D300 is now FANTASTIC to me... Thanks to some forum members...

photoforfun said:

photoforfun said:

photoforfun said:

Stany, since you shot this photo in RAW have you tried applying D2XMode3 to it in CaptureNX to override your Neutral settings?
Do you see the dreaded noise when you do this?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I just tried it because you asked for. Yes, it becomes noisier...

Click to expand...

I think "vivid" is causing even more troubles than D2Xmode3...

Anyhow, as long as I will keep D300, neutral will be the setting. Even standard does give too much noise for me(tried it as well...)

Kindest regards,
Stany
I prefer one really good picture in a day over 10 bad ones in a second...

http://www.fotografie.fr/

Great info.
--
http://www.guitaradoptions.com
----
Nikon D200
Nikkor 28-70 f/2.8
Nikkor 105 f/2.8 Micro
Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8
Canon G9

photoforfun said:

photoforfun said:

Congrads. This is a highly customizeble camera and with further tweaking, you may find other reasons to like the camera even more.
Dez

Click to expand...

Thanks for your reaction.
"The other reasons" to like D300 I knew already before I exchanged my
D3 for a D300. The only "unknown" was IQ compared to D3, and I'm
happy I discovered that you have to tweak D300 differently than D3 to
get similar results...

--
Kindest regards,
Stany

Click to expand...

Curious. Is the D3 "tweakable" as well?
--
Dez

http://photos.dezmix.com

Stany, thank you for taking the trouble to do the comparison.
This is so helpful for a new D300 owner.

Albert

photoforfun said:

photoforfun said:

Glad to hear you.

But would you send Low Iso that you've been complaining all along about the noise.
I saw suddenly you jumped with happiness because you found the solution to

Click to expand...

Thanks for your reaction.
Sorry to call you "landmarks4711", can't do otherwise as you hide
your real name...

photoforfun said:

low Iso noise but then you send high Iso picture to show it.

Click to expand...

Do you think iso 500 is high iso? If so, why iso 6400 is an option
with D300?
For shooting a picture @ 300mm, handhold, if you want it tacksharp
you need no slower as 1/1000 sec or you don't have any chance to
capture something decently sharp...VR or not VR... so iso 200 wasn't
an option in this shot...
Upto that I always try to stop down a bit with 80-400VR, F5.6 is not
the strongest aperture for this lens @ the longer end...

--
Kindest regards,
Stany
I prefer one really good picture in a day over 10 bad ones in a
second...

http://www.fotografie.fr/

Click to expand...

I don't object about our difference on low Iso perception or you bird photo, I appreciate. It's agreat photo.

Replying my posting I thought you would then send Iso200 the lowest default Iso (that a lot of threads were talking about), but instead you just talking.

I would like to see what kind of Iso200 at 100% crop that you will produce with your new setting. (Of course it will be very clean from noise based on your criteria)

I'm not an expert but I think it was LCD Brightness set to -1, not brightness in Picture Control.

By the way, what exactly is brightness in the Picture Control? Is it exposure?

bad_andy said:

Others have suggested that, in the Neutral picture control,
Brightness should be turned down to -1. What's your opinion?

Click to expand...

I'll adjust this weekend. So far I have only ever used D2X Mode I or Mode II. I haven't noticed too much noise, but maybe I am just used to it.

Greg

Not a D300 owner but I found on my camera if I stick to the standard ISO steps I get lower noise, i.e ISO 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600.

I think it is because to do ISO 500 it is under exposing at ISO 400, then doing a software offset of exposure. So noise is worse. I think the sensor only measure the standard ISO stops and create the in-between stops in software.

Could be worth a check.

Just want to save that setting advice in case I ever upgrade from the D200.

Glad you are happy with your switch.
--

Dave

the bottom left corner of your 100% crop



Your picture was still too noisy to me,
and probably to your standard too
(your standard was used to be too high but not anymore)

You're looking at a crop of an ISO 500 shot in a bright dark transition area. Could you please ellaborate on why you consider this picture especially noisy?
--


Humans fear time, yet time fears photography...

photoforfun said:

photoforfun said:

Stany, since you shot this photo in RAW have you tried applying D2XMode3 to it in CaptureNX to override your Neutral settings?
Do you see the dreaded noise when you do this?

Click to expand...

I just tried it because you asked for. Yes, it becomes noisier...

--
Kindest regards,
Stany
I prefer one really good picture in a day over 10 bad ones in a
second...

http://www.fotografie.fr/

Click to expand...

Possibly becauase the image is slightly underexposed. You would probably get the same noise if you added +0.33 exp and left it neutral.

I'm looking at an image I changed to D2xmodeIII, neutral and STD and I don't see any noise in an ISO 100 image.

--
Just another Shooter.

I just saw the difference in Noise with an Image shot at ISO 400 and changed to D2xModeIII from STD and it did create more noise. However, I did underexpose that image a bit and it was more noticable in D2xmodeIII VS. Standard mode. Pretty interesting, I guess D2xMode III is more picky with the Exposure

Thanks Stan!

Cheers,

Ray
--
Just another Shooter.

Primo: why the waffle? It IS because the camera IS noisy at low isos, period.

Secundo: why the D2X modes now? Because they hope you'll imagine it is OK with D2X modes, but it isn't: because if it were, they would have supplied the machine with them in firmware at launch.

Third (cany spell you know...) the dynamic range is less than it should be because the noise floor, being high, robs us of the oomph we need, BUT if you set blacks to ZERO in all applications you will discover that the black noise pitting visible is reduced. Applying software noise reduction works better, is easier to do, and because you have no blacks in the image (there are none if you observe the scene anyway) your range of tones is extended and more like what we SEE. (I hate this because it looks too soft initially but it is true, and you can easily beef up your saved result with auto levels when opening your TIFFS in photoshop later)

FOURTH, The on- screen image can be better corrected for aberrations in this mode as they are easier to see, but if you are using Lightroom, turn off the option to defringe anything first.

Fifth. Do NOT apply sharpening in-camera. Keep it to ZERO. Shooting RAW means you can sharpen later. Leaving in-camera sharpening OFF gives smooth results in a file that has , as a result, less artifacts. If you dispute this, just shoot a few files in RAW UNSHARPENED and open them on-screen. Zoom to the recommended 100% and sharpen, and watch as you do so, the noise floor go rapidly through the roof, (just like it did on my Canon 20D).Therefore if your image is in pinpoint sharp focus , you can often getaway without sharpening it AT ALL. And this means LESS noise. (Am I too Loud?)

SIXTH. Dont have more than minimal contrast either, this adds to the noise and the visibility of artifacts. Auto Levels, auto-contrast, curves and histogram adjust do better AFTERWARDS in PP. Easier to see, easier to control.

RAW lets yiou add whatever you want and tweak however you want later, at NO risk to the original soft relatively noise-free file. Remember that the less contrast you have set in-camera the MORE and GREATER the dynamic range of the file, and you can retrieve overexposed highlights more easily whilst preserving shadow detail.

I found trhat NX increases the appearance of noise relative to Elements with the Plug-ins, or Lightroom.So does Bibble. I prefer NX and Bibble, but the D300 doesnt like 'em

I apply in Photoshop 0.2 radius sharpening at 402% and a threshold of 1 in a noisy file and zero if I'm very lucky. This option I nicked from Etchells and it gives a halo-less tight sharpening which is quite natural, nice.

A warning about post-processing. Lightroom has a minimum radius for sharpening of 0.5, quite uselessly too high. PSP8 is worse at 1.0!

They are all pathetically badly designed and fiddly to adjust, but PSP7 and Photoshop let you tighten down to 0.2, better than in-camera can manage, I believe and another source of noisy files

The ability to set and save your own presets makes the D2X ones redundant, IMHO, but I would not EVER set in-camera sharpening to SIX (contour map level!)
in order to try to rescue perhaps poorly focussed images.

I returned my D300 because the noise is unacceptable at base ISO: you have to be able to shoot and get a photograph that convinces, not a graph of more or less noise avec! You have to be able too, to reduce that noise in software afterwards whilst retaining the fine detail. It cannot be done. Well-lit scenes with fine detail suffer when reducing midtone and shadow noise, which is visually obviously necessary because you can see it!

So you cannot have your cake and eat it too, and I suspect that MANY posts are fraudulent. Are they SENSORED?? Your postings could be from 2MP machines because at that enlargement you simply cannot tell. I must add that mine never shown any noise in skies, but then I meter carefully- the spot metering on the grey pigeon would have helped as its a Kodak Gey card grey pigeon, maybe? and you need to check because on the first body I bought the spot-metering was up the creek. The second was precise and accurate- a superb tool with the right sensor.

When Nikon send me noiseless files of an average subject untreated from a D300, I'll let you know, but I spent two weeks testing every setting and every possibilty, and could not get acceptable results. They have four Gig of unsharpened RAW file tests at all settings from me and HAVE ADMITTED that "yes, there does seem to be a noise problem.....", tikhe?

Its a shame because it is a lovely camera. But a thousand pounds plus for pixels visible at 200ISO, neine danke. Il y a quand meme, des limites!

Munro,

I have been thinking the same thing...The d300 is noisy at low iso's, I see it. I never noticed it so much in my D200 at low iso's...

I am going to try some of the more neutral in camera settings as ALL my shots go into PP.

Please explain about NX adding to the noise. In the D200 days NX really processed the images better then PSCS2 or 3...Now I am wondering if the noise I am seeing is compounded by NX. I generally do a bit of a sharpen in NX, then save as tiff to open in PSCS3...Would I be better off in PSCS3 with no work in NX?

I am hoping that reducing the in camera settings to neutral will help...

Scott

...and I wrote from the first day of my switch that I was ready to give up some IQ for the advantages D300/DX format gives me, but not too much...
I wrote:

" ...Eventhough the overall IQ of the D3 is superior to the IQ of the D300 - @ all isos -D300 suits better my overall shooting priorities. Eventhough D3 has better dynamic range, files are simply "richer" with better tonality and there is a 2 stops noise advantage D3 has over D300, the above 12 points are valauble arguments to prefer D300 over D3... " in this thread:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=26431826

The little bit noise in the deep shadow areas don't bother me, you get this with any DX format camera and even with Canon 1Ds, but strong noise in the sky disturbed me tremedously, but this problem is completely solved now, so it's allright.

Using "neutral" setting gives me very pleasing results, way better as D2Xmode3 and especially "vivid" gave me. Using "neutral" you can stretch sharpening en contrast quiet a bit, without noticable noise. Using "vivid" with D300 makes low iso images unacceptable noisy.

I prefer not to PP if possible, only if it's necessary, and I prefer NX over Adobe products.
--
Kindest regards,
Stany
I prefer one really good picture in a day over 10 bad ones in a second...

http://www.fotografie.fr/

photoforfun said:

...and I wrote from the first day of my switch that I was ready to
give up some IQ for the advantages D300/DX format gives me, but not
too much...
I wrote:

Click to expand...

" ...Eventhough the overall IQ of the D3 is superior to the

photoforfun said:

IQ of the D300 - @ all isos -D300 suits better my overall shooting
priorities. Eventhough D3 has better dynamic range, files are simply
"richer" with better tonality and there is a 2 stops noise advantage
D3 has over D300, the above 12 points are valauble arguments to
prefer D300 over D3... " in this thread:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=26431826

The little bit noise in the deep shadow areas don't bother me, you
get this with any DX format camera and even with Canon 1Ds, but
strong noise in the sky disturbed me tremedously, but this problem is
completely solved now, so it's allright.
Using "neutral" setting gives me very pleasing results, way better as
D2Xmode3 and especially "vivid" gave me. Using "neutral" you can
stretch sharpening en contrast quiet a bit, without noticable noise.
Using "vivid" with D300 makes low iso images unacceptable noisy.
I prefer not to PP if possible, only if it's necessary, and I prefer
NX over Adobe products.
--
Kindest regards,
Stany
I prefer one really good picture in a day over 10 bad ones in a
second...

http://www.fotografie.fr/

Click to expand...

thanks
now its clear to the proportion of your standard of noise. (no more no less).
great to know you are happy especially with the blue sky.

Here i tested the Nikon D200 "in-camera" sharpening settings ! The camera was set on tripod, using a Nikon AF-S 24-70 at f/4 - ISO 160. Of course, i shot in RAW !

The images are cropped at 100%, with no post-process at all.

From Top Left to Bottom Right, the settings are "+2 HIGH", "+1 Medium High", "Ø Normal", "-1 Medium Low", "-2 Low", "None"

Obviously, the "None" setting has a lot less noise ! Now, the next step is to check wether one gets betters results by shooting at "None" and sharpen in post-process, or use some in-camera sharpening !?!



...why not do the same test with a D300 ? ...and a D3 ?

Cheers,
J-P.

Pics at http://www.pbase.com/scherrer
Equipment list in profile

the pattern of sharpening noise in the first photo here is what people called "film like" grain noise

JP Scherrer said:

Here i tested the Nikon D200 "in-camera" sharpening settings ! The
camera was set on tripod, using a Nikon AF-S 24-70 at f/4 - ISO 160.
Of course, i shot in RAW !

The images are cropped at 100%, with no post-process at all.

From Top Left to Bottom Right, the settings are "+2 HIGH", "+1 Medium
High", "Ø Normal", "-1 Medium Low", "-2 Low", "None"

Obviously, the "None" setting has a lot less noise ! Now, the next
step is to check wether one gets betters results by shooting at
"None" and sharpen in post-process, or use some in-camera sharpening
!?!



...why not do the same test with a D300 ? ...and a D3 ?

Cheers,
J-P.

Pics at http://www.pbase.com/scherrer
Equipment list in profile

Click to expand...

...i spent a few hours trying several sharpening methods -on the SHARP NONE file-, and found out that Nikon's OWN "in-camera" sharpening is VERY GOOD !

None of the sharpening tricks i applied gave me a better -less noise- rendering than the one i got with the in-camera SHARP HIGH setting !

...nice if someone else would try to do their own tests on different cameras, like D200, D300, D3 !?!?!

Cheers,
J-P.

Pics at http://www.pbase.com/scherrer
Equipment list in profile