baer

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

tomcat

Nikon D5 and D750

baer

Thanks!
I heard Fuji was good,...ISO 100,000?

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Read some great things about the Nikon DF and it will take even non-AI lenses.
https://m.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-df

Whoops, you said high megapixels...
I still wouldn’t count it out.

berchman Loc: South Central PA

To the best of my knowledge, no current camera will give you a satisfactory photo at ISO 100,000. The Nikons mentioned are the cameras usually cited to be super at low light. I have taken acceptable (to me) photos with a Fuji X-T2 at ISO 12,800 and the new Fuji X-T3 coming out in September is reputed to be even better at low light.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

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.

baer

Thank you all very very much!!

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

Current Fuji cameras are very comfortable at ISO 6400 and 12800 -
6400 ISO is more than enough sensitivity for most situations.

baer

Thank you!

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

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!

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

The Nikon Df is very good in low light, thanks to the excellent long exposure noise reduction feature.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

I have a D5 and consider it to be very good in low light. I have not tried any other manufacturer, so I cannot provide comparisons.

The D5 native ISO goes up to 100K, and extension ISO levels are available up to 3million. That does not mean they produce good images up there.

"Good images" is a subjective term. In my unscientific tests I find I can use the camera to ISO 25K pretty well. My images are used online or in newsletters, so a bit of noise is not a real problem. I don't print large. I do noise reduction in Lightroom. Noise reduction in LR produces some blur to wipe out the noise. The range of luminance noise reduction is 1-100. I try to limit my noise reduction to 40 or 50.

I have, of course, tried the camera at all the available high ISO levels. For normal use I will limit the ISO to 25K. I have gotten usable images (with my usage restrictions) at 100K. In my opinion, everything above that is for emergency use only, and provided largely as marketing hype. I have been able to get moderately usable images at 200K and 400K, but only in cases where I could have gotten a usable image at 100K.

I have a D4 for backup, which I will normally use up to about 16000.

baer

I can not thank you enough for your detailed and most thoughtful reply and advice!
Thank you VERY much!

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

Nikon Df is excellent at low light/high ISO. Not high MP though, 16.2. Check it out.

baer

Thank you!!