ISO Sensitivity: I am looking at upgrading to Full Frame FX from DX but I am confused about ISO sensitivity and low light performance: Why does a D7200 or D3400 have native ISO...

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

I am looking at upgrading to Full Frame FX from DX but I am confused about ISO sensitivity and low light performance: Why does a D7200 or D3400 have native ISO sensitivity of 100-25,600 and a full frame D750 is only100-12,800? All are 24mp. I thought that a full frame FX sensor with larger pixels would be more sensitive to light than the DX sensor. What am I missing here? So looking forward to your UHH answers since Google doesn’t have a clue. Thanks!!

markjonmiller

The D750 is an older camera. The newer D850 ISO is
64–25,600 in 1, 1/2 or 1/3 EV steps (down to 32 and up to 102,400 as expansion)

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Just because a camera has a huge ISO range doesn’t mean it’s useful. In other words, the range really doesn’t tell you much about the actual performance characteristics of a camera. A Full frame sensor has larger pixels for equivalent resolution than a crop frame and that typically translates into lower noise, higher DR (dynamic range) and better low light high ISO performance, given the same generation of sensors. In general, an equivalent resolution and generation FF sensor is about a stop better in low light/high ISO performance than its crop sensor equivalent. Here’s a link that will allow you to compare both the DR and low light/high ISO performance of various cameras (be sure to see the chart below the graph): http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

Built at different times with different designs and sensors. Compare release dates on DPReview.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

TriX wrote:

Just because a camera has a huge ISO range doesn’t... (show quote)

If I am reading this correctly the D3400 and D7200 are identical but the dynamic range of the D750 is slightly better?

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

rjaywallace wrote:

Built at different times with different designs and sensors. Compare release dates on DPReview.

The D750 is older but still has the Expeed 4 processor. Does an older sensor affect ISO sensitivity even tho it is 24mp?

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

ronpier wrote:

If I am reading this correctly the D3400 and D7200 are identical but the dynamic range of the D750 is slightly better?

If you look at the DR chart of the 3 cameras, you’ll see that the D750 is about a half stop better than the 7200 and about one stop better than the 3400 at base ISO and almost a full stop better in terms of high ISO/low noise performance in the tabulation below than either the 3400 or 7200, which are very similar in that respect.

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

TriX wrote:

Just because a camera has a huge ISO range doesn’t... (show quote)

Higher ISO is usable, but at s price ... it’s much like film days of pushing film.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

TriX wrote:

If you look at the DR chart of the 3 cameras, you’ll see that the D750 is about a half stop better than the 7200 and about one stop better than the 3400 at base ISO and almost a full stop better in terms of high ISO/low noise performance in the tabulation below than either the 3400 or 7200, which are very similar in that respect.

Thank you TriX. It’s making a little more sense. I’m looking at an FX camera that performs a little better than its DX brothers. Given its age that seems to be pretty good at this time.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

LWW wrote:

Higher ISO is usable, but at s price ... it’s much like film days of pushing film.

Sometimes that price is too steep considering the end results.

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

ronpier wrote:

Sometimes that price is too steep considering the end results.

I’m not arguing that, but if it’s a choice between not getting a paid shot at all and getting it at 25.6K ISO I’ll take the shot.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

ronpier wrote:

I am looking at upgrading to Full Frame FX from DX but I am confused about ISO sensitivity and low light performance: Why does a D7200 or D3400 have native ISO sensitivity of 100-25,600 and a full frame D750 is only100-12,800? All are 24mp. I thought that a full frame FX sensor with larger pixels would be more sensitive to light than the DX sensor. What am I missing here? So looking forward to your UHH answers since Google doesn’t have a clue. Thanks!!

Where you went wrong is believing the camera manufacturer's claims for ISO range. The number given are just marketing hype, unless you don't care about image noise. FF sensors provide better low light performance than crop sensors, providing they are of similar vintage. ISO 6400 is what you can expect from FF if you want decent IQ. Its about double than from the very best crop sensors.

Check out DXO.com for more realistic ISO numbers for most cameras, as well as other data.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

LWW wrote:

I’m not arguing that, but if it’s a choice between not getting a paid shot at all and getting it at 25.6K ISO I’ll take the shot.

I’ll take your word for that. Have very little experience beyond 12,800. Appreciate your input. Maybe I will give it consideration.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

joer wrote:

Where you went wrong is believing the camera manufacturer's claims for ISO range. The number given are just marketing hype, unless you don't care about image noise. FF sensors provide better low light performance than crop sensors, providing they are of similar vintage. ISO 6400 is what you can expect from FF if you want decent IQ. Its about double than from the very best crop sensors.

Check out DXO.com for more realistic ISO numbers for most cameras, as well as other data.

Thanks, I generally try stay below 3200, 6400 highest with my d3400. But I really prefer 1600 or less.

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

ronpier wrote:

Thanks, I generally try stay below 3200, 6400 highest with my d3400. But I really prefer 1600 or less.

All things being equal, lower is definitely preferable.