Wish Nikon gives us 2x crop on a D800/D800E/D600/D4 via a firmware upgrade

Started Mar 19, 2013 | Discussions thread
RicksAstro Veteran Member • Posts: 3,703
Re: Wish Nikon gives us 2x crop on a D800/D800E/D600/D4 via a firmware upgrade

whoosh1 wrote:

i'm not against feature additions at all. i just want the engineers to spend time on important ones (how about implementing hdr bracketing correctly?). if you've ever worked in software/hardware design, you would know that changing anything for a device released around the world means design discussions/proposed solutions/implementation/testing and then support. that's a lot. better i just set up a batch file to crop to any aspect ratio i want in pp.

I work in software design/development on networking products/firmware (various roles progressively - tester, developer, lead, manager, director, software architect). At one point of time - I had worked on a feature that was supposed to have consumed a significant amount of my time (having routes for destinations to have an option to drop all packets on a match rather than forward) but was done in may be an hour or two - of course tested probably for a few days (whose manager may have claimed credit for a few weeks of effort), tracked & as a regular feature - and then later advertised with a cool name as one of the highlights of the release. The point is that the 2x crop is such a feature which should take hardly any effort (on top of the infrastructure to do the 1.2x and the 1.5x crops) for a Nikon developer & a SQA person. The implementing the correct hdr bracketing that you mention may not be such a low hanging fruit.

To provide the correct shaded/outlined framing in the viewfinder, it may not be so simple as you think depending on the viewfinder HW implementation.   And with every SW change, you must deal with the law of unintended consequences.   I'm also in the embedded SW business for avionics, and I can't tell you how many times a small change caused a ripple effect despite extreme efforts to contain it.

I find in-camera cropping as useful as in-camera special effects (as in not useful at all).    I'd much rather have the complete field at my disposal, particularly for more dynamic subjects.   Restricting yourself to a crop when the subject gets nearer unexpectedly is unnecessary.

A 2x (or any) crop mode does not gain reach at all...the pixel density remains the same.   Your lens will not produce a more detailed image of that distant bird...it will be identical if cropped the same in post.  All you are doing is throwing away data at the edges.  There are many times I change my mind about the composition when I see it on a large screen and am glad I captured a little more to give me flexibility.

The physical focus point locations can't possibly change, and there are a myriad of selections of which are active.   And metering is biased towards the focus point (unless you are using center weighted, which you can also bias to be weighted towards the center).   So for shooting, I don't see any benefit to an artificial crop except for maybe video.

Yes, you can have smaller file sizes, but I'd rather buy a faster computer than waste pixels that you may find useful after the fact.   Yes, if you're cranking out thousands of shots at a wedding and dumping them on a CD with no PP, I can see a benefit.    But if you're going to tweak each image anyway, then cropping is just a small part of the workflow.    I try not to restrict myself to the traditional aspect ratios when cropping, which makes for far more interesting screen and book presentations.

-- hide signature --
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow