Reading mode: Light Dark

D800 Softness, Grain & CA!!!

Go to last post
afterburn said:
afterburn wrote:
afterburn said:
Lasse Eisele wrote:

The Tamron shot (#3) is different. It was taken at f/16 and 1/6 s. At f/16 you will inevitably get some diffraction softness, but what we're seeing here is camera shake. You just can't use the self timer at 1/6 s with a 90 mm lens. The mirror slap will kill the image. You need mirror lock-up and a remote release. Or stay away from the tricky speeds (say, 1/2-1/30 s). I own the Tamron 90/2.8 and it is stellar on my D800E.
Click to expand...
I don't necessarily agree.

IMG_20130702_0875-O.jpg


This was a 2 second exposure at f16 and ISO1600 using my 50mm/f1.8G, without a tripod, without self-timer, without mirror lockup and without remote release. I just kneeled down behind a rock boulder and held it on there to steady my hands. And it is sharp, no motion blur. And this is not the longest exposure I have made utilizing a solid object to create sharp shots without tripod.
Click to expand...
Yes, you can get sharp shots with your technique if you can find a rock steady surface. But your technique is completely different from the one I criticized. Mirror slap is not an issue at 2 s exposures and you were actually dampening the slap with your hands as well. So I don't understand what you don't agree with.

Nice shot by the way, though perhaps a bit oversaturated for my taste.
 
Gobbly said:
Hello,

Background:-

I've been using a D90 for the past 5 years and I have a Nikon 50mm 1.8D lens and a Tamron 90mm 1:1 Macro lens besides the Kit lens my D90 came with. I've been very satisfied with the D90 unit that I have. But I wanted to upgrade to a Fx body because the one thing that I wasn't satisfied with my D90 was the low light performance and also I wanted to get into film making.

What happened:-

After what seems like an eternal wait, I finally saved up the money and ordered a brand new D800 off Amazon and it reached my hands yesterday. I was expecting to be blown away by the IQ but right off the bat something didn't feel right. I just couldn't put my finger on why but I certainly wasn't blown away. I was in fact disappointed.

With the Nikon 50mm 1.8D, my most favorite lens of all time, I wasn't getting the sharpness I loved it for. With the image as is on the LCD screen, everything seemed alright but when I zoomed in, there was notable softness and worse of all GRAIN! I slept unhappy last night and this morning I started researching and noticed that a lot of people were saying the D800 needs "good technique" and that I can't expect good sharpness while shooting hand-held. I mean, even at 1/8000s my images were soft and grainy. I just don't expect a $3k body to be so soft even at 1/8000s.

The issue:-

Mind you, this isn't an issue of back focusing or front focusing. The focus is quick and spot on, both in the left and the center focus points. The issue is with softness and grain.

The following shot is taken handheld with a Nikon 85mm f1.4 lens that I borrowed from my campus photographer. My hands were very steady.

100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld (steady though) with the Nikon 85mm f1.4 lens.
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld (steady though) with the Nikon 85mm f1.4 lens.

I know the ISO is bumped up to 2500 and that could result in some grain but quite frankly this much grain is unacceptable to me on a camera that is known for its low light performance.

Our campus photographer was surprised with the lack of sharpness too but he suggested that it might be because of the low shutter speed or that perhaps my hands weren't steady enough.

What I did:-

Anyway today I went out in the cold to do some real testing to eliminate all possible operator errors. I used my tripod and shot some timed shots. Here are the results.

[ATTACH alt="100% crop of unedited RAW image taken using Nikkor 50mm 1.8D mounted on tripod with timer and the Image Quality setting on the camera was "Fine" and the print size is "Large". I made sure that the aperture wasn't too wide open so that the DOF wasn't too shallow."]413956[/ATTACH]
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken using Nikkor 50mm 1.8D mounted on tripod with timer and the Image Quality setting on the camera was "Fine" and the print size is "Large". I made sure that the aperture wasn't too wide open so that the DOF wasn't too shallow.

I used my Tamron 90mm macro for the following shot.

100% crop of unedited RAW image taken mounted on a tripod with timer using the Tamron 90mm lens, which is very sharp with my D90. I ensured that the DOF wasn't too shallow, thus the small aperture.
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken mounted on a tripod with timer using the Tamron 90mm lens, which is very sharp with my D90. I ensured that the DOF wasn't too shallow, thus the small aperture.

