D100 still producing good results :<) - Who's staying the course

I've still got my D100, a camera which I love and which still gets used - I am buying a D200 next week but the D100 will still be used (having two lens options when shooting gigs will be great - except for my back!)
--
Wayne Charlton
Amsterdam, NL
http://www.fluffermusic.com

'some may say that slow is good - and they may be right on some days. But I am here to tell you fast is best - it is much better to be fired from a cannon than squeezed from a tube. And that is why God invented Fast Motorcycles, Bubba' - Hunter S. Thompson

Gary,

I suppose that would be the way to do it. But... is it worth the effort, better to check that your D100 is focusing correctly, i.e. not back-focusing or front-focusing - search on this forum for a suitable method for doing this - but use a decent lens, a prime if you have one or your Nikkor 24-85mm.

If the focusing is OK you still have to accept that the D100 has quite a strong AA filter and the default sharpening is not aggressive as most P&S cameras.

I shoot almost exclusively in RAW mode and have my in-camera sharpening set to "normal", I usually apply a small amount of sharpening in NC/NX and to my eyes most images look nicely crisp and full of detail.

Regards,

-JohnK.

...The D100 should NEVER deliver results like that!!! A new camera won't do any better.

Buy new glass...





--
http://www.carlmphotography.com

'I'd knock on wood for good luck, but it just gives me a headache!!!'

I think his 24-85 should deliver decent images if nothing is wrong with camera or lens (and technique!). That the Sigma with some strange TC attached won't do so is not surprising, however.

I'd suggest to do some controlled test, maybe of the D100 against the P&S (in this case set the D100 in cam sharpening to the highest setting or sharpen in photoshop), maybe the D100 only. He should be able to get a decently sharp image with that lens.

Basil

I have one of these lenses at present. Its OK and on a par with the 18-70mm.

It is possible the camera has a fault, but the softness is more likely to be caused by poor technique. D100 out of the camera images are notoriously soft. Conversely, they also have a greater capacity to benefit from sharpening without looking over processed.

To get the sharpest possible pictures, I shoot in RAW, and sharpen on the computer. In Photoshop, three stage sharpening gives the best results. Firstly, sharpen during RAW conversion. After cropping, and levels, sharpen the JPEG using Smart Sharpen, Lens Blur. If it looks oversharpened afterwards, tone back the sharpening by using Fade Sharpen. After the final tweaks, I do a final sharpen using unsharp mask: 20,10,2.

If you are using Nikon Capture, set the sharpen to Normal or Medium High. After all the adjustments, use unsharp mask. The above settings will work here also.

The pictures I posted earlier in this thread were all produced using Nikon Capture, though for the final tweaking and sharpening I may also have used Photoshop.

S.

Nice shots!

And a similar shot from the cameras older brother:

We are in the same boat, MacArthur said: Old soldiers never die.

Waynster said:

I've still got my D100, a camera which I love and which still gets
used - I am buying a D200 next week but the D100 will still be used
(having two lens options when shooting gigs will be great - except
for my back!)
--
Wayne Charlton
Amsterdam, NL
http://www.fluffermusic.com

'some may say that slow is good - and they may be right on some
days. But I am here to tell you fast is best - it is much better to
be fired from a cannon than squeezed from a tube. And that is why
God invented Fast Motorcycles, Bubba' - Hunter S. Thompson

Click to expand...

... from my cold dead hands. Either that ot the shutter will break.
--
Read my blog -> http://radio.weblogs.com/0101365/

...While the 24-85 AFS-G isn't the sharpest tool in Nikon's shed (I finally got rid of mine), it should still deliver acceptable results with the D100. The images with his Sigma lens are another story...that lens needs to go...

--
http://www.carlmphotography.com

'I'd knock on wood for good luck, but it just gives me a headache!!!'

(nt)

This shot was too sharp. I had to soften it.

Wow !!!
That picture is so sharp that should be illegal.

Don't tell nobody, but the best posted pictures are from D100 users.

Josh

Here's one one of mine, D100 + 80-400VR.



Josh

Just when I think I've got the dough for the D200, another tooth needs a filling, the car needs a new tire, etc.

But the D100 is a fine camera and will always remain so I believe, unless one day they really can expand the dynamic range.

--
Phil Flash
SF, CA USA
'Trust the 'kon!'

