Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: People who ask about the D800 have never experienced medium format  (Read 35683 times)
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7333


WWW
« Reply #140 on: October 14, 2012, 02:33:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Stefan,

Just to make the point I have two "Zeiss" lenses marked with T* and dual serial numbers. They are made by Sony. So I'm not Zeiss sceptic.

You are also right that sharpening is part of the mix. A lens having benign aberrations would sharpen better than one having extreme corrections.

I also checked out the Diglloyd article and his finding was in part the reason I posted the question. He essentially says that the lens is lacking contrast and needs to be stopped down to f/11, but when stopped down it draws lovely. Diglloyd says that it is only matched by the 100/2 Macro Planar. I mostly shoot at f/8 so F/11 is OK with me.

A couple issues where I don't agree, but I am open for good explanations:

1) Flatness of field. When I shoot landscape, more often than not everything is at infinity. Curvature of field would affect edges and corners negatively: I would claim that a landscape subject at infinity when rendered in the focal plane would be flat. So I would argue that low curvature of field is important.

2) To my knowledge diffraction is only dependent on lens opening. Now, the shape of the aperture matters but most modern lenses I have nearly circular aperture. Diffraction is a property of light and nothing lens designers can do about. The reason that lenses loose sharpness is diffraction. The earlier a lens is becoming diffraction limited the better is the lens.

Now, I may be wrong on these issues. You can perhaps explain where I err, or point me to some source of information? Life is a learning experience!

I don't understand your statement "and a much denser blue channel (about 15-20%) gives the Zeiss glass this 3D look." Which blue channel are you talking about?

Also, could you post a sample with an example of "this 3D look", perhaps also with another image lacking the 3D look. It is much talked about, but I have not seen it demonstrated. Well possible that my Zeiss lenses have some of that 3D-look, I don't know.

Thanks for responding and trying to enlighten me about the issue.

Best regards
Erik

Eric

the Zeiss MF lenses that we use are somehow misrepresented by the shere numbers. If you read Lloyds test he also states this.
it is my experience that many lenses, especially from the MF range are totally misunderstood and should be looked at new from a digital point of view.
First- a larger imagecircle and the longer Flange Focal Distance result in chromafree and very low vignetting images. This kind of uniformity
is much more important than what people see in these MTF charts, which are valid only for flat repro situations which are not occuring in 99% of all images shot.
A final sharpening of very uniform and clean but not so sharp image will result in a better image than a pinsharp center with a lightfalloff with chromas in the edges and
uneven image character.

I see this proofed by many of our customer Photos who are more and more realizing that the current mainstream of lens"knowhow" totally misrepresents
the fact that some older lenses are also not so much prone to diffraction (many new lenses have their peak at open aperture which makes them nearly unusable
if you NEED to stop them down e.g. for product Photography where you just need this depth of field and struggle for every mm !)

This in combination with the special T* coating (7 layer-still best of all!) and a much denser blue channel (about 15-20%) gives the Zeiss glass this 3D look.

greetings from Germany
Stefan
Logged

Stefan.Steib
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 415



WWW
« Reply #141 on: October 14, 2012, 04:56:45 PM »
ReplyReply

I just wanted to point you on a discussion on the Openphotography forum from 2007 that was discussing this exact same subject but I just saw that the comparison images are gone now.

You can try yourself, all the Zeiss lenses with the latest T* cotaing do show this, best comaprison maybe the 100mm Zeiss makro and the 100mm EF Canon makro.

The Blue channel (as in RGB....) is denser with more info on the zeiss one the exact same  scene, lighting and processing. This is also the reason why the Zeiss lenses always look cooler and the Canon look yellowish.

About the 3D look, of course this is subjektive, but I´d propose to go over to flickr and take a look at the Zeiss groups, any user of these lenses reports this, but of course as
nobody permanently keeps a complete double set of lenses to test in his bag you will not find much 1:1 examples.
This was also discussed to death half a zillion times now, just type Zeiss 3D look into google and you will find exactly 1610000 results for this search.
I guess I will not start nr. 16100001.

regards
Stefan
Logged

Because Photography is more than Technology and "as we have done this all the time"
www.hartblei.de     www.hcam.de    www.spectralize.com
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7333


WWW
« Reply #142 on: October 14, 2012, 05:02:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

As I said I have two Zeiss lenses myself. I will google.

That thing about the blue channel, setting white balance on a gray card, wouldn't it adjust for that?

Best regards
Erik


I just wanted to point you on a discussion on the Openphotography forum from 2007 that was discussing this exact same subject but I just saw that the comparison images are gone now.

You can try yourself, all the Zeiss lenses with the latest T* cotaing do show this, best comaprison maybe the 100mm Zeiss makro and the 100mm EF Canon makro.

The Blue channel (as in RGB....) is denser with more info on the zeiss one the exact same  scene, lighting and processing. This is also the reason why the Zeiss lenses always look cooler and the Canon look yellowish.

About the 3D look, of course this is subjektive, but I´d propose to go over to flickr and take a look at the Zeiss groups, any user of these lenses reports this, but of course as
nobody permanently keeps a complete double set of lenses to test in his bag you will not find much 1:1 examples.
This was also discussed to death half a zillion times now, just type Zeiss 3D look into google and you will find exactly 1610000 results for this search.
I guess I will not start nr. 16100001.

regards
Stefan
« Last Edit: October 14, 2012, 10:38:32 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #143 on: October 15, 2012, 01:13:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Your points about Zeiss lenses are well known in the film industry.  Matched Zeiss PL mount primes really are amazing.  Many in rental are OLD, beat looking things.  Wonderful lenses.

T

I just wanted to point you on a discussion on the Openphotography forum from 2007 that was discussing this exact same subject but I just saw that the comparison images are gone now.

You can try yourself, all the Zeiss lenses with the latest T* cotaing do show this, best comaprison maybe the 100mm Zeiss makro and the 100mm EF Canon makro.

The Blue channel (as in RGB....) is denser with more info on the zeiss one the exact same  scene, lighting and processing. This is also the reason why the Zeiss lenses always look cooler and the Canon look yellowish.

* * *

Logged
Stefan.Steib
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 415



WWW
« Reply #144 on: October 15, 2012, 04:58:29 PM »
ReplyReply

>>>>That thing about the blue channel, setting white balance on a gray card, wouldn't it adjust for that?<<<

Well the greybalance will change the visible image, but the Blue channel does hold more information than a comparable blue channel on a canon lens.

This will affect shadows and Highlights. there is simply more detail visible and more contrast.

regards
Stefan
« Last Edit: October 15, 2012, 05:00:38 PM by Stefan.Steib » Logged

Because Photography is more than Technology and "as we have done this all the time"
www.hartblei.de     www.hcam.de    www.spectralize.com
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7333


WWW
« Reply #145 on: October 15, 2012, 08:58:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

You don't think that this would be related to better correction of the secondary spectrum on the Zeiss lens? I mean better correction of chromatic aberration in the blue part of the spectrum?

If I had Nikon or Canon I would probably just buy a Zeiss 100/2 Macro Planar to find out. I could put it my Sony with a Leitax adapter but loose automatic aperture and AF and 100 macro is not something I use very often.

I guess I try to compare the Zeiss lenses I have with the other lenses I have to begin with. I don't know about how much Zeiss the Sony lenses are, but they have T* markings, Zeiss serial numbers (in addition to Sonys) and came with a QC certificate from Zeiss (but no MTF curves).

I may end up buying a Hartblei? Who knows? The Sony FF I have right now is an Alpha 900, and it lacks live view. I do regard LV necessary for accurate focus with TS lenses. I have the new Alpha 99 on order and I think that camera is more suitable to work with T/S lenses.

Best regards
Erik




>>>>That thing about the blue channel, setting white balance on a gray card, wouldn't it adjust for that?<<<

Well the greybalance will change the visible image, but the Blue channel does hold more information than a comparable blue channel on a canon lens.

This will affect shadows and Highlights. there is simply more detail visible and more contrast.

regards
Stefan
Logged

TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #146 on: October 16, 2012, 09:18:25 AM »
ReplyReply

I've had a mixed experience with D800e color, partly due to some software issues.  I can get what I want but it takes some work in both the raw converter and in PS.  I like LR4 for the D800 in MOST situations.  C1 gets a sharper TIFF, but the profiles can be strange, but then again, C1's color editor is a very powerful and effective tool.  I end up using both.  I'm working on automating the process with new profiles and presets in C1 and LR.  When it comes together, the results are stunning.

It does come down to flexability.  I understand not liking DSLRs, its just a different experience from MF.  I like to work with both, although I favor using my 501cm with TMax over anything else. 

I think that is really the issue of True Focus right there. If the combined movement if photographer and model is more than 10 mm it fails. If you move 5 mm and the model moves 5 mm, the shot is out of focus. If even one of you is mostly still, it is a godsend. This is why the discussion is so polarized -- there is no middle ground. It either works for you or it doesn't. If it does work for you, it can be the difference between being able to use MFD vs. confined to DSLR.

I think people also fail to realize that needs are different for each photographer. I'm in the process of evaluating a new camera system, and it has to be flexible because I'm not entirely sure where I am going as a photographic direction. I was all excited to get a D800 until I spent a little time with one and realized it is the feel and format of DSLRs that I dislike the most. The resolution is great. The color reproduction is less so. Against a new Credo there is no comparison. Against a 25-40 mp Aptus or P-series Phase back of somewhat more comparable cost the decision process isn't that easy. If you need leaf shutter lenses or need lens movements the decision is easy, but if those are only things that you would really like to have some of the time, it gets tough. Same with telephotos. If you need them, the choice is easy. If you use a short tele on occasion, the choice gets harder. Sure the D800 is a relative bargain, that is undeniable, the question is whether it works for you or not. And that is a question that I have had a hard time answering.
Logged
ndevlin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 504



WWW
« Reply #147 on: October 16, 2012, 09:47:18 AM »
ReplyReply

I've had a mixed experience with D800e color, partly due to some software issues.  I can get what I want but it takes some work in both the raw converter and in PS.  I like LR4 for the D800 in MOST situations.  C1 gets a sharper TIFF, but the profiles can be strange, but then again, C1's color editor is a very powerful and effective tool.  I end up using both.  I'm working on automating the process with new profiles and presets in C1 and LR.  When it comes together, the results are stunning.

It does come down to flexability.  I understand not liking DSLRs, its just a different experience from MF.  I like to work with both, although I favor using my 501cm with TMax over anything else.  

+1  Your experience mirrors mine precisely.

- N.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2012, 10:03:53 AM by ndevlin » Logged

Nick Devlin   @onelittlecamera
fcicconi
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 41


WWW
« Reply #148 on: October 16, 2012, 10:12:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Hallo,

It depend of your work and How you work.
I prefer MF becouse I can see better in the finder. soon I make portraits F2,8 T 1/2 sec. and with 35mm it was really hard the focus, with the autofocus too..
Os for this that I choose MF and not 35mm
I tested IQ160 and Nikon D800, the file on the screen is not so different. I didn't printed in large size...
Only in the green of the grass and trees there is a difference.

My best.
Fabrizio
Logged
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2364


« Reply #149 on: October 16, 2012, 12:00:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Today I returned my D800e to the Nikon service point to get the green screen calibrated. This must be the most horrible screen I have ever used. I got so annoyed by its ugliness it started to have an impact on my shooting.

The colors that come out of the D800 are my next main gripe. Very nice for product work but I detest the rendering of skintones. The files also have what I would call 'a deep green undertow' that is very hard to get rid off without altering other things. Compared to the D800 my HB files are a true joy to open. Probably I need to just figure out how to get where I want but I have never had a Nikon that behaved this way colorwise.

I am also not so sure whether I find the new AF module more pleasant to use than the old one that was in the D3s and D700.

All in all, sofar this is the Nikon DSLR I have had the hardest time getting used to, I started with the D1 and have used most Nikon DSLR's.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2012, 12:03:05 PM by Dustbak » Logged
LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 798


« Reply #150 on: October 16, 2012, 12:08:57 PM »
ReplyReply

I actually think out of all the DSLRs I've used, the D3x had the best color rendition.  But perhaps I'll get that out of the D800 if I work a bit harder at it.
Logged

TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #151 on: October 16, 2012, 12:52:00 PM »
ReplyReply

+1  Your experience mirrrs mine precisely.

- N.

Glad I'm not alone!  I have my Canon and Leaf workflows down to a science, everything is what I expect from those cameras.  it just throws me off having to work this stuff, and I really think it comes down to the profiles. 
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7333


WWW
« Reply #152 on: October 16, 2012, 01:12:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

What do you mean by green screen?

Could you post a sample? It seems that at least one poster had badly mixed up his profiles in C1, something similar happened to you?

The raw files I saw from Nikon D800/D800E were very good in color. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=69391.msg549425#msg549425

Best regards
Erik

Today I returned my D800e to the Nikon service point to get the green screen calibrated. This must be the most horrible screen I have ever used. I got so annoyed by its ugliness it started to have an impact on my shooting.

The colors that come out of the D800 are my next main gripe. Very nice for product work but I detest the rendering of skintones. The files also have what I would call 'a deep green undertow' that is very hard to get rid off without altering other things. Compared to the D800 my HB files are a true joy to open. Probably I need to just figure out how to get where I want but I have never had a Nikon that behaved this way colorwise.

I am also not so sure whether I find the new AF module more pleasant to use than the old one that was in the D3s and D700.

All in all, sofar this is the Nikon DSLR I have had the hardest time getting used to, I started with the D1 and have used most Nikon DSLR's.
Logged

TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #153 on: October 16, 2012, 01:16:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Erik, he is talking about an issue where the screen, as opposed to the file, shows a green cast.  My D800e has this, but less so than others.  The files are unafected.

My profile problem was out of control.  I dumped all preferences and restarted the machine and things returned to normal.

Hi,

What do you mean by green screen?

Could you post a sample? It seems that at least one poster had badly mixed up his profiles in C1, something similar happened to you?

The raw files I saw from Nikon D800/D800E were very good in color. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=69391.msg549425#msg549425

Best regards
Erik

Logged
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2364


« Reply #154 on: October 16, 2012, 01:21:14 PM »
ReplyReply

No I cannot (largely because the body is already gone with UPS), the screen is way too green. This seems to be a pretty widespread issue. Apparently Nikon can calibrate it and fix that. At least one of my issues will be levied.

About the files, I am sure eventually I will get out of it what I like but I dislike opening the files for the first time and the amount of effort it takes sofar to get near I want is more than I would have preferred.

I like working with gelled flash and this is typically where the D800 behaves very differently than my D700 or the H4D. Profiling is kind of useless when going for pleasant (vs accurate). I probably need to look for different gels in this case.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2012, 01:31:50 PM by Dustbak » Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7333


WWW
« Reply #155 on: October 16, 2012, 01:27:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for explanation. Must be tired, but I didn't get it!

Best regards
Erik

Erik, he is talking about an issue where the screen, as opposed to the file, shows a green cast.  My D800e has this, but less so than others.  The files are unafected.

My profile problem was out of control.  I dumped all preferences and restarted the machine and things returned to normal.

Logged

TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #156 on: October 16, 2012, 02:29:26 PM »
ReplyReply

I can live with it, for now.  It isn't that bad and is more visible in daylight.  Otherwise no problems, other than the color issues.  The problems I am having are not hardware related.  I can get amazing colors from it, its just work that I haven't had to do in years.  I don't like having to use LR and C1, depending on the file.  The D800e is very IR sensative.  Not as bad as the M8, but with some lenses blacks go purple.

And Moire.  I've seen it.  Less than with my Aptus 75s, 5d2 and 5d3, but in places I don't expect.  By places I don't expect, I mean when shooting outside, on the street.  I've only seen moire in the studio, and on the street only with the M8.  But I found moire in a guy's sweatsuit and hat.  I couldn't see the pattern in the clothes from 20 feet, but the D800e resolved it TOO well.  Fixed easily in C1, by the way.

No I cannot (largely because the body is already gone with UPS), the screen is way too green. This seems to be a pretty widespread issue. Apparently Nikon can calibrate it and fix that. At least one of my issues will be levied.

About the files, I am sure eventually I will get out of it what I like but I dislike opening the files for the first time and the amount of effort it takes sofar to get near I want is more than I would have preferred.

I like working with gelled flash and this is typically where the D800 behaves very differently than my D700 or the H4D. Profiling is kind of useless when going for pleasant (vs accurate). I probably need to look for different gels in that case.
Logged
nik
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 202


WWW
« Reply #157 on: October 16, 2012, 05:23:56 PM »
ReplyReply

You can get this fixed!!? Awesome, it's going in as soon as I'm back home. The green cast on the LCD monitor is awful.

Today I returned my D800e to the Nikon service point to get the green screen calibrated.
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7333


WWW
« Reply #158 on: October 16, 2012, 10:41:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

The IR issue is great surprise, good to know.

Regarding moiré, I guess we have been warned. The D800 has OLP filtering while the D800E has some engineering work done to remove the effect of the OLP filter. But rejoice, my understanding is that moiré actually means that your lens outresolves the sensor. So when you see moiré you know having exact focus and good microcontrast at pixel level. So the moiré actually shows that your technique is good!

Best regards
Erik

I can live with it, for now.  It isn't that bad and is more visible in daylight.  Otherwise no problems, other than the color issues.  The problems I am having are not hardware related.  I can get amazing colors from it, its just work that I haven't had to do in years.  I don't like having to use LR and C1, depending on the file.  The D800e is very IR sensative.  Not as bad as the M8, but with some lenses blacks go purple.

And Moire.  I've seen it.  Less than with my Aptus 75s, 5d2 and 5d3, but in places I don't expect.  By places I don't expect, I mean when shooting outside, on the street.  I've only seen moire in the studio, and on the street only with the M8.  But I found moire in a guy's sweatsuit and hat.  I couldn't see the pattern in the clothes from 20 feet, but the D800e resolved it TOO well.  Fixed easily in C1, by the way.

« Last Edit: October 16, 2012, 10:58:13 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7333


WWW
« Reply #159 on: October 16, 2012, 11:56:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

You could try my sharpening settings, enclosed below. This goes into deconvolution. Radius should match PSF of lens+sensor so you would increase if you stop down. My guess is that 1.5 (or so) works best for D800E at f/16.

BTW. How do you scan T-MAX 100? Trying to get some life in my Pentax 67 but have never been happy with my scans since I shoot DSLRs.

Best regards
Erik

C1 gets a sharper TIFF, but the profiles can be strange, but then again, C1's color editor is a very powerful and effective tool. 

Logged

Pages: « 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad