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: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Choices   -   Page   3 | |
Rate Topic |
Author | Post |
---|
Posted: Mon Feb 4th, 2019 12:37 |
|
21st Post |
blackfox![]() ![]()
![]() |
just spent a hour going through old files with my lad on his i.mac ..he's had d800,d810, and like me most of the lower end models from both Nikon and canon . conclusions being that if your happy with what your producing with what you have then stick with it .. he reminded me that when we have changed in the past sometimes it doesn't end happily i.e a good lens on a different body might not give the same results , , it might need a micro adjust , or produce more noise etc etc etc so unless a few bob drops in my pocket unexpected I'll soldier on ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
||||||||
|
Posted: Mon Feb 4th, 2019 18:19 |
|
22nd Post |
jk![]() ![]()
![]() |
This is one of the articles I read and led me to the belief that there are no perfect solutions to our needs but we need to adapt or compromise depending on conditions. http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/does.pixel.size.matter/ There was another much more technical article which left me confused but in essence said that different cameras were suited to specific conditions you just need a camera that suits the conditions you normally shoot under. I think this may have been the article. https://aberration43mm.wordpress.com/2015/01/01/pixel-size-noise-and-stuff/ https://aberration43mm.wordpress.com/2014/12/20/the-exposure-trapeziums-trapezoids/
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
Posted: Tue Feb 5th, 2019 01:43 |
|
23rd Post |
Robert![]() ![]()
![]() |
Thank you JK, that is a really helpful link. I have already read that article, I will read it again when I wake up better, maybe this afternoon. It has also led me to other really interesting and pertinent articles to help me better understand night sky photography and what I can do to improve my techniques and equipment.
____________________ Robert. |
||||||||
|
Posted: Tue Feb 5th, 2019 01:51 |
|
24th Post |
Robert![]() ![]()
![]() |
Eric wrote:Robert wrote: I am not ignoring this post Eric, I appreciate the challenge, I simply want to gain a better understanding before I respond. I do still feel Jeff's question is about more than noise, it's about improving his images, if that's possible! Noise isn't the only issue, at least, not in my opinion. I tried to simplify it. Obviously it needs backing up with something demonstrable. I have both the D300S and the D3, so I will try to compare the two.
____________________ Robert. |
||||||||
|
Posted: Tue Feb 5th, 2019 03:32 |
|
25th Post |
Eric![]() ![]()
![]() |
Robert wrote:Eric wrote: I thought you were thwacking pavers. 😆 I understand there are two different issues here....sharpness and noise. But they are intrinsically linked because the method of de-noising reduces sharpness. Yes, we can mask the subject and remove noise selectively, but that's extra work. I am convinced that if our ooc images had no noise upto 4000/5000 we would all have less processing to do and be much happier bunnies....as we can then add sharpening to the images without fear the noise will be made evident. But maybe that's just me. ![]() I will be interested to see the results of you experiment as I never had the S version, just the straight D300. Jonathan said the D3S was better at handling noise than the D3 so maybe at the same time they improved the D300. ![]() There is no doubt that cropping any cameras image will amplify whatever noise is there as well. The basic question is whether the capture noise level in an FX is sufficiently better ...such that on enlargement it is STILL better or as good as the image out of the DX camera. My assessment of the two was under good lighting ...ie 200iso. So no noise to worry about. To be honest, I wasn't even thinking of noise when I did the test, just the need to carry round the DX body as ell as the D3. Perhaps had I done the test at 2000iso it might have given me a different slant. Because I do feel that noise and the specifically the handling of noise has an important influence on perceived sharpness. ![]()
____________________ Eric |
||||||||
|
Posted: Tue Feb 5th, 2019 05:30 |
|
26th Post |
jk![]() ![]()
![]() |
Eric wrote: ![]() I probably need to talk this out face to face rather than here in text as these days I dont like writing long technical papers. If you look at the controls that affect sharpness, noise, etc.. Exposure (not sure if this should be included as we should be trying to expose correctly). Contrast (apparent sharpness but in reality no change in sharpness). Clarity (apparent increase in sharpness due to some highlight boost and mid-range levelling and shadow deepening). Luma noise (reduction in light effected noise). Chroma noise (reduction in colour effected noise). Sharpness/Unsharp (too little and it is unsharp, too much and you get horrible artifacts). Have I missed others? ![]() ![]() All these effect apparent sharpness. We are looking at a mulifactorial problem which means there is huge complexity.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
Posted: Tue Feb 5th, 2019 07:57 |
|
27th Post |
Robert![]() ![]()
![]() |
jk wrote:Have I missed others? Resolution? Resolution is fundamental for texture and detail like hair and feathers. Resolution can also affect the dynamic range, blown highlights and un recoverable, under exposed shadows, hence bracketing where this is an issue. Highlight and shadow detail are important in many documentary images. Maybe less important in arty images where graduation might be more important than outright sharpness.
____________________ Robert. |
||||||||
|
Posted: Tue Feb 5th, 2019 08:25 |
|
28th Post |
Robert![]() ![]()
![]() |
Eric wrote:I thought you were thwacking pavers. 😆 I am, in between downpours. ![]()
____________________ Robert. |
||||||||
|
Posted: Tue Feb 5th, 2019 08:41 |
|
29th Post |
jk![]() ![]()
![]() |
Robert wrote:jk wrote: Yes Resolution is also important. Obviously this is a function of pixel numbers and bit depth.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
Posted: Tue Feb 5th, 2019 15:45 |
|
30th Post |
Eric![]() ![]()
![]() |
OK but part from... Exposure Contrast Clarity Luma noise Chroma noise Sharpness/Unsharp and Resolution.... What else have the `Romans' done for photography? ![]()
____________________ Eric |
||||||||
|
This is topic ID = 1641 Current time is 06:17 | Page: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Cameras > Choices | Top | |
Users viewing this topic |
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. |