This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you.

 Moderated by: chrisbet, Page:  First Page Previous Page  ...  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next Page Last Page  
Nikon D850 specifications   -   Page   11
 Rate Topic 
AuthorPost



Posted: Sat Oct 28th, 2017 13:08
 
101st Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6995
Status: 
Offline
I always said that Adobe had made the design of LR too complex and not modular enough.
Dare I say it “Some of the west coast software developers are very poor system architects!”
ЉˆðŸ˜Ž



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Sat Oct 28th, 2017 17:08
 
102nd Post
Robert



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: South Lakeland, UK
Posts: 4066
Status: 
Offline
jk wrote:
I always said that Adobe had made the design of LR too complex and not modular enough.
Dare I say it “Some of the west coast software developers are very poor system architects!”
ЉˆðŸ˜Ž


I would agree, they seem to pursue their own agendas irrespective of the user experience. Tunnel vision.

So much software has grossly under employed features that clutter up RAM and other resources when only a tiny minority of users actually use these features. Todays SSD's can rustle up code in a trice, well designed modular software would be good.



____________________
Robert.

 




Posted: Sat Nov 18th, 2017 04:31
 
103rd Post
Graham Whistler



Joined: Fri Apr 13th, 2012
Location: Fareham, United Kingdom
Posts: 1939
Status: 
Offline
At last Adobe Photoshop CC has caught up and I can now process D850 Nefs!



____________________
Graham Whistler
 




Posted: Sat Nov 18th, 2017 05:17
 
104th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6995
Status: 
Offline
Adobe who???
Need to try the competition.
I have PS CS6 and it works fine with all my add-ins and actions.



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Sat Nov 18th, 2017 05:17
 
105th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6995
Status: 
Offline
Adobe who???
Need to try the competition.
I have PS CS6 and it works fine with all my add-ins and actions.



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Sun Nov 19th, 2017 10:57
 
106th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6995
Status: 
Offline
I have been trying to ascertain how Nikon have managed to make a camera that provides 45/24/12MP all off one sensor. I guess it is processing done in the EXPEED5 chipset.

Does anyone have a url that provides this information?



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Sun Nov 19th, 2017 11:28
 
107th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6995
Status: 
Offline
I got this from Iliah Borg of RAWTherapee fame.

What we have from Nikon:

"Seamlessly switch between RAW sizes of Large (45.7 MP), Medium (25.6 MP) and Small (11.4 MP)"

This translates to:

Nikon specs:

L: 8,256 x 5,504 pixels

M: 6,192 x 4,128 pixels

S: 4,128 x 2,752 pixels

Reality:

L: 8,288 x 5,520 pixels

M: 7,104 x 4,728 pixels

S: 6,216 x 4,136 pixels

How it happens:

- first, the raw data for M and S is resampled in the camera, to get 7,104 x 4,728 and 6,216 x 4,136 from 8,288 x 5,520;

- next, it is resampled in raw converter software, to get 6,192 x 4,128 from 7,104 x 4,728, and 4,128 x 2,752 from 6,216 x 4,136.

M and S formats contain bayer pattern, not YCC data, as it was with previous sRAW format.

PS. This is not the first time Nikon are underreporting the number of pixels, same happened with D1x (and in a way, with D1 and D1h too).



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Sun Nov 19th, 2017 12:36
 
108th Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4583
Status: 
Offline
jk wrote:
I got this from Iliah Borg of RAWTherapee fame.

What we have from Nikon:

"Seamlessly switch between RAW sizes of Large (45.7 MP), Medium (25.6 MP) and Small (11.4 MP)"

This translates to:

Nikon specs:

L: 8,256 x 5,504 pixels

M: 6,192 x 4,128 pixels

S: 4,128 x 2,752 pixels

Reality:

L: 8,288 x 5,520 pixels

M: 7,104 x 4,728 pixels

S: 6,216 x 4,136 pixels

How it happens:

- first, the raw data for M and S is resampled in the camera, to get 7,104 x 4,728 and 6,216 x 4,136 from 8,288 x 5,520;

- next, it is resampled in raw converter software, to get 6,192 x 4,128 from 7,104 x 4,728, and 4,128 x 2,752 from 6,216 x 4,136.

M and S formats contain bayer pattern, not YCC data, as it was with previous sRAW format.

PS. This is not the first time Nikon are underreporting the number of pixels, same happened with D1x (and in a way, with D1 and D1h too).


Not sure I understand?

Is he saying that the downsized files sizes are NOT 25.6 and 11.4mp but 33.5 and 25.7mp resp? And you need to use Adobe raw to get the rest?

You could confirm that my taking some shots at those settings?

I suppose the $64000 question is .....what's the quality difference between Nikon's resampling and merely cropping the 45mp image to the same dimensions?

Unless you have no intention of post processing or have limited space on your SD cards, I don't see the point in shoooting at these lesser standards......unless the IQ is better resampling than cropping?

o.O



____________________
Eric
 




Posted: Sun Nov 19th, 2017 13:29
 
109th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6995
Status: 
Offline
Re:
How it happens:

- first, the raw data for M and S is resampled in the camera, to get 7,104 x 4,728 and 6,216 x 4,136 from 8,288 x 5,520;

- next, it is resampled in raw converter software, to get 6,192 x 4,128 from 7,104 x 4,728, and 4,128 x 2,752 from 6,216 x 4,136.


The first part is as I expected an EXPEED5 processing event.
I dont understand the second part.



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Sun Nov 19th, 2017 16:10
 
110th Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4583
Status: 
Offline
jk wrote:
Re:
How it happens:

- first, the raw data for M and S is resampled in the camera, to get 7,104 x 4,728 and 6,216 x 4,136 from 8,288 x 5,520;

- next, it is resampled in raw converter software, to get 6,192 x 4,128 from 7,104 x 4,728, and 4,128 x 2,752 from 6,216 x 4,136.


The first part is as I expected an EXPEED5 processing event.
I dont understand the second part.


I suppose if the second part is a raw converter event, it would be interesting to know if ALL raw converters do it?

Still don't understand the wisdom of down sampling photos in camera or in raw converter. Any intervention that reduces an image size, however effected, is an inevitable quality downgrade....however well effected.

I never downsample an image till it's required at a lower resolution....and always keep the full size version, just in case. This was a lesson learnt very early on in digital, when I was required to print a large exhibition panel 4m x 3m from a photo I had accidentally downsampled in PS and oversaved at kb size!

After all, we never cutdown our trannies and negatives

I prefer to have the biggest possible master ...just in case.


o.O



____________________
Eric
 

Reply
1st new
This is topic ID = 1444     Current time is 10:04 Page:  First Page Previous Page  ...  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next Page Last Page    
Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Cameras > Nikon D850 specifications Top

Users viewing this topic

Post quick reply

Go to top
Go to end
Messages
Home
Recent topics
Unread posts
Last posts
Splash

Current theme is Modern editor



A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk Thank you.


Hosted by Octarine Services

UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0827 seconds (72% database + 28% PHP). 84 queries executed.