akustykmagmanetpl
Senior Member
never used D3 so I can't relate this to actual D3 quality, but it sure looks good enough. seems to me even better than 5D + 28-75 combo.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
D3x vs. D3 for landscapes - any practical difference? (img)
- Thread starter sigala
- Start date
I don't use a telephoto nearly as often as normal to wide, but it does come in handy sometimes for 'extracted' landscapes, and can also be useful for stitching.
Agreed, the Tokina 12-24 is a real gem. I'm usually willing to pay for quality, but it's always nice when you can get top quality without paying so much.
--
Jeff Kohn
Houston, TX
http://www.pbase.com/jkohn
http://jeffk-photo.typepad.com
Yeah, the size/weight of the 70-300 makes it very attractive. Flying with the 200-400 is a PITA since it limits the other camera gear I can bring with me, and hiking in the mountains just isn't feasible with the 200-400.
Keeping low helps some, when practical. I have a Wimberley Sidekick that I've used for wildlife shooting, but hadn't considered trying it for landscapes. The rubber ball idea is an interesting one, I'll have to give that a try. I've found placing a beanbag on top of the lens can help some, as well.
--
Jeff Kohn
Houston, TX
http://www.pbase.com/jkohn
http://jeffk-photo.typepad.com
Your more than welcome to barrow my 70-300 VR anytime Roman.
hi, i'm a d3 user and very recently now, a d3x user.
here are my initial impressions.
for landscapes, i'd been very happy with the d3. however the detail has been nice, but 'artistic' and a bit 'plastic' and overfiltered, even with conversion from raws. the d3x regains those fine details plus even better tone and gradation. all at the same time as keeping the 'ergonomics' and operating procedures unchanged. so there is essentially no 'learning curve' going from d3 to d3x, just a boost in fine image detail and tone gradation. obviously at a steep price.
here are my initial impressions.
for landscapes, i'd been very happy with the d3. however the detail has been nice, but 'artistic' and a bit 'plastic' and overfiltered, even with conversion from raws. the d3x regains those fine details plus even better tone and gradation. all at the same time as keeping the 'ergonomics' and operating procedures unchanged. so there is essentially no 'learning curve' going from d3 to d3x, just a boost in fine image detail and tone gradation. obviously at a steep price.
RomanJohnston
Forum Pro
I have the next 4 days off....you busy?
Roman
--
The best tools of a successful photographer as well as a 'well lived' life is appreciation and a sense of adventure.
These are the tools of mastery of all things.
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/
Roman
--
The best tools of a successful photographer as well as a 'well lived' life is appreciation and a sense of adventure.
These are the tools of mastery of all things.
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/
lightmagic
Senior Member
As the say goes, the most important thing in a car is the brake. Well, the same principle applies to cameras, where the tripod is more important than the camera, if you want a high quality image.
The Lightmagician
Sun is my eye
Winds my breaths
Sky my open Mind.
http://www.lightmagical.com
--
The Lightmagician
Sun is my eye
Winds my breaths
Sky my open Mind.
http://www.lightmagical.com
John M Roberts
Senior Member
I had similar results when shooting my 67 Pentax with 300mm lens. I first thought it was problems with film flatness, then the lens. I later realized it was due to vibration. Blur occurred on one side, at the beginning of the exposure, and settled down by the end of the exposure which displayed sharpness at the other end of the frame. All on a tripod and MLU. That curtain is way to huge.
The stated benefits of shooting 35mm wide angle lenses on a tripod at high shutter speeds is surprising information. I rarely reached those speeds in my shooting but assumed a shutter speed equal or more to the focal length of the lens was safe for handheld. Its great to consider new info.
John R
unfortunately I am busy.
,
Marcin 3M
Senior Member
Shutter yrim in D3 is vertical.
Anyway, it's possible that air movement on the left side of second shot spoiled sharpness. Ground shape may create such kind of effect.
--
Marcin_3M
Anyway, it's possible that air movement on the left side of second shot spoiled sharpness. Ground shape may create such kind of effect.
--
Marcin_3M
markmark
Senior Member
keep the camera you have...
the money would be better spent on a couple of photo classes or workshops
the money would be better spent on a couple of photo classes or workshops
sigala
Active member
Thanks for your feedback!
In the last couple of days I compared a number of D3 and D3x samples, and it appears to me that if I use a quality plug-in to make them the same size (i.e. genuine fractals) and then apply some sharpening (i.e. Nik Sharpener Pro for RAW) the difference in "crispness" and visible / meaningful details appears to be no more than 20% at ISO 200. At ISO 1600 and 3200 I actually preferred D3 output every time as it responded to sharpening with much less artifacts.
I had a local opportunity to buy a slightly used D3x for as low as $6200 yesterday and desided to pass. I would have had to top off roughly $3K after selling my D3. While I do want to upgrade to the 24 MP sensor, my feeling is that like many others I will likely wait for the D700x - which at least will give me a smaller body to carry and possibly video as an added bonus. This of course is a speculation - however I simply cannot see how Nikon will let Canon sell its 5D Mark II for the second year in a row without offering any camera in the same spec / price range to compete.
In the last couple of days I compared a number of D3 and D3x samples, and it appears to me that if I use a quality plug-in to make them the same size (i.e. genuine fractals) and then apply some sharpening (i.e. Nik Sharpener Pro for RAW) the difference in "crispness" and visible / meaningful details appears to be no more than 20% at ISO 200. At ISO 1600 and 3200 I actually preferred D3 output every time as it responded to sharpening with much less artifacts.
I had a local opportunity to buy a slightly used D3x for as low as $6200 yesterday and desided to pass. I would have had to top off roughly $3K after selling my D3. While I do want to upgrade to the 24 MP sensor, my feeling is that like many others I will likely wait for the D700x - which at least will give me a smaller body to carry and possibly video as an added bonus. This of course is a speculation - however I simply cannot see how Nikon will let Canon sell its 5D Mark II for the second year in a row without offering any camera in the same spec / price range to compete.
sigala
Active member
I managed to improve the sharpness and focus in both images in question (or at least I think I did) by using the Focus Magic plugin and fixing the edges with just one pixel offset.
At this time I do think that motion blur from the handheld shooting was the culprit in my case - it make sense to me that taking picture of a subject that is almost ten miles away from me, like those skyscrapers in the panoramic shot, an amount of movement that is one tenth of a degree will result in a shift significant enough to create blur.
Here are the results of Focus Magic application - you be the judge... do they look sharp enough?
LA Panorama Take Two:
The Port of St John's Take Two:
At this time I do think that motion blur from the handheld shooting was the culprit in my case - it make sense to me that taking picture of a subject that is almost ten miles away from me, like those skyscrapers in the panoramic shot, an amount of movement that is one tenth of a degree will result in a shift significant enough to create blur.
Here are the results of Focus Magic application - you be the judge... do they look sharp enough?
LA Panorama Take Two:
The Port of St John's Take Two:
Marianne Oelund
Veteran Member
The LA panorama is still soft at the left side, and it's showing lateral CA as well (red is shifted toward the edge). Aside from that, sharpness looks very good, and the second photo has excellent sharpness.
Bernard Languillier
Senior Member
Or this device:Don't try this with a tripod - you'll need two.
http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Customkititems.asp?kc=CB%2DYS%2DQR%2DPkg&eq=
I have been using this, it seems to be working fine.
Cheers,
Bernard
Bernard Languillier
Senior Member
As long as you get 480 dpi at your chosen print size, I agree.
It really depends on the type of images. The sample above prints at 60 inch wide and you can see detail with your nose at 5 cm from the image and more details with your nose at 1cm of the image. It would not work with a crop of a D3 image. It would be plain awful and a waste of paper.
Now the image below is from a single D2x image and could be printer just as large without any problem.
Cheers,
Bernard
Bernard Languillier
Senior Member
When everything else is perfect, the D3x has significant value over the D3 for landscape.
Now, I'll be shooting from a boat at dusk tonight and will be using the D3 instead of the D3x because I know that not everything is going to be perfect (not even mentioning the beers that I will be forced to drink also...).
Cheers,
Bernard
-----------------------------------
http://www.light-of-earths.com
Now, I'll be shooting from a boat at dusk tonight and will be using the D3 instead of the D3x because I know that not everything is going to be perfect (not even mentioning the beers that I will be forced to drink also...).
Cheers,
Bernard
-----------------------------------
http://www.light-of-earths.com
Marianne Oelund
Veteran Member
Yes, that's a nice solution for inadequate tripod collars. Unfortunately, it won't help tripods or heads that are not stiff enough, though. Slipping a monopod under the camera body is a very cheap and effective solution for shutter-induced vibration (assuming the camera's in horizontal orientation).Or this device:Don't try this with a tripod - you'll need two.
http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Customkititems.asp?kc=CB%2DYS%2DQR%2DPkg&eq=
I have been using this, it seems to be working fine.
Bernard Languillier
Senior Member
I have been using this with my Gitzo GT 5531s and RRS BH-55 (probably the best combo in the western part of the galaxy) and it does seem to improve the sharpness of images taken with the 300 f2.8 VR (VR off) on the d3x. It is true that if would not help if the tripod/head is at fault but why save a few bucks on tripod if you have a d3x?
The monopod idea is interesting, and would work in vertical position too if you use a RRS L Bracket and this device (that I use also by the way on top of a light Velbon carbon monopod):
http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Itemdesc.asp?ic=MH%2D01&eq=&Tp=
Cheers,
Bernard
Marianne Oelund
Veteran Member
For vertical position, you need to use a second tripod under the camera, instead of a monopod, because of the direction of shutter movement. Since the shutter is moving horizontally, the monopod can't take up its mechanical shock (it provides no lateral support), but a tripod can, even if you only use two of its legs.
Admittedly, though, I rarely bother to use a tripod under the camera body, because it's rather fussy to set up.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum