Posted: 4/12/2025 12:18:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: vmax84][Edited]
|
Originally Posted By Den40: Nice photo! Which one is better than the D500 for low light, the D3s or the D780? The D780 is waaaaaaay better than the D3s in low light and the D500 is "pretty" good. But if I'm shooting low light, I don't even think about using the D3s. The D500........maybe. The D780 really is quite good in low light. |
|
Originally Posted By vmax84: The D780 is waaaaaaay better than the D3s in low light and the D500 is "pretty" good. But if I'm shooting low light, I don't even think about using the D3s. The D500........maybe. The D780 really is quite good in low light. Originally Posted By vmax84: Originally Posted By Den40: Nice photo! Which one is better than the D500 for low light, the D3s or the D780? The D780 is waaaaaaay better than the D3s in low light and the D500 is "pretty" good. But if I'm shooting low light, I don't even think about using the D3s. The D500........maybe. The D780 really is quite good in low light. Barring any gee-whiz electronics technology, the sensor with the bigger area will usually perform better in low-light because it has bigger ID optical diodes which gathers more light, in this the case the FX camera will outperform the DX camera in low light. BTW the typical ad-hype that the more MPs the better indicating camera quality is not exactly true, you maybe able to quote more MPs, but sacrifice low-light performance, again barring an electronic gee-whiz technology. This electronic gee-whiz technology is why Sony's RX10- and RX100- series cameras performs so well. |
