes and suspect the D700 would be better even in the daytime. We'll see. It's all a matter of money at this point. New lens or new body? Oh, to have unlimited cash. <g>
The d700/d3 is the only camera I would recommend over getting a new lens if your current lens lineup is adequate, especially if you shoot nighttime sports. I have been using a sigma 120-300/D700 combo for a year for sports because of the full frame difference. The last two football games I have been using a 70-200/d700 for football and I still get the same keeper rates per game, it is just different because I am able to get some of the closer shots and I am more mobile with a lighter lens.
</g>