Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Best Low Light Digital Camera
Page <<first <prev 3 of 7 next> last>>
Jul 22, 2018 22:30:36   #
Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.
 
GoofyNewfie wrote:
Love the form factor.
Except $$$$.


Just kidding.

Reply
Jul 22, 2018 22:39:03   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
baer wrote:
What digital cameras are best for low light photography and have good resolution/High megapixels?
I’m still using recorder film...for my Nikon FTN and F4.
Thanks for your help!
Sincerely,
Baer


Nikon D4 or D5. And the D810/850 if you downsample to 20 mp. Downsampling averages the noise and improves image quality. Canon 5D Mk III

Reply
Jul 23, 2018 00:30:48   #
tomcat
 
Apaflo wrote:
That is one of the most difficult assignments possible. I worked at that for years...

The Nikon flagship DSLRs starting with the D3S are the best bodies to use, each being slightly better than the previous model and all being significantly better than any other camera. Today a D5 is the best if your budget can deal with it, and a used D3S is the least you want.

Keep in mind that the best DX body will never be able to close the gap. Don't even think about it.

There were significant improvements with each model up to the D3S, but only small improvements at each step along the way since. If money is not tight the D5 is worth it, but the image quality difference is not as great as the cost difference.
That is one of the most difficult assignments poss... (show quote)



I am retired, so the D5 is definitely out of my price range now. I am the "official event photographer" for the high school, and I know they would not pony up the money for that body. I am drooling over a D3s because I have a friend with one of those and I have been envying his images every time he shoots a concert or a play. His low light images have almost 0.0 noise and the sharpness and color rendition is just like being there. I keep hoping that a UHH member will want to sell his D3s. I regret not buying one of those when I was working and had more disposable income, so I keep my fingers crossed that one with a low shutter count will pop up.

Reply
 
 
Jul 23, 2018 00:56:59   #
GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City
 
tomcat wrote:
I am retired, so the D5 is definitely out of my price range now. I am the "official event photographer" for the high school, and I know they would not pony up the money for that body. I am drooling over a D3s because I have a friend with one of those and I have been envying his images every time he shoots a concert or a play. His low light images have almost 0.0 noise and the sharpness and color rendition is just like being there. I keep hoping that a UHH member will want to sell his D3s. I regret not buying one of those when I was working and had more disposable income, so I keep my fingers crossed that one with a low shutter count will pop up.
I am retired, so the D5 is definitely out of my pr... (show quote)

I have bought and sold quite a bit from the members at Fred Miranda. Here’s one offering: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1551659/0?keyword=Nikon,D3s#14518706

Reply
Jul 23, 2018 05:26:39   #
mikegreenwald Loc: Illinois
 
I learned a lot from this post. Thank you!!


amfoto1 wrote:
ANY recent APS-C DSLR or mirrorless camera will simply blow away ANY film you can buy to use in your old SLRs. Below is a test shot I did at ISO 16000 with one of my 20MP, APS-C format Canon 7D Mark II cameras:



Sure, if you look closely at the enlarged detail you'll see some noise, but that's a lot larger than I'd ever print this image and IMO the "noise" is pretty well controlled. This image was done without flash, by the light of a single 60 watt CFL bulb and a small window, each roughly 8 to 10 feet from the subject. Lens was a 100-400mm zoom at 158mm and f/5, handheld with image stabilization that made possible 1/125 shutter speed at ISO 16000. Image was shot RAW with care not to underexpose (which always amplifies the appearance of noise), and was post-processed in Lightroom 6 with default level of noise reduction.

I regularly use my Canon 7DIIs at ISO 3200 and 6400, without concerns. Sometimes, when necessary, I'll use them even higher at 8000, 12800 and 16000 (can be pushed higher, but I don't due to noise). With the highest ISOs I usually do extra noise reduction in Photoshop (with a Noiseware plug-in). But, again I deliberately DID NOT, do any special noise reduction for the above test shot. When I first got the cameras, I did that test in order to see "worst case" at ISO 16000.

Besides, try pushing ANY film to ISO 16000!

"Full frame" cameras with modest resolution and bigger, less "crowded" sensors are even better for ultra high ISO. Since you've probably already got Nikon mount lenses, I might recommend 24MP Nikon D750 or a 36MP Nikon D810 (depending upon your budget). Your lenses also can be used via simple, inexpensive adapters on Canon DSLRs such as their full frame 26MP 6D Mark II or 30MP 5D Mark IV (or earlier versions in either of those series, which might now only be available used or refurbished). If you wanted a little bit smaller "mirrorless" camera instead, Nikon and Canon don't offer one that's full frame yet, but Sony makes some full frame mirrorless that can be used with vintage Nikon F-mount lenses via simple adapters. Their A7-series models are more affordable and a modest 24MP, while their A7R-series are higher resolution models that tend to be more expensive.

Pentax also makes excellent full frame cameras now, but AFAIK you wouldn't be able to adapt and use your existing lenses on them.

Nikon makes a number of APS-C cameras (D3000-series entry level models, D5000-series step up models, D7000-series and D500 advanced amateur and pro-oriented models). Those can also be used with your current lenses, except they will be subject to a 1.5X "lens factor" due to the smaller size sensor. Lenses will "act longer" than you're accustomed to.... For example, a 50mm standard lens on your film camera becomes a neat, short telephoto and "acts like 75mm" on these crop sensor cameras. This is great for telephotos, but not so great for wide angles. The smaller sensor cameras also won't be as "high ISO/low light capable" as the full frame, although the recent models can run circles around any film you might use in your SLRs.

It's also possible to adapt vintage Nikon F-mount lenses for use on Canon APS-C DSLRs or mirrorless cameras (with a slightly different 1.6X "lens factor"), or to use them on APS-C Sony and Fuji (both 1.5X, same as Nikon APS-C) or on micro Four/Thirds format Olympus and Panasonic mirrorless (2X "lens factor"... 50mm will "act like" a 100mm lens would on your SLRs).

Another consideration with modern lenses will be a camera's ability to autofocus in low light conditions. Some of the latest models are really good at this.... I know Canon 6D Mark II (full frame) and 80D (APS-C), for example, can still focus in as low as -3EV (essentially "moonlight"). This won't matter with vintage manual focus lenses, of course. HOWEVER, you instead need to be able to see to focus manually, and many (most?) DSLRs optical viewfinders and focus screens simply don't have any of the manual focus assist features like were found in older SLRs. For manual focusing the mirrorless cameras might be helpful, because many of them have electronic viewfinders that can both amplify the brightness of the view in low light and commonly provide manual assist features such as "focus peaking".

So, depending upon what you want to do... if you want to continue using some favorite lenses, whether or not you mind if those lenses are effected by the "lens factor" of a smaller format sensor, and just how low light you need/want to shoot in, you have a number of possibilities to choose among.

EDIT: Yes, Nikon Df would be a neat choice, too. It's full frame and "retro" styled to look and operate somewhat like 1980s FM2n or FE2 models, for example. Though I don't use one, I love the look and feel of the Df. However, you gotta REALLY want that retro look, because Df are VERY expensive for a 16MP full frame camera! You can get newer, higher resolution, better low light performing cameras for the same or considerably lower cost! A chrome Df body only costs $2100... a black version is $2750. In contrast, a D750 (50% higher resolution) costs about $1700... Or a D810 with more than 2X the resolution is selling for $2800. (Both those are only offered in black versions.)

To make your $ go a little farther with any of these, you might consider refurbished or quality used from a trustworthy store. D810: $1700. D750: $1400. I also found a used Canon 5D Mark III (22MP) for $1000 and 6DII for $1400, original 6D (20MP) for as little as $800. Df (16MP) simply aren't as common used or refurb'd, I did find a black one used for $2000 and some silver ones for as low as $1500.

When it comes to the cost of DSLRs and all digital... The initial expense is considerably more than comparable film cameras (digital cameras are basically powerful little specialized computers). But you will no longer have the ongoing cost of film and processing. Some people say "digital is free".... which isn't really true because you still need to buy memory cards, hard drives for storage, computers and software for post-processing.... and will wear out cameras and repair or replace them eventually. However, it's considerably less expensive than film!
ANY recent APS-C DSLR or mirrorless camera will si... (show quote)

Reply
Jul 23, 2018 05:36:48   #
Architect1776 Loc: In my mind
 
jeep_daddy wrote:
All of the full frame cameras today are the best in low light conditions. Of course, it helps to have a fast lens too. So in Canons lineup you have the 6D, 6D II, 5D III, 5D IV, and the 1DX II. In the Nikon lineup you have the D610, D750, D810, D850, & D5. Sony has the Alpha a7, a7 II, a7S II, a7 III, a7S II, & a9.


And all your nikon lenses will fit and focus to infinity on all the cameras listed here just fine.

Reply
Jul 23, 2018 05:55:44   #
Jolly Roger Loc: Dorset. UK
 
Assuming you are a Nikon guy this won't help you.
The attached shot is one I posted a couple of weeks ago. Canon 1DX MkII. ISO 25,600.


(Download)

Reply
 
 
Jul 23, 2018 06:15:01   #
BJW
 
baer wrote:
What digital cameras are best for low light photography and have good resolution/High megapixels?
I’m still using recorder film...for my Nikon FTN and F4.
Thanks for your help!
Sincerely,
Baer


I have 3 different brand digital cameras for different types of photography. One is a full frame, one a crop sensor and one a M4/3rds.
I find that regardless of brand, i get the best results in low light with my full frame with a fast (f1.7 or faster) wide angle lens (28mm). In body and in lens image stabilization are important too. Pushing the ISO on the full frame to 64,000 is no problem. My favorite brand is the Leica but I hear the Sony A7riii sensor is superb. Good luck.

Reply
Jul 23, 2018 07:04:14   #
billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
 
baer wrote:
What digital cameras are best for low light photography and have good resolution/High megapixels?
I’m still using recorder film...for my Nikon FTN and F4.
Thanks for your help!
Sincerely,
Baer


D5, D850, D500 all share many software components and all are very good in low light. The D5 however is the clear winner. I would also mention the D750, but it is one generation removed from the other three but still very good.

Reply
Jul 23, 2018 07:25:43   #
Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida
 
Mac wrote:
Even though you shoot video, you should treat yourself to a Df anyway.



Reply
Jul 23, 2018 07:38:04   #
jacklewis014
 
tomcat wrote:
I am retired, so the D5 is definitely out of my price range now. I am the "official event photographer" for the high school, and I know they would not pony up the money for that body. I am drooling over a D3s because I have a friend with one of those and I have been envying his images every time he shoots a concert or a play. His low light images have almost 0.0 noise and the sharpness and color rendition is just like being there. I keep hoping that a UHH member will want to sell his D3s. I regret not buying one of those when I was working and had more disposable income, so I keep my fingers crossed that one with a low shutter count will pop up.
I am retired, so the D5 is definitely out of my pr... (show quote)


Shop around and see if you can upgrade to at least a D4 or D4s.
Both are great and will save you a few dollars.

Reply
 
 
Jul 23, 2018 08:11:10   #
tomcat
 
GoofyNewfie wrote:
I have bought and sold quite a bit from the members at Fred Miranda. Here’s one offering: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1551659/0?keyword=Nikon,D3s#14518706



Are they a pretty reliable bunch?

Reply
Jul 23, 2018 08:13:45   #
tomcat
 
Jolly Roger wrote:
Assuming you are a Nikon guy this won't help you.
The attached shot is one I posted a couple of weeks ago. Canon 1DX MkII. ISO 25,600.


Very impressive shot. I'm a retired Nikon guy, so the only way I would do this model Canon is if I could get that exact camera and lens for less than $500

Reply
Jul 23, 2018 08:16:29   #
GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City
 
tomcat wrote:
Are they a pretty reliable bunch?


Never had an issue with any transaction.
I wouldn’t hesitate buying from there.
You have to join but it costs nothing to buy and is a great website. The forum is not as informal as here but it’s always good to get other opinions. Never seen any trolls.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/
They have a section dedicated to sports and brand-specific threads as well.
I like the informal nature here a bit better.

Reply
Jul 23, 2018 08:21:41   #
Low Budget Dave
 
I am surprised more people haven't mentioned the Sony A7iii. The Sony a7iii scored a 96 on the DXO low-light test. That is the highest score of any 35mm sensor they have ever tested.

Some people tend to criticize the DXO scores, because they sometimes assign a low weight to something you might consider important. For example, the Nikon D850 has a color-depth advantage over the Sony A7iii, which makes it's overall score higher. If you are looking for extreme low-light performance, though, you should remember that the color depth advantage only matters at ISO 400 to 800. Once you get past ISO 3200, the Sony is visibly better. (For a camera as good as the D850, that is saying quite a lot.)

The Sony a7iii will also autofocus down to -3EV. This is about as good as you will get for a $2000 camera. The Nikon d5 will go down to -4EV, but that is a $6500 camera.

The Sony a9 also claims -3EV autofocus, but at that light level it will focus faster than the a7iii, thanks to some tricks Sony did with the stacked CMOS sensor. Again, though, the a9 is in the $4500 dollar range. For a $2000 camera, you literally will not beat the Sony A7iii.

The only reason you might want to reconsider is if you are using the camera for astrophotography, or for low-light sports. If you are doing astrophotography, the Sony noise reduction will "eat" any stars that it considers to be bad pixels. They may have already come out with a fix to turn that "feature" off, but make sure you research it before you shoot starts at night.

If you are shooting low-light sports, then you will need a camera designed for that purpose. The A9 is a very good sports camera, but the Nikon D5 is amazing, and has great color all the way up to ISO 102,400. The Canon 1DXii is similar. Even though they use different types of noise reduction, and I happen to like the Nikon version better, many people prefer the Canon 1DXii for its color saturation at ISO 102,400. In my opinion, the Sony a9 holds its own against the "big boys", and offers in-body image stabilization as well.

There are people who argue endlessly about the topic, but most pros still use Canon or Nikon for low-light sports. Sony is clearly making inroads into the market, so if you are in the mood to experiment, look to see if you can rent one.

But if you only have $4000 to spend, then but the Sony a7iii, get a good lens or two, and spend the rest of the money on a short vacation to try them out.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 7 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.