Reading mode: Light Dark

Hogan responds to unhappy Nikon photographers

Go to last post
Thom Hogan said:
(I need another bet since it appears I lose my D700x one this year ;~)
Click to expand...
This is as close to a confirmation as I've seen so far. Makes me feel better about getting the a850, but a little sad for some Nikon users, and angry at Nikon.
--
Anthony Beach
 
Hi Guys,

you both hit on my sentsitive spots, which i am rapidly de-sensitising.
Thom Hogan said:
frederic fahraeus said:
Yes ofcourse you can do anything, press more into whatever you want, may it be cameras, cars or rockets BUT as Nikon explained: at the cost of something and that cost is file-quality.
Click to expand...
If that's what Nikon told NASA, then Nikon is as lost as NASA, I think. Never, ever bet against technical development. Sometimes you get lucky with a short term sag in ongoing development, but long term you always loose that bet. What a statement like that really says is that Nikon doesn't know how to go further with their sensor development and partners.
Click to expand...
NASA to Nikon. Dear me, No Sense Of Mission. And i mean the personal, human sense of mission. Bring back Carl Sagan.

I remember being amazed that 100K contractors or so were active on the Apollo"n" mission - how many are employed in this digital imaging game?

Exactly how important is it to people to perceive better?

I think we are entering a technological dark age. The incentives to push quality imaging at the low levels plane out early, whilst the breadth of skills and study required to understand why we do not get greater cameras (or even solve basic technique errors with AI - sory i mean "If It Works It Isn't AI" go google my meaning) are creating barriers i fail to explain to those who want to learn from me who sail through their Bar (barrister / attorney) exams and even some with quantitiative backgrounds (there we have a meeting between incomprehensions, theirs meets mine!)

I for one am tired of following development curves, decade cycles, product launches (the likes of which only Thom makes readable and discernable) and think, well, i shall become the Mad Prophet Of The PhotoWays and say "I had enough".

Or, rather, like the recurring theme, i'll go back to what i know and get something outta what i got.

Oops, now where are the tools to do that for the "unwashed masses"?

That's the breakthrough.

Now i'm riffing: how many RIP vendors came out fo the AI Winter? Outta Symbolics? Outta Harlequin? What happened to that ethos? Yeah, I know it was Govvy money. How sick and sad.

But that was the origin of most pre - press code since 1980.

No wonder we got utter crap for post processing, since the USPTO allowed Nixon's attorney (Bill Gates II, NOT Trey) to push wierd applications.

And Nope, it was ruined not by that alone. Not by my view.

I'll get to the point, but i'm hitting posting limits again :(
 
Needless to say, I will be spending more time now at the Sony SLR forum, so for those irritated by my presence here, bear with me and have a little patience (after all, I've been reasonably patient with Nikon), I believe I will be posting a lot fewer replies to this forum (especially after reading what Thom just posted below).
headofdestiny said:
Anthony, you may have a decentering issue with the 24-70, although the sweetspot of that lens is around 35-50mm for sharp corners.
Click to expand...
Yeah, in that range the lens is stellar.
headofdestiny said:
70mm needs f11 for sharp corners, and is by far a weakpoint of the lens.
Click to expand...
It's not too weak really, just not a big step up on the a850 from my 45 PC-E on the D300.
headofdestiny said:
The Zeiss zooms have field curvature to deal with (some say that contributes to the "3d-ness,") and you should find Edward Karaa on getdpi.com forums and talk to him about opimizing it.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I'll look into that.
headofdestiny said:
Incidentally, he actually prefers IDC to LR, because at least the colors are good.
Click to expand...
IDC has terrible artifacts in it, it makes going from 12 MP to 24 MP pointless.
headofdestiny said:
Seriously, avoid Adobe with Sony cameras (I'm not sure what is availabe for A850 now. DxO ?) With the A900, I use C1 and RT (I'm on windows.)
Click to expand...
Avoid ACR with Nikon cameras too. I will probably buy C1 when it supports the a850, I always liked it for my D200 and D300 (really sharp with good colors, but not the best DR).
--
Anthony Beach
 
mikeboh said:
I've read that Zeiss as a general philosophy designs lenses for improved center sharpness over corners.
Click to expand...
Stopping down so much was the bigger issue. At f/5.6 the Zeiss pulls another 17% ahead of the Nikkor at the focal lengths I compared them at.
--
Anthony Beach
 
guess i'm in for the Long Haul :-)
Thom Hogan said:
At the moment there is a bit of a backlash against more pixels. More pixels came too fast, faster than sensor fundamentals supported. Now we have a demand for dynamic range and noise handling. But the bottom line is that if you graph it, there's no evidence that any wall has been reached.
Thom Hogan said:
Whats the point in having, say 35MPs if the overall quality is less then 24MPs.
Click to expand...
Funny thing is, the same thing was said about 24mp. And the people that said it were wrong.
Click to expand...
This is for Thom! No bollox brother, and thank you for being the first pundit to say (paraphrased) that most people couldn't handle a D3X without being a ***** on the glass. Mate, there is no glass. There, that's it, and i've been ranting about it for a while. Fred can go with his big Nikkor colection and he's studio and set shots and get great stuff from a D3X.

This is a new Para for reasons: can you recall the "MFDigest" 8k website archive of AF probs and "hitting 50lpppm"??

Fred i know really controls his shots, and he gets to control light too.

My take: D3X is simply priced to avoid disappointment. Sorry you don't have a busines that gets you gaffers and lighting guys, or a stock agency deal that brings you in enough for $8K supports. Well, then, a D3X ain't for you. Took me a while to really suss this, because i was making my own decisions and not thinking outside of those, but really, all Nikon did with the D3X pricing was protect their users from real dissapointment. Ironically, given my SIG, that's where Sony people have led themselves.

But those who are dialled in to what they need really can use the extra pixels. They don't necessarily mean additional noise. I am not doing wierd 8" prints with deliberately downrezzed prints to get a "wow" on that format.

This BIGMP game just challenged what we all want. Cred to Thom for "as good as it gets" in essay. I nearly punted a whole business son that trigger.

But think back to advertising for a moment, just one: VW for a start. They are real good at translating their product to an emotional standpoint anyone can perceive. They did that since the classic one with the funeral train and the guy in the VW inherits. So how do we sell photography now?
Thom Hogan said:
Again, if that's true, then it says more about Nikon than it does sensor development. Indeed, if the whole MX development thing was true, this could be a self-serving statement by Nikon. A very self-serving statement.
Thom Hogan said:
Besides only a few years back, if you remember there were serious talks about limits of a FF or DX sensor.
Click to expand...
Yes, there were. And those limits were higher than 24mp, by the way. As long ago as 2002 I was writing that I believed that the DX limit was likely to be somewhere in the low 20's, perhaps as high as 24mp. Funny thing is, people thought I was nuts, now we have an 18mp camera that uses a slightly smaller sensor that seems to be putting out just fine files and seems to be more lens limited than sensor.
Click to expand...
Is all this development going the wrong way? I mean i am amazed how things have moved in the sensors, yet the only thing i've seen impress me is, well, not pure pixels, i think it's processing (3X).

Diminishing returns. If you have so much invested in plant, and the photo game has been taken over by silicon nuts, what is there next?

Ludicrous hint: just ordered a K7 . . .
Thom Hogan said:
Thom Hogan said:
In any event, why would you need 45MPs in a DSLR???
Click to expand...
"Need"? No, I don't need it. There are declining benefits from more pixels at that level, however there are benefits.

I'll make you a bet (I need another bet since it appears I lose my D700x one this year ;~): Within two years we'll have a 30+mp full frame DSLR.

--
Thom Hogan
author, Complete Guides to Nikon bodies (21 and counting)
http://www.bythom.com
Click to expand...
Thom! Thom? Is that you taking back the D700X plan? Or are you secretly a Brit? :-)

You know i stand - not against it - but believing no 700X.

Wow you guys, thanks for posting as always,
  • john
--
=====================
Bring Back The Mind Of Minolta !
=====================
 
1. Don't know or care, as I mainly get my advice directly for the camera/lens manufacturers Web Sites and from the Kenrockwell.com online site; and, I am a happy camper with both the Nikon and Leica gear I own. In fact, for my shooting interests/needs, my Nikon gear is so good that I have no needs to purchase anymore; and, after my Leica M9 arrives, I'll have all the Leica stuff I am interested in too. :-)

2. I recommend people get and keep the gear that meets their personal interest/needs, and stop worrying so much about what others and 3d Party reviewers like or don't like. :-)

--
BRJR ....(LOL, some of us are quite satisfied as Hobbyists ..)


david nix said:
Interesting and insightful comments by Thom on the Nikon culture and how it is affecting Nikon's financial bottom line. It appears that, unlike some of the other camera companies, Nikon marches to its own drummer and not the Nikon customer. What do you think? Continuing to use my D300.
David Nix
Click to expand...
 
Iliah Borg said:
Kabe Luna said:
Same with one's photography. Most customers only know what they've already seen. Allowing them to dictate creative usually results in less rather than more innovative results.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is exactly what was my problem with one of new customers. Essentially he was after a "common" look for his promotional materials, something along the line "sex sales", but was too shy to make it really work. We spent 3 days discussing, and I turned the job off.
Click to expand...
Not my usual scene of comment, but anyhow:

I have books and books, by which i mean cheap self - binds, usually laser printed but good duplex etc, of "looks". The idea is to saturate or overload a customer with ideas. These "books" are themes in a way, but really run offs of work that i think fits together. After a thousand or so pages there's only left an impression.

One of the things i do is to keep visuals of things i've seen, sometimes in work i do not do, such as architecture, and make them available.

If i have a interested customer, the question is then "which and what did you like?" and get them with a pen on the prints, cull it down. Circle ther bits they appreciate. From that you find colors, focuses, scenes . . . hardly a test but a great leveller to avoid someone trying to get you to replicate a look and then them not finding it in your portfolio.

Positively speaking, what i get from this is often an aspirational. Often a customer selects a lighting appearance or style, which can be replicated or attempted. I get specifics. I'm not using my own work to illustrate. But the minute i am called out on a shot customer likes, i am well aware how i lit or shot my own, and can compare.

Then i can get to practicalities, and at that point i have th ecustomer involved in the process so i can cut to budget.

Hope of some interest,
  • john
--
=====================
Bring Back The Mind Of Minolta !
=====================
 
JKirbs said:
Bring back Carl Sagan.
Click to expand...
Easy enough: A sensor is composed of silicon and captures photons — billions upon billions of photons.
JKirbs said:
how many are employed in this digital imaging game?
Click to expand...
Given that over 100m cameras are sold every year (and that doesn't include cell phones), quite a few.
JKirbs said:
Exactly how important is it to people to perceive better?
Click to expand...
Difficult to say. One of the issues is that presentation technology hasn't improved at the same pace as acquisition technology. The largest TV most people can buy for their house is only going to do 1080 lines and doesn't need more than 4mp to fill.

But the issue isn't really people perceiving better, it's companies that sell millions of units a year (Nikon sells 13m cameras) having something that seems convincing enough to sell more next year. Once you get on the escalator you discover it doesn't have a top floor: you have to keep going up or you're pushed off by others who will.
JKirbs said:
I think we are entering a technological dark age.
Click to expand...
Nope. No evidence of that, whatsoever, and plenty of evidence that the opposite is true.
JKirbs said:
I for one am tired of following development curves, decade cycles, product launches (the likes of which only Thom makes readable and discernable) and think, well, i shall become the Mad Prophet Of The PhotoWays and say "I had enough".
Click to expand...
Then get off the escalator and let the others through ;~). There's no doubt that in any product category that some buyers eventually get weary. It's also true that some creators get myopic (e.g. "the only thing worth pursuing is more megapixels"). But that doesn't mean that underlying technology improvements stop.

