Confirmed: No practical advantage to removing D7100 AA filter

Started Apr 25, 2013 | Discussions
Reilly Diefenbach
Senior MemberPosts: 8,275Gear list
Like?
Re: Points well
In reply to Mako2011, Apr 27, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Boy, they're out today.  Everyone who can't get a D7100 is out for scalps and running loose.

Is it really beyond the realm of possibility that the lack of a blur filter would enable a sharper picture?

Nope, and no one said it wouldn't...just in the case of the D7100, it made no practical difference.

To you, perhaps.  But not to anyone wanting the best possible resolution from the DX format.  Which may indeed be a secondary consideration, as noted by several above.

I can keep going with this until we hit 150, no problem.

Gone on with what? The review's conclusions have already been validated in full.

Nonsense.  Validated only to those who wish to believe that everything's the same, nothing to see here, move along.  I can see the difference, others can't.  No surprise there!

No one said they could not see a difference...only that the difference is of no practical relevance to photography in general per the context of the review.

"Photography in general."  Please.  Taking a picture of a cat would show better with the D7100, no question.  Better fur detail and microcontrast.

Your examples confirm that as well.

How is a fuzzier picture from the D5200 "confirm that as well?"  Curious.

Because the mis-focus seems to have a bigger over all effect than the presence of a AA filter. That points well to the reviews conclusions.

Mr Hamments says the smudges on the bottles are in focus, I say it's in focus, you say it isn't.  Let's see now...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jared Huntr
Senior MemberPosts: 1,518Gear list
Like?
Re: the problem is....
In reply to kewlguy, Apr 27, 2013

kewlguy wrote:

...those who claim there is not much difference between D5200 and D7100 never really use AA-less cameras, I'm afraid. Use them in the field, don't just download the samples. Shoot in varying lights and ISOs. See if there's too small difference to talk about.

I've used M9 and D800e (plus a Canon 600D astro-mod w/o OLPF) and I would never go back! It's like a thin mist is removed from the photo Clarity, for sure, is improved due to better micro contrast.

I'm sure some Pentax users could confirm that they like the output from K5 IIs better than the K5 II

I guess you are late to the party ..this was already addressed...

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51358667

 Jared Huntr's gear list:Jared Huntr's gear list
Ricoh GR
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,774
Like?
Data
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Apr 27, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:Mr Hamments says the smudges on the bottles are in focus, I say it's in focus, you say it isn't.  Let's see now...

No, he said the image is front focused. You point to the wiz wheel and say it is not and then use that area to validate your conclusions. Since it's not in focus, some of your conclusions are based on faulty data.

-- 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
Daisy AU
Senior MemberPosts: 1,561Gear list
Like?
Re: Data
In reply to Mako2011, Apr 27, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:Mr Hamments says the smudges on the bottles are in focus, I say it's in focus, you say it isn't.  Let's see now...

No, he said the image is front focused. You point to the wiz wheel and say it is not and then use that area to validate your conclusions. Since it's not in focus, some of your conclusions are based on faulty data.

-- 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)

With all due respect to both of you, the point is there is a difference in the test shots of the D7100 and D5200, which appears to be because of the removal of the low pass filter.  The statement that this difference is of no use in "practical" photography is relative to what each person expects of their photography.  Why keep on arguing about this?

-- hide signature --

Thanks,
Daisy AU - Brisbane

 Daisy AU's gear list:Daisy AU's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,774
Like?
augment not
In reply to Daisy AU, Apr 27, 2013

Daisy AU wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:Mr Hamments says the smudges on the bottles are in focus, I say it's in focus, you say it isn't.  Let's see now...

No, he said the image is front focused. You point to the wiz wheel and say it is not and then use that area to validate your conclusions. Since it's not in focus, some of your conclusions are based on faulty data.

-- 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)

With all due respect to both of you, the point is there is a difference in the test shots of the D7100 and D5200, which appears to be because of the removal of the low pass filter.

