D90 to D7000 my findings

Barry Fitzgerald · Oct 1, 2012

Mako2011 said:
Mako2011 said:

It's not a "massive" issue, but a weaker aspect of the D7k

Click to expand...

Not really...did you notice:

" I've noticed a bit of chatter on the net about "overexposure." But that's not what's really happening with the D7000 metering system. No, it's that color matching and pattern matching coming into play. And correctly, I think. Let's say, for example, that there's a skin tone in the foreground of your scene. Perhaps the person with that skin is even a bit backlit. Well, the D7000 certainly sees that skin tone and knows where to put it on the tonal scale. But in previous Nikon matrix meters, if the background was producing values that would blow out the histogram, the matrix meter tended (but not always and not completely) to preserve highlights. I don't see as much of that with the D7000 (except in single servo AF). It's not going to preserve those highlights at the expense of what it thinks is "subject." It certainly won't preserve them as much as previous Nikon matrix meters, even when it decides to do so. Two other things play into the "overexposure" issue. First, there's gamma. People coming from older (pre-D3) Nikon bodies and seeing Picture Controls for the first time are reacting to the mid-range boost that the default Picture Control applies compared to the old style image settings. Second is contrast. The defaults (and many of the other Picture Controls) push contrast a bit, and that has a tendency to make bright seem brighter."

Again, knowing the settings really can make a big difference.

With respect Mako Thom is just blasting out the marketing material without real world shots to back it up.

http://norman.walsh.name/2011/05/31/d7000

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ndw/5771852749/

Well what is the subject? Clearly the metering has made an inappropriate choice. I'd expect some of the sky to be blown..but it's blown it out to kingdom come, worse it's pushed shadow areas to mid tone..highlights gone entirely.

Mako2011 said:
Actually is less biased than the D90 in same mode.

IMO that is not what is going on the D90 is less prone to excessive blowouts for such shots.

The D7k should have some fancy scene recognition, and should know that's a scenic shot. It's failed entirely in that photo above, the AF point should have little to no influence on the exposure for such shots.

No idea why Nikon can't get it better for photos like this, it's not hard to work out what to do metering wise

Mako2011 said:
BTW, do you have a return date yet for the body? Good luck and have a great week.

I will return it Monday week

JCB123 · Oct 1, 2012

Well sending it back after one day does sound a tad impulsive. I had (still have) a D90 and wanted a second body. After some long deliberation I decided on a D7000 over the a D5100 or a second D90.

I fine tuned my lenses, on the basis that a camera that can fine tune probably needs it. It still took a few days to adjust my technique before I was consistently getting sharp hand held results. At first I felt that many of my pictures were not as sharp as I would have liked. So I tested it using a tripod. mirror up and remote release. The results were sharp. So I paid more attention to my shooting technique, used slightly faster shutter speeds, and surprise surprise the results improved.

I bought my D7000 after production restarted after the Thailand floods, so I wasn't an early adopter (never am) I find the AF to be very capable and accurate. I use the AEL button assigned to AF ON and have the camera permanently set to AF-C. I use single point or 9 point dynamic for the most point and rarely have any issues. I don't use the 3D tracking mode but to be honest my prejudice against that mode came from trying it on the D90.

As for skin tones, I've read a lot of critisism of the D7000 in this respect, but I never had a problem with it. Perhaps I'm not critical enough. That said I don't shoot jpegs these days so maybe its an issue with the in camera jpeg settings or the picture style settings.

Mako2011 · Oct 1, 2012

Barry Fitzgerald said:
Mako2011 said:

Member said:

It's not a "massive" issue, but a weaker aspect of the D7k

Click to expand...

Not really...did you notice:

" I've noticed a bit of chatter on the net about "overexposure." But that's not what's really happening with the D7000 metering system. No, it's that color matching and pattern matching coming into play. And correctly, I think. Let's say, for example, that there's a skin tone in the foreground of your scene. Perhaps the person with that skin is even a bit backlit. Well, the D7000 certainly sees that skin tone and knows where to put it on the tonal scale. But in previous Nikon matrix meters, if the background was producing values that would blow out the histogram, the matrix meter tended (but not always and not completely) to preserve highlights. I don't see as much of that with the D7000 (except in single servo AF). It's not going to preserve those highlights at the expense of what it thinks is "subject." It certainly won't preserve them as much as previous Nikon matrix meters, even when it decides to do so. Two other things play into the "overexposure" issue. First, there's gamma. People coming from older (pre-D3) Nikon bodies and seeing Picture Controls for the first time are reacting to the mid-range boost that the default Picture Control applies compared to the old style image settings. Second is contrast. The defaults (and many of the other Picture Controls) push contrast a bit, and that has a tendency to make bright seem brighter."