--
Thom Hogan
author, Complete Guides to Nikon bodies (21 and counting)
http://www.bythom.com
 
photonut2008 said:
I'm no fan of ACR, but I'm waiting for something better to use with the a850.
Click to expand...
But that's one of the problems with buying outside the mainstream. If Company A sells X products and Company B sells 3X products, which one do you think gets the most aftermarket support and attention? Surely you're not waiting for Sony to enter the software business and show you want the sensor can really do, right? Big companies like Adobe are going to put their resources first and foremost into large quantity sellers. That leaves boutique software companies to fill your demand, at best.
photonut2008 said:
I am hoping LR can do double duty to justify its expense
Click to expand...
LR uses the ACR converter.
photonut2008 said:
Yes, I know f/16 is crippling -- and yet the a850 still did better.
Click to expand...
This is one of the reasons why I tell people that more pixels isn't necessarily going to dead end. You have to push diffraction pretty far before you lose all the gain. However, note that you should have gotten a 1.4x gain and you say you got a 1.25x gain (I personally don't think it's that high in best case).

--
Thom Hogan
author, Complete Guides to Nikon bodies (21 and counting)
http://www.bythom.com
 
Thom, Iliah can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that the Sony/Adobe raw conversion issue has more to do with how Adobe deals with good color seperation, rather than Adobe simply not fine tuning things for Sony. Iliah has spoken quite a bit about how Sony has a different approach in this regard (which does cost it at high ISO.)

Anthony, Adobe may not be the very best for Nikon raws, but is much better for current Nikon cameras than it is for Sony.
 
Hayya Thom!
Thom Hogan said:
JKirbs said:
Bring back Carl Sagan.
Click to expand...
Easy enough: A sensor is composed of silicon and captures photons — billions upon billions of photons.
Click to expand...
LOL!
Thom Hogan said:
Thom Hogan said:
how many are employed in this digital imaging game?
Click to expand...
Given that over 100m cameras are sold every year (and that doesn't include cell phones), quite a few.
Click to expand...
You got me on the retail expansion. I am thinking now of street urchins selling 2MP digicams along with certain smokables . . .

We are all employed!
Thom Hogan said:
Thom Hogan said:
Exactly how important is it to people to perceive better?
Click to expand...
Difficult to say. One of the issues is that presentation technology hasn't improved at the same pace as acquisition technology. The largest TV most people can buy for their house is only going to do 1080 lines and doesn't need more than 4mp to fill.
Click to expand...
Bloody bugger Hell Right. THANK YOU! I stare at $8K screens and think them utterly crap. Remember the "3M" (1 MHz, 1MB, 1MP)"?

Where's the development for that, along Moore's?

But we can do something here: content retention is the limit of display tech. C.F Hollywierd. We could do 4K RIGHT THE DAMN NOW. (that's 8MP cine for the lost) just sending 2 buck USB thingies.

Enterblamement drives delivery. Reason why i am still dealing with SDI on a tiny 24" screen, and DCI has no end user color management proponents outisde THX which is a kludge.
Thom Hogan said:
But the issue isn't really people perceiving better, it's companies that sell millions of units a year (Nikon sells 13m cameras) having something that seems convincing enough to sell more next year. Once you get on the escalator you discover it doesn't have a top floor: you have to keep going up or you're pushed off by others who will.
Click to expand...
Enterblamement again. How dare we see in our homes what a 70mm (optically uprezzed!) print did in our teenage years?
Thom Hogan said:
Thom Hogan said:
I think we are entering a technological dark age.
Click to expand...
Nope. No evidence of that, whatsoever, and plenty of evidence that the opposite is true.
Thom Hogan said:
I for one am tired of following development curves, decade cycles, product launches (the likes of which only Thom makes readable and discernable) and think, well, i shall become the Mad Prophet Of The PhotoWays and say "I had enough".
Click to expand...
Then get off the escalator and let the others through ;~). There's no doubt that in any product category that some buyers eventually get weary. It's also true that some creators get myopic (e.g. "the only thing worth pursuing is more megapixels"). But that doesn't mean that underlying technology improvements stop.
Click to expand...
Screw the escalator mate! Problem is we're all ON THE BLOODY THING! We're all in same boat, i mean, you say it yourself on the production scale issues. I, for one, do not welcome our "HD overlords". Or go scan a 35 print on a Northlight/Arri/whatever and deal with a bunch of 40Gb/s infiniband to get it to screen. I think there's a lot of way to go on the perceptual models to reduce that.

God Bless & thanks!
  • john
--
=====================
Bring Back The Mind Of Minolta !
=====================
 
Thom Hogan said:
photonut2008 said:
I'm no fan of ACR, but I'm waiting for something better to use with the a850.
Click to expand...
But that's one of the problems with buying outside the mainstream. If Company A sells X products and Company B sells 3X products, which one do you think gets the most aftermarket support and attention? Surely you're not waiting for Sony to enter the software business and show you what the sensor can really do, right? Big companies like Adobe are going to put their resources first and foremost into large quantity sellers. That leaves boutique software companies to fill your demand, at best.
Click to expand...
I was planning on moving to one of those boutique software applications (Mac only) soon anyway. It's now ahead of any future lens purchases since my D300 and lenses can also benefit from it.
Thom Hogan said:
Thom Hogan said:
I am hoping LR can do double duty to justify its expense
Click to expand...
LR uses the ACR converter.
Click to expand...
Right, so it will be back to single duty.
Thom Hogan said:
Thom Hogan said:
Yes, I know f/16 is crippling -- and yet the a850 still did better.
Click to expand...
This is one of the reasons why I tell people that more pixels isn't necessarily going to dead end. You have to push diffraction pretty far before you lose all the gain. However, note that you should have gotten a 1.4x gain and you say you got a 1.25x gain (I personally don't think it's that high in best case).
Click to expand...
Those bars on the resolution chart presumably work out to about 12% each. The a850 resolves about 2 bars better everywhere I look, in one instance it resolved 4 bars better (along the diagonal axis, things are a little less pronounced though along the vertical and horizontal axises).

One thing about these tests I've done is that they are lens against lens, and equivalent focal lengths (and sometimes equivalent apertures too). That can work both ways as far as favoring one system over the other, but I am just trying to figure out which camera I want to use for which purpose.

For my purposes, with what I have right now (which is very limited on the Sony system), I would say anything narrower than 44mm FOV on the DX goes to the D300, and landscapes with wider FOVs go to the Sony (factoring stitching into the equation may make my current breakpoint between systems for landscapes in the range of 30° along the vertical axis). Given what you wrote about no "D700x" this year, I'm glad I bought the a850 and it could be a while before I buy anymore Nikon gear (a year or two I would say, if not longer).

If someone were to ask me about switching systems though, I would probably say don't do it. Sony is too limited right now in their lens choices, and Nikon's ergonomics suit me better (Sony's UI has some good points though that Nikon could learn from). FWIW, I didn't buy a Sony a850 because of Thom's (and other's) advice, I bought it in spite of that advice.
--
Anthony Beach
 
So what will you say Fred, when Canon do release a 1DSMKIV that exceeds 24MP and likely delivers 30 plus MP images of excellent quality?
frederic fahraeus said:
Wrong! Nikons technical division have said. " tahts it" they cant squeeze anything more or press in anything more into the D3X sensor. Its the end of line, as far as the 24MP, FF is concerned.

Basically all this crying and halloring is for nothing. Next step is MF.
Click to expand...
 
...for Leica's M9. Depending on the terms of that agreement, Nikon/Kodak could use that as a basis the same way Nikon used Sony's 24.5 as the starting point for its own sensor. Otherwise, Nikon could be designing the sensor from scratch itself, as it did the 12.1MP CMOS in the D3 and D700, with a "silent" partner manufacturing it. Clearly they have the ability, having done such a thing now twice (D2h/s and D3/D700). In fact, one could argue that the precent has been to keep design of the sensors for the "high speed" professional cameras in-house.