Stuff I own in my profile.

I have em both and shoot equally with each, both with great results. Long live the d100
--
Nikon D200
Nikon D100
Sigma 100-300 f4 HSM
Sigma 120-300 f2.8 HSM
Nikon 80-200 f2.8 ED Push-Pull
Tokina 12-24 f4
Nikon 18-70 AFS DG EX
Nikon 85 f1.8 D

You Pay for What You Get - DMB

I followed your suggestion when using Nikon Capture to set the sharpen to Normal or Medium High. After all the adjustments, I used unsharp mask of 20, 10, 2. The results are quite nice. I was always uneasy of using any NC sharpening at all, I just used USM. I have a really lame question, does appling USM after using NC sharpen help to reduce any artifacts that can lead to a photo looking over-sharpened? Thanks for your comments one and all.

Here are some examples

Old Method



New Method



Old Method



New Method



Images can be viewed here;
http://www.pbase.com/kramerkrause/photo_phun

-MKrause...

http://www.pbase.com/kramerkrause

Long time viewer and pbase supporter...

I'm glad you followed up my tip (and I bet you are also!). I didn't like to say I thought your pictures look too soft. Now they look just right.

As to what is happening, I do not understand all the theory, but whether a picture is oversharpened will depend not only on your settings, but at what size you view the image. You will not get artifacts using the methods I have described. You will however get more noise, but with the D100 it looks like film grain and I find it quite acceptable. What is unacceptable is colour noise, which looks exceedingly ugly and reveals flaws in the sensor. This tends only to occur at high ISOs and when dark pictures are boosted.

You will gain a better understanding of the effect of the stages of sharpening when using Photoshop CS2. If you are working on a picture to be blown up large, its best to do the conversion using Nikon Capture, with NC sharpening. You will then be able to do Smart Sharpen in Photoshop, and to finish the picture using the unsharp mask. If you use this method you will be able to add a little more sharpening to your animal pictures, without making them look over sharpened.

Another advantage of sharpening in Photoshop is that it allows you to preview the effect of the sharpening, and when you have committed yourself, you can also use the fade slider to ease back the amount of sharpening to make the picture look just right.

I am pleased to have been of assistance. Hopefully it won't take you years and years to go back sharpening all your earlier conversions!

On another topic, I agree with the poster below who says you should sell on your Sigma lens. It really is not good enough. If you look at some of my other posts, you will find that I like the Nikon 70-210mm AF (either f4.5-5.6 or contant f4). You can pick this up for the same as you will get for Sigma and if you can find a good one, it will outperform any comparable lens short of an f2.8.

Good luck, S

While we are celebrating our D100 cameras, its worth mentioning this.

Nikon Capture has moved forward in leaps and bounds with versions 4 and NX. Although NC seems to me to be optimised for the D70 and later cameras, it is still helping to such more quality from Nikon D100 RAW files.

Its the improvement in Capture that finally helped make my mind to buy a Nikon camera to use alongside my Fuji S2.

If any of you guys are only using Photoshop, then its time to investigate the improvements in NC. It doesn't supercede Photoshop, but I find its a useful extra tool for sucking out that extra ounce of image quality.

S.

Stoker98 said:

On another topic, I agree with the poster below who says you should
sell on your Sigma lens. It really is not good enough. If you
look at some of my other posts, you will find that I like the Nikon
70-210mm AF (either f4.5-5.6 or contant f4). You can pick this up
for the same as you will get for Sigma and if you can find a good
one, it will outperform any comparable lens short of an f2.8.

Click to expand...

May I suggest the 55-200 DX kit lens instead? IMHO this is a great lens for very little money (unless you are a build quality/metal mount fanatic ).

Basil

I haven't tested it yet, but I have tested the equivalent Sigma (which some posters seem to prefer) and it my opinion its useable, but not particularly good. Both of these lenses will suffer from vignetting which you won't get with the 70-210mm, though of course its quite easily corrected these days.

From what I have read, the 55-200mm is worth considering. If I can pick up one cheap, I will do a comparison and post the results.

All we ever get on these forums is opinions about lenses, usually expressed with passion and not reason because the guys have invested a lot of money, and with comments that are often suspect because people live in different latitudes, with very different lighting challenges. What we need is photos comparing new lenses with ones we know, at different apertures and focal lengths.

S.