Why I love my D200

Started Jul 24, 2013 | Discussions
rkumar
Regular MemberPosts: 408
Like?
Reason for blown red channel on D7000
In reply to Stacey_K, Jul 26, 2013

Kodak - differences in spectral distribution of daylight (equal across wavelengths) and tungsten lighting (more red).

http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploadedFiles/US_plugins_acrobat_en_motion_newsletters_filmEss_03_Nature-of-Light.pdf

"Daylight film is used when the primary source of illumination is skylight, daylight or HMI light, which approximates daylight. Tungsten film is used to capture scenes in which the primary light source is tungsten. Because daylight has a relatively flat spectral curve, which means roughly equal energy at all wavelengths, the red, green, and blue sensitivities of a daylight film are roughly equal. Because tungsten light’s spectral curve shows that much more red energy is emitted than blue light, tungsten film is balanced so that the blue sensitivity is correspondingly higher than the red sensitivity."

D7000 uses the same "film" in sunlight and tungsten lighting. I believe the CFA has been setup (thinner red filter?) so that more light reaches the sensor in low-light conditions (indoor, tungsten, more red light). This improves the low light capability of the D7000 compared to D200. But in bright daylight, it ends up sending too much red light into the photo-sites.

Thom Hogan's comments - he mentions bayer filter changes compared to previous Nikon cameras

http://www.bythom.com/nikond7000review.htm

"Surprisingly, the Red and Blue channel raw responses are a bit different than we're used to in Nikon DSLRs. I was quite surprised when I started putting together my UniWB file for my Complete Guide: something seemed different in the channel responses. Clearly, there are Bayer filtration changes on this camera compared to other Nikon/Sony DSLR/sensor combos. The Red channel is not as good, the Blue channel is better. This is likely one of the reasons why people are commenting about the improved noise (most low light situations are warm light, so the Blue channel is often the first and highest noise producer). But this means also that if you're a raw shooter and you've got ACR/Lightroom/whatever presets that you've dialed in for a D5000/D90/D300, you're going to be redoing them."

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jimoyer
Senior MemberPosts: 1,575Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I love my D200
In reply to Trevor G, Jul 26, 2013

Trevor G wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

Stacey, maybe you should give Trevor a break and give him a couple of days/weeks to match your D200 output with the D7000

I don't have a D7000. I have a D700.

Trevor, i do admire your positive attitude and that is a good thing, and i swear that if you do match your D7000 to the D200, i will take back everything that i have said and i will go out and RE-BUY the D7000. Please don't forget the write down all the procedures you are working on during this process

I can approximately match samples from two different posters so far, by reducing the exposure of their over-exposed D7000 images by 0.3EV.

That means that the two D200 users who responded with images have not been shooting their D7000s accurately. An over-exposed image, even by just 0.3EV, will always look inferior to a correctly exposed one.

It's possible that the D200 does produce lovely images which users absolutely adore. It's also possible that, for some reason I have not yet worked out, some D7000 users don't know about or use the onboard histogram tool and just expect the metering to produce perfect results every time.

The D7000 appears to be set to produce a higher dynamic range image than the D200. The metering and tone curve of the D200 is definitely different to my D700 as well.

Stacey_K and John Moyer are welcome to enjoy their D200s for ever. If they claim they are superior in some way to later cameras, and supply flawed images to prove that, then I understand that I am permitted to challenge them on those claims.

This is a public forum - it does not belong to D200 fans.

PS It's also OK for people to be D200 fans. I am not against them.

-- hide signature --

Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

What Trevor can't seem to grasp here is that I am not claiming the D200 is superior to my D7100....that's just ridiculous..  The D7100 is a significantly more capable camera as is the D7000.  What I am saying, and what others have said is that in certain instances....usually well lit, low ISO images....I prefer the output...primarily the color rendition...that the D200 produces.

 jimoyer's gear list:jimoyer's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Nikon D200 Nikon 1 V1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Olympus PEN E-PL5 +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Stacey_K
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,931Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I love my D200
In reply to Trevor G, Jul 26, 2013

Trevor G wrote:

It's not readily posible to properly restore a JPEG once it has been over-exposed - I would need a RAW, or for you to shoot again at -0.3 to -0.5EV EC.

I've already done this!!

OK let me make this simple. The first D7000 image I posted that you said was "simply .3EV over exposed" was shot at 1/320 at f5.6. The next day I uploaded and posted another D7000 image that was shot at the same time, less than a second after the other. This one was shot at 1/400 at f5.6. That is .3EV less exposure in my book, which is what you asked for and the image looks worse not better. Now you are asking for what I have already posted again? This is I think the third time you have said this!

Shooting in manual mode the "exposure compensation" setting only affects the meter reading, it has nothing to do with what exposure occurs. You do understand that correct? And you understand if the one image shot at F5.6 at 1/320 "simply needs" an exposure comp of -.3, shooting it at f5.6 at 1/400 *is* -.3EV less exposure right? If you understand this, you should understand the second D7000 image I have already posted twice is exactly what you keep asking for,

One more time, here is that shot with the -.3EV adjustment from the original D7000 image you say is over exposed. No channels are clipped in the highlights yet it still has the color problems. overall this image looks worse IMHO than the original D7000 shot and it's why I didn't choose it.

This color mushing and lack of saturation in some parts of the image yet over saturation in others is NOT an exposure or WB problem! I know you can't accept that images from different cameras look different and can't be made to all look the same. I can see from your gallery you are obsessed with this.

In low light and especially warm light, the D7000 works much better than the d200. In daylight IMHO the D200 is much better. Please feel free to ignore my opinions but please stop asking me to post images I already have just because it doesn't fit what you expect them to look like.

-- 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
Stacey_K
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,931Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I love my D200
In reply to Trevor G, Jul 26, 2013

Trevor G wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

Stacey, maybe you should give Trevor a break and give him a couple of days/weeks to match your D200 output with the D7000

I don't have a D7000. I have a D700.

Trevor, i do admire your positive attitude and that is a good thing, and i swear that if you do match your D7000 to the D200, i will take back everything that i have said and i will go out and RE-BUY the D7000. Please don't forget the write down all the procedures you are working on during this process

I can approximately match samples from two different posters so far, by reducing the exposure of their over-exposed D7000 images by 0.3EV.

That means that the two D200 users who responded with images have not been shooting their D7000s accurately. An over-exposed image, even by just 0.3EV, will always look inferior to a correctly exposed one.

One last time, here is my origonal D200 image along side a second D7000 image that was exposed -.3EV below the first one you keep saying over and over is "-.3 over exposed' and we simply don't know how to operate a camera. Do these look the same to you? IMHO it still has the same saturation problems the first "over exposed" one does but in addition, simply looks flat and lifeless now.

If these look the same to you, then you aren't seeing what I see in them.

It's possible that the D200 does produce lovely images which users absolutely adore. It's also possible that, for some reason I have not yet worked out, some D7000 users don't know about or use the onboard histogram tool and just expect the metering to produce perfect results every time.

See above and again stop throwing insults at the people who don't agree with you.

Stacey_K and John Moyer are welcome to enjoy their D200s for ever. If they claim they are superior in some way to later cameras, and supply flawed images to prove that, then I understand that I am permitted to challenge them on those claims.

See above, lowering the exposure -.3EV below the sample that was "over exposed .3EV" doesn't make them look the same, yet you keep repeating this over and over and over. -They don't match simply lowering the exposure- as you repeatedly have claimed. I'm not sure why you keep saying this when looking at the sample images I have uploaded at your request out of the camera that are at the exposure you requested show this isn't factual.

This is a public forum - it does not belong to D200 fans.

PS It's also OK for people to be D200 fans. I am not against them.

I'm not a "d200 fan". I've just starting using one so it's not like I have some long love affair with it. I'm not happy that the camera I actually prefer using, the D7000, doesn't work as well in bight sunlight at base iso as this older model does. I don't like I now feel I have to deal with 2 camera bodies given the D7000 is so much better in lower/warmer light situations. But I'm not going to pretend this isn't the case either.