To me, images of such poor sharpness TAKEN IN CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENTS devoid of shake (both on the camera and the subject) on lenses that are known for their sharpness is simply unacceptable.

But as I was experimenting with different subjects, I noticed something even more alarming - Chromatic Aberration that was quite ugly and scary.

100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld with the 50mm 1.8D lens
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld with the 50mm 1.8D lens

EWWW!!!

Note that close examination of this subject revealed nothing other than just pure white text on brown background.

I tried on a 85mm f1.4 lens that I had borrowed and the CA got worse! Here's the shot:-

100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld with the 85mm f1.4 lens
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld with the 85mm f1.4 lens

I was worried that the earlier handheld shots were because I had "poor technique" and the IQ bothered me a lot. I was just disappointed but now after doing all the testing using tripod and timer, I'm convinced there's something terribly wrong and it isn't just my technique that's at flaw.

I went for Amazon because of their beautiful return policy and I'm seriously considering returning this unit and getting a new one but I want to be sure that this is the unit's flaw and not something that I'm doing incorrectly or worse, if this is expected of the D800. I just want to make sure that I won't have the same issue with the new D800 that I'll purchase after returning this one.

So the following are the questions I have:-
  1. Are these results expected of a brand new D800 and the lens combinations?
  2. Am I doing something incorrect?
  3. Can you confirm with certainty that my unit is flawed?
Thanks a lot for reading through this extremely long post. I appreciate any constructive comments.

PS - I have to add, PLEASE view the images in original size to appreciate my concerns of grain and softness. The images as is in the post don't reveal the grain as much.
Click to expand...
Let me explain sonething to you which you obviously do not understand. Shooting at 2500 iso in low light and zooming to 100% on a monitor means you will see a lot of grain! If ypu compare low light performance of the 800 to a 700 or your 90 that it is much better in terms of detail and noise. I know after reading that last sentence your face will have dropped so let me explain it. You are looking at a much much higher magnification image with a d800! The ONLY way you can compare files is by downsizing all three to 12mp. I do not understand why this is so hard to grasp. I used to shoot a d700. Yes on the 800 i see more grain at 100% on a monitor...but print the files. Do you know what printing is? You wont see the noise unless you are printing huge and in that case you should be at base iso! The d800 is basically same as the d4 in terms of noise handliing. look at both files and downsize thr 800 to 16mp.It is so good I dont usually do NR and i print minimum of 18 by 12 inches Nd upwards. I see oittle to no grain on the prints on my wall. Throw a glass of cold water over yourself and wake up.
--
facebook https://www.facebook.com/stevenrphotographs
flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/steverphotographer/
google + https://plus.google.com/u/1/110463150518351139559
 
I downloaded the female portrait sample from dpreview of the 800. Looks wonderful on my hd tablet. Its shot at iso100.

Shoot a similar pottrait using your 800 at iso100.

If it is as wonderful, there is no problem.

If it is not as wonderful, then return the camera.

Perhaps try the 800e which is without the optical low pass filter.

The nikons released in the last year with olpf all looked kind of soft.

Thats why all the new releases come without olpf, of course nikon will nevef admit there was a problem in the first place.
 
Actually, the D4 has larger photosites on the sensor (which can collect more light), and has better low light performance than the D800... every time.
 
I would like to add to the idea that using quiet mode help with hand held on the D800.

I am an experienced photographer and have used a D700 since it first came out. I now have a D800. The D800 does require more care with technique than the D700. it took me a while to get the best from the D800, but I now think it is a great camera if used carefully and for the correct jobs.

I do find using quiet mode helps. I wonder if the mirror moves a little bit more slowly in QM and this help with stability when hand held.
 
"To suggest the OP change cameras because of an incorrect assumption about the d800s andD600 high ISO ability seems extreme. There won't be all that much difference between theD800 and D600 in the final prints or web galleries."

You're misinterpreting. My reading of his post was that among SEVERAL things he mentioned, the OP was under the assumption that the D800 was a body known to be great for low light. Nope - sorry, it's a body known for amazing potential image quality at the more base ISOs. Doesn't mean it's BAD for low light, but that's NOT what it was designed to. As for your statement about "incorrect assumption" and quoting DXO scores, you should know I've shot live stage dance/theater performance for 25 years and have shot the D100, D70, D2X, D80, D300, D90, D3, D3S, D700, D800, D800E, D7000 and D7100 bodies. You sure you want to keep on assuming I don't know what the hell I'm talking about when it comes to real life (as opposed to DXO score) low ISO performance?

The whole point of my response to the OP was to provide a compendium of things that might be working against him, including BUT NOT LIMITED TO the idea that the D800 is this magical super great high ISO body. You seem to have chosen one item from my list and made it your argument, which is not the way it goes. Understand I'm not knocking the D800E I currently shoot with; it's by far my favorite camera, any brand, any format, film or digital, I've ever shot with in over 30 years shooting, no question, but I also know that no single camera is perfect at everything, and for low light stage work, I'll take a D3S and a D600/D610 and probably a D700 every day of the weak.

My argument for the OP stands; it's not likely the body, but most likely the OP's craft/technique that is the problem, combined with improper expectations and some bad lens/aperture/shutter speed choices. So in that way, no, going to a D610 won't fix things either.

-m
 
anotherMike said:
anotherMike wrote:

You're misinterpreting. My reading of his post was that among SEVERAL things he mentioned, the OP was under the assumption that the D800 was a body known to be great for low light.
Click to expand...
I would disagree. Downres that shot to that of the D610 and, viola, excellent noise characteristics.
anotherMike said:
The whole point of my response to the OP was to provide a compendium of things that might be working against him, including BUT NOT LIMITED TO the idea that the D800 is this magical super great high ISO body.
Click to expand...
It's among the best ... the moment you downres a D800 file to the same size of the other camera bodies to which you are comparing.
 
You're falling into the trap of assuming that one pixel from, let's say, a D70, equals one from a D800. It doesn't, simply because the D800 pixel has to cover an area of only about 40 percent as high by 40 percent as wide as the D70 one. Which means that all that noise is going to print so small that you don't see it.

In practice, I've been absolutely astonished at how low the noise on the D800 is. Even what I had before, the D7000, comfortably beat film for high ISO noise, but not like this. ISO 3200 is no longer mushy even at pixel level in editing. The noise it does have I usually prefer to keep to provide at least some texture and depth, but because it's mostly luminance noise rather than chroma it's easy to reduce or even remove if you want. The bottom line is that if you print everything out the same size, let's say 12x18 inches, a D800 and D600 print are going to be almost indistinguishable at high ISO, a modest advantage to the D800 at lower ISO, but both well ahead of previous generation cameras like the D700 at any ISO.

The flip side of that huge boost in pixels from the D800 is that, when you're editing on screen, you will see literally every mistake of technique you made, including some you never knew you were making before. Considering a handheld minimum shutter speed that equals the reciprocal of the lens focal length -- that goes out the window with this camera, unless you're completely caffeine free . . . but, once again, when that enormous file is distilled down into a typical size print, life starts to seem very good indeed, especially with the improvements in color repro and dynamic range on previous generation cameras.

The other thing is two very basic mistakes in your technique, and both come back to your needing to do a better job of lighting the subject. First, f2.2 on an 85mm lens at the focus distance you're using, aside from being very demanding for a highly technical photograph on a lens that's optimal around f4 to f5.6, isn't even going to eliminate all blur in the three or four millimeter depth from the top surface of the computer chips to the base of the circuit board, the depth of field is that shallow. If you're looking to do product photography, for example; bring in some supplemental lighting and increase the depth of field. Second, if that product photography is for more of a commercial purpose than an artistic one, you'll want to keep ISO as low as possible no matter what camera you're using. Then what happens is that the huge D800 dynamic range becomes your friend, building up as it does one-for-one with each one-stop reduction in ISO. But you need that extra lighting.
 
Gobbly said:
Gobbly wrote:

Hello,

Background:-

I've been using a D90 for the past 5 years and I have a Nikon 50mm 1.8D lens and a Tamron 90mm 1:1 Macro lens besides the Kit lens my D90 came with. I've been very satisfied with the D90 unit that I have. But I wanted to upgrade to a Fx body because the one thing that I wasn't satisfied with my D90 was the low light performance and also I wanted to get into film making.
Click to expand...
I'm just wondering why the OP bought a D800 for film making. I don't know much, but I know this isn't a camera that vid makers are buying.

Gear lust drove this purchase. A D600, D7100, probably would have been better and more in line with the OP's skills. Maybe a D5300. If you're serious about making movies then a Canon 5 III or Pana GH3 (worse low-light, but vastly better for movies) should have been considered.
 
Don't know if you are being sarcastic or not. Just because you don't feel you can handle 36MP of the D800 doesn't mean others can't.
 
Gobbly said:
Gobbly wrote:

Hey everyone, thanks for all your replies. All this seems to put things in context and I'm reconsidering returning the camera.

Now that I understand things better I do think it's foolish to zoom 100% and pixel peep.

But I want to make sure that my unit is normal. So I've uploaded a fresh RAW file here - https://www.dropbox.com/s/ac0i9vrifiyevr4/DSC_0252.NEF

If you could download it and inspect it and let me know if the grain levels are acceptable and that the image is sharp, I'd appreciate it.

I took it with the 28-70mm f2.8D AF-S lens that I borrowed. It was taken handheld.

Also I just love to see an unedited RAW file of an image from your D800 that you would consider your sharpest or your best image in terms of image quality. Of course you don't have to oblige if you're concerned about copyrights or something but it's just something I want to see to compare images from mine and make sure my unit is alright.

Ultimately, all I want is for me to have a fully functional flawless unit and I don't want to make any compromises even if it means I have to be overcautious. I hope that's understandable.

Thanks everyone!
Click to expand...
Loads of full size samples at various ISOs here:

http://www.frescoglobe.com/2013/10/10/d800-review-over-one-year-on/

They are all edited though. I don't see much reason to deal with unedited files. It's the final result which matters.

edit: I edited your raw file. Again, it's slightly out of focus. But also the depth of field is very very thin, so things get out of focus quickly - especially when you are taking closeup photos like this.

Here's a link. The noise is fine, and it's sharp too (though I had to apply more sharpening than I would if the image was 100% perfectly focused)

Loading…

db.tt
 
Last edited:
Gobbly said:
Gobbly wrote:
Gobbly said:
u007 wrote:

Also what RAW software are you using? That conversion is terrible. Where's the dynamic range? It looks like you put a film preset on it or something.
Click to expand...
u007, thanks for the reply.

No, this is not a joke post at all. Serious concerns!

Anyway a lot of you have been saying that my RAW conversion is bad. I don't usually shoot in RAW and don't know the nuances.

I have Photoshop CS6 and it couldn't open the RAW files out of the D800 so I had to install the latest version of Camera RAW plugin. It was DNG Converter 8.2. Right after I installed it I could open the RAW files in Photoshop and I'm posting crops saved as JPEGs right after opening it that way. I made sure that the quality of the JPEG export is at 12 standard.

Am I doing something wrong?
Click to expand...
What do the files look like if you shoot jpeg in camera? Or perhaps try developing a raw file in camera with the built-in editor. That sharpens it and puts on some noise reduction too.
 
Gobbly said:
Gobbly wrote:

...

I tried on a 85mm f1.4 lens that I had borrowed and the CA got worse! Here's the shot:-

100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld with the 85mm f1.4 lens
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld with the 85mm f1.4 lens

...
Click to expand...
That's not a CA in this shot - it's purple fringing, that happens often at boundaries of blown highlights, especially with old(er) fast lenses. The extent of this effect (AFAIK) depends on a particular combination of a sensor and a lens.

--
Cheers,
Stas.
P.S. Comments and critiques are always welcome :) .
 
Member said:
SushiEater wrote:
Member said:
RudivanS wrote:

'Film is actually higher in resolution than any digital right now'

baloney
Click to expand...
A high resolution film like Fuji Velvia is rated at anywhere 90-150mp.Google it.
Member said:
1/2 a second hand held - more baloney or you just got lucky kid.
Click to expand...
I have more than 40 years experience in photography and I will gladly share it with you if you come to Los Angeles. I sometimes can shoot 1 second shots if I really want to. D800e has too much mirror slap but I can do it with Canon 5D III in silent mode and with battery grip attached. I have battery grip on D800e too.
Click to expand...
 
Gobbly said:
Gobbly wrote:

Hello,

Background:-

I've been using a D90 for the past 5 years and I have a Nikon 50mm 1.8D lens and a Tamron 90mm 1:1 Macro lens besides the Kit lens my D90 came with. I've been very satisfied with the D90 unit that I have. But I wanted to upgrade to a Fx body because the one thing that I wasn't satisfied with my D90 was the low light performance and also I wanted to get into film making.

What happened:-

After what seems like an eternal wait, I finally saved up the money and ordered a brand new D800 off Amazon and it reached my hands yesterday. I was expecting to be blown away by the IQ but right off the bat something didn't feel right. I just couldn't put my finger on why but I certainly wasn't blown away. I was in fact disappointed.

With the Nikon 50mm 1.8D, my most favorite lens of all time, I wasn't getting the sharpness I loved it for. With the image as is on the LCD screen, everything seemed alright but when I zoomed in, there was notable softness and worse of all GRAIN! I slept unhappy last night and this morning I started researching and noticed that a lot of people were saying the D800 needs "good technique" and that I can't expect good sharpness while shooting hand-held. I mean, even at 1/8000s my images were soft and grainy. I just don't expect a $3k body to be so soft even at 1/8000s.

The issue:-

Mind you, this isn't an issue of back focusing or front focusing. The focus is quick and spot on, both in the left and the center focus points. The issue is with softness and grain.

The following shot is taken handheld with a Nikon 85mm f1.4 lens that I borrowed from my campus photographer. My hands were very steady.

100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld (steady though) with the Nikon 85mm f1.4 lens.
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld (steady though) with the Nikon 85mm f1.4 lens.

I know the ISO is bumped up to 2500 and that could result in some grain but quite frankly this much grain is unacceptable to me on a camera that is known for its low light performance.

Our campus photographer was surprised with the lack of sharpness too but he suggested that it might be because of the low shutter speed or that perhaps my hands weren't steady enough.

What I did:-

Anyway today I went out in the cold to do some real testing to eliminate all possible operator errors. I used my tripod and shot some timed shots. Here are the results.

[ATTACH alt="100% crop of unedited RAW image taken using Nikkor 50mm 1.8D mounted on tripod with timer and the Image Quality setting on the camera was "Fine" and the print size is "Large". I made sure that the aperture wasn't too wide open so that the DOF wasn't too shallow."]413956[/ATTACH]
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken using Nikkor 50mm 1.8D mounted on tripod with timer and the Image Quality setting on the camera was "Fine" and the print size is "Large". I made sure that the aperture wasn't too wide open so that the DOF wasn't too shallow.

I used my Tamron 90mm macro for the following shot.

100% crop of unedited RAW image taken mounted on a tripod with timer using the Tamron 90mm lens, which is very sharp with my D90. I ensured that the DOF wasn't too shallow, thus the small aperture.
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken mounted on a tripod with timer using the Tamron 90mm lens, which is very sharp with my D90. I ensured that the DOF wasn't too shallow, thus the small aperture.

To me, images of such poor sharpness TAKEN IN CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENTS devoid of shake (both on the camera and the subject) on lenses that are known for their sharpness is simply unacceptable.

But as I was experimenting with different subjects, I noticed something even more alarming - Chromatic Aberration that was quite ugly and scary.

100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld with the 50mm 1.8D lens
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld with the 50mm 1.8D lens

EWWW!!!

Note that close examination of this subject revealed nothing other than just pure white text on brown background.

I tried on a 85mm f1.4 lens that I had borrowed and the CA got worse! Here's the shot:-

100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld with the 85mm f1.4 lens
100% crop of unedited RAW image taken handheld with the 85mm f1.4 lens

I was worried that the earlier handheld shots were because I had "poor technique" and the IQ bothered me a lot. I was just disappointed but now after doing all the testing using tripod and timer, I'm convinced there's something terribly wrong and it isn't just my technique that's at flaw.

I went for Amazon because of their beautiful return policy and I'm seriously considering returning this unit and getting a new one but I want to be sure that this is the unit's flaw and not something that I'm doing incorrectly or worse, if this is expected of the D800. I just want to make sure that I won't have the same issue with the new D800 that I'll purchase after returning this one.

So the following are the questions I have:-
  1. Are these results expected of a brand new D800 and the lens combinations?
  2. Am I doing something incorrect?
  3. Can you confirm with certainty that my unit is flawed?
Thanks a lot for reading through this extremely long post. I appreciate any constructive comments.

PS - I have to add, PLEASE view the images in original size to appreciate my concerns of grain and softness. The images as is in the post don't reveal the grain as much.
Click to expand...
Having gone from d90 to d800 myself i know exactly how you feel. Truth is:

1. Forget about "snapshot" approach to taking pictures. I used nikon f/2.8 trinity on d90 and I would get great pictures essentially machine gunning the combo of d90 and 24-70. Take time to focus, compose and take the shot and D800 will surprise you.

2. Because of bigger sensor f/2.8 on d800 is like f/4 on d90 as far as DOF / corner sharpness is concerned.

3. Calibrate your lenses and use the adjustments that d800 supports.

4. Last and most important: respect the camera or it will, with great detail, show you every bit of your poor technique.



Forget about zooming in to pixel level to see huge detail, unless yu are checking for critical focus; enjoy the picture as a whole.

--
1. D800 is the first camera with resolution so high that it simply does not matter.
2. Most people who do not own/shoot d800 miss-understand it. Color depth and accuracy in addition to resolution is what makes d800 great. Resolution alone is over rated.
 
I downloaded your file ..the sharpness on the center flower was fine..as was the grain ..the D800 files need a good sharpen when viewing at 100%
Gobbly said:
Gobbly wrote:

Hey everyone, thanks for all your replies. All this seems to put things in context and I'm reconsidering returning the camera.

Now that I understand things better I do think it's foolish to zoom 100% and pixel peep.

But I want to make sure that my unit is normal. So I've uploaded a fresh RAW file here - https://www.dropbox.com/s/ac0i9vrifiyevr4/DSC_0252.NEF

If you could download it and inspect it and let me know if the grain levels are acceptable and that the image is sharp, I'd appreciate it.

I took it with the 28-70mm f2.8D AF-S lens that I borrowed. It was taken handheld.

Also I just love to see an unedited RAW file of an image from your D800 that you would consider your sharpest or your best image in terms of image quality. Of course you don't have to oblige if you're concerned about copyrights or something but it's just something I want to see to compare images from mine and make sure my unit is alright.

Ultimately, all I want is for me to have a fully functional flawless unit and I don't want to make any compromises even if it means I have to be overcautious. I hope that's understandable.

Thanks everyone!
Click to expand...
 
Gobbly said:
Gobbly wrote:
So the following are the questions I have:-
  1. Are these results expected of a brand new D800 and the lens combinations?
  2. Am I doing something incorrect?
  3. Can you confirm with certainty that my unit is flawed?
Thanks a lot for reading through this extremely long post. I appreciate any constructive comments.
Click to expand...
As for your questions, they can be answered pretty much as follows:

1) Yes, probably
2) Yes, very likely you are doing several things wrong
3) No, not much indicate that

I know this is going to sound rude, and possibly condescending. But please, it really is not meant to be. It is a honest attempt at actually explaining where a lot of these 'issues' come from. The main issue shining through your entire post is you have very unrealistic expectations and have very little experience with and knowledge about many of the things you worry about.

Just some samples
- you blame camera for CA - a phenomena almost entirely caused by the lens, not the camera.
- You shoot at iso 2500 and expect to see very little grain in 100% scale - when all cameras display some amount of grain at all iso setting, and progressively more so as you increase the iso, and looking in 100% is usually a sure way of confusing the issue.
- You claim to have steady hands, well, no one has really.
- You seem oblivious to the role of lighting in the images, a lot of the issues you point at can at least in part be blamed in the light.
- You seem to have little or no experience in raw processing and the drastically different results even small changes in processing can lead to.
- You shoot a example in raw, do not process it, and mention the camera settings for quality and print size - settings who has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on raw files.
- You shoot one example at 1/6 and f/16, meaning you combine the effects of mirror slap with diffraction to cause a rather blurry image

In short, you are blaming the camera for issues which are almost entirely caused by the light, by the lenses and more then anything by yourself ...

Again, I know all of this sounds rude and probably condescending too. But it is not the intention of my post. It is just you have managed to combine some of the most common user errors with some of the most common user misconceptions, paired with a healthy dose of unrealistic expectations