Confirmed: No practical advantage to removing D7100 AA filter

Started Apr 25, 2013 | Discussions
Jared Huntr
Senior MemberPosts: 1,498Gear list
Like?
Confirmed: No practical advantage to removing D7100 AA filter
Apr 25, 2013

Not that it is surprising, but it seems the cheerleading squad from the Cameralabs D7100 review mega-thread here:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51316314

were wrong about how the lack of an AA filter makes a useful difference.

According to dpr:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d7100/18

"In short, even if you were willing to put the best glass available on the D7100 and shoot at a wide aperture, you're not likely, even with a lot of effort, to leverage visible benefits of the OLPF removal. While this may be a bit of a disappointment for some, the very good news is that to date we've seen no practical downside to the filter's removal for still photography. It is essentially neutral with regard to image quality."

Those cheerleaders can now be added to my 'less credible' folder for future reference.

 Jared Huntr's gear list:Jared Huntr's gear list
Ricoh GR
Nikon D7100
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Reilly Diefenbach
Senior MemberPosts: 8,144Gear list
Like?
The only thing around here less credible
In reply to Jared Huntr, Apr 25, 2013

is DPR's reviewing staff who apparently won't look at their own comparison widget which clearly shows a difference between the D5200 and the D7100.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
fotolopithecus
Senior MemberPosts: 1,699Gear list
Like?
Re: The only thing around here less credible
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Apr 25, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

is DPR's reviewing staff who apparently won't look at their own comparison widget which clearly shows a difference between the D5200 and the D7100.

Have the D5200 images been sharpened to remove the effects of the AA filter? I too see a slight difference in sharpness, but not detail. If sharpened I doubt any difference will be visible.

 fotolopithecus's gear list:fotolopithecus's gear list
Nikon D610 Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,379
Like?
They agree
In reply to Jared Huntr, Apr 25, 2013

Jared Huntr wrote:

Not that it is surprising, but it seems the cheerleading squad from the Cameralabs D7100 review mega-thread here:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51316314

were wrong about how the lack of an AA filter makes a useful difference.

According to dpr:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d7100/18

"In short, even if you were willing to put the best glass available on the D7100 and shoot at a wide aperture, you're not likely, even with a lot of effort, to leverage visible benefits of the OLPF removal. While this may be a bit of a disappointment for some, the very good news is that to date we've seen no practical downside to the filter's removal for still photography. It is essentially neutral with regard to image quality."

Nikon agrees and it's why the filter was left out of the process.

Those cheerleaders can now be added to my 'less credible' folder for future reference.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jared Huntr
Senior MemberPosts: 1,498Gear list
Like?
Re: The only thing around here less credible
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Apr 25, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

is DPR's reviewing staff who apparently won't look at their own comparison widget which clearly shows a difference between the D5200 and the D7100.

DPR never said there wasn't a difference.

"Our conclusion after viewing dozens of comparisons was that outside the controlled environment of our studio, even extremely minor shifts in focus or (potentially) sensor alignment could trump the absence of an OLPF in accounting for any visible differences between the D7100 and D5200."

The take-away is that there is no PRACTICAL advantage. I'm not sure why that concept is so difficult to grasp.

And before anyone attempts to extrapolate these results into a general statement that removing AA filters make no difference, DON'T. We are only referring to the D7100.

 Jared Huntr's gear list:Jared Huntr's gear list
Ricoh GR
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Reilly Diefenbach
Senior MemberPosts: 8,144Gear list
Like?
Re: The only thing around here less credible
In reply to fotolopithecus, Apr 25, 2013

Sharpening produces artifacts.  Detail and microcontrast left out on the intake is not able to be reconstituted and can't show as well as detail brought in unfiltered.  Hasselblad, Leica, Nikon, Pentax, Fuji and Phase One all agree.  Some experts disagree from a lofty perch untroubled by experience or ownership of any of the above or indeed of any experimentation whatsoever.

My suggestion: Download the two raws from the DPR comparison and see for yourselves instead of endlessly theorizing.  It will only take two passés through CNX2 or ACR to erase all doubt.

Somebody show me a pic from the D5200 which is this sharp.  Please.  Prove me wrong with a full size jpg.  These raws, taken under identical conditions with the same lens are available at the Imaging Resource website.  Jpg shooters need not apply.  Take your best shot:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/51747496@N08/8593053986/sizes/o/in/set-72157633040562803/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Reilly Diefenbach
Senior MemberPosts: 8,144Gear list
Like?
Re: They agree
In reply to Mako2011, Apr 26, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

Jared Huntr wrote:

Not that it is surprising, but it seems the cheerleading squad from the Cameralabs D7100 review mega-thread here:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51316314

were wrong about how the lack of an AA filter makes a useful difference.

According to dpr:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d7100/18

"In short, even if you were willing to put the best glass available on the D7100 and shoot at a wide aperture, you're not likely, even with a lot of effort, to leverage visible benefits of the OLPF removal. While this may be a bit of a disappointment for some, the very good news is that to date we've seen no practical downside to the filter's removal for still photography. It is essentially neutral with regard to image quality."

Nikon agrees and it's why the filter was left out of the process.

No, I'm sorry, Nikon does not agree with that premise.  They left the filter out because they wanted to blow every other manufacturer out of the water for detail and microcontrast, just as they did with the D800e, and that they have done without any doubt.  Canon executives must be grinding their teeth to the gums in helpless envy by now.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,379
Like?
Re: The only thing around here less credible
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Apr 26, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Sharpening produces artifacts.  Detail and microcontrast left out on the intake is not able to be reconstituted and can't show as well as detail brought in unfiltered.  Hasselblad, Leica, Nikon, Pentax, Fuji and Phase One all agree.  Some experts disagree from a lofty perch untroubled by experience or ownership of any of the above or indeed of any experimentation whatsoever.

My suggestion: Download the two raws from the DPR comparison and see for yourselves instead of endlessly theorizing.  It will only take two passés through CNX2 or ACR to erase all doubt.

Somebody show me a pic from the D5200 which is this sharp.  Please.  Prove me wrong with a full size jpg.  These raws, taken under identical conditions with the same lens are available at the Imaging Resource website.  Jpg shooters need not apply.  Take your best shot:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/51747496@N08/8593053986/sizes/o/in/set-72157633040562803/

In terms of practical difference...is there any? You have to print really really big and control the lighting well to see it. In a side by side with good PP, it's not easy to see in practical terms. Things are just too close at this point.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,379
Like?
Wishful
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Apr 26, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Jared Huntr wrote:

Not that it is surprising, but it seems the cheerleading squad from the Cameralabs D7100 review mega-thread here:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51316314

were wrong about how the lack of an AA filter makes a useful difference.

According to dpr:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d7100/18

"In short, even if you were willing to put the best glass available on the D7100 and shoot at a wide aperture, you're not likely, even with a lot of effort, to leverage visible benefits of the OLPF removal. While this may be a bit of a disappointment for some, the very good news is that to date we've seen no practical downside to the filter's removal for still photography. It is essentially neutral with regard to image quality."

Nikon agrees and it's why the filter was left out of the process.

No, I'm sorry, Nikon does not agree with that premise.

Yes they they do. They told me so.

They left the filter out because they wanted to blow every other manufacturer out of the water for detail and microcontrast, just as they did with the D800e, and that they have done without any doubt.

Wishful thinking. Nikon is a manufacturing company first, not a bunch of photographers passionate about photography.

Canon executives must be grinding their teeth to the gums in helpless envy by now.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Reilly Diefenbach
Senior MemberPosts: 8,144Gear list
Like?
Still waiting
In reply to Mako2011, Apr 26, 2013

For anyone to show me a pic from a D5200 or a D7000 taken under the same conditions that's as sharp.  Speculation is too cheap to meter.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jared Huntr
Senior MemberPosts: 1,498Gear list
Like?
Re: They agree
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Apr 26, 2013
 

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Jared Huntr wrote:

Not that it is surprising, but it seems the cheerleading squad from the Cameralabs D7100 review mega-thread here:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51316314

were wrong about how the lack of an AA filter makes a useful difference.

According to dpr:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d7100/18

"In short, even if you were willing to put the best glass available on the D7100 and shoot at a wide aperture, you're not likely, even with a lot of effort, to leverage visible benefits of the OLPF removal. While this may be a bit of a disappointment for some, the very good news is that to date we've seen no practical downside to the filter's removal for still photography. It is essentially neutral with regard to image quality."

Nikon agrees and it's why the filter was left out of the process.

No, I'm sorry, Nikon does not agree with that premise.  They left the filter out because they wanted to blow every other manufacturer out of the water for detail and microcontrast, just as they did with the D800e, and that they have done without any doubt.  Canon executives must be grinding their teeth to the gums in helpless envy by now.

I think you are misled.

read Nikon's press release:

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/About-Nikon/Press-Room/Press-Release/hcxs022y/Superior-Clarity-and-Nimble-Precision%3A-The-DX-Format-Nikon-D7100-Embraces-The-Advanced-Enthusiast-With-Intuitive-Engineering.html

"because of the high resolution and advanced technologies, the optical low pass filter (OLPF) is no longer used".
Note that they are not saying that the filter was removed to increase resolution. It was removed because it was not needed. Do you honestly think Nikon marketing would pass up this opportunity to spin the advantages of AA removal if it were true?

 Jared Huntr's gear list:Jared Huntr's gear list
Ricoh GR
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,379
Like?
We too
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Apr 26, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

For anyone to show me a pic from a D5200 or a D7000 taken under the same conditions that's as sharp.  Speculation is too cheap to meter.

Never said that the D5200 would be as sharp...they are saying, that there is no practical difference in terms of practical photography. We too are waiting for you to show us an example where there in indeed a "practical" difference. We have time...good luck

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,379
Like?
Exactly
In reply to Jared Huntr, Apr 26, 2013

Jared Huntr wrote:

 It was removed because it was not needed.

That is exactly how they phrased it when I asked the question in person.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Reilly Diefenbach
Senior MemberPosts: 8,144Gear list
Like?
Re: Wishful
In reply to Mako2011, Apr 26, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Jared Huntr wrote:

Not that it is surprising, but it seems the cheerleading squad from the Cameralabs D7100 review mega-thread here:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51316314

were wrong about how the lack of an AA filter makes a useful difference.

According to dpr:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d7100/18

"In short, even if you were willing to put the best glass available on the D7100 and shoot at a wide aperture, you're not likely, even with a lot of effort, to leverage visible benefits of the OLPF removal. While this may be a bit of a disappointment for some, the very good news is that to date we've seen no practical downside to the filter's removal for still photography. It is essentially neutral with regard to image quality."

Nikon agrees and it's why the filter was left out of the process.

No, I'm sorry, Nikon does not agree with that premise.

Yes they they do. They told me so.

They left the filter out because they wanted to blow every other manufacturer out of the water for detail and microcontrast, just as they did with the D800e, and that they have done without any doubt.

Wishful thinking. Nikon is a manufacturing company first, not a bunch of photographers passionate about photography.

Canon executives must be grinding their teeth to the gums in helpless envy by now
M

Some guy at CES told you they just did it for no particular advantage?  That doesn't sound right.  The Nikon lens list for the D800e was not just hooey, they were trying to get people to use the right optics to take full advantage of the increased resolution.   DXO even measured the "e" at a perceived sharpness score 25% better than the D800 before all hell broke loose and they had to take it down.  Sounded about right to me.  Same deal with the D7100.  The 18-105Vr will show better with the D7100 than it ever did with the D7000 or the D5200, but top quality lenses put it in a different orbit altogether.  So DPR got that half right.

I know competitiveness when I see it, and it's written all over all the mid to upper Nikon product.  Sony, too, to the best of their ability.  Nikon just has the best engineers for now, and it shows they are in it to win.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JimPearce
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,279Gear list
Like?
Not likely to get an answer here...
In reply to Mako2011, Apr 26, 2013

My thought is that yes, there could be a subtle difference in my large prints with the 300 f2.8 VR and 500 f4 AF-S. But there will never be any direct comparison, let alone any way to compare here. And why is the question important? It isn't like anyone using these lenses is likely to buy a D5200 and print large.

-- hide signature --

Jim

 JimPearce's gear list:JimPearce's gear list
Nikon D7100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Reilly Diefenbach
Senior MemberPosts: 8,144Gear list
Like?
Re: We too
In reply to Mako2011, Apr 26, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

For anyone to show me a pic from a D5200 or a D7000 taken under the same conditions that's as sharp.  Speculation is too cheap to meter.

Never said that the D5200 would be as sharp...they are saying, that there is no practical difference in terms of practical photography. We too are waiting for you to show us an example where there in indeed a "practical" difference. We have time...good luck

It's not a matter of luck at all.  I've already done it, as has Renato, but it seems not to have been noticed.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Reilly Diefenbach
Senior MemberPosts: 8,144Gear list
Like?
Re: Exactly
In reply to Mako2011, Apr 26, 2013

I'm having trouble with the completeness of that statement from the Nikon person, whoever he or she was.    There's more.  Fuji and Pentax have removed the AA filter for the same reason, a better picture, both to universal acclaim, and not because it wasn't needed.  None of the "everything the same" stuff that has seemed to attach to the D7100, to the comfort of some.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
fotolopithecus
Senior MemberPosts: 1,699Gear list
Like?
Re: Exactly
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Apr 26, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

I'm having trouble with the completeness of that statement from the Nikon person, whoever he or she was.    There's more.  Fuji and Pentax have removed the AA filter for the same reason, a better picture, both to universal acclaim, and not because it wasn't needed.  None of the "everything the same" stuff that has seemed to attach to the D7100, to the comfort of some.

DP is not the only testing site that said it made no difference Reilly.

 fotolopithecus's gear list:fotolopithecus's gear list
Nikon D610 Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,379
Like?
not necessarily
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Apr 26, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

For anyone to show me a pic from a D5200 or a D7000 taken under the same conditions that's as sharp.  Speculation is too cheap to meter.

Never said that the D5200 would be as sharp...they are saying, that there is no practical difference in terms of practical photography. We too are waiting for you to show us an example where there in indeed a "practical" difference. We have time...good luck

It's not a matter of luck at all.  I've already done it, as has Renato, but it seems not to have been noticed.

Yes a difference, but not necessarily a practical one D5200 to D7100

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
howielenny
Contributing MemberPosts: 678Gear list
Like?
Does it really matter?
In reply to Jared Huntr, Apr 26, 2013

I've come from the d7000 to the d7100. Personally from my own perspective my images are slightly sharper straight out of camera with the d7100 compared to my old d7000. If that's down to the AA filter or not I don't really care to be honest  All I know is I'm getting a little better quality images with my D7100 and lens setup than I was with my D7000. I'm also finding that I'm getting slightly better exposure with my d7100.
Does that mean the d7000 is a bad camera of course it doesn't. Does it mean I'm enjoying my d7100 more than my d7000, of course it does
Instead of worrying about what if's and but's maybe people should just decide if they want the D7100 or not.
Simples

 howielenny's gear list:howielenny's gear list
Nikon D7100 Fujifilm X-M1 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM Tamron SP AF 60mm F/2 Di II LD IF Macro +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads