BL Blog

Nikon D7100 – Cropped Sensor for Night Photography?

Gear Talk

Want to know how the Nikon D7100 stands up to the challenge of night photography? David Kingham is a landscape photographer who focuses on the night sky. Kingham put the Nikon D7100 to the test to find out if its cropped sensor is worth considering as a viable choice for night shooting, especially when compared to the similarly-priced Nikon D600.

Nikon D7100 – Cropped Sensor for Night Photography?
by David Kingham

After my previous test The Best Nikon for Night Photography, I was bombarded with requests to test the new contender in the APS-C sensor arena–the Nikon D7100. The initial numbers from DXOMark looked very promising for a cropped sensor. Previous cropped sensor bodies do not fare well with the extremely high ISO’s needed for night photography.

Set Up

I needed a benchmark to compare the D7100 to so I choose the Nikon D600 as a comparison because it’s the closest, price wise, and is the next logical step up from the D7100. The D600 also fared extremely well against the other full frame bodies I previously tested. So I felt this was a fair test of APS-C vs. Full Frame sensors.

For the test, I needed a fast, wide angle lens. For the D7100, I choose the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8, which is a stellar performer when shooting wide open. For the D600, I choose the Rokinon 24mm 1.4. I set both lens at f/2.8 to level the playing field and I set the Tokina to 16mm to match the equivalent focal length of the 24mm.

Build

The build of these cameras are nearly identical. The D7100 is a bit smaller and some of the buttons are moved around but, overall, it felt like using the same camera. I will note that the virtual horizon in the viewfinder of the D7100 is very similar to the D800, with the gray indicators that you cannot see at night. The D600 uses the meter instead, which is much nicer to use in the dark. Also, the smaller viewfinder of the D7100 made it much harder to compose a scene at night.

p1602814922

Live View

Due to the smaller sensor, and its limited ISO capabilities, I was not able to find a star in live view to focus on. Although I use hyperfocal most of the time, it is much harder to achieve with a zoom lens. I took several test shots at different focus points to learn where this lens had the sharpest stars and, eventually, I found that spot to be past infinity, strangely. This would have been much easier to confirm with Live View, but it’s not a deal breaker.

Image Quality

Since the cameras have nearly the same resolution, I did not resize the samples. They are simply screenshots of the raw files in Lightroom 4.

First up are the overall shots with no adjustments applied–except correcting the white balance.

©David Kingham

Exposure: 20 Seconds, f/2.8, ISO 6400.

You can clearly see a marked difference in the exposure, even though they were taken with the exact same settings. I am unsure if this is due to the lens or the body. My guess would be a difference in how much the aperture actually physically opens between the lenses. This was unexpected and, in retrospect, I wish I would have used the same lens on both bodies even with the different focal lengths to know for sure. I found the difference to be about 2/3 of a stop, so this is not a perfect side-by-side test. It will give you adequate information to decide if the D7100 is good enough for your needs, though.

Next are 100% crops of the sky and foreground of the previous shot. The sky looks fairly similar, with a bit more color and luminance noise in the D7100. Not bad so far.

©David Kingham

©David Kingham

Now we take a look at the foreground.

©David Kingham

©David Kingham

We’re starting to see where full frame has a distinct advantage. The D7100 has significantly more noise and the detail in Devils Tower is non-existent. With the D600, you can make out the ‘bear claw marks’ or the rock columns on the sides of the tower.

Next I edited each file using my standard processing techniques to create the best possible image with the data in the raw file. I did not use the same settings, I processed each uniquely to get the best results possible.

Overall the look of the D600 images are much better. The color and clarity make the image stand out. I simply could not get the image from the D7100 to look as good as the D600.

©David Kingham

©David Kingham

This time around I decided to push beyond the manufacturers’ ‘in-spec’ ISO ratings. I set each camera to H2.0, or ISO 25,600 (both of their maximum ISO’s). My expectations were low.

©David Kingham

©David Kingham

The D600 was shockingly good! I could actually see myself utilizing this ISO when using an f/2.8 lens. The D7100, on the other hand, is clearly out of its league at this point. Heavy grain and the glaringly obvious purple sensor amp on the bottom of the image is a deal killer–not usable at all at this ISO (but I didn’t expect it to be).

Here is a crop of the foreground. The heavy grain, loss of detail and purple in the shadows of the D7100 are obvious.

©David Kingham

©David Kingham

Another crop of the sky (disregard the sloppy focus). Luminance noise is fairly acceptable on the D600.

©David Kingham

©David Kingham

Finally, an edited version of each.

©David Kingham

©David Kingham

Full resolution jpegs can be downloaded here (all are un-edited):

Nikon D600 ISO 6400

Nikon D7100 ISO 6400

Nikon D600 ISO 25,600

Nikon D7100 ISO 25,600

Conclusion

If you’re heavily invested in the DX format, or you want to get into night photography the cheapest way possible and still have stunning results, the Nikon D7100 is an extremely good choice. I’m stunned that a cropped sensor could have acceptable results at ISO 6400, with 24MP nonetheless. This camera is of very high quality and I wouldn’t hesitate recommending it to anyone who is just starting out. Paired with the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, you’ll have a killer combo to start shooting the night skies.

It’s still not full frame, though. The D600 blows the D7100 out of the water in my opinion. When looking at the sky, there isn’t a huge difference, but what’s really important to me for shooting night landscapes is having shadow detail in the foreground. Having a great foreground is the key factor to making your night images stand out from the crowd. Having the ability to see the foreground, even on a moonless night, is huge. If you’re serious about getting the best night images possible, the D7100 will not get you there–you need to step it up to full frame.

Bonus Review: Tokina 11-16 2.8

As a bonus I have a small review of the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 lens. This is the original version of this lens–not the newest model which reportedly performs slightly better (I will be comparing these 2 lenses soon).

The center of the frame is extremely sharp–a bit sharper than the Rokinon 24mm f/1.4. When looking at the edges, though, the sharpness falls off dramatically.

©David Kingham

©David Kingham

You can see the extreme distortion stretching out the stars and making them much softer. The Rokinon has a strong advantage here and overall is much better quality.

You must consider that your options are very limited in this focal length for DX lenses that have an aperture of f/2.8. When taking that into consideration, this lens is extremely good with very little coma wide open at 11mms and almost no coma at 16mm. Also, overall sharpness isn’t too bad. The stretching of the stars in the corners is the only issue, which is only exacerbated by using the lens profile correction.

Bonus Review No. 2: Nikon 35mm 1.8G

I had high hopes for this lens with its aspherical elements. I was immediately disappointed when I put the lens on the D7100, though. I was surprised to see there was no focus scale–absolutely no indication of your focus. This lens was meant strictly for autofocus and using this lens with manual focus is a huge guessing game. Since Live View does not perform well enough on the D7100 (even at f/1.8), I had no way to focus except to take a shot, check the LCD, slightly refocus, and repeat over and over again.

I did finally get it in focus to check the quality. If you can get to this point then the lens is fairly good–sharp in the center with only a slight drop in sharpness in the corners and almost no coma at f/1.8. The biggest flaw is significant glow around the brightest stars, which doesn’t go away until f/2.8.

©David Kingham

©David Kingham

This lens is the equivalent to a 50mm lens on full frame–not a focal length I use terribly often at night. If you’re looking for some complementary lenses to the Tokina 11-16mm, I would recommend the Rokinon 24mm f/1.4 and the Rokinon 35mm f/1.4. The added benefit of these lenses is that they will be compatible with a full frame body if you decide to upgrade someday. The Nikon 35mm f/1.8G is for cropped sensors only. I cannot recommend this lens for night photography unless your budget is extremely tight and you need this focal length–but be prepared for frustration.

To read more from David Kingham, check out his blog here.

If you have any great night photography to share, please include it in the comments below and let us know what you shot with!

Thank you for reading this post. Leave a comment or subscribe to the RSS feed and have future articles delivered right to your feed reader. Love BL? Become an affiliate today!
The following two tabs change content below.
Alexandria Huff is a portrait photographer based in San Francisco. Her tutorials can be found here on the BorrowLenses Blog, 500px, Shutterfly, Snapknot, and SmugMug. She specializes in studio lighting. Follow her work on 500px.

Comments

  • I have a Tokina 12-24 f4 lens. Is that a good lens for night sky photography ? or do I need a f 2.8 or lower ? Appreciate your advice

    Thanks
    Raees

  • You really need 2.8 or lower, especially on an APS-C sensor

  • Kyndel says:

    Thank you very much for this review – I expected it to be more or less as you show here, when you use iso 6400, but it is very fine to see it testet so thorough.

    I am not sure the difference would have been so huge if you have used iso 3200 or lower.

    But I would have liked VERY MUCH if you have testet the difference if you shoot at iso 100 and long exposures instead of getting the iso up, because I am very interested in the issue:

    ……Will the bigger sensor also have a clear advantage here or is it only minor when shooting long exposures at iso 100 (tripod of course)??

    Best from Denmark/Steinar

  • Kyndel says:

    ……and we say they have about the same Dynamic Range – example D7000 has 13,9 and D600 has 14.2 according to DxO, but even this is about the same, will there still be a difference in long exposures at iso 100 (tripod at night) ??

  • Malcolm says:

    Thanks for the review! Those are really some out of this world “test images”

  • […] Blog @ BorrowLenses البته مقایسه d7100 با d600 هست. جالبه که 7100 رو با d600 هم مقایسه میکنن . دوربین خوبیه پاسخ با نقل قول […]

  • toxictabasco says:

    This is a great review. Very nice images.
    However, I tend to use longer exposure at night and sunrise/sunset, and smaller apertures for huge DOF. Thus using a Sigma 8-16 for the ultra wide and a 17-50mm for wide to norm. Both do extremely well with image resolution, and the depth of field is a good as any full frame under long exposure conditions. I would consider a full frame if shooting large apertures and shallow DOF at night. Shooting the moon and stars is easier with Full Frame. For DX, just need to work harder in post processing.

  • Leave a comment, a question, or show us your work!