Nikon D3

ArtsyMarissa

Hey all! I purchases a Nikon D3 about 4 months ago. I got it because I shoot sports in low lit gyms or outdoor football stadiums and it was supposed to allow high ISO photography.

I have been using this camera for this football season and while it is a huge jump from my D7000, I cannot go past 3200 ISO without the pics looking like total crap. I see on google people having crisp clear 6400 ISO pics with this body. I am sure I have all the settings correct. So what could be the issue? I am looking to upgrade even further to the D3s but not if I cannot use the high ISO. Is there that much difference in the D3 and D3s that one would look like crap at 3200 and the other not??? I am in full darkness by the second quarter and shooting only by the lights of the stadium. Am I asking too much to be able to go to iso 6400 and have low grain or noise. I expect some but these are completely unusable on the D3 as I am using it currently. I have seen the ISO comparison pics on google between the D3 d4 and D3s. My 3200 looks as bad and grainy as the ISO 25600 samples.

I use the nikon 70-200 2.8 lens from the sidelines so I do not think its lens choice either. I am not even thrilled with the 3200 ISO as it takes and lot of editing to get rid of the grain. You can barely make out faces and on ISO 4000 you cannot make anything out, way to much noise.

I got the body used and it had 32K actuations. Any thoughts appreciated. ~M

ziggy53

Without knowing which lenses* you are using and how you are using them, without knowing if you shoot RAW or JPG, and without seeing images before and after processing, I can only offer a guess.

Excessive digital noise is generally caused by insufficient exposure (underexposure) and lifting the exposure in post-processing. Make sure to properly expose, which often means using large and heavy prime lenses. An exception is the AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II zoom.

If you use an AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II plus an AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II (for the more distant subject matter), both at f2.8, and if you properly expose the images, you should be capable of shooting wonderful images even in relatively poorly lit venues.

If you are shooting with lesser lenses and underexposing, and if you lack sufficient focal length so that you need to do heavy cropping, that can produce grainy images.

Shooting to RAW/NEF will give you a bit more processing freedom as well.

*(I see now that you are using a 70-200mm, f2.8 zoom, which should work fine for your sports needs especially if it is one of the Nikon AF-S versions.)

Cygnus Studios

Ziggy is 100% correct that your exposure must be correct when using 5000 or 6400 or you will see noise in the under exposed areas really fast. However, you can use less than average to average glass at this level and still get acceptable results. You also must have the correct settings in your camera. Set all 3 noise reduction settings in your menu.

Now once you use HO.3 or HO.7 you'll need exceptional glass and some software to keep the noise down even with the correct exposure. H1.0 and H2.0 are pretty much useless unless you have serious software skills.

I just did a quickie test shot here at ISO 6400 with one of the cheapest lens ever, the sigma 28-92mm (it's also about 10 years old). With a slight adjustment the noise would be darn near zero.

NikonsandVstroms

Also since "useless" is subjective could you post some 100% crops of what you mean? I've got a D700 which is essentially the same sensor so I can check to see how they compare.

If you could post some examples with and without your noise reduction editing, along with the software and settings you're using. That way I can see if it's an issue with your camera or processing method. I can tell you that the unprocessed RAW files will have very noticeable noise at ISO 6400 when looking at them 100%. For color work that's the max ISO I'll use for that camera.

ArtsyMarissa

Here is an unedited pic. I did not edit it at all because I am not on the correct pc thats displays the proper profiles and all that.

This is 2.8, 3200ISO (which is the absolute maximum I can go) 1000 or 800 shutter at a football game only under the lights.

I have an 70-200 2.8 lens not that new II one, must be the one before. I have the noise setting on the lowest. Discovered that after my first basketball game lol... where I expected much more...

Thanks all for the suggestions! Appreciate it!

ziggy53

ArtsyMarissa wrote: »

Here is an unedited pic. I did not edit it at all because I am not on the correct pc thats displays the proper profiles and all that.

This is 2.8, 3200ISO (which is the absolute maximum I can go) 1000 or 800 shutter at a football game only under the lights.

I have an 70-200 2.8 lens not that new II one, must be the one before. I have the noise setting on the lowest. Discovered that after my first basketball game lol... where I expected much more...

Thanks all for the suggestions! Appreciate it!

Thanks so much for including/leaving the EXIF information in the image.

