Confirmed: No practical advantage to removing D7100 AA filter

Started Apr 25, 2013 | Discussions
RobCMad
Regular MemberPosts: 332Gear list
Like?
Re: It's always a sign of desperation...
In reply to Jared Huntr, Apr 27, 2013

Jared Huntr wrote:

Shunda77 wrote:

Jared Huntr wrote:

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

I couldn't quite make it out.

when the poster ignores key questions relevant to the thread and instead attempts to get personal by being critical of the messenger, his equipment, and his images instead of addressing the message itself...

Like clockwork unfortunately, you're not the first and you won't be the last

 

ok thanks, good to know.

I wonder why someone with no Nikon gear is spending so much time posting opinions about Nikon cameras.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Najinsky
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,598
Like?
The practical difference
In reply to Mako2011, Apr 27, 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

The practical difference is simple. Geartographers have an intense need to believe their images suck.

If they believe their images suck, they can begin the exciting and enjoyable journey into photography, learning why their images suck and how to improve them with light, perspective, contrasts and purpose.

Crappy gear holds back the geartographer by allowing doubt to fester; what if it's not me, what if it's my gear that sucks?

Only by acquiring the absolute best equipment within reach can this doubt be finally quashed and the healing begin.

That D7100 IR image is indeed a thing of extreme beauty. It's perfection has the power to heal and allow the journey to begin. Which is why I feel extra bad, cruel even, for pointing out that the most prominent orange crayon in the far right of the Crayola Crayon box shows clear aliasing artefacts.

No healing today I'm afraid.

-Najinsky

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jakes
Senior MemberPosts: 1,517
Like?
Re: Data
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.  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

It's like wrestling with a pig. You get muddy and the pig likes it.

-- hide signature --

jakes
WSSA# 107

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,831
Like?
What if increased resolution was not the design goal.
In reply to Jared Huntr, Apr 27, 2013

Jared Huntr wrote:

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

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

While it may have been a design goal for the D800e. What if they are just trying to save money and removed the filter. Nikon states with the D4 they were able to reduce aliasing using a thinner OLPF and use processing to remove the rest of the aliasing artifact.

What if it is just a logical progression, they depended on a piece of glass (silica) to remove aliasing  and now they are doing it in software or processing. The processing chip has gotten fast enough that they can add the task for alias removal to the process of producing a jpg image and not slow down FPS, writing to card which would have happened in the past due to limited speed and processing of the chip

Could be a cost saving measure that they may or may not pass on to us. If they do actually remove it one more piece of glass removed from in front of the sensor could be a good thing.

If the anti alias filter is using polarization to do this process, perhaps removing the silica increased the amount of light to the sensor which is sort of suggests in this demontration.

http://www.nikon.com/about/technology/rd/core/image/image_processing_e/index.htm

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
twamers
Regular MemberPosts: 234Gear list
Like?
Re: Confirmed: No practical advantage to removing D7100 AA filter
In reply to Jared Huntr, Apr 27, 2013

We already agreed on another thread the other day that if you print at a4 size and put in a frame and view then the average person will see virtually no difference (D7000 vs. D7100). I asked that question as that's how I print (I don't do birding or major on landscapes) and where my interest lays in this discussion.

If you do other things with the photos - blow up mega size, heavy crops, mega size tv's, projectors etc etc then I'm sure the differences are there.

The D7100 is very clearly an excellent piece of kit and builds on the D7000 and extends the technologies as we'd expect - otherwise why release it?

The big question is what does the photographer want and need based on what they do.  I'm very happy with my D7000 for what I do and I have no need to upgrade - all the things I've mentioned in para 2 are of no interest to me.

But others will have a need because their requirements are different. They will say the D7100 is best for them and they will be right - it's just not for me.

I've been entertained by this thread but ultimately for me the only right answer is what makes each individual happy for what they do.  Happy shooting.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Reilly Diefenbach
Senior MemberPosts: 8,278Gear list
Like?
Almost done!
In reply to Jared Huntr, Apr 27, 2013

Does anyone else who doesn't have an AA less camera want to weigh in with your experiences?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jakes
Senior MemberPosts: 1,517
Like?
Re: Almost done!
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Apr 27, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Does anyone else who doesn't have an AA less camera want to weigh in with your experiences?

Why yes, Reilly. I had an AA-less camera (D7100). It took pretty pictures but it felt like a brick in my hands. The D90 did not. So I sent the D7100  back and got a D5200. It does not feel like a brick and it also takes pretty pictures.

-- hide signature --

jakes
WSSA# 107

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tko
tko
Forum ProPosts: 10,342
Like?
Re: They agree
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Apr 27, 2013

Or Canon engineers could be rolling on the floor laughing.

Don't worry. Next year Canon will be putting in an unobtanium glass filter that will set new records for microcontrast and umbelievability ratios. Of course, you won't really be able to see the difference, but that's that the point, is it?

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
AdamT
Forum ProPosts: 56,682Gear list
Like?
Re: Confirmed: No practical advantage to removing D7100 AA filter
In reply to twamers, Apr 27, 2013

We already agreed on another thread the other day that if you print at a4 size and put in a frame and view then the average person will see virtually no difference (D7000 vs. D7100).

Nor would you between those cameras and the D50, D70, D80 etc . A4 isn`t very demanding , Files from the 2.7Mp D1H would print bigger than that with ease

I've been entertained by this thread but ultimately for me the only right answer is what makes each individual happy for what they do.  Happy shooting.

Correct, buy it if you need it otherwise its a waste ..

a very sharp 24Mp opens up opportunities for very heavy cropping which means that a fast sharp prime can be left on instead of a slow, optically compromised zoom . this is what I loved about the D2X in its day - it had a very very weak very high quality AA filter which meant you really got your moneys worth from that noisy 12Mp sensor at low ISOs , the croppability was amazing compared to the regular 6Mp/8Mp cams of its time . the D7100 is that all over again but 24Mp comapred to 12, 16 and 18Mp and without the horrendous High ISO performance which let the otherwise Stellar D2X down .

-- hide signature --

** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **

 AdamT's gear list:AdamT's gear list
Sigma DP1 Canon PowerShot G1 X Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,778
Like?
Things to come?
In reply to Jared Huntr, Apr 27, 2013

That was interesting...bottom line might be, we don't really know the true difference between having and not having a filter on the D7100 as there is no non-AA filter model. The D5200 is not the same sensor or ADC pipeline. It would appear that there are indeed differences in the two 24mp images but, perhaps more to do with a combination of things than just the absence of an AA filter would lead us to believe. As Nikon pointed out, It made no difference so they decided to leave it off. Winder what the next generation will hold. Obvious that  Nikon is in a "make it better than before" kind of mood

-- 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: 15,778
Like?
Big Thanks
In reply to Mako2011, Apr 27, 2013

Big Thanks to everyone for a very civil discussion. Things have come a long ways.

-- 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
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads