3rd D7000 - Tests In Store...

Personally, I wouldn't risk taking Christmas photos with a new camera--unless you have lots of time in the next few weeks to learn how to use it with confidence.

David Lal said:

Is not what you are describing actually more attributable to the inevitable optical compromises in any zoom (and the bigger the zoom range, the more likely the problem) rather than the body of the camera?

Click to expand...

I did wonder that, but I think LiveView giving sharp images at any focal length pretty much discounts this.

David

The lens contains a data-table of "Z" points of correction, for a fix-focal (prime) you get X points of correction values distributed over the focal distance range the lens covers - MFD to infinity focus. In a zoom, that table of data becomes two-dimensional - X for focal distance , Y for zoom amount (focal length ) - giving you X * Y = Z points of correction in the lens' EEPROM memory. I think Nikon uses eight intermediate zoom positions, and about twenty distance points.

The camera has to rely on those correction points. It (the camera body) can only do one measurement in normal PD AF mode - are the measured rays in negative phase (front focus), on phase (in focus according to the AF module), or in positive phase (back focus). This information is then filtered through the correction value the lens sends to the body for the present distance/zoom value, and a focus correction amount is sent back to the lens.

The micro-adjustment feature (at least seems) to work only with the AF module output, giving you the same amount of "+" or "-" over the whole range of available distance/focal length combinations. This is kind of natural, since the body cannot possibly know what the zoom lens' correctional needs are (this depends on longitudinal CA and spherical aberration curves)
......................

So, "correct AF" is quite a lot harder to achieve than most people would seem to think. I've even encountered astigmatic Canons (5Dii) - bodies with mis-aligned vertical and horizontal lines in cross-type AF-points. Imagine what happens when the two measurement points that are supposed to tell the AF module what to do can't agree on a measurement value...

For what it's worth, I had a very similar experience with 2 new D7000 kits I tried (different focus adj needed for different zoom position and focus distance). I've decided to try again in the new year, after the issues hopefuly get sorted out.

Here is the thread describing this: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1034&message=37020392

.. Katie

assuming the store doesn't have great light

Indoors but with decent (not great) lighting I think you should at least be getting this kind of sharpness. It's not perfect, firstly because it's ISO 800, and also note I used M (which is 9mp), middle compression, and size-saving JPEG engine.

Use a prime lens like a simple 35mm 1.8, wide open.

To make sure it's not user error, you should of course:

• use a tripod or at least rest the camera on a couple books or similar. Given the high resolution it's only too easy, if you hold the camera and "rip the shot" a bit, to get results that seem a bit out of focus - but are due to operator error. I mean it, my practice of shooting with a handgun helps here, you need to press the shutter w/o knowing exactly when it goes in
• use the timer release to make double sure you're not causing any vibrations

For practical use not tests, I think it's wise to think about a VR lens. People don't realise how such lenses become key with high resolution digital cameras which will reveal any slight movement of the user's hands. Why do you think so many pros or semi pros love that 70-200 f2.8 VR zoom? Because it's optially good, but also bc of VR of course.

I for one can easily anguish when I think that a new toy doesn't really perform as hoped / expected - so I can understand where you're coming from. The other bit is whether you CAN AFFORD the camera, meaning it doesn't cause you guilt vs other more necessary items in your budget.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/antoinebach/5221494135/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/antoinebach/5222138624/

Buyer's Remorse is a big thing.

What's another big thing, and a more tangible one at that, is if money is really fairly tight, so that buying your D7000 puts other bits of your finances under stress.

If that's the case, then you shouldn't have bought a D7000 in the first place, and you should therefore return it.

All the best.

antoineb said:

Buyer's Remorse is a big thing.

What's another big thing, and a more tangible one at that, is if money is really fairly tight, so that buying your D7000 puts other bits of your finances under stress.

If that's the case, then you shouldn't have bought a D7000 in the first place, and you should therefore return it.

All the best.

Click to expand...

Interesting reply, but no - I can afford it quite comfortably, it's not buyers remorse - I'm loving everything about the camera with the exception of the lack of sharpness/focus.

Since I started playing with the camera, I have had my share of not perfectly in focus shots. But I was also getting reasonable shots such as the one below taken at f2.2:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/antoinebach/5210811971/sizes/o/in/photostream/

I was also liking the shallow DOF:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/antoinebach/5207263547/lightbox/

Still, in a first stage I have been worried and played w AF micro-adjust - but to no avail. What I mean is that I was getting the same proportion of what I estimated to be hits / misses, at micro-adjust ranging from -20 to +20 in steps of 5. So I concluded that this wasn't the problem, and went back to AF microadjust OFF.

Note that all these shots were typicall done w the 35mm lens and at wide apertures.

Then I've tried two things:

• stop down the 35mm lens a bit for a bit more than paper-thin DOF (which is what I was getting at closer range). Indeed when the DOF is so tiny, there are TWO risks: (1) that of ripping when hitting the shutter (I don't think I do this), and (2) that of moving ever the slight bit forward or backward.
• play instead w the 18-200mm lens, whose max aperture is just 3.5 thus giving more DOF, and also has VR

This gave me better results but I was still wondering.

So I did test shots again, at f1.8 again, this time using a good tripod, in decent light, and on a static subject of course. And with timer release. And for good measure I took a couple shots w phase-detect AF (single-point mode of course ( )), and then take one shot in LV where I would focus manually using the magnification.

That latter phase of the test had me get results that were pretty much as good w the AF in phase-detect, than the best I was getting manually. So I feel better now, with results like the two below:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/antoinebach/5221494135/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/antoinebach/5222138624/

Anway, that's why I'm suggesting you run some tests like I suggested: static subject, camera on a good tripod, prime lens wide open (35mm 1.8 G, 50mm 1.4 G, 50mm 1.8 D, etc), timer release, and compare w the best you can do using LV and manual focus. Good luck.

( ) the multi-point mode will fail to give perfect focus at wide apertures on objects with some shape, because the very shallow DOF will mean that averaging over some points will mean overall failure.

This entire focus thing with the D7000 has me scared to purchase. Good focus is probably more important than exposure as if the exposure is off a little, it is easy to adjust. I do not want to buy a camera body and be constantly concerned about and looking for an issue. The D90 is looking better all the time. Were there similar concerns at debut with this camera?

and to the OP, good luck with the outcome with your local camera store and Nikon.

All the coments about 'soft focus' and my own observatiosn on internet 'gallery' pictures to this point seem to imply that it's either better to wait for nikon to update the D7000 software or wait for the D300 replacement.
Too many 'ifs' in reviews thus far.

I mean it's NOT like you pick it up and shoot away and all the shots are in wonderful focus, no. Which I personally found - and am still finding - quite frustrating coming from advanced compacts that give me clean focus shots. Whether it's due to their large DOF which compensates for any focusing errors, or whether their contrast-detect AF is just more precise.

And, really the 16mp means that you will get to see small blurs say due to ripping the shutter button, which you might not have seen at 12mp.

I have played with D90's many times and frankly the actual differences, that will play a role in real-life, are MODEST to the point of being marginal:

• the D7000 gives you 16mp vs 12mp, which is of no importance. Really. Actually I shoot my D7000 at 9mp anyway most ofthe time. NEUTRAL.

• the D7000's viewfinder is 100% which for ME, is a big difference with the D90. I hate to carefully compose a shot and then end up with MORE stuff. +1 to D7k

• AF speed on both is about the same in phase detection. AF speed in contrast-detect LV mode is a lot faster on the D7000 - though it remains too slow for any practical use imho. NEUTRAL

• metering on both is about the same. This being said the D90 will still be able to meter in light levels where the D7000 will not. And, the D7000 is said by DPreview to overexpose scenes that are either very bright, or very contrasty. NEUTRAL or maybe +1 to D90

• high-ISO is a bit better on the D7000. Will this make a HUGE difference on your shots at normal print sizes? Nope. NEUTRAL

• video is easier to use on the D7000, and is HD. But its AF is clumsy at best so I don't think it's a really useable function anyway. I'd say NEUTRAL, call it +1 for D7k if you want.

• continuous shooting is faster onthe D7000 - personally I don't care about this bit, but some people do. NEUTRAL to +1 for D7k

• display is the same

• menu system is largely the same

• two card slots. Frankly I don't care about this one but for someone who would really be shooting TONS it might matter, or someone really needing RAW + JPEG

Two examples from the D300 I owned in 2007:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/antoinebach/2122570349/in/set-72157603506852755/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/antoinebach/2126810984/in/set-72157603506852755/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/antoinebach/2128955932/in/set-72157603506852755/

I would not DREAM of getting this kind of sharpness w my D7000 as it is.

When the Canons with 18MP came out a lot of people as here were complaining about soft focus. Turns out that the camera was ok, it was user error. High MP makes us refined out technique when shooting. extremely subtle hand movement that were not observable with 12 MP is now quite evident because of the higher MP. Just my two cents worth.

Sorry, Ken Rockwell already did the teddy bear, or is it a monkey?

cdlftw said:

Hi all,

I'm taking back my second D7000 to the store for a 3rd replacement on Wednesday due to backfocus / soft images (also confirmend by store manager). I'm going to test this camera in store, as opposed to taking it away like I did with the second one. Since I won't have the luxury of a week's shooting, what kind of shots/settings would you suggest? I'm thinking something like a small teddy bear, that has a decent amount of detail in the fibers, possibly a test chart - mounted on a tripod?

(Also, wondering what you would suggest if this 3rd camera also exhibits the same problems, which I'm praying it doesn't. Refund, off to Nikon service etc...)

Many thanks,
CDL

Click to expand...

Do a long exposure with a super tiny aperture to try and look for hot pixels.

--
A Beginning Amateur Photographer

Mannypr said:

When the Canons with 18MP came out a lot of people as here were complaining about soft focus. Turns out that the camera was ok, it was user error. High MP makes us refined out technique when shooting. extremely subtle hand movement that were not observable with 12 MP is now quite evident because of the higher MP. Just my two cents worth.

Click to expand...

If that were the case here, why are the liveview shots sharp and the OVF shots not?
--
http://fruminousbandersnatch.blogspot.com/

The D90, which I own and is a terrific camera, is thoroughly outclassed in each and every department by my new D7000. The camera is sharp beyond belief by comparison, as it should be with 33% more pixels. It also latches focus onto its subject like nobody's business, just as DP Review says. All six of my lenses snap to as never before. The out of camera jpgs are to die for, pure satin, close to or as good as a D700. It is a dream camera, one I've been waiting for all my life.
Thanks, Nikon!

Looking at your picutres, especially the napkin ring and lens cap gives me hope and I may just go for a 4th D7000? Am I such a bad photographer? Yes! I feel pretty stupid, but I sware... I couldn't focus the last three I had as clear as you have.... which tells me I (as in me) was not learned enough on this new fangled device... and must yet punish my soul again with anguish and dispare.... thanks.... I think.