It turns out, you shot this with ISO 4000 and f2.8 at 1/800th shutter speed. Here is the relevant portion of the EXIF data (with some highlighting):

Filename - crapsample.jpg
Make - NIKON CORPORATION
Model - NIKON D3
Software - Adobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows
ExposureTime - 1/800 seconds
FNumber - 2.80
ExposureProgram - Manual control
ISOSpeedRatings - 4000
DateTimeOriginal - 2015:09:10 06:29:13
DateTimeDigitized - 2015:09:10 06:29:13
ShutterSpeedValue - 1/800 seconds
ApertureValue - F 2.80
ExposureBiasValue - 0.00
MaxApertureValue - F 2.83
SubjectDistance - -1 m
MeteringMode - Multi-segment
LightSource - Auto
Flash - Not fired
FocalLength - 200.00 mm
ColorSpace - sRGB
SensingMethod - One-chip color area sensor
CustomRendered - Normal process
ExposureMode - Manual
White Balance - Auto
DigitalZoomRatio - 1 x
FocalLengthIn35mmFilm - 200 mm
SceneCaptureType - Standard
GainControl - High gain up
Contrast - Normal
Saturation - High
Sharpness - Hard
Compression - 6 (JPG)
XResolution - 72
YResolution - 72
ResolutionUnit - Inch

---

You used Manual Exposure; good for you! Too many folks try to use automated exposure and sometimes it works but many times a proper manual exposure is better. In small football fields there are often "gaps" in lighting, especially in the end zones, and the lights may also fluctuate at line frequency (60 cycles/sec). This means you may need more exposure in some parts of the field versus other parts of the field. The line frequency fluctuation is just something you have to expect on many smaller fields, so for important stuff just shoot plenty of images in small bursts.

I note that you left Contrast at Normal, but you boosted both Saturation and Sharpness. For better results at high-ISOs I suggest at least turning down the sharpness. The reason is that the camera also boosts high-ISO noise with the in-camera sharpening.

A shutter speed of 1/800th may be overkill for the action, so you might try 1/250th to 1/500th to see if you can decrease the noise a bit. The image does look a bit underexposed to me so the longer exposure may work to your advantage.

In "Display mode", under "Detailed photo info", enable the "Highlights" and "RGB Histogram", and use those to help indicate optimal exposure. (Shoot with your exposure "to the right" according to the RGB Histogram, avoiding color channel clipping, and try to keep the Highlights blinkies limited to spectral highlights.)

If you shoot JPG, make sure that "Image quality" is set to "JPEG Fine" instead of the default "JPEG Normal", and make sure that "JPEG compression" is set to "Optimal quality" instead of the default "Size priority". Both of the default settings are not great for high-ISO settings.

ArtsyMarissa

I thought the shutter had to be 800-1000 to combat blur and freeze the action? I don't remember where I read that but I thought I did...

This was the beginning of the season so I was still getting to know the cam and I cannot even tell you I know what all those settings mean lol. I know I was having washed out colors and thats the only reason I touch the saturation, sharpening and all that... It was ISO 4000 too so that tells me its before I decided I couldn't go higher than 3200!

Thanks for all that info ziggy, I have 2 more games left so will try them out

NikonsandVstroms

ArtsyMarissa wrote: »

I thought the shutter had to be 800-1000 to combat blur and freeze the action? I don't remember where I read that but I thought I did...

This was the beginning of the season so I was still getting to know the cam and I cannot even tell you I know what all those settings mean lol. I know I was having washed out colors and thats the only reason I touch the saturation, sharpening and all that... It was ISO 4000 too so that tells me its before I decided I couldn't go higher than 3200!

Thanks for all that info ziggy, I have 2 more games left so will try them out

It all depends on what's going on, for some action 1/125 is more than enough, but there are other situations that you need to go higher and higher. I'd check the histogram like Ziggy said and use that to get an idea of what your exposure is like, in the image you posted for example there is practically no information in the last 1/4 of the histogram. And since shadows have more noise than well lit areas your image is a lot noiser than it would have been if properly exposed. So I wouldn't worry about the camera, just practice getting your exposures right and being able to eyeball changes in light.

Another thing I do in similar situations is use spot metering, that way I can find an area which is either close to middle grey or I can guesstimate the exposure compensation needed.

NikonsandVstroms

Here's a D700 image (same sensor as your D3) at ISO 3200, straight from the camera, and 100% crop:



Here's a shot at ISO 6400:



6,400 is my personal limit with the D700 since the above shot will clean up a good bit with some noise reduction. All the color noise for example is really easy to take out and then the rest comes down to your personal taste and how much noise VS detail you can live with. But a big question is what's the final use for these images? If it's for the web then 12,800 might be fine, but as you go higher in with your ISO there's less of a margin for error with your exposure.

ArtsyMarissa

I use my action photos to make team and player posters and books. Or they can just get prints. The print out is always forgiving with noise which is good but they see low res images first on facebook to lure them into buying so I want them to look better.

I do not know much about histograms and exposure and all that. In the last year or so I was focused on learning the iso, shutter aperture and how they work together. No time like the present though to get to the next level. I am known more for my design and editing work but its changing Thanks all... I actually decided to get the 3DS when a great deal fell into my lap. I basically traded the D3 and $300 for it (not to the same people lol) and will upgrade my lens next season and then I should be set for some years, thanks for all the info!