Reading mode: Light Dark

Type I banding in Phil's D200 sample

Go to last post
ARClark

ARClark

Veteran Member
Messages
5,340
Solutions
4
Reaction score
4,621
Location
NC, US
At least one of Phil's D200 photos has Type I banding. Check out the spot lights and flourescent lighting in the following photo:



Alan
 
Just wanted to add that I posted this for a couple reasons.

1) I think it lends support to the contention that a large percentage (if not most?) of D200s probably have Type I banding (which has been acknowledged by Nikon). This is the type of banding I see in my D200 that was serviced for Type II banding by Nikon, and which most others have reported after servicing of their D200s.

2) It puts into perspective the degree of impact of Type I banding on D200 images. It's noteworthy that this type of banding is not readily notiecable, even to a very trained eye. :> ) ( For those that have not read the D200 review, Phil mentioned that he had not seen banding in images from his sample camera.) I wouldn't have seen it had I not known where to look and made an effort to find it, and I only see it in some of his original size photos. The above sample is the most obvious.

For those of you considering buying a D200 and you're worried about banding, the DPReview samples are probably a pretty good real world example of what you may experience. Considering the overall capabilities of this camera, and the range of potential digital afflictions that a camera can experience, one could argue that this type of banding is insignificant in most people's everyday photography.

Regards, Alan
 
I think you've pretty well summed it up. I believe there is now sufficient information available to make an informed decision on whether to buy a D200 or not. The type I banding (as seen in Thom's photo and elsewhere) is a design property of the D200 imaging system. Nikon states this in plain English on their FAQ page. If the banding exhibited around the lights in this photo does not bother you (or if you just can't see it), then there is every reason to buy the D200. If it does bother you, then it makes sense to pass on the D200 and begin looking for another camera. It would be a little more complicated if there were any reason to believe that Nikon will make the hardware changes necessary to produce a 100% band-free camera. The odds of this happening, however, seem vanishingly small. So, potential buyers may not like it, but the decision really is that simple.
 
Unacceptable. I'll pass.

Just got into photography in a more serious way and ordered a D200 in November. But I didn't receive it before going on holiday. In the meantime I purchased a mint F100, Tokina 12-24, D50 and 18-200VR hoping that I would upgrade to a D200 in time. Now all is for sale except the D50 + 18-200VR until Canon comes up with a similar quality lense.

Until then I'm still wiling to buy Nikon as long as they come out with a camera with the lowlight capabilities of the 5D or D2Hs, the autofocus capabilities of the D2Hs and the resolution of the D2X, D200 or 5D and the size and build quality of the D200. I thought the D200 would be such a thing. Wishful thinking I know.

I have no one to blame but myself for my haste and putting so much faith in Nikon. Ultimately, I may have to get a Canon EOS-1D MKII N but I don't understand why it has to be such a beast.

(Yes, I want it all and money is no object). A 1.13 crop sounds is fine by me.

Nikon, are you listening?

Raz
--

An optimist believes this is the best of all possible worlds. A pessimist fears that is true.
http://www.pbase.com/bluethermal
 
Some people have better eye's than me,the enlargement is how big.
--
Stocko
 
With such a wishlist you'll find anything unacceptable. Check back here in five years. Strange thing is most experienced folks (like Phil) do not see much of a problem with these artifacts while more inexperienced users cry wolf. Thanks for sharing your view though.
raztec said:
Unacceptable. I'll pass.

Just got into photography in a more serious way and ordered a D200
in November. But I didn't receive it before going on holiday. In
the meantime I purchased a mint F100, Tokina 12-24, D50 and
18-200VR hoping that I would upgrade to a D200 in time. Now all is
for sale except the D50 + 18-200VR until Canon comes up with a
similar quality lense.

Until then I'm still wiling to buy Nikon as long as they come out
with a camera with the lowlight capabilities of the 5D or D2Hs, the
autofocus capabilities of the D2Hs and the resolution of the D2X,
D200 or 5D and the size and build quality of the D200. I thought
the D200 would be such a thing. Wishful thinking I know.

I have no one to blame but myself for my haste and putting so much
faith in Nikon. Ultimately, I may have to get a Canon EOS-1D MKII N
but I don't understand why it has to be such a beast.

(Yes, I want it all and money is no object). A 1.13 crop sounds is
fine by me.

Nikon, are you listening?

Raz
--
An optimist believes this is the best of all possible worlds. A
pessimist fears that is true.
http://www.pbase.com/bluethermal
Click to expand...
 
I think that might better have said "Nonexistent banding of any kind... at least according to ONE (OR SOME) owners of later shipments"

I think until we go a bit more than a few days without reports of "nonexistent banding" we might not be 100% out of the banding woods just yet
David Chin said:
... at least, according to owners of later shipments:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=17340164

--
Regards, David Chin
(D.7.0. & C.P.4.5.0.0.)
http://www.pbase.com/dlcmh/nikonlinks
Click to expand...
 
Forgive my ignorance, but is the purple/red fringing around the lights what we're refering to?

Cause, maybe its that I wear glasses or something, but to ME, this image is an accurate representation of what bright artificial light sources look like at night.

Even if I'm mistaken, I agree with you that there's nothing worth being a stupid troll baby about in that image. Freakin' people....

--
Lee Saxon
Tulane Hullabaloo
Photography Editor
 
If that is the worst sort of artifact in the D200, then its probably ahead of a lot of cameras. :-)

I suspect that a decent RAW converter could probably reduce that sort of defect in time - just like RSE and ACR did with the 20D.
--
'Your ideas intrigue me, and I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter'

http://www.pbase.com/timothyo

 
raztec said:
Unacceptable. I'll pass.

Just got into photography in a more serious way and ordered a D200
in November. But I didn't receive it before going on holiday. In
the meantime I purchased a mint F100, Tokina 12-24, D50 and
18-200VR hoping that I would upgrade to a D200 in time. Now all is
for sale except the D50 + 18-200VR until Canon comes up with a
similar quality lense.

can i buy your tokina 12-24? send me a message.
Click to expand...
 
you have banding (striping) in many many kinds, under many many conditions. And it is not related to brand or camera type either.

I have a camera which is banding type 'free' but I know for sure I can let it show up if I want too. Overexposed shot, high iso in a high contrast situation.

D200 is a fine camera,

michel

Curiosity is the key to creativity - Morita Akio
http://www.fotopropaganda.com
 
Philip_F said:
With such a wishlist you'll find anything unacceptable. Check back
here in five years. Strange thing is most experienced folks (like
Phil) do not see much of a problem with these artifacts while more
inexperienced users cry wolf. Thanks for sharing your view though.
Click to expand...
Actually, an 8-10mp CMOS sensor with bigger pixel diameter like the D2Hs and the CAM2000 autofocus system in a D200 body would've done the trick. That would've given acceptable noise levels, (better than the D2X but not quite as good as the D2Hs) and the best autofocus system available.

But I'd rather believe they don't want to do that for marketing reasons rather than being unable to master that chip technically. It would cut into the sales of their D2X and D2Hs. But in addition to marketing, it's also a philosophical thing and a reflection of shortsightedness and a lack of confidence. A near perfect camera never requires an upgrade, so they're thinking lost future sales.

But the number of converts they would win over from other manufacturers (including Canon) and the respect amongst professionals they would engender would more than offset their other losses. The number of hobbyists like myself without a lot invested in either camp far exceeds the number of professionals, who've incidentally migrated more from N to C than the other way around. (At least the ones I've spoken to). And with all the new customers, think how much more glass they'd sell.

Raz
http://www.pbase.com/bluethermal
 
raztec said:
Actually, an 8-10mp CMOS sensor with bigger pixel diameter like the
D2Hs and the CAM2000 autofocus system in a D200 body would've done
the trick.
Click to expand...
No it wouldn't as the lens you're so much in favour of (18-200 VR) wouldn't cut it on a larger sensor by quite a margin. In fact the combination you are seeking exists in the Canon mount (and it's expensive) it's the 1D MkII (or 1Ds MkII if the fps is less important) and the 28-300L IS USM (which is the FF equivalent of your 18-200 VR).
--
regards
Karl Günter Wünsch
Visit my gallery at
http://www.fotocommunity.com/pc/pc/mypics/461808
 
Karl Günter Wünsch said:
In fact the combination you are seeking exists in the Canon mount (and it's
expensive) it's the 1D MkII (or 1Ds MkII if the fps is less
important) and the 28-300L IS USM (which is the FF equivalent of
your 18-200 VR).
Click to expand...
Thanks Karl for the suggestion. In time, I may just have to go that route, but I do a lot of travelling and flying in a paraglider and the size and weight of the MKII would ground me.

Best,
Raz

--

An optimist believes this is the best of all possible worlds. A pessimist fears that is true.
http://www.pbase.com/bluethermal
 
while nikonians look at bandings in phils samples..

impressive discovery! let me jump ship!
ARClark said:
At least one of Phil's D200 photos has Type I banding. Check out
the spot lights and flourescent lighting in the following photo:



Alan
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top