Again, knowing the settings really can make a big difference.

Click to expand...

With respect Mako Thom is just blasting out the marketing material without real world shots to back it up.

http://norman.walsh.name/2011/05/31/d7000

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ndw/5771852749/

Some nice shots but they also show lack of exposure control.

I have, with experience, trail, and error found Thoms description of focus point bias and exposure control very accurate regards the D7K. It is after all a new body to you, and your experience to date is limited but well on its way to gaining.

Member said:
Well what is the subject? Clearly the metering has made an inappropriate choice. I'd expect some of the sky to be blown..but it's blown it out to kingdom come, worse it's pushed shadow areas to mid tone..highlights gone entirely.

Had he changed focus modes and or AF-Area modes he could have controlled exposure much better. As it stands...look at the EXIF, you can see the camera was not the one actually making the inappropriate choices.

Member said:
Member said:

Actually is less biased than the D90 in same mode.

Click to expand...

IMO that is not what is going on the D90 is less prone to excessive blowouts for such shots.

As noted...above not actually what is happening.

Member said:
The D7k should have some fancy scene recognition, and should know that's a scenic shot. It's failed entirely in that photo above, the AF point should have little to no influence on the exposure for such shots.

With respect, ou may have missed the part about how Focus Point Bias can be controlled though AF mode on the D7K. In the case the user chose to let the camera be influenced. You don't have to allow it to bias....other modes basically turn it off.

Member said:
No idea why Nikon can't get it better for photos like this, it's not hard to work out what to do metering wise

That is why I'm surprised the shooter was unable to understand how to use it effectively. I have noticed a trend to treat the new meters as if the react exactly the same as Matrix meters of old.......the do not. Things have changed and many simply fail to realize and notice. BTW, auto ISO works differently now vs your older D90. Don't get surprised. Good Luck.

Kim Letkeman · Oct 1, 2012

Barry Fitzgerald said:
With respect Mako Thom is just blasting out the marketing material without real world shots to back it up.

You do understand that he carries and shoots the camera for many weeks when he writes his guides. And with his experience and technical acumen, you do understand that his knowledge of how to shoot the camera and its strengths and weaknesses is multiple orders of magnitude above average.

Member said:
http://norman.walsh.name/2011/05/31/d7000

And by posting this example, you have confirmed that you understanding of fundamentals is multiple orders of magnitude below average.

The example was a dark space and a bright sky. The dark space influences the meter because it is the subject. So the sky gets blown.

The photographer must compensate the meter to cause something else to happen, which was done in the second image in that example. But he calls it an "exposure issue" ... while I call it "normal."

Most cameras react that way ... and those that do not often have to be compensated upwards to open shadows.

Either way, half the population will b-tch and moan ... and they will always be wrong, as you are. It is the photographer's responsibility to gauge intent and act on it. The camera cannot gauge intent.

Member said:
Well what is the subject? Clearly the metering has made an inappropriate choice.

The metering made a choice. Appropriateness is based on intent, and only the hands on the camera can decide what the intent should be.

What you want is a conservative meter.

Are you aware that the D7000 has a global setting for that? Set it to -2/3EV permanently and live in bliss.

Member said:
I'd expect some of the sky to be blown..but it's blown it out to kingdom come, worse it's pushed shadow areas to mid tone..highlights gone entirely.

Yes, and the compensation was ... what? You guessed it ... 0EV.

That is an incompetent exposure in sunny conditions. Unequivocally.

Member said:
IMO that is not what is going on the D90 is less prone to excessive blowouts for such shots.

The D90 meter is biased differently ... you are still talking like a victim ... poor me, the meter is not working. What shall I do?

Member said:
The D7k should have some fancy scene recognition, and should know that's a scenic shot. It's failed entirely in that photo above, the AF point should have little to no influence on the exposure for such shots.

No idea why Nikon can't get it better for photos like this, it's not hard to work out what to do metering wise

The photographer failed entirely. That's all that happened.

