Just published: Our in-depth Nikon D7100 review

Started Apr 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
Gar Ber Regular Member • Posts: 116
Re: Just published: Our in-depth Nikon D7100 review

mosswings wrote:

Gar Ber wrote:

Good camera,  I only find it a bit peculiar that there's only a small mention of: "Faint noise patterns are visible as low as ISO 100."

I'm not saying they are not faint, but I think the pattern nature of it should deserve a sentence of two more. Again, maybe not due to the amount of noise pattern itself, but because I guess Nikon DX users got used to having practically none of these issues in the semi-recent past (D90 -  D7000 maybe even before) and they might find it surprising / unexpected to see noise pattern when pushing shadows in gig/concert, night or "extreme DR retrieval"  kind of photography. They need to be ready to deal with it if it becomes visible. But this is just an opinion about this information being relevant; I know it is for me and a couple of people in my "photographic bunch". There were several posts about this already so it's pointless to go into details once again.

The reason why they didn't comment more on it is because 1) they are not aiming the review at the posters who use the camera at "extreme DR retrieval" conditions and 2) it's not that great of a concern to any but a small fraction of the user base.  However, they were not unaware of these issues. They even introduced a new test in this review to search for it - the dim corner lighted studio shot to induce extremely deep shadows.  They saw nothing worth commenting on.  They did some pretty hefty shadow pulling (the shadowed gate shots).  They saw nothing worth commenting on.

From this I would conclude that they have concluded that it is worth nothing more than a small comment, and that those who are really concerned about it know what to do, either to a) deal with it, through pattern-aware NR and changes in shot and processing practices, or to b) avoid a purchase.  By dedicating an excessive amount of space to a rather minor problem, DPR runs the risk of the bulk of their readership misinterpreting the importance of it to their purchase decision.

Personally, I'd like some others evaluation of the streaking issue, but again, it's a minor problem of concern only to the limit-testers, and it will not be fixable by a firmware patch, so again those who are affected by it have already decided to either sit back and await the D400 or to move on to a FF Nikon (or other mfr.) that appears artifact free.

I can see the reasoning in what you're saying, I'm not so sure it'll have such small impact as you imply, but we'll probably never be able to ascertain how many people will come across this issue while using D7100 (or D5200) anyway. Do you think it's really such a small number of people that will  need to push such dark shadow areas ? I'm really asking for your opinion, because even in my small-ish circle (maybe fifteen) of photographer peers, three of us regularly deal with such situations (But yes. we've learned to deal with them as necessary by our diverse gear, that was besides the point.)

On another point actually the reviewer has succeeded in "producing" some noise pattern in the gate shot, but not in the foliage but in the wooden frame beneath the roof - easily not noticeable since it's not a homogeneous background anyway. This is just an observation and it doesn't invalidate the above reasoning; D7100 is a good camera.

Just as a curiosity, how are you so certain how DPreview conducted the research for this review ? (I'm truly asking just as a curiosity, since you sound pretty certain asserting they did this and that.)

Thanks for your time mosswings.


Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow