Nikon D40 vs. D80 image quality?

Hi!
I just read about the new D40.
If I'm correct it has a 6.1MP sensor of the same size as the 10.2MP
sensor of the D80.
Are the already any comparisons with regards to dynamic range and
high ISO noise?

Lots of Greetings!
Volker

Volker Hetzer writes:
I just read about the new D40.
If I'm correct it has a 6.1MP sensor of the same size as the 10.2MP
sensor of the D80.
Are the already any comparisons with regards to dynamic range and
high ISO noise?

If the D40 is like the D50, it is a little bit quieter than the D80.

"Paul Rubin" wrote in message
...
Volker Hetzer writes:
I just read about the new D40.
If I'm correct it has a 6.1MP sensor of the same size as the 10.2MP
sensor of the D80.

Correct, it's a 6mp sensor.

Are the already any comparisons with regards to dynamic range and
high ISO noise?

If the D40 is like the D50, it is a little bit quieter than the D80.

It has good high ISO performance:

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/came...21/page_8.html

That page has a night shot at 800 and 1600, and it looks similar to
what my D80 would produce.

Bill wrote:
"Paul Rubin" wrote in message
...
If the D40 is like the D50, it is a little bit quieter than the D80.

It has good high ISO performance:

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/came...21/page_8.html

That page has a night shot at 800 and 1600, and it looks similar to what
my D80 would produce.
So the bigger pixels are no real advantage? Strange.

Lots of Greetings!
Volker

Volker Hetzer wrote:
Bill wrote:
"Paul Rubin" wrote in message
...
If the D40 is like the D50, it is a little bit quieter than the D80.

It has good high ISO performance:

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/came...21/page_8.html

That page has a night shot at 800 and 1600, and it looks similar to what
my D80 would produce.
So the bigger pixels are no real advantage? Strange.

Who knows ? Maybe the manufacturer artificially makes the bigger pixels
of D40 to be noisier than those of the D80, so that the manufacturer
could sell more high-priced D80s ?

On 3 Dec 2006 04:14:22 -0800, "minnesøtti"
wrote:


Volker Hetzer wrote:
Bill wrote:
"Paul Rubin" wrote in message
...
If the D40 is like the D50, it is a little bit quieter than the D80.

It has good high ISO performance:

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/came...21/page_8.html

That page has a night shot at 800 and 1600, and it looks similar to what
my D80 would produce.
So the bigger pixels are no real advantage? Strange.

Who knows ? Maybe the manufacturer artificially makes the bigger pixels
of D40 to be noisier than those of the D80, so that the manufacturer
could sell more high-priced D80s ?

I LOVE conspiracy theories!
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

minnesøtti a écrit :
Volker Hetzer wrote:
Bill wrote:
"Paul Rubin" wrote in message
...
If the D40 is like the D50, it is a little bit quieter than the D80.
It has good high ISO performance:

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/came...21/page_8.html

That page has a night shot at 800 and 1600, and it looks similar to what
my D80 would produce.
So the bigger pixels are no real advantage? Strange.

Who knows ? Maybe the manufacturer artificially makes the bigger pixels
of D40 to be noisier than those of the D80, so that the manufacturer
could sell more high-priced D80s ?

hem...
the area ratio (10/6 in theory) is not very important and the noise is
probably proportional to the square root of the area (need to be checked)...
anymay, i think the noise at high iso is more processing dependant as
area demendant, so the manufacturer sets the noise he wants.
you have to compare both noise and details at high iso.

"Volker Hetzer" wrote in message
...
Bill wrote:
"Paul Rubin" wrote in message
...
If the D40 is like the D50, it is a little bit quieter than the
D80.

It has good high ISO performance:

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/came...21/page_8.html

That page has a night shot at 800 and 1600, and it looks similar to
what my D80 would produce.

So the bigger pixels are no real advantage? Strange.

All other things being equal, bigger pixels are better.

But there's more to it than just the pixel sites, such as processing
and noise reduction algorithms that vary from model to model. Shooting
in RAW, the D40 probably produces a slightly less noisy image, but in
JPG they're likely similar since the D80 tends to soften a bit in JPG
in order to compensate for noise. But in RAW the images are sharp as a
tack.

All of this aside, I don't really care about noise at high ISO and I
rarely shoot higher than 400 unless it's the ONLY way to get the shot.
I would rather use a tripod and longer exposure than raise the ISO.

Volker Hetzer wrote:

Hi!
I just read about the new D40.
If I'm correct it has a 6.1MP sensor of the same size as the 10.2MP
sensor of the D80.
Are the already any comparisons with regards to dynamic range and
high ISO noise?

Lots of Greetings!
Volker

The D40 sensor has the same pixel count and size as the D50,
so probably plots along with the D50 on the graphs on this web page:

http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...rmance.summary

The full D50 analysis is at:
http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...ensor_analysis

The D50 is a good low light camera.

Roger

minnesøtti wrote:
Volker Hetzer wrote:
Bill wrote:
"Paul Rubin" wrote in message
...
If the D40 is like the D50, it is a little bit quieter than the D80.

It has good high ISO performance:

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/came...21/page_8.html

That page has a night shot at 800 and 1600, and it looks similar to what
my D80 would produce.
So the bigger pixels are no real advantage? Strange.

Who knows ? Maybe the manufacturer artificially makes the bigger pixels
of D40 to be noisier than those of the D80, so that the manufacturer
could sell more high-priced D80s ?

Possible. Nikon saved a bundle going from the normal sized D70 body to
the diminutive D80 and since the sensor size didn't increase, their
costs are kept way down. However, since the D80 performs as well or
better than the D200, the idea they cripple the cheaper cameras doesn't
fit, at least in that case.