If the meter is conservative and always protects skies at all cost, people will constantly complain about noisy shadows.

So it does not matter where the boas is set, the photographer must always intervene.

Member said:
I will return it Monday week

A week of Mondays. Strange place you live in ...

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com

Barry Fitzgerald · Oct 1, 2012

Kim Letkeman said:
You do understand that he carries and shoots the camera for many weeks when he writes his guides. And with his experience and technical acumen, you do understand that his knowledge of how to shoot the camera and its strengths and weaknesses is multiple orders of magnitude above average.

Correct me if I'm wrong this is the same Thom who denies the D7k ever had any AF problems, and seems intent on smoke and mirrors blaming users and focus shift?

Well the only good news is he's started to wake up a bit with the D800 fiasco..so there is some hope

Kim Letkeman said:
The example was a dark space and a bright sky. The dark space influences the meter because it is the subject. So the sky gets blown.

There is blown.and there is really blown

I've taken shots of people where the meter has gone to 1.5 stops overexposure at times, not often but that dark suit can spoil things

That's not normal..and it's a flaw in the metering

Kim Letkeman said:
The photographer must compensate the meter to cause something else to happen, which was done in the second image in that example. But he calls it an "exposure issue" ... while I call it "normal."

I won't suggest the D7k has a bad meter, but it could be better. Imagine this that classic moment arrives and you capture it..only to find it's goofed up with some stupid exposure (even in raw you can't save it) so you dial in the exp compensation..ooops moment gone..oh well ;-0

Kim Letkeman said:
Most cameras react that way ... and those that do not often have to be compensated upwards to open shadows.

I would expect most camera to have have blown the sky..but not to grossly overexpose that much

Kim Letkeman said:
Either way, half the population will b-tch and moan ... and they will always be wrong, as you are. It is the photographer's responsibility to gauge intent and act on it. The camera cannot gauge intent.

On the contrary as I've said those folks who do the metering should know full well the AF bias needs to be toned right down for scenic shots.

Kim Letkeman said:
The metering made a choice. Appropriateness is based on intent, and only the hands on the camera can decide what the intent should be.

The intent is the AF point which is in most cases not the point of interest.

Kim Letkeman said:
What you want is a conservative meter.

I'd dial down the exposures in such situations

Kim Letkeman said:
Are you aware that the D7000 has a global setting for that? Set it to -2/3EV permanently and live in bliss.

Trouble is that's a universal adjustment and the D7k does ok in some situations..and struggles in some others. Not really a solution

Kim Letkeman said:
The D90 meter is biased differently ... you are still talking like a victim ... poor me, the meter is not working. What shall I do?

IMO Nikon goof around too much with their metering..D80 all over the place super overexposure, D90 improved..then D7000 a bit worse. Why change a good thing?

Kim Letkeman said:
The photographer failed entirely. That's all that happened.

If the meter is conservative and always protects skies at all cost, people will constantly complain about noisy shadows.

You need to re-read what I said..

Kim Letkeman said:
A week of Mondays. Strange place you live in ...

I live in a place where the language was invented not distorted. A week Monday means amazingly Monday in a weeks time (quite simple)

Billx08 · Oct 1, 2012

Barry Fitzgerald said:
. . .

Member said:
Kim Letkeman said:

You do understand that he carries and shoots the camera for many weeks when he writes his guides. And with his experience and technical acumen, you do understand that his knowledge of how to shoot the camera and its strengths and weaknesses is multiple orders of magnitude above average.

Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong this is the same Thom who denies the D7k ever had any AF problems, and seems intent on smoke and mirrors blaming users and focus shift?

I highly doubt that Thom ever said that the D7000 never had any AF problems. Every camera ever made has at least a very small percentage of cameras that don't AF properly. So you're corrected. That's better than calling you a liar, although I'll assume that's the case unless you can post one or more links showing that Thom ever wrote that. This is what he did write in his review, and his credibility is incredibly high. Yours is incredibly low.

Member said:
Autofocus System

Surprise, surprise. This autofocus system is quite good (at least in normal shooting). It feels responsive, does well in low light (but not exceptionally well), and covers a nice wide area of the frame. Coupled with the new method of making autofocus settings, you should be able to get excellent performance in almost any condition with the mirror down. In basketball sessions, it did a very good job of following action, perhaps slightly better than the D300s, but definitely not quite up to the level of my D3s. But anyone up to a D90 user will be blown away with this new system, so it's a big win here. I've seen reports from others about being disappointed with active autofocus use, such as with birds in flight (BIF). I haven't been able to duplicate their problems, though I will note that you may need to adjust your settings if you're coming from another high-end camera. I found my optimal BIF settings for the D7000 to be slightly different than for my D300s.