-- 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
Stacey_K
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,931Gear list
Like?
Re: Reason for blown red channel on D7000
In reply to rkumar, Jul 26, 2013

This makes a lot of sense. In lower levels of warm light, the d7000 is REALLY good. It's miles better than anything I could hope to get from the D200. In bright sun, the D200 looks better.

-- 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
Stacey_K
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,931Gear list
Like?
Re: nice way to explain and volunteer yourself into the post
In reply to inlawbiker, Jul 26, 2013

inlawbiker wrote:

I agree! I keep a D70s around just for the CCD "look" that I love, it's very nice to see experienced photographers go into detail on the why's and how's. And also to know: I'm not crazy for keeping my old camera around and still using it.

I've found in bright daylight, the D200 has better color/look to the images but under lower light levels, especially with warmer light, the D7000 is miles better than anything I can coax from the D200.

-- 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
Trevor G
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,388Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I love my D200
In reply to Pangloss, Jul 27, 2013

Pangloss wrote:

However, what I have noticed and may be connected to what Stacey has mentioned in her original post in this thread, is that my V1 "clips hard", whereas my D200 hardly clips at all under harsh sunlight outdoors, and it's kind of a more gradual clipping.

Are you evaluating clipping from JPEGs or RAW?

What is apparent is that the D200 is the last of a breed of CCD-equipped DX format Nikon bodies with a unique imaging engine that has some hard-to-reproduce qualities.

I'm still waiting for people to show me those imaging qualiities, and/or details as to what they are specifically referring to.

-- hide signature --

Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
n057
Senior MemberPosts: 2,862Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I love my D200
In reply to Trevor G, Jul 27, 2013

Trevor G wrote:

Pangloss wrote:

However, what I have noticed and may be connected to what Stacey has mentioned in her original post in this thread, is that my V1 "clips hard", whereas my D200 hardly clips at all under harsh sunlight outdoors, and it's kind of a more gradual clipping.

Are you evaluating clipping from JPEGs or RAW?

What is apparent is that the D200 is the last of a breed of CCD-equipped DX format Nikon bodies with a unique imaging engine that has some hard-to-reproduce qualities.

I'm still waiting for people to show me those imaging qualiities, and/or details as to what they are specifically referring to.

-- hide signature --

Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

Trevor, don't be no cloud on a sunny day man!

JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers

 n057's gear list:n057's gear list
Nikon Coolpix 995 Nikon D200 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Trevor G
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,388Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I love my D200
In reply to Pangloss, Jul 27, 2013

Pangloss wrote:

Trevor,

That's the second time in this thread you suggest that another poster doesn't know how to use in-camera histograms to get proper exposure: you did that with me a few posts above and now you are doing it with Stacey.

I hope you realize that is both unpleasant and pathetic.

I agree - not using +/-EV Compensation and the on-board histogram to avoid over-exposure is an example of poor camera usage. I wouldn't call it pathetic.

To post an image (leave alone 2 images) with those features in a technical discussion, especially in a forum of users of professional grade DSLRs, is less than expected.

To call me names for drawing attention to a lack of technical skill or care in taking photos is unnecessary - I wouldn't call it pathetic, though.

It's true that highlighting the problem could be unpleasant for the people concerned so I will be careful to avoid giving offense, because I am not trying to do that.

-- hide signature --

Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
olliess
Contributing MemberPosts: 832
Like?
Re: Why I love my D200
In reply to Stacey_K, Jul 27, 2013

Stacey_K wrote:

One last time, here is my origonal D200 image along side a second D7000 image that was exposed -.3EV below the first one you keep saying over and over is "-.3 over exposed' and we simply don't know how to operate a camera. Do these look the same to you? IMHO it still has the same saturation problems the first "over exposed" one does but in addition, simply looks flat and lifeless now.

I see a difference. Would you mind if I played around with these and possibly repost (exposure) adjusted versions?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Trevor G
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,388Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I love my D200
In reply to olliess, Jul 27, 2013

olliess wrote:

A matrix meter isn't meant to be a guide. It's meant to nail the exposure without intervention. The best ones pretty much do at this stage in the game.

I don't know your background in this forum or photography in general, however this statement suggests that you are more of an armchair critic rather than an actual shooter.

