Why I don't want the D850 anymore: I don't want the D850 any more because I've read that there is too much noise. Maybe the pixels are just too many, or too small so that the limit of...

GalaxyCat Loc: Boston, MA

I don't want the D850 any more because I've read that there is too much noise. Maybe the pixels are just too many, or too small so that the limit of the technology is reached in this design. Plus, the camera has to be even more sensitive to vibration/shake/etc... due to the smaller pixels, which is required if the sensor is the same size as other dslrs, which is the 35mm size.

Comments?

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

GalaxyCat wrote:

I don't want the D850 any more because I've read that there is too much noise. Maybe the pixels are just too many, or too small so that the limit of the technology is reached in this design. Plus, the camera has to be even more sensitive to vibration/shake/etc... due to the smaller pixels, which is required if the sensor is the same size as other dslrs, which is the 35mm size.

Comments?

Where did you read this? Was it someone on Ugly Hedge Hog? The sensor of the D850 is one of the best on any camera ever! The D850 is a top notch state of the art camera with few peers. You either read the comments of someone not qualified to review the D850, or you misinterpreted the review.

pounder35 Loc: "Southeast of Disorder"

GalaxyCat wrote:

I don't want the D850 any more because I've read that there is too much noise. Maybe the pixels are just too many, or too small so that the limit of the technology is reached in this design. Plus, the camera has to be even more sensitive to vibration/shake/etc... due to the smaller pixels, which is required if the sensor is the same size as other dslrs, which is the 35mm size.

Comments?

Don't believe everything you read as far as magazine comparisons. If you look at a photography magazine that gives a certain Canon model great reviews you'll find that Canon spends a lot on advertising in that issue. The next month the same magazine will be crazy over a new Nikon. Guess what. Nikon spent a ton of money on ads. You need to find a seller with a good return policy and take the camera out for a "test drive". Do you really need 45MP? NO!!!! Printing output can't match the mega-pixels of the camera. Drop back a generation or two with something like a 14MP camera. You'll see great results and save a lot of money to spend on lenses. People who have to have the latest greatest of everything have more money than sense. I'd like to have the latest Porsche 911 but there's not a lot of places I can drive 190 MPH. Think about it. Spend less on the body and more on the glass.

Robeng Loc: California

GalaxyCat wrote:

I don't want the D850 any more because I've read that there is too much noise. Maybe the pixels are just too many, or too small so that the limit of the technology is reached in this design. Plus, the camera has to be even more sensitive to vibration/shake/etc... due to the smaller pixels, which is required if the sensor is the same size as other dslrs, which is the 35mm size.

Comments?

Well, you can answer your own question. Last week you offer to do a painting of one of my images from Big Sur, California. Those images were taken with a Nikon D850, do you see any noise. If you want I can post those images again to show you. Anyway the D850 is great when it comes to noise, I usually start at ISO 1000 and work my way up for landscape shots.

Also I thought I saw you purchased a Canon, why would you jump from one manufacture to another.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

GalaxyCat wrote:

I don't want the D850 any more because I've read that there is too much noise. Maybe the pixels are just too many, or too small so that the limit of the technology is reached in this design. Plus, the camera has to be even more sensitive to vibration/shake/etc... due to the smaller pixels, which is required if the sensor is the same size as other dslrs, which is the 35mm size.

Comments?

Nope. The D850 is a lot of things, but noisey ain't one of them. You have a cheapish lens on this thing, it will show all the deficiencies. But, with a $3400 camera body, you shouldn't be using the 18-55 kit lens.

I don't see any noise here, and it was incredibly hazy with the exhalations of 3900 Elephant Seals and surf.

(Download)

jpwa Loc: Inland NorthWest

[quote=pounder35]Don't believe everything you read as far as magazine comparisons. If you look at a photography magazine that gives a certain Canon model great reviews you'll find that Canon spends a lot on advertising in that issue......
Interesting

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

GalaxyCat wrote:

I don't want the D850 any more because I've read that there is too much noise. Maybe the pixels are just too many, or too small so that the limit of the technology is reached in this design. Plus, the camera has to be even more sensitive to vibration/shake/etc... due to the smaller pixels, which is required if the sensor is the same size as other dslrs, which is the 35mm size.

Comments?

I'm not sure I agree, but you do put forth a salient argument. I would think that Nikon engineers (or QC personnel) would catch such problems in the development stage. Have you experienced these problems with your own 850? Please do not make decisions on what others say!

JPL

GalaxyCat wrote:

I don't want the D850 any more because I've read that there is too much noise. Maybe the pixels are just too many, or too small so that the limit of the technology is reached in this design. Plus, the camera has to be even more sensitive to vibration/shake/etc... due to the smaller pixels, which is required if the sensor is the same size as other dslrs, which is the 35mm size.

Comments?

Well, then someone else will get his camera a bit sooner since you do not want one. People are still lining up for this camera and I have not heard of any returns due to noise or other image quality issues.

BebuLamar

GalaxyCat wrote:

I don't want the D850 any more because I've read that there is too much noise. Maybe the pixels are just too many, or too small so that the limit of the technology is reached in this design. Plus, the camera has to be even more sensitive to vibration/shake/etc... due to the smaller pixels, which is required if the sensor is the same size as other dslrs, which is the 35mm size.

Comments?

While I don't think that what you said is true of the D850 but well that's good for you if it can cure GAS.

jkatpc Loc: Virginia Beach

GalaxyCat wrote:

I don't want the D850 any more because I've read that there is too much noise. Maybe the pixels are just too many, or too small so that the limit of the technology is reached in this design. Plus, the camera has to be even more sensitive to vibration/shake/etc... due to the smaller pixels, which is required if the sensor is the same size as other dslrs, which is the 35mm size.

Comments?

I do not believe it to be too noisy nor subject to blur if used with the right lenses and using the right technique. True, it does challenge you, but the results are spectacular, in my opinion. Here is a mallard and a yellow-pumped warbler, both cropped to just about 1:1 in LR, and the detail is pretty good. Lens was Tamron 70-200 2.8. I have the D850 and D500, and find the noise level at high ISOs to be more than acceptable, with the D850 less noticeable due to higher resolution.

(Download)

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Gee, I heard it on the internet...

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

DaveO wrote:

Gee, I heard it on the internet...

I have a feeling the source of this idea is not even that reliable ...

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

GalaxyCat wrote:

I don't want the D850 any more because I've read that there is too much noise. Maybe the pixels are just too many, or too small so that the limit of the technology is reached in this design. Plus, the camera has to be even more sensitive to vibration/shake/etc... due to the smaller pixels, which is required if the sensor is the same size as other dslrs, which is the 35mm size.

Comments?

Yes the D850 has more noise than the D810 or D800E but it still way less noisy than the D500 or about 90% of the current models available.

Yes your technique is important but that's true of any quality camera if you want quality images.

The reason to own a D850 is because it can do things easier, that you want to do, that your current camera does less efficiently or not at all. Otherwise its a waste of money.

Jim Bob

joer wrote:

Yes the D850 has more noise than the D810 or D800E but it still way less noisy than the D500 or about 90% of the current models available.

Yes your technique is important but that's true of any quality camera if you want quality images.

The reason to own a D850 is because it can do things easier, that you want to do, that your current camera does less efficiently or not at all. Otherwise its a waste of money.

"...way less noisy than the D500..." Based on my experience, I would challenge that assertion as it relates to ISOs between 1600 and 4000. Got any facts or experience to support it.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

Jim Bob wrote:

"...way less noisy than the D500..." Based on my experience, I would challenge that assertion as it relates to ISOs between 1600 and 4000. Got any facts or experience to support it.

Just the fact that I use both cameras and know what I'm getting. Don't take my word for it and check DXO.