Member said:
If you read Internet fora, particularly dpreview, you'll find many "doesn't focus," "hot pixels," and "overexposes" posts, as well as other complaints about the quality of the new camera. I've already dealt with that a bit in the review (see the section on hot pixels), but I think it needs to be addressed directly: while Nikon's quality control in the digital era has not been something to brag about, and while Nikon is surely pressing the factory to the max to produce product quickly, I see no evidence that the D7000 is any different than any other recent Nikon product in terms of quality. Back in my days in the tech industry, we used to shoot for

As some of you know, I'm proactive in following up such complaints. While I no longer do it publicly on forums, I still send messages and emails to people with complaints in an attempt to see if they're really valid. Many of those "doesn't focus" problems actually turn out to be things like not understanding that Single Point AF does not seem to track motion quite the same as Dynamic Area. Likewise, the "overexposes" complaints often end up being not liking the change in gamma that the Standard Picture Control imparts coupled with things like Single Point AF (there it is again) telling the matrix meter to put more emphasis on the thing that's being focused on. Unless that's skin tone or brighter, the camera will "overexpose." It's one of the reasons why my books are so well received: I point out these things and what you should do about them.

But the real issue here is that we've got a lot of people buying into very sophisticated equipment--and the D7000 is extremely sophisticated--and expecting magic "just set to auto and shoot" results. If you're thinking about the D7000 as your camera, expect to spend some time learning it, mastering it, and setting it appropriately for what you're trying to do at any time.

http://bythom.com/nikond7000review.htm

(continued)

Billx08 · Oct 1, 2012

(continued)

Billx08 said:
I've taken shots of people where the meter has gone to 1.5 stops overexposure at times, not often but that dark suit can spoil things

That's not normal..and it's a flaw in the metering

More likely than not a better photographer wouldn't suffer the same metering problems. This is probably a case of a stubborn old dog not bothering to learn new tricks.

Billx08 said:
Billx08 said:

The metering made a choice. Appropriateness is based on intent, and only the hands on the camera can decide what the intent should be.

Click to expand...

The intent is the AF point which is in most cases not the point of interest.

There's a big clue here that may well explain why you think that you have metering problems. Do you know what I'm talking about or do you need more clues?

Billx08 said:
Billx08 said:

A week of Mondays. Strange place you live in ...

Click to expand...

I live in a place where the language was invented not distorted. A week Monday means amazingly Monday in a weeks time (quite simple)

The same Gibraltar that's in your profile? What you wrote is total nonsense. Assuming that the English language was born in Gibraltar, it would have greatly diverged in all of the English language nations, and only a fool would claim that the English spoken in any nation was the exemplar of true, undistorted English. In any case, assuming Gibraltar, we find :

Billx08 said:
As a British overseas territory, the sole official language of Gibraltar is English, and it is used by the Government and in schools.

Many of Gibraltar's linguistic influences come from its neighbours, Spain and Morocco.

Most locals are bilingual, also speaking Spanish, due to Gibraltar's proximity to Spain. Most Gibraltarians converse in Llanito, their vernacular which is mostly based on Andalusian Spanish, but greatly influenced by other Mediterranean languages. However, because of the varied mix of ethnic groups which reside there, other languages such as Hindi, Berber, and Arabic are also spoken on The Rock.

Llanito

Llanito (pronounced [ʎaˈnito]) is the main local vernacular, and is unique to Gibraltar. It consists of an eclectic mix of Andalusian Spanish and British English, as well as languages such as Maltese, Portuguese, Italian of the Genoese variety and Haketia.

Andalusian Spanish is the main constituent of Llanito, but is also heavily influenced by British English. However, it borrows words and expressions of many other languages, with over 500 words of Genoese and Hebrew origin. It also typically involves code-switching to English.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Gibraltar

I doubt that as much as 1% of DPReview's forum members and lurkers would know what "A week Monday" meant. Restating :

Billx08 said:
I live in a place where the language was invented not distorted. A week Monday means amazingly Monday in a weeks time (quite simple)

So simple, and yet you struggle with the D7000's metering. I guess that it wasn't invented where you live.

Kim Letkeman · Oct 1, 2012

Barry Fitzgerald said:
Correct me if I'm wrong this is the same Thom who denies the D7k ever had any AF problems, and seems intent on smoke and mirrors blaming users and focus shift?

Well the only good news is he's started to wake up a bit with the D800 fiasco..so there is some hope

Well, you are nothing if not stubborn lol ...

Member said:
There is blown.and there is really blown

That's what she .... never mind ...

This rage you have for anything that does not match your ideal camera is actually getting comical. The lengths you go to in order to justify absconding from the responsibility to learn and control your camera is astounding

Member said:
I've taken shots of people where the meter has gone to 1.5 stops overexposure at times, not often but that dark suit can spoil things

I've never taken a shot where that happened ... and I've shot in every kind of light. Perhaps that's because I have developed the ability to anticipate how the meter will react to a scene and then just shoot it correctly.

But your way also creates an image

Member said:
That's not normal..and it's a flaw in the metering

It's a flaw in the photographer.

Deep down, you know that.

Member said:
I won't suggest the D7k has a bad meter, but it could be better. Imagine this that classic moment arrives and you capture it..only to find it's goofed up with some stupid exposure (even in raw you can't save it) so you dial in the exp compensation..ooops moment gone..oh well ;-0

As I said above ... I have learned my meter. I don't care what situation comes up, I always set the meter up before the moment so I get a good capture. In really tricky light, I shoot negative compensation because I know I can pull shadows up with great latitude on a D7000.

If you are getting caught with 1.5 stop overexposures, you need to take a serious look at your metering technique and camera setup.

Member said:
I would expect most camera to have have blown the sky..but not to grossly overexpose that much

Unfortunately, without an A/B comparison, everything you are saying is pure speculation and an utter waste of your breath.

Member said:
On the contrary as I've said those folks who do the metering should know full well the AF bias needs to be toned right down for scenic shots.

And block all the shadows? I think that's the photographer's decision. And if the photographer has even modest skills, that is the easy part. Not only that, but professionals learn how to use graduated ND filters for said scenic shots, reducing the vast gulf between the dark canyons and the bright skies.

You always seem to rant about images that are ruined by what amounts to very amateurish technique. You have become mom and pop's biggest advicate, without realizing that mom and pop just don't care

Member said:
The intent is the AF point which is in most cases not the point of interest.

Ah ... so the thing that is in focus is not the subject.

You really just wrote that

Member said:
I'd dial down the exposures in such situations

So buy yourself a D70s. That has a very conservative meter that many loved. The fact that Nikon has gone away from that type of meter should make you reconsider your thoughts on the matter ...

Member said:
Trouble is that's a universal adjustment and the D7k does ok in some situations..and struggles in some others. Not really a solution

Exactly. That's why I would never use it.

What is required is some skill. Learn the meter in your current camera (not the ideal meter in the non-existent camera) and then bias it yourself in real time. People that learn how to do that never whine about what Nikon chooses to do with their meters. (Although the D80 was a bit of a special case

)

Member said:
IMO Nikon goof around too much with their metering..D80 all over the place super overexposure, D90 improved..then D7000 a bit worse. Why change a good thing?

D80 was clealrly an experiment or developed by the B team. D90 was better, D7000 even better (if you know what you are doing) and of course the professional meters are amazing ...

Member said:
You need to re-read what I said..

No, I really don't.

Member said:
I live in a place where the language was invented not distorted. A week Monday means amazingly Monday in a weeks time (quite simple)

That would be really embarrassing for me if you had actually written "a week Monday" ... because everyone in North America also knows what that means.

But no ... you actually wrote ....

Member said:
Member said:

Member said:

I will return it Monday week

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Seriously ... did you not go back and check?

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com

Barry Fitzgerald · Oct 2, 2012

Billx08 said:
More likely than not a better photographer wouldn't suffer the same metering problems. This is probably a case of a stubborn old dog not bothering to learn new tricks.

The problem is when someone comes along and says "a better photographer" it makes me think one simple thing.

The person suggesting that isn't very good themselves. I stand to be corrected, but really who the hell do you think you are talking to?

Do you actually have any understanding of photography at all? Because if you did there wouldn't be a debate. Some angry 19 year old behind a pc does not a photographer make.

You get the idea..

Barry Fitzgerald · Oct 2, 2012

Kim Letkeman said:
It's a flaw in the photographer.

Just like the AF yes? Lol

Kim I can't actually take a lecture off the 2 of you (yourself and Bill) because I don't actually think either of you cuts it where it counts ie the images. I'll apologise if you can throw something up that's decent.

Thing is bar stool preaching doesn't work around here.

You enjoy testing..great no problems..but I'll take lectures from talented photographers maybe..but not 2 dude who argue anything but based on some kind of experience.

Sorry I just can't take you very seriously..I wish I could but you're simply blasting out fanboy mantra that just cuts 0 ice around here.

Kim Letkeman · Oct 2, 2012

Barry Fitzgerald said:
The problem is when someone comes along and says "a better photographer" it makes me think one simple thing.

The person suggesting that isn't very good themselves. I stand to be corrected, but really who the hell do you think you are talking to?

I'm already on record. You come across as a Luddite. That's who the hell seems to be ranting over there ...

You talk like the matrix meter just sucks these days, while ignoring the fact that it is a computer application feature just like any other. And when they tweak algorithms to improve one area, it is very easy and even likely that another will change.

These changes add up to a small burden on the photographer to learn the new equipment and become competent with it.

You are stubbornly refusing to acknowledge the "craftsman" angle to all this, maintaining instead that it should be obvious to anyone skilled in the art that all meters should be very conservative. This is just one option for the default behavior, and most certainly not at all obvious.

Your example is of an ultra contrasty scene at which someone pointed a D7000 set to 0EV. That's who you should be screaming at in anger. Not the people telling you that he blew it, plain and simple.

Member said:
Do you actually have any understanding of photography at all? Because if you did there wouldn't be a debate. Some angry 19 year old behind a pc does not a photographer make.

And here is where you make the blind assumption that your assertion is part of photography canon and anyone who does not simply know what you are asserting is uneducated or young.

Wrong.

Member said:
You get the idea..

We've had the idea for a very long time ... you rant, we correct. Repeat.

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com

Barry Fitzgerald · Oct 2, 2012

Kim Letkeman said:
I'm already on record. You come across as a Luddite. That's who the hell seems to be ranting over there ...

And you come across as someone who simply takes a die hard fan perspective.

Kim Letkeman said:
You talk like the matrix meter just sucks these days, while ignoring the fact that it is a computer application feature just like any other. And when they tweak algorithms to improve one area, it is very easy and even likely that another will change.

I've made some decent points, I've not said the matrix sucks..but I've said it's over biased to the AF point. I can work around that I've done it before..on the other hand the D7k is fluffing some shots exposure wise that are quite simple really for any camera.

Kim Letkeman said:
These changes add up to a small burden on the photographer to learn the new equipment and become competent with it.

What competent like you Kim?

Kim Letkeman said:
You are stubbornly refusing to acknowledge the "craftsman" angle to all this, maintaining instead that it should be obvious to anyone skilled in the art that all meters should be very conservative. This is just one option for the default behavior, and most certainly not at all obvious.

I see a bunch of dudes maybe 3/4 on on this forum that make the D7k out to be some kind of golden wonder..it's a nice camera, but it's beyond some quirks.

Kim Letkeman said:
Your example is of an ultra contrasty scene at which someone pointed a D7000 set to 0EV. That's who you should be screaming at in anger. Not the people telling you that he blew it, plain and simple.

If you bothered to read what I said I'm not surprised it blew the sky..but I am surprised it tried to turn shadow areas into mid tones..it's like spot metering at times. Fine if you are in spot metering..multi segment metering is supposed to be "somewhat intelligent" isn't that what the brochure says? lol

It's also designed to reduce the need for exposure compensation.

Kim Letkeman said:
And here is where you make the blind assumption that your assertion is part of photography canon and anyone who does not simply know what you are asserting is uneducated or young.

We've had the idea for a very long time ... you rant, we correct. Repeat.

Until either of you can put something up to show some understanding of photography I'm simply talking to 2 bar stool preachers..

Sorry but that's the way you come across..and so does the other poster.

Kim Letkeman · Oct 2, 2012

Barry Fitzgerald said:
Kim Letkeman said:

It's a flaw in the photographer.

Click to expand...

Just like the AF yes? Lol

Both. The meter can be biased correctly and the AF can be fine tuned. If fine tune does not work, it can be adjusted by Nikon. Some cameras do require that. The concept is called sample variation. It has been explained to you many times.

Member said:
Kim I can't actually take a lecture off the 2 of you (yourself and Bill) because I don't actually think either of you cuts it where it counts ie the images. I'll apologise if you can throw something up that's decent.

The last refuge of the bankrupt mind ... insult the photography. If you ever manage a cogent argument, I will hold you to that apology.

Member said:
Thing is bar stool preaching doesn't work around here.

Thing is that you are continuing on your petulant rant. I see it, others see it, time to look in a mirror.

Member said:
You enjoy testing..great no problems..but I'll take lectures from talented photographers maybe..but not 2 dude who argue anything but based on some kind of experience.

a) 1390 posts on my blog and over 1.25 million hits. I've written fewer than half of those on a bar stool

b) 12580 images on my gallery as of right now. No doubt you have examined them all in your usual cogent and thorough style

c) None of your insults regarding my photography is even remotely relevant to a technical argument. And just in case you were wondering, that's what this is.

Member said:
Sorry I just can't take you very seriously..I wish I could but you're simply blasting out fanboy mantra that just cuts 0 ice around here.

Now that, is petulant. Wah wah, you say that I have to take control of my camera ... you're just a fan boy!

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com

Barry Fitzgerald · Oct 2, 2012

Kim Letkeman said:
c) None of your insults regarding my photography is even remotely relevant to a technical argument. And just in case you were wondering, that's what this is.

Kim I can't repeat this enough but to lecture someone on photography one must demonstrate some understanding of it. Not just ISO ladders (interesting for testing maybe..but overall not that exciting)

So until that day comes..(ie you can demonstrate a practical grasp on photography) I'm left with the same conclusion.

If you're dumb enough to blame me for a lack of knowledge, or not knowing about photography or basic metering..well fire away. Thing is.. I actually have stuff to show..not all award winning..but enough to demonstrate I can cut the chips when I'm in the Kitchen. Same for Bill above suggesting a "better photographer" is quite rude. So can anyone be shocked when I throw the mud back?

It's a bit like an art critic who can't paint..or X factor with a judge who can't sing. I just have no time at all for them..for obvious reasons ;-)

nikkorwatcher · Oct 2, 2012

I surprised people would expend so much verbiage on mere metering. You only need a little experience which is easily gained when you immediately see the results. By closely looking at the RAW files you'd soon learn the habits of your particular camera.

For landscape shots I habitually use exposure lock after capturing a reading from a mid tone in the foreground. You don't even need a spot meter for this, only a centre weighted meter

Barry Fitzgerald · Oct 2, 2012

nikkorwatcher said:
I surprised people would expend so much verbiage on mere metering. You only need a little experience which is easily gained when you immediately see the results. By closely looking at the RAW files you'd soon learn the habits of your particular camera.

For landscape shots I habitually use exposure lock after capturing a reading from a mid tone in the foreground. You don't even need a spot meter for this, only a centre weighted meter

These are simply observations and comparing the metering to the D90, nothing more. I'd agree CW is likely a better bet of AEL as you say metering off other areas to tone down the overly keen meter.

For jpeg shooters I would use ADL and drop the exposure down a bit in the metering fine tune, but you can't make a correction that's too big (1/3 stop maybe helps a little)

I'm actually a "lot" more concerned with the Autofocus than the metering quirks.

antoineb · Oct 2, 2012

Most important point: the D90 then D7000 and before that D80, moved in 2 year cycles. The D7000 came out in September 2010, and thus is very likely due for replacement any time soon.

It may be that due to current activity at Nikon (D600 recently announced and becoming available), as well as maturing of DSLRs and a push to move customers to full-frame, Nikon purposedly delay the D7000 successor a bit. But still, buying a D7k now, very little before the new model and thus a likely price drop, seems dangerous.

From where I stand (D7000 owner) it looks like you mostly have the usual "getting used to a new tool" phase, coming from a tool which you are very familiar with and thus know how to put to work for best results.