Of the 11 cameras I have owned the closest one to being able to leave at 0EV Comp all the time (but only because I always shot RAW with EXR sensor processing) was the Fuji X10. Otherwise every camera (mostly DSLRs) needed -0.3 in general, while some, such as the Panasonic G1 and the Pentax DS2, needed -0.7EV on most shots/scenes.

But then, I am particular about having no blown highlights in my images.

An in-camera histogram is also provided so that the keen photogrpaher can avoid channel clipping, while still exposing the sensor as much as possible when desirable.

Unless it's a live histogram, you have to take the shot and THEN view the histogram. The moment could be gone by then, so review + reshoot is not always an option.

In the shots displayed in this and the other "Wonderful D200" thread, there were no such time constraints.

When taking shots for technical evaluation especially, it would be wise to always check the RGB histogram back.  Once it's set for a particular scene, unless the lighting changes you don't need to check again.

I get the feeling though, that a lot of people in here don't ever use the histogram feature, and are not even sure what it means or how to understand it.

-- hide signature --

Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Pangloss
Senior MemberPosts: 2,298Gear list
Like?
FYI: nobody is trying to convince you of anything
In reply to Trevor G, Jul 27, 2013

Trevor G wrote:

What is apparent is that the D200 is the last of a breed of CCD-equipped DX format Nikon bodies with a unique imaging engine that has some hard-to-reproduce qualities.

I'm still waiting for people to show me those imaging qualities, and/or details as to what they are specifically referring to.

I am starting to think that is exactly the time-wasting trap that you somehow managed to drag Stacey into: trying to show you something you absolutely don't want to see, even if (metaphorically of course) one were to rub your nose in it.

I actually bought my D200 a few weeks ago without any expectations at all, and my main basis for comparison is the V1, because I can use F-mount lenses on both cameras. So I did some comparison shots with both cameras and was surprised by how similar their color rendering is, at base ISO at least (just goes to show how good the V1 color rendering is, that it almost - but not quite - matches the colors of the D200). Also the resolution is the same and the raw files use a similar format and I can develop raw from both cameras using ViewNX2. Strange, isn't it? 1" CMOS sensor using 2011 Aptina technology on the one hand, and Sony APS-C CCD plus some special Nikon ADC soup, all dating back from 2005, on the other hand.

Just to explain that whatever I wrote above is based on my personal observations i.e. Your Mileage May (and probably will) Vary. Just like Stacey is just reporting what she observed. Nobody has any obligation to show or prove anything to you (or anybody else for that matter), and nobody is trying to convince you (or anybody else) of anything.

Finally: I am not inviting you to take a look at my post in the Nikon 1 forum because I am not sure you would fully appreciate the meaning of "just for fun": Just for fun: D200 vs. V1, which is which?

-- hide signature --

Andrew
Novice photographer

 Pangloss's gear list:Pangloss's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Nikon D200 Ricoh GXR A12 50mm F2.5 Macro Ricoh GXR GR Lens A12 28mm F2.5 Nikon 1 V1 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
olliess
Contributing MemberPosts: 832
Like?
Re: Why I love my D200
In reply to Trevor G, Jul 27, 2013

Trevor G wrote:

olliess wrote:

A matrix meter isn't meant to be a guide. It's meant to nail the exposure without intervention. The best ones pretty much do at this stage in the game.

I don't know your background in this forum or photography in general, however this statement suggests that you are more of an armchair critic rather than an actual shooter.

Why, because I understand why matrix metered autoexposure eventually supplanted the center weighted, manual metering cameras that I grew up with?

From Nikon's website:

"The 3D Color Matrix Meter II takes into account the scene's contrast and brightness, the subject's distance (via a D- or G-type NIKKOR lens), the color of the subject within the scene and RGB color values in every section of the scene. 3D Color Matrix Metering II also uses special exposure-evaluation algorithms, optimized for digital imaging, that detect highlight areas. The meter then accesses a database of over 30,000 actual images to determine the best exposure for the scene. Once the camera receives the scene data, its powerful microcomputer and the database work together to provide the finest automatic exposure control available."

In other words, the Matrix Meter isn't trying to inform an expert decision, it's trying to make an expert decision.

Of the 11 cameras I have owned the closest one to being able to leave at 0EV Comp all the time (but only because I always shot RAW with EXR sensor processing) was the Fuji X10. Otherwise every camera (mostly DSLRs) needed -0.3 in general, while some, such as the Panasonic G1 and the Pentax DS2, needed -0.7EV on most shots/scenes.

That's funny, I've also owned 11 cameras. Only about half had evaluative meters, so I guess I got used to using the exposure compensation feature. In fact, some were manual only, so I guess there wasn't even exposure compensation -- I just used my centerweighted meter (or my Pentax spot meter) as a "guide."

But then, I am particular about having no blown highlights in my images.

Which is what I suggested the D7000 ought to strive a little harder to avoid.

An in-camera histogram is also provided so that the keen photogrpaher can avoid channel clipping, while still exposing the sensor as much as possible when desirable.

Unless it's a live histogram, you have to take the shot and THEN view the histogram. The moment could be gone by then, so review + reshoot is not always an option.

In the shots displayed in this and the other "Wonderful D200" thread, there were no such time constraints.

The tendency for the matrix meter to blow highlights is more problematic when there are time constraints. If there are no time constraints, then you don't really need a meter at all, now do you?

I get the feeling though, that a lot of people in here don't ever use the histogram feature, and are not even sure what it means or how to understand it.

If you've been trying (as you say) not to give offense, then so far you haven't been doing a very good job of it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Stacey_K
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,931Gear list
Like?
Re: FYI: nobody is trying to convince you of anything
In reply to Pangloss, Jul 27, 2013

Pangloss wrote:

Trevor G wrote:

What is apparent is that the D200 is the last of a breed of CCD-equipped DX format Nikon bodies with a unique imaging engine that has some hard-to-reproduce qualities.

I'm still waiting for people to show me those imaging qualities, and/or details as to what they are specifically referring to.

I am starting to think that is exactly the time-wasting trap that you somehow managed to drag Stacey into:

Which is what this is.

I showed him the difference I see between a D7000 and a D200 using two sample shots, he then claims (like he has before) the D7000 shot is simply .3EV under and starts playing the histogram game. I have dozens of images all shot at various exposures and I know it's not simply a minute exposure problem.

So then I post EXACTLY the exposure he asked about and all that has happened since is he ignores that image and keeps repeating this same "The D7000 shot was .3EV overexposed" , "I'm still waiting to see images" etc even after uploading and showing him this other D7000 shot done seconds later at .3EV under the one he claims was "simply .3EV over exposed". He's ignoring it because this second D7000 shot at the exposure he says is correct looks even worse!

It's simply a time wasting trap/game but I hope some other people learned something from this so it wasn't a complete waste of my time I won't get sucked into this nonsense again.

-- 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
Pangloss
Senior MemberPosts: 2,298Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I love my D200
In reply to Trevor G, Jul 27, 2013

Trevor G wrote:

...

It's true that highlighting the problem could be unpleasant for the people concerned so I will be careful to avoid giving offense, because I am not trying to do that.

Unfortunately it seems that you have already had enough time to wreak havoc in this thread, and some of your arguments were even mildly interesting, but when you switched to "ad hominem" attacks my patience ran out.

I could go on and keep replying to your posts, but some time ago I decided that life is too short and started using that magical forum tool called "ignore button". No offense meant, but welcome to my ignore list.

-- hide signature --

Andrew
Novice photographer

 Pangloss's gear list:Pangloss's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Nikon D200 Ricoh GXR A12 50mm F2.5 Macro Ricoh GXR GR Lens A12 28mm F2.5 Nikon 1 V1 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Stacey_K
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,931Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I love my D200
In reply to olliess, Jul 27, 2013

olliess wrote:

Stacey_K wrote:

One last time, here is my origonal D200 image along side a second D7000 image that was exposed -.3EV below the first one you keep saying over and over is "-.3 over exposed' and we simply don't know how to operate a camera. Do these look the same to you? IMHO it still has the same saturation problems the first "over exposed" one does but in addition, simply looks flat and lifeless now.

I see a difference. Would you mind if I played around with these and possibly repost (exposure) adjusted versions?

Sure at this point I could care less, I'm done with this conversation after this post.

So now what exposure problem do you see? Trevor said the original was shot .3EV over exposed (you agreed), now this one exposed -.3 EV of that other isn't right either? Good grief there is no pleasing you guys until you photoshop them yourselves (doing who knows what) till they are close and then you find some excuse about how something about it was shot wrong.

I will say about any PP image, we have no way of knowing how much PP has been done. Given had badly you two guys want to prove this wrong, I honestly don't trust a "Oh I just moved the ev slider .3 and Bingo, looks just like the other!" Trevor did this and his "simply adjusted by .3EV shot" looks nothing like the shot that was actually out of the camera exposed .3EV under. I know that I have done zero PP to any of these.

The issue I have with all of this is I do some outdoor event photography. I sometimes have hundreds of images to deliver and I need good OOC jpegs that I can simply give them with minor PP (if any). I don't have time to micro adjust the exposure checking the histogram, the people have walked away by the time I am reviewing the image. Many times I am shooting so fast I can't even check the images till later.

I find with the D7000 the OOC jpegs rarely are deliverable, there is no RAW "batch" setting that will make all of them -all- look good when shooting outdoors in bright sunlight either. I can adjust one image, if I apply this same adjustment to another that was shot in slightly different color temp lighting, or the people are wearing different color clothes (esp wearing red) etc, that requires a different adjustment. The D200 seems to just hit the shot with OOC jpegs. For low light indoors shooting, the D200 doesn't even come close to what the D7000 can do. I find each has their strong points and I'm not sure why you two are obsessed trying to prove , honestly I have no idea what your trying to prove other than you're right and everyone else is wrong.

And of course I can PP the D7000 image or play with the raw file to get a much better shot than these posted. No one is saying that you can't. So you PP this and reposting is pretty pointless unless you just feel a need to do it for some reason.

This just appears to me to be a time wasting trap/game, I'm done playing. Use whatever camera you want and/or believe there is no difference, I simply don't care.

-- 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
Pangloss
Senior MemberPosts: 2,298Gear list
Like?
Re: FYI: nobody is trying to convince you of anything
In reply to Stacey_K, Jul 27, 2013

Stacey_K wrote:

Pangloss wrote:

Trevor G wrote:

What is apparent is that the D200 is the last of a breed of CCD-equipped DX format Nikon bodies with a unique imaging engine that has some hard-to-reproduce qualities.

I'm still waiting for people to show me those imaging qualities, and/or details as to what they are specifically referring to.

I am starting to think that is exactly the time-wasting trap that you somehow managed to drag Stacey into:

Which is what this is.

I showed him the difference I see between a D7000 and a D200 using two sample shots, he then claims (like he has before) the D7000 shot is simply .3EV under and starts playing the histogram game. I have dozens of images all shot at various exposures and I know it's not simply a minute exposure problem.

So then I post EXACTLY the exposure he asked about and all that has happened since is he ignores that image and keeps repeating this same "The D7000 shot was .3EV overexposed" , "I'm still waiting to see images" etc even after uploading and showing him this other D7000 shot done seconds later at .3EV under the one he claims was "simply .3EV over exposed". He's ignoring it because this second D7000 shot at the exposure he says is correct looks even worse!

It's simply a time wasting trap/game but I hope some other people learned something from this so it wasn't a complete waste of my time I won't get sucked into this nonsense again.

-- hide signature --

Stacey

Stacey, I for one appreciated your starting this thread and I am grateful for your posts and technical explanations about the D200's specially competent color rendering in good light.

And most importantly, I hope you will continue to enjoy shooting the D200 for its special qualities at base ISO and when 10MP is more than enough resolution (which is the case for 99% of what I shoot). Despite its age, it's a great DSLR, don't allow anything (specially an online discussion) to tarnish the experience of using this fine imaging tool!

Cheers,

-- hide signature --

Andrew
Novice photographer

 Pangloss's gear list:Pangloss's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Nikon D200 Ricoh GXR A12 50mm F2.5 Macro Ricoh GXR GR Lens A12 28mm F2.5 Nikon 1 V1 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
olliess
Contributing MemberPosts: 832
Like?
Re: Why I love my D200
In reply to Stacey_K, Jul 27, 2013

Stacey_K wrote:

olliess wrote:

I see a difference. Would you mind if I played around with these and possibly repost (exposure) adjusted versions?

Sure at this point I could care less, I'm done with this conversation after this post.

So now what exposure problem do you see? Trevor said the original was shot .3EV over exposed (you agreed), now this one exposed -.3 EV of that other isn't right either? Good grief there is no pleasing you guys until you photoshop them yourselves (doing who knows what) till they are close and then you find some excuse about how something about it was shot wrong.

I think you're being overly sensitive. I agreed with Trevor about the overexposure because the histogram DID look clipped in the red, not because I think he's right on all counts.

Anyway, I just want to see what's in the pictures, because they look different. I just asked in case I found an exposure (or color) adjustment that could help.

I will say about any PP image, we have no way of knowing how much PP has been done. Given had badly you two guys want to prove this wrong

Uhh. I was agreeing with you. I said there's a visible difference even after you adjusted to -0.3.

This just appears to me to be a time wasting trap/game, I'm done playing. Use whatever camera you want and/or believe there is no difference, I simply don't care.

Good grief. There's already too much drama in the world.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Trevor G
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,388Gear list
Like?
Re: The D200 just gets it right without too much fiddling
In reply to Stacey_K, Jul 27, 2013

Stacey_K wrote:

Trevor G wrote:

It's only 0.3EV, but it still makes a difference. When the red channel clips, as it did in Stacey's case, that changes the colour of red objects to magenta or pink, usually. It also messes up the overall look of an image.

OK I'll explain this one last time. This morning I uploaded another D7000 image shot the same time as the first D7000 shot, this new one was exposed another .3 lower. Nothing is clipping in this histogram on the high end but this image looks horrible, underexposed, flat and is now clipping the shadows.I would never pick an image like this to print out of a bracketed set of images but you said ".3EV fixed all the problems" and obviously it doesn't.

Stop looking at the exp compensation in the exif, these were shot in manual mode, exp compensation does -absolutely nothing- when bracketing exposure in manual mode.

I was looking at the histogram. That showed the over-exposure.

One D7000 was shot at f5.6 1/320 with slight red channel clipping (no worse than the D200 shot), this other was shot at f5.6 1/400 which is the .3EV less exposure you said was the sole problem. This isn't rocket science.

You are right, the D200 image looks great, while the d7000 image looks flat.

But...have you reset the D7000 to Standard picture mode, instead of Natural, yet?  That will make a difference.  They are designed to run in the punchier Standard mode.

And also note when I pull the exposure WAY down on the D7000 shot (2/3 EV less than D200 shot), the red petal on the left is still a mush of solid color with no detail, the shot has much less contrast in the mid tones yet now has blown the shadows on the blue channel. Again this mid tone saturation problem is NOT exposure related.

You/she/we cannot compare the output of any cameras unless both are exposed so that no channels clip.

OK the above D7000 shot is .3EV lower like you said would make it look the same as the D200 image,

I think you are deliberately misrepresentiung me - I was talking about exposure.

I have never said that it was impossible for someone to show a better image from the D200 than some other camera.  I stated quite firmly that what had been presented so far were very poorly prepared "comparison" images flawed from the outset.  They were.

You have now done better.  Congratulations.

However, the differences will probably diminish once you put the D7000 in Standard (or whatever they call the default) Picture Mode.

-- hide signature --

Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Stacey_K
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,931Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I love my D200
In reply to olliess, Jul 27, 2013

olliess wrote:

Good grief. There's already too much drama in the world.

I'm sorry for snapping at you in my post. I've just had enough of this -argument-, repeating myself (and insults from another poster) and was originally simply trying to share something I found that works for me. In daylight the D200 has better colors etc, in low light the D7000 is much better. I'm not trying to convince anyone but I have convinced myself after using both now for a while which one I will use for which task. I'm done with this thread, if anyone wants to continue, feel free

-- 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
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads