Nikon DSLR forum

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: ... 9 10 11 12 13 14

D400 rumours again - Page 14

Rate Topic

Author	Post

Posted: Tue Jun 4th, 2013 10:59

131^st Post

Eric

Joined:	Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location:	United Kingdom
Posts:	4583
Status:	Offline

Robert wrote:
It's not a sacking matter Doug! :devil:

Actually I think it was a very good list for 'top of the head', several things on there I didn't know about.

To me the biggest gripe I have about these 'cheap' high resolution consumer bodies is the horrible, harsh, gritty noise in shadow areas, I have seen it time and again in images on here even at the low screen resolution we get online. On occasions when I have mentioned here I have been accused of pixel peeping??? So I have moved on since it doesn't affect me, I am happy with my antiquated D1x and D200. Of course it could be caused by the compression process used when the images are compressed when they hit the forum server software, but I don't think so because it doesn't happen with the larger pixel cameras. It has been said it's caused by post processing but I'm not so sure.

My D3100 is just the same, even with NEF's straight from the camera. Looking in the shadow areas, instead of smooth, graduated shade it's a speckled gritty mixture of light and dark pixels mixed to produce the appropriate shade, instead of a smooth graduated area of the appropriately coloured pixels. I don't believe the shaded areas are outside the gamut of the sensor or the software because larger pixel cameras manage to produce smooth shaded areas despite their comparative brick sized pixels. Also it's not JPEG artefacts because it happens with untouched NEF's straight from the camera.

And yet we still use them?

I just wonder if we protesteth too much over these less than perfect characteristics.?

No...it's not as good as a D3/4, or newer Dxxx bodies.

But sometimes its more about being fit for purpose...and for most people not selling their work, a Dxxxx maybe acceptable. o.O

____________________
Eric

Posted: Tue Jun 4th, 2013 17:24

132^nd Post

Doug

Joined:	Sun Apr 8th, 2012
Location:	Adelaide, Australia
Posts:	187
Status:	Offline

Robert wrote:
...Also it's not JPEG artefacts because it happens with untouched NEF's straight from the camera.

Since we can never actually view the nef, I have to ask how are you viewing images.
Typically it will be a jpeg preview.
In the case of Lightroom, Aperture, iPhoto and other high end software it should be a damn good jpeg (updated each time a change is made) but other software might not be as good.

Also, even with nefs, under exposure and subsequent brightening or opening of shadows will enhance nasties.
Jpeg artifacts, created at export or upload, are another matter.

Try exporting a Tiff and various full res Jpegs, then compare in photoshop.
(Use 'arrange windows', match zoom (100%), then hold space and shift while click dragging to compare different areas)
The Tiff will be free of compression artifacts and only show actual image nasties

My expectation,
An underexposed and brightened image will show nasties in the tiff.
A well exposed image (unbrightened) won't show shadow nasties.
The best available jpegs will be indistinguishable from the tiff.

A good thing to try would be shooting a grey scale at a correct exposure (no gap at right edge of histogram and no, or very tiny amount of, clipping)
and repeat with 3-4 stops less exposure (400iso is a good setting).
Adjust the second image (using exposure slider) to plus 3 stops then export and compare tiffs and jpegs as described above.

My expectation,
Tiff AND Jpegs from image 2 will show shadow nasties compared to those from image 1.

____________________
Recent & Popular posts
ProCapture | Genius on Demand Blog

Posted: Wed Jun 5th, 2013 16:36

133^rd Post

Ed Matusik

Joined:	Thu Apr 5th, 2012
Location:	Pennsylvania USA
Posts:	187
Status:	Offline

I've got to say that since buying my D4, all else seems trivial. The D300 can't compare to the the capabilities of this camera. It will take a lot to make me buy another DX camera. - EdM

P.S., the 2X nikon telextender(TC III)with the 200-400mm lens is spectacular.

Posted: Wed Jun 5th, 2013 17:09

134^th Post

Doug

Joined:	Sun Apr 8th, 2012
Location:	Adelaide, Australia
Posts:	187
Status:	Offline

Ed Matusik wrote:It will take a lot to make me buy another DX camera. - EdM

I believe a your love of the D4 has little to do with DX v FX.
I don't think we would ever see it, but a D4 with a DX sensor would be almost as great.

____________________
Recent & Popular posts
ProCapture | Genius on Demand Blog

Posted: Wed Jun 5th, 2013 17:18

135^th Post

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

Ed Matusik wrote:
I've got to say that since buying my D4, all else seems trivial. The D300 can't compare to the the capabilities of this camera. It will take a lot to make me buy another DX camera. - EdM

P.S., the 2X nikon telextender(TC III)with the 200-400mm lens is spectacular.

That is very interesting to hear you say that.

I have long felt that FX suits me better but it is not easy to define why!
As such I have considered buying a D600 but dont think it meets my desired specification for the general camera characteristics. I'd be interested to hear from Peter Lo in HK, as I know he has one, as to how it compares to a D3.
The lack of a 10pin socket and improved AF seems like small differences until you consider the replacement of legacy interface electronics and accessories for the change from 10 pin to USB and the fact that the AF needs to match D3 characteristics or better!

Then on top of that there is the consideration of long telephotos when DX and FX are considered.

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

1st new

This is topic ID = 216 Current time is 10:04	Page: ... 9 10 11 12 13 14
Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Cameras > D400 rumours again	Top
Users viewing this topic