On the AF point, I'd say two things:

first, the D7000 has significantly more resolution. This means that things that might have looked in focus on the D90, will look less tack sharp. One solution to adapt to this, is to NOT use the full resolution. Frankly, 16mp is too much for most situations where shooting conditions are not 100% perfect, and so using one of the lower-resolution modes is a good idea (and means smaller files too)

second, as you probably know there are manufacturing tolerances on both the bodies, and the lenses. Say you have a D90 body where the mount is "too short" (ie at the shorter end of the tolerance), and a 18-105 which is "too long". Put together these two do very well. Now suppose your D7000 is "too long" also - put that 18-105 on it and you need AF micro-adjust. Micro-adjust is easy enough to do, take a useful target (a simple measuring tape will do), put it at an acute angle to the camera's line of sight, use a tripod and timer release, set the AF point on some round figure. Take series of shots and move the AF micro-adjust in steps of 5 at first. And once you've found the sweet spot, narrow down in steps of 1.

DO NOTE that of course (1) the micro-adjust is PER LENS, and (2) the micro-adjust needed will vary with the shooting distance, and for a zoom with the focal length, so decide on your most frequent shooting conditions (don't optimise for 105mm and 12ft if most of your shooting is 18mm and long distances)

Mako2011 · Oct 2, 2012

Barry Fitzgerald said:
Billx08 said:

More likely than not a better photographer wouldn't suffer the same metering problems. This is probably a case of a stubborn old dog not bothering to learn new tricks.

Click to expand...

The problem is when someone comes along and says "a better photographer" it makes me think one simple thing.

I think he meant a photographer more familiar with that particular body.

Member said:
Do you actually have any understanding of photography at all? Because if you did there wouldn't be a debate. Some angry 19 year old behind a pc does not a photographer make.

I think he was just trying to help. There are aspects of the new camera you have shown you are unfamiliar with.

For example. How CDAF can indeed hide lens focus calibration issues.

How Focus point bias can be negated with the D7K

How the Matrix metering solution has been significantly tweaked D90 to D7000

Your explanation of how AF-A is different regards certain lens is another example. I learn new stull all the time and look forward to be corrected...it really helps and I think you and I might actually be close in term of years experience. Hope things get even better for you.

Mako2011 · Oct 2, 2012

Barry Fitzgerald said:
Kim Letkeman said:

I'm already on record. You come across as a Luddite. That's who the hell seems to be ranting over there ...

Click to expand...

And you come across as someone who simply takes a die hard fan perspective.

Member said:

You talk like the matrix meter just sucks these days, while ignoring the fact that it is a computer application feature just like any other. And when they tweak algorithms to improve one area, it is very easy and even likely that another will change.

Click to expand...

I've made some decent points, I've not said the matrix sucks..but I've said it's over biased to the AF point. I can work around that I've done it before..on the other hand the D7k is fluffing some shots exposure wise that are quite simple really for any camera.

You keep bringing up AF point bias without seeming to understand how it is setting dependent. It's quite simple for any photographer to turn it off if they wish. Much easier than in the D90.

Billx08 · Oct 2, 2012

Barry Fitzgerald said:
Billx08 said:

More likely than not a better photographer wouldn't suffer the same metering problems. This is probably a case of a stubborn old dog not bothering to learn new tricks.

Click to expand...

The problem is when someone comes along and says "a better photographer" it makes me think one simple thing.

Better photographers would probably be able to think of several things, and they wouldn't be as simple as the silly opinions that you perpetually push.

Member said:
The person suggesting that isn't very good themselves. I stand to be corrected, but really who the hell do you think you are talking to?

A stubborn old dog that can't bother to learn new tricks.

Member said:
Do you actually have any understanding of photography at all?

Of course. A much better understanding than you, apparently.

Member said:
Because if you did there wouldn't be a debate. Some angry 19 year old behind a pc does not a photographer make.

That's a colossally ignorant, totally incorrect assumption, seeing as how I bought my first camera when I decided to go for the Nikon F instead of the Nikon SP.

Member said:
You get the idea..

Yep, and you don't. Again.

D90 to D7000 my findings

Barry Fitzgerald

Guest

Senior Member

Community Leader

Forum Pro

Barry Fitzgerald

Guest

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Barry Fitzgerald

Guest

Barry Fitzgerald

Guest

Forum Pro

Barry Fitzgerald

Guest

Forum Pro

Barry Fitzgerald

Guest

Leading Member

Barry Fitzgerald

Guest

Veteran Member

Community Leader

Community Leader

Forum Pro

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts