ProfHankD: I think AA filters don't make sense anymore. Just have small enough sensels to be past Nyquist for any lens and do analog/digital reduction in resolution. Easy. As I account for Bayer filters, a 5um sensel is at Nyquist for a lens resolving 50lppmm -- which few do corner-to-corner. 5um is just 14MP APS-C, or 36MP FF -- i.e., the D800. A little higher sensel count just makes the AA issue disappear.
The D7100 pixels are 3.9 um. That's the major reason it doesn't suffer from lack of an AA filter.
I've had my D7100 for four months now and I'm liking more the more I use it. Really impressive image quality particularly compared to the D90.
I find Nokia's whitepaper on the Lumia 1020 to be pseudo-engineering without any math--a.k.a marketing hype--and only serves as the latest example of elucidation through obfuscation. It might serve to make the clueless feel they're purchasing some advanced technology, but really, how is Bayer sensor interpolation noise overcome by (electrically noisier) oversampling?
mosc: It's not unique to cameras or even tech gear. Flip through your TV infomercial section to see exercise equipment and programs, jewelry, collectibles, cleaning products/equipment, cooking aids, time shares, the list is never ending. It is deep seated cultural materialistic desires routed in our love of self indulgence.
People try to feel better about themselves by purchasing rewards. Our spending patterns show a pretty direct correlation between unhappiness and "impulsive" purchases. At the extreme, people compensate for problems in their personal lives by acquiring things they enjoy in small bursts of time. This is exasperated by marketing that plagues on addictive personality traits and looks only at the moment of sale as the only value add to the company. The purchase itself is the enjoyment, not the product use.
The only real way to break this cycle is to find things you find rewarding by interaction with others or by accomplishments rather than purchases. The problem is mental.
Boy isn't that the truth. I had to sell my Ferraris just to keep up with the latest in tube electronics.
dennishancock: Timely article and greatly appreciated!
One further question: what would be a recommended color temperature setting?
5260 K seemed to work out well.
Timely article and greatly appreciated!
meanwhile: Gu-raphics. Not Ji-raphics. He's messing with us.
Thanks DpReview. Most helpful.
GPW: Can the buffer be fixed with a firmware update?
On the face of it, this is a lack of memory hardware not correctable by software. Something like a car with a two gallon gas tank. Unless of course the RAM is there and Nikon has switched it off.
mforbes: You guys crack me up, complaining about the buffer, I make my living taking photos of outdoor adventure events, zip lining, white water rafting etc., I use Nikon gear and have no idea what the buffer size is in any of my cameras, we don't have time to spray and pray and have the guests sort through a bunch of images and pick out the ones they buy, we do that for them by getting one or two good photos of them. If you need a large buffer for Fido running around the backyard, get a V1.
There would be a wide spread of requirements on buffer size taking a picture burst. It would depend on your personal situation and desired outcome.
Apparently gymnastics photography places different demands on the photographer than photographing white water rafters.
oeriies: I've been using the D7100 for 3 weeks with a 500mm f/4G and a 35mm f/1.8G. I've been a Pentax user for a while, currently owning a K-5. There is a lot of detail in the D7100 shots, which is important for birds and wildlife, and the continuous autofocus system is a dream compared to the K-5. The bummer is the buffer, as others have noted and as is clear in the DPReview appraisal. I spent an hour shooting seagulls in flight the second day I had the camera just to try to learn my new gear. I knew from the specs that I should get 6fps shooting raw. Fired off a burst to catch an on-coming bird -- 5 shoots and the camera stopped dead. I thought that for sure I had a defective unit. It was only when I went to the user forum here that I found that this is how the camera is designed. Nikon, you've got to be kidding. I hope there is at least a partial fix via software for the buffer problem that we'll see soon. It is a crippling flaw in an otherwise excellent camera.
Nikon would do its customers right by recalling the D7100 and adding a larger image buffer.
I have recently migrated to the D7100 from the D90 and it's proving a quantum jump in image quality, noise, color rendition, focus response, and features.
What condemns the D7100 to the insanely good category as opposed to the insanely great in my mind is the issue heavily discussed here--the image buffer. I'm not a sports oriented photographer and I'm OK with jpegs, but the thought that skimping on two dollars worth of memory is Nikon technical management's idea of the pursuit of technical excellence is astounding.
I'm getting a burst of 18 jpegs before the frame rate drops by approximately two-thirds. ( DX mode, optimal compression quality, fine image quality, large image size.)
Considering this camera is otherwise a technical tour de force, it appears Nikon technical management wasn't thinking. Marketing should be asking how many sales of the D7100 it will be losing because of this gaffe. Heads should roll. I know they would in America.
P.S. Great review, DpReview!
Great article. Stunning results. Would be great to see these images in 3D.
Reilly Diefenbach: We've done better tests than this on the DX forum. The results are pretty plain. Advantage D7100!
I can appreciate that Dpreview spent a lot of time trying to conduct this experiment so we can compare the effect of an OLPF/non-OLPF sensor on an apples to apples basis. But given the qualitative approach applied here, this experiment does not control the other factors that influence image capture resolution.For example in your Image Quality Test (OLPF filter) on page 6 using your in-door scene, there's about a 1.35 percent larger magnification difference between the D7100 and the D5200 example.More troubling is the question whether we know what we're actually measuring. For example you state that the D800 has better resolution than the D7100. Now maybe that's true, but considering the D7100 pixel is 3.92 microns on a side versus 4.88 microns for the D800, on it's face the D7100 stands to out resolve the D800 in an equal apples to apples resolution test.
So as a technical test, your procedures really need some fundamental grounding in optical metrology. Sorry.
Excuse me but this is the latest example of The Emperor Has No Clothes. That Eggleston tricycle photo is worth no more than twenty-five cents.
Phixer323: These stunning images are going force me to look back at mine from 68-69 (Chu Lai)! Like this photographer, my slides have been locked away for over forty years. I can't even imagine that they would even come close to these.
Time to 'come out of the closet.'
Great photos for Vietnam veterans to relive; great photos for Americans to ponder.
Another soldier's views at http://www.DennisHancock.com/vietnam a lot of people look at.
What a great effort! This review offers a significant service to photographers trying to sort out the features/distinctions/advantages of existing raw converter software. Thanks for this review DPR.
And a request for a new category of evaluation for the follow-on review: how easy is it to learn this software. I know you allude to the availability of on-line resources. The point though would be how good are they. I'm evaluating DxO Pro 8 right now, moving from their version 5, and their manual and on-line resources leave me at a fork in the road with no place to go. Maybe it's me. But the manual seems to have been written by the programmer who knows the UI and doesn't realize he's explaining things in terms of undefined concepts.
lomtevas: My D7000 was pure BS. I was utterly disappointed in it. I had to take it to Nikon to adjust focus and the internal mirror. It still shoots fuzzy pictures. It does not capture the shot quickly. Focus is not quick and lighting is wrong. I will pass my D7000 to one of my kids and avoid Nikon. I will certainly not purchase a D7100.
The D7100 has great specs. Whether or not you get that from your camera is total luck of the draw. Nikon doesn't seem to reliably build products that meets their advertised specs.
Great article! Let's have more.