Just a thought.
brunobarolo said:
photoforfun said:
A 18Mp FX sensor in a D700-alike body, with as low noise than D700/D3, weaker AA filter and an improved video mode over the D90-D300s, would do so, price €2695. I hope for november announcement, december availability...
--
Kindest regards,
Stany
http://www.fotografie.fr/
http://www.fotografie.fr/fotoforum/index.php

I prefer one really good picture in a day over 10 bad ones in a second...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
- -
Kabe Luna

http://www.garlandcary.com
 
JKirbs said:
But we can do something here: content retention is the limit of display tech. C.F Hollywierd. We could do 4K RIGHT THE DAMN NOW. (that's 8MP cine for the lost) just sending 2 buck USB thingies.
Click to expand...
Yes, we could have much better display tech. But all those young folk who decreed that content is free with their MP3 rips basically scared the bejeebers out of the old fogey content producers. Free perfect copies tend to ruin the business model. Of course, many of those that proclaimed content to be free on the Web but were taking in massive VC funding to create Web sites without a business model discovered...well, you kinda do need a business model to pay salaries. Jennifer Aniston, U2, Spongebob, et.al. don't grow on trees, after all.
JKirbs said:
How dare we see in our homes what a 70mm (optically uprezzed!) print did in our teenage years?
Click to expand...
Somehow I doubt Hollywood would have any problems with you making the biggest wall in your house a theater screen if they could be guaranteed to get their US$8 (adjusted every year for inflation) per person for each thing you put out it.

--
Thom Hogan
author, Complete Guides to Nikon bodies (21 and counting)
http://www.bythom.com
 
JKirbs said:
So how do we sell photography now?
Click to expand...
Excellent point. I could probably do a pretty good E-P1 ad right now. The camera isn't perfect, but it's changed my casual shooting. (To the residents of South Africa who saw this weird American bring small LED panels and cameras to every meal and photographed everything he ate causing the wait staff to come to a complete standstill, my apologies for spooking you and making you question your choice of eating establishment.)
JKirbs said:
Is all this development going the wrong way? I mean i am amazed how things have moved in the sensors, yet the only thing i've seen impress me is, well, not pure pixels, i think it's processing (3X).
Click to expand...
Yes, processing has certainly changed the game. It's going to change the game more. In theory, you can put plenty of processing power on the sensor, in the ADC, and down the chain. And lots of processing power makes it possible to remove lots of defects. I can't really think of something I wouldn't be trying to remove from the data.
JKirbs said:
Diminishing returns. If you have so much invested in plant, and the photo game has been taken over by silicon nuts, what is there next?
Click to expand...
HAVEN'T YOU BEEN LISTENING TO ME? You're as bad as Nikon ;~). The one thing that every camera company could fix that would make a difference is user experience. Oh, they make their little stabs here and there, almost like they're trying to reinvent Microsoft Bob. Then you pick up an Apple product and realize that--with lots of design and someone who is a perfectionist calling the shots--you can actually make devices that have pretty darned good user experience in them. Not to say Apple is perfect. But heavens, the difference between UI on an iPhone and on the E-P1 makes it seems like one was designing for humans and the other for some alien species. (Still, I like the E-P1: I just try to ignore all the junk piled on to that camera's UI.)
JKirbs said:
Thom! Thom? Is that you taking back the D700X plan?
Click to expand...
I still expect it. But I just don't see it coming before PMA now.

--
Thom Hogan
author, Complete Guides to Nikon bodies (21 and counting)
http://www.bythom.com
 
Kabe Luna said:
...for Leica's M9. Depending on the terms of that agreement, Nikon/Kodak could use that as a basis the same way Nikon used Sony's 24.5 as the starting point for its own sensor. Otherwise, Nikon could be designing the sensor from scratch itself, as it did the 12.1MP CMOS in the D3 and D700, with a "silent" partner manufacturing it. Clearly they have the ability, having done such a thing now twice (D2h/s and D3/D700). In fact, one could argue that the precent has been to keep design of the sensors for the "high speed" professional cameras in-house.
Click to expand...
I don't think they can do video with that sensor. Heck the MFDB guys haven't even figured out how to do in-camera LiveView with those slow CCD's. I also have doubts about how competive it would be at high-ISO (I haven't looked specifically into the M9 sensor, but none of the other MF-style sensors have been competive at high-ISO).

--
Jeff Kohn
Houston, TX
http://www.pbase.com/jkohn
http://jeffk-photo.typepad.com
 
Yes, at comments in this thread! "Im using so software, but its not any good" "no good for the Sony", Im using this for Nefs, BUT NX is better".

these are the kind of people that would buy a Ferrari and then put second-hand tires on and complain about the price of petrol.
 
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