Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Would you consider a d800 if you don't print larger than 16x20?  (Read 9763 times)
HSakols
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 356


« Reply #20 on: June 08, 2012, 03:04:59 PM »
ReplyReply

When are d800e's going to ship?
Logged
LGeb
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


« Reply #21 on: June 08, 2012, 03:27:47 PM »
ReplyReply

They are shipping. Just not very fast. My D800E came in 10 days ago. I was on the wait list at Hunts for 5 weeks.

I'm also very glad I got the E version. No signs of moire, except in one host where I was trying to induce it. I had to try several times before I got the right distance from a mesh outdoor chair. It was easy enough to clean up in Lightroom.
Logged
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3412


« Reply #22 on: June 09, 2012, 05:00:14 AM »
ReplyReply

I have both cameras and I must say that I regret buying the D800. The D800E is in another league. Even at A3 size prints you can see the difference. There are also significant edge effects between bright and dark in high contrast areas with the D800.

Hi,

From another post by you on LuLa it appears that your sharpening workflow is causing artifacts. If that is indeed the cause (hard to say without an example/crop) then a re-evaluation is in order. An earlier analysis of the two models showed only a marginal (1%) resolution difference before sharpening, if any. After proper sharpening the only real difference would be the higher risk of aliasing and false color artifacts of the D800E.

There can be a small benefit for the D800E when only shooting subjects that will not give rise to moiré and jagged edges/lines, and of very low contrast at the micro-detail level. Also, poor lens quality, or shooting with diffraction generating narrow apertures, or defocus, will act as a low-pass filter to reduce visible aliasing tendencies of the D800E.

Quote
I have not yet after 2 months seen any problems with moiré with the D800E.

Not everybody is as sensitive to the artifacts, and not all subjects are as critical in causing them. The main question becomes, how do you think you can remove the artifacts when they do ruin an image? I'm sure that the risk is too high for many people who shoot once in a lifetime events and especially when time constraints prohibit long postprocessing efforts to mitigate some of the (avoidable) damage.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Johnphoto
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


« Reply #23 on: June 09, 2012, 04:56:46 PM »
ReplyReply

I can say that there is a significant difference in the character of the files between the D800 and D800E when you look at them in 100%.
The D800 is showing a much coarser structure than the D800E. I don´t know how a big difference is in resolution, but the the big difference is the micro structure character and that is what you see when you blow the pictures up big.
Logged
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3412


« Reply #24 on: June 09, 2012, 05:28:32 PM »
ReplyReply

I can say that there is a significant difference in the character of the files between the D800 and D800E when you look at them in 100%.
The D800 is showing a much coarser structure than the D800E. I don´t know how a big difference is in resolution, but the the big difference is the micro structure character and that is what you see when you blow the pictures up big.

Hi,

Since we can only guess at what you're looking at, I have to assume it is true in your view. However, a coarser structure is exactly not what the original D800 data capture (in a direct comparison with the D800E) shows. It's rather lacking a bit of micro-contrast near the limiting resolution (as it should, exactly like human visual contrast sensitivity tapers off when resolution increases above its peak), just like all Low-Pass filtered captures. Therefore, we can only assume that your sharpening is causing your impression.

The good news is that the sharpening can be adjusted, quite easily. If you tell/show us what you did, we can tell you how to improve ... I don't know what tools you have at your disposal so that makes it hard to give relevant advise.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
quismond
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 23


« Reply #25 on: June 09, 2012, 05:37:40 PM »
ReplyReply

I can say that there is a significant difference in the character of the files between the D800 and D800E when you look at them in 100%.
The D800 is showing a much coarser structure than the D800E. I don´t know how a big difference is in resolution, but the the big difference is the micro structure character and that is what you see when you blow the pictures up big

What you call "micro structure character" of the D800E files is mostly false detail and aliasing, which contributes to that impression of (fake) perceived sharpness.

There is a very revealing article by Professor Bob Newman (Aliasing and anti-aliasing) where he compares and explains the differences between both cameras files published in Amateur Photographer magazine (U.K.), issue Saturday 9 June 2012.
Logged
Johnphoto
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


« Reply #26 on: June 10, 2012, 05:44:08 AM »
ReplyReply

I am using no sharpening at all. Just making the RAW file processing in Lightroom 4. The difference in micro structure is very significant.
Logged
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3412


« Reply #27 on: June 10, 2012, 07:53:29 AM »
ReplyReply

I am using no sharpening at all. Just making the RAW file processing in Lightroom 4.

Okay, now we're getting somewhere. Do you mean sharpening switched-off (see attachment), or default sharpening (see attachment), or amount set to 0 (see attachment)?

From what you are describing sofar (e.g. double contours) it sounds like you are using default sharpening, which is sharpening with too large a radius (assuming a decent lens, aperture not too narrow, and good focus).

Capture sharpening for the D800 would probably require a radius of no more than 0.8-0.9, and the D800E requires no more than 0.7-0.8 radius. Using a larger radius will most likely result in halo artifacts unless you can judiciously reduce their visibility with noise reduction and masking, or have a subject without sharp edges and lines.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Johnphoto
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


« Reply #28 on: June 10, 2012, 11:50:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Great ! I will check what I was using, but most certainly default sharpening since I never changed it since buying Lightroom 4.

Thanks in advance !
Logged
Johnphoto
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


« Reply #29 on: June 10, 2012, 12:43:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Wow ! I changed the radius as you said and voila! No edge effects and the file of the D800 does not appear coarse anymore ! This is what this forum is for. Thank you so much BartvanderWolf!
Logged
HSakols
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 356


« Reply #30 on: June 10, 2012, 01:19:04 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm getting the impression that maybe there isn't that much difference between the d800 and d800e. Unless maybe if you are making poster sized prints. 
Logged
kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 720


WWW
« Reply #31 on: June 11, 2012, 04:53:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for sharing all of your perspectives. I would like to be able to extract more details from distant scenes or landscapes that have lots of vegetation.  I find I get quite excellent details from my closeups. 

As for the landscape photos you will see a lot more detail, The macro will show also more detail but the 36Megapixel sharpness zone is very thin... and beyond d8 contrast and sharpness will decline.
So focus stacking is the way to go I suppose.
Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 720


WWW
« Reply #32 on: June 11, 2012, 05:11:22 AM »
ReplyReply

I have the d800E for about two weeks now and in comparison with the d3x I find the images have more information at pixel level.
Fine structures are cleanly exposed. The PCE lenses i use now more clearly show some degradation when shifted especially when it comes to microcontrast.
still i feel happy to make a 71 megapixel print at 160x120 cm- (50x60 inch) It looks perfect
So that is not too bad for a 1500 euro lens...
All my lenses flourish like never before on the d800e - even the bad ones.
So far only very few and small areas i found to have moiré.  From d800 and d800e Moiré examples i have seen on the internet it seems the d800 has moiré too but a bit less pronounced.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2012, 03:08:04 AM by kers » Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
arlon
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126



WWW
« Reply #33 on: June 11, 2012, 09:45:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Have D90 and D700, got D800E a few weeks ago. I'm still experimenting with the D800E but I think it's going to be able to do everything the the others did and lot more. I shoot a lot of macro and simply get way better defination at larger file sizes. I start with 36 mp image and crop to 12mp so it's the same as the what I start with on a D700 and there is just no comparing the sharpness of both images at 12mp assuming the same lenses. Took a shot of the moon a few nights ago and it is probably the sharpest moon image I've ever come up with. I used to shoot dozens of shots and hope one would be better than the rest, shooting the D800E in LV mode, they were all better than the best from my other cameras. The LV focus for static images is nothing short of amazing. I shoot a lot of MF lenses and the ability to zoom so far in to focus in LV makes it almost worth the price for that single feature. LV on the D800 is in another league when compared to the D90..

I've never considered making prints larger than 16x20 but with this camera I might just rethink paying the price of a nice larger print if I ever get that "wall hanger"!

Moon shots (last one of the moon is from the d800e): http://www.pbase.com/arlon/moon
« Last Edit: June 13, 2012, 04:46:42 PM by arlon » Logged

Honey, did you bring an extra battery?
Lightsmith
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 111


« Reply #34 on: June 22, 2012, 02:54:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Something that surprised me was shooting some JPEGs with the D800E at the Basic High Quality setting of the camera and later looking at them on my monitor. They could enlarge without falling apart nearly as much as the RAW files from my D3. I can see a lot of situations like with my product photography where I can shoot JPEG instead of RAW and not worry about how large I need to go with the file. The D800 Basic JPEG is half the size of the D3 RAW file so it is a space saver over time.
Logged
rethmeier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 773


WWW
« Reply #35 on: June 24, 2012, 05:55:17 AM »
ReplyReply

The work I shoot gets published in magazines and I can't see the difference between images I took with a Sinar E 75 MFDB  or a Canon 5DmkII in print.
It's the same story in my filmdays between my Contax RTS III and the Fuji Gx680.
Logged

Willem Rethmeier
www.willemrethmeier.com
Sydney Australia
Brad Barr
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 20


WWW
« Reply #36 on: June 27, 2012, 06:20:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Couple things here:
Print size is only part of the benefit.  The ability to crop quite heavily and still maintain an image suitable to print to 16x20 (which is actually pretty small imo) has much more to do with it.  I print at least one 24x30 from every wedding and portrait session I do. 

I see the benefits of better color, better black level (compared to the d300 and before), dynamic range, and more importantly, af, and low light af capabilities (things you cant beef up in post) are just as beneficial as large print making.

I think many are forgetting you can always shoot this thing at lower jpeg settings and still get superior results to most other bodies out there...plus the downsampling shows reduced noise and reduced artifacting...not to mention faster pp'ing
Logged

Brad
www.bciphoto.com
www.bci-sports.com
www.sportsshooter.com/photobrad

D3s, D3, D300, Nikon: 14-24 2.8, 24-120 f4VR 70-200VRII, 300 2.8, 400 2.8VR; 1.7-TC2, Siggy 50 & 85 1.4's + Spiderholster, D300 IR just for grins.
hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1666


« Reply #37 on: June 28, 2012, 06:12:09 AM »
ReplyReply

...An earlier analysis of the two models showed only a marginal (1%) resolution difference before sharpening, if any. After proper sharpening the only real difference would be the higher risk of aliasing and false color artifacts of the D800E.

There can be a small benefit for the D800E when only shooting subjects that will not give rise to moiré and jagged edges/lines, and of very low contrast at the micro-detail level. Also, poor lens quality, or shooting with diffraction generating narrow apertures, or defocus, will act as a low-pass filter to reduce visible aliasing tendencies of the D800E.
I would think that images that have to be shot using high ISO (poor SNR) would be potentially hard to sharpen/deconvolve. If you need high sharpness at the sensel level, and shoot at high ISO, the D800E might show some benefit.

Fortunately, when doing ISO6400+, having 36 million sharp pixels is not high on my priority list. Having reasonable focus and getting the image is usually enough for me personally.

-h
Logged
ndevlin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 504



WWW
« Reply #38 on: June 28, 2012, 09:14:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Don't forget about cropping.  My favourite shot of the last six months is about 45% of a 645D frame. Looks great even big.....because I had detail to spare to start with. Ditto with the D800E.

All other things being equal (and they're not - the D800 is state-of-the-art), there is never a downside to more data to start with.

- N.

ps. If you think the files are "too big", ditch your Commodore 64 and 64GB hard drive and buy some current technology Tongue Grin
Logged

Nick Devlin   @onelittlecamera
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad