[genotypewriter]

There's quite a misconception out there thinking massive low-noise advantages can come over night. Nikon somehow seem to imply that they defy physics that all other mortals have to obey. Interestingly enough, in the midst of these supposed noise improvements, Nikon cameras are the least used in astrophotography* applications for some reasons explained in the first link below. The other links are also related to the same topic of "cooking RAW files" or manipulating the data captured by the sensor before writing them to the RAW files.





Cooking RAW Files



Look for the line "this occurs even before the raw image is written to the file" in the Nikon section below:

http://www.astropix.com/HTML/I_ASTROP/NIK_CAN.HTM



Another article:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Our-...cooked-RAW



Dark frame subtraction is also evident especially in the D3X "full SNR" compared to other sensors:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Came.../Nikon/D3X





Noise vs. Resolution



My own comparison of 1Ds3 vs. D3 vs. a900 ISO1600 RAW noise w.r.t. resolution:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/3012247230



DXOMark on the same (1Ds3 vs. D3) confirms this:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Our-...omparisons





I know this post can be easily thought of as a N vs. C thing... but instead, I hope the readers here are able to see it as a "photographers vs. manufacturers" thing instead.



GTW





* Astrophotography as in taking pictures of stars and deep space objects through dedicated astro-telescopes. Taking cameras to space to take pictures of space-stations, Earth, etc. isn't what I'm referring to here.