Yes, there are differences...but it can not all be contributed to the presence or absence of the low pass filter.

The statement that this difference is of no use in "practical" photography is relative to what each person expects of their photography.  Why keep on arguing about this?\

Not an augment at at. A general discussion that I have learned from while researching nuances of the topic.

-- 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
Daisy AU
Senior MemberPosts: 1,561Gear list
Like?
Re: Confirmed: No practical advantage to removing D7100 AA filter
In reply to marike6, Apr 27, 2013

marike6 wrote:

If DPR cannot see the difference between the D5200 and D7100 in terms of sharpness, then they are not looking closely enough.  And all this talk about "real world" is utter nonsense.  If the D5200 and D7100 show a difference in the RAW Comparison, then they will show a difference in general shooting out in the field if both cameras are shot with the same technique, the same lenses and off the same tripod.

If DPR is trying to say that "with handheld snapshots it's hard to see a difference", that totally different than asserting that there is "no difference at all".

And because they say "there is no practical advantage", it's clear that they mean that for snapshots in the park, they can't tell the difference.  But it is kind of lame for a testing site to keep using silly caveats like "the real world". What real world is that?  Either there is a difference or there isn't.  Tests are about empirical data, not general impressions based on what they think real world usage of this camera will be.

But just like D800E out-resolves the D800, the D7100 out-resolves the D5200.  And it has zero to do with "best lenses" or any other made up caveat that DPR is trying to sell it's readers.  The D800E out-resolves the D800 because it doesn't have an OLPF to blur detail to control moire and the same is true for the D7100 and D5200.

Well said!

-- hide signature --

Thanks,
Daisy AU - Brisbane

 Daisy AU's gear list:Daisy AU's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Daisy AU
Senior MemberPosts: 1,561Gear list
Like?
Re: Confirmed: No practical advantage to removing D7100 AA filter
In reply to marike6, Apr 27, 2013

marike6 wrote:

Shunda77 wrote:

marike6 wrote:

Shunda77 wrote:

You need to look at the data and try and understand why results may be different between a full frame sensor and an APS-C sensor.

I don't "need" to do anything, I understand quite well about pixel densities, and so forth.

It's just funny how measurebaters want to spend all day talking about brick wall tests, minor differences in high ISO, diffraction, banding, etc.  Then when the RAW Studio Test scene answers a very specific question like the AA-filter question (but they don't like the answer), they want to say "yes but in the real world".

Are you kidding? I should trust you and the cheerleaders here over an established, professional review site like DPR?

I'm not asking your to trust me or anyone else.  I couldn't care less.  I'm just stating my opinion, just like you.

But when you are a "professional review site" as you say, you'd expect DPR not to get the D7100's high ISO performance wrong, where they placed the D7100 near the bottom for high ISO performance.  That doesn't inspire much confidence.    If the D7100 high ISO ability is "near the bottom of APS-C sensor cameras" as DPR claims in the review, then so is the D7000, D5200, and D5100 high ISO performance "near the bottom" for APS-C sensor cameras.

Fortunately we have sites like DxOMark who know how to properly test cameras for low-light/high ISO performance.

Let's see what else has DPR, your so-called "professional review site" claimed over the past year?  Here's a good one: "for the majority of users to get better IQ than the Olympus OMD you need to go to FF" (From DPR OMD review - paraphrasing is mine).

If you want to read the above statement about the OMD as the truth because DPR said it, that's fine.  I prefer to analyse IQ performance form cameras that I own, and to learn from other professional testing sites.  I've used an E-PL5 and a D7000 quite a lot, and I can tell you for sure that the E-PL5/OMD doesn't have as good IQ as the D7000.  Not does it have as good IQ as the K-5, D5100, D5200, X-Pro1, X100, NEX-7, et al. But DPR would have people believe that it does as they are using a confusing wording like "for the majority of users".  It the same kind of caveat as "real-world" in their D7100 AA-filter discussion.  For the "majority of users" the to get better IQ than the OMD, you need to go to FF is similar to "The lack of OLPF doesn't make a difference in real-world, practical terms".   Either the OMD IQ is as good as the best of APS-C or it is not.  "For the majority of users" has nothing to do with it.  Either the lack of OLPF in the D7100 makes a difference or it doesn't.  "Real world usage" is an assumption with a huge number of variables and differing interpretations for it to be useful.  Like the phrase "for the majority of users", the phrase "real-world usage" is inextricably tied to DPR's bias.  And as such, it's not useful.  No two photographers shoot the exact same subject, with the exact same technique.  So how does DPR know what "real-world usage" is?  They are making too many assumptions about what "real-world shooting is" for such a nebulous term to be useful for potential D7100 customers.

The evidence is overwhelming, yet this nonsense persists, it is quite remarkable.


For more discerning users there is a difference, as others above have pointed out.

No there isn't, it is an imaginary advantage that is misleading people and not helping those who genuinely want to know what this camera is like.

And talking about "more discerning users" is utterly ridiculous in that a discerning user wouldn't bother with imaginary advantages.

As it stands there are other outstanding features of this camera that makes this discussion largely irrelevant, but we shouldn't pretend it is more than what it is.

DPR gave the damned thing a gold award and people are still complaining it isn't good enough. Let the D7100's real merits stand, not the imaginary advantages pushed by fanboys.

Again, if you can see that D7100 images are sharper than D5200 images in the RAW Studio Test at f8 (a diffraction limited aperture), you can be sure that D7100 images are sharper than the D5200 images at f4. Amadu Diallo even says in the Review comments that "yes if you shoot at f3.5 on a 50 1.4, you will see a difference".  Because there is not "practical" advantage to you or DPR doesn't mean there is not one to me or anyone else.  You cannot make assumptions about users of such a camera as if they are amateurs or beginners shopping for a D3100 and kit lens. This is a high end / enthusiast DSLR, so it's not a stretch to thin such users might have a set of great Nikkors.

If the added acutance has "no practical advantage" for you, that's another issue.   I'm not here to convince anybody, just stating my view like anyone else.  I don't even shoot APS-C, nor am I interested in whether or not people like or hate the D7100. People are going to use what they can afford, or what gives them the best possible images.

I just find the sensational headline "Confirmed" about as silly as it get's in there forums.  Nothing is confirmed other than the fact that DPR has it's own biases, it's own conclusions.  And like their flat out wrong opinion that "for the majority of users to get better IQ than the OMD you need to go to FF", their absurd conclusion that the lack of OLPF in the D7100 is dependent on how people shoot in some arbitrary "real world usage" so that means that "essentially there is no difference".

Agree. Take this from a beginner/amateur/hobbiest:  Even I can see the difference!  Would I upgrade from my D7000?  No.  Would I buy the D7100 over the D7000 if I was purchasing today instead of 12 months ago?  Yes. Mainly because of the 24MP and not because of the removal of the low pass filter.  The images coming out of the D7100 are better than the D7000, but not enough to now ditch my D7000.  Will wait for a D8000  

-- hide signature --

Thanks,
Daisy AU - Brisbane

 Daisy AU's gear list:Daisy AU's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Stacey_K
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,408Gear list
Like?
Re: Astonishing but the same everywhere else too
In reply to Shunda77, Apr 27, 2013

Shunda77 wrote:


There seems to be such a need for the new equipment to be more than it really is, almost as if the very wellbeing of certain individuals hinges on it.

I wonder if this is true for most consumer goods, I guess it probably is when it comes down to it.

It is. Go look at the computer hardware forums or really any forum that involved any sort of tech discussion. It's no different.

I play some online video games (wow) and a year or so ago wanted a better video card. At my monitors resolution do I now need the newer card capable of more than my current 90 frames per second (that I'd never see..)? Should I rush out and replace my one year old card because they have a new one that will do faster frame rates at a resolution I never use? Nope, have no need or interest in one right now.

Some people just MUST have the latest/greatest and anyone who doesn't see the need to upgrade each cycle is "clueless" etc. Sound familiar?

-- hide signature --

Stacey

 Stacey_K's gear list:Stacey_K's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Nikon D7000 Nikon D800 Nikon AF Nikkor 105mm f/2D DC +14 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
kewlguy
Senior MemberPosts: 1,545Gear list
Like?
Re: the problem is....
In reply to Jared Huntr, Apr 27, 2013

There is a lens issue - what I think interesting is that when I use DPR's RAW comparison, I can't help to notice that NEX-7 (at low iso) looks sharper and has better micro contrast than D7100. NEX-7 still has AA filter and it's 24MP as well. It could be Sony vs Toshiba sensor, somehow? Or is it the lens? It has been an interesting discussion, nevertheless.

 kewlguy's gear list:kewlguy's gear list
Canon EOS 600D Nikon 1 J1 Canon EOS 6D Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm X-T1 +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
kewlguy
Senior MemberPosts: 1,545Gear list
Like?
Re: Worst titled post ever
In reply to blue_cheese, Apr 27, 2013

By omitting OLPF doesn't mean it's a bare sensor. Nikon still has to put optical IR filters on the sensor that will also keep the focusing distance the same as the rest of the cameras.

 kewlguy's gear list:kewlguy's gear list
Canon EOS 600D Nikon 1 J1 Canon EOS 6D Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm X-T1 +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JimPearce
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,387Gear list
Like?
Addressed how?
In reply to Jared Huntr, Apr 27, 2013

What makes the D7100 different from the others - unless you're a D7000 owner clinging to illusions?

-- hide signature --

Jim

 JimPearce's gear list:JimPearce's gear list
Nikon D7100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
coudet
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,814
Like?
Re: Agreed
In reply to Mako2011, Apr 27, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Is it really beyond the realm of possibility that the lack of a blur filter would enable a sharper picture?

Nope, and no one said it wouldn't...just in the case of the D7100, it made no practical difference.

It does make some difference. As Reilly says, it gives sharper / crisper (not to be confused with more resolution) picture which, of course, disappears completely after applying some sharpening to D5200. Dpreview says so, and with correct words being used: D7100 delivers a more crisp file.

But, it does not really give more resolution which is the most important thing. For more resolution, I say again, you need more megapixels. Just compare D800 with both D7100 and D5200, it spanks both equally.

Where dpreview makes a mistake is saying that it's neutral to image quality. It's not. What they should say at the conclusion is that it does give a crisper picture than D5200, and that it does show significantly more artifacts than D5200 (look at the coin).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
coudet
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,814
Like?
Re: the problem is....
In reply to kewlguy, Apr 27, 2013

kewlguy wrote:

There is a lens issue - what I think interesting is that when I use DPR's RAW comparison, I can't help to notice that NEX-7 (at low iso) looks sharper and has better micro contrast than D7100. NEX-7 still has AA filter and it's 24MP as well.

Sony NEX cameras have weak AA filters, I have been pointing this out since it came out. D5200 also. They're all 24mp cameras, they all resolve pretty much the same.
NEX-7 and D5200 are about the same here, D7100 a bit worse: LINK.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jared Huntr
Senior MemberPosts: 1,518Gear list
Like?
Re: Addressed how?
In reply to JimPearce, Apr 27, 2013

JimPearce wrote:

What makes the D7100 different from the others - unless you're a D7000 owner clinging to illusions?

What was already addressed was the mistaken notion of being able to achieve significant improvement in IQ in all cases when the AA filter is removed.

Some cameras have a stronger AA filter to begin with so removing it has a more significant impact on IQ. Nikon on the other hand has used a very weak AA filter on the D5200 which lessens the difference between with and without the AA filter. That is one reason why the D7100 is different from the others.

The relationship between pixel density and the AA filter also plays a part in the ultimate IQ.  If you are going to make comparisons, at least keep one factor constant and don't compare two cameras with different sensor pixel densities and make sweeping generalizations about the effect of the AA filter.

 Jared Huntr's gear list:Jared Huntr's gear list
Ricoh GR
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,774
Like?
do not know
In reply to coudet, Apr 27, 2013

coudet wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Is it really beyond the realm of possibility that the lack of a blur filter would enable a sharper picture?

Nope, and no one said it wouldn't...just in the case of the D7100, it made no practical difference.

It does make some difference.

We really do not know that as we have no example of a D7100 with an AA filter. (D5200 uses a different sensor/ADC). Nikon says it made no difference and why it was left our of the design of the D7100.

But, it does not really give more resolution which is the most important thing. For more resolution, I say again, you need more megapixels. Just compare D800 with both D7100 and D5200, it spanks both equally.

Where dpreview makes a mistake is saying that it's neutral to image quality. It's not. What they should say at the conclusion is that it does give a crisper picture than D5200, and that it does show significantly more artifacts than D5200 (look at the coin).

Again, different sensor...can't contribute the difference you see to just a lack of an AA filter.

-- 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
kewlguy
Senior MemberPosts: 1,545Gear list
Like?
Re: the problem is....
In reply to coudet, Apr 27, 2013

I checked your link - put on your glasses....

NEX-7 has the best micro contrast despite still using AA filter. D5200 is considerably softer than NEX-7 and D7100. Check other parts such as coins on the Martini, the bill (red face), blue robot, the globe etc..

My take is that the lenses are the determining factor here. Still, D7100 produces better clarity over D5200.

 kewlguy's gear list:kewlguy's gear list
Canon EOS 600D Nikon 1 J1 Canon EOS 6D Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm X-T1 +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Shunda77
Senior MemberPosts: 1,661Gear list
Like?
Re: The only thing around here less credible
In reply to Whalligeo, Apr 27, 2013

Whalligeo wrote:

I would be absolutely delighted. However as you are too lazy to figure it out yourself, you will have to agree my fee in advice. Also, the evidence is actually on the DPR web site, Reilly has even pointed it to you guys.

You have GOT to be joking.

You are less credible than my 4 year old on this subject.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Shunda77
Senior MemberPosts: 1,661Gear list
Like?
Can you see the Emperors new clothes?
In reply to Whalligeo, Apr 27, 2013

Whalligeo wrote:

You really are a bit of a wind bag. There is an imagery advantage, that is not miss-leading, or imagined, but you do need competence to bring it out, and you also need to know what you are looking for. Clearly you have yet to acquire these skills.

Oh yes of course.

I've taken your advice and just booked myself in to "the Emperors new clothes tailoring course", they said it's guaranteed to help me understand the effects of the loss of the AA filter.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Shunda77
Senior MemberPosts: 1,661Gear list
Like?
Re: Confirmed: No practical advantage to removing D7100 AA filter
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Apr 27, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Let's face the unspoken subtext here.  Some posters are simply covering up for the fact that they cannot afford the D7100 or the associated good lenses to go with and making themselves feel better about not having the funds to do the upgrade, or, as in the case of the OP, any Nikon at all.

I think most pixel peepers are certifiable, you collect all the gadgets you like, I've got photography trips to plan.

Here's a picture you're bound to relate to!.

http://thevichallengediet.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/emperors-new-clothes1.jpg

Just make sure you don't end up looking the fool.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
coudet
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,814
Like?
Re: the problem is....
In reply to kewlguy, Apr 27, 2013

kewlguy wrote:

I checked your link - put on your glasses....

Don't be rude. Check your attitude at the door.

NEX-7 has the best micro contrast despite still using AA filter. D5200 is considerably softer than NEX-7 and D7100. Check other parts such as coins on the Martini, the bill (red face), blue robot, the globe etc..

You're talking about something else here than what I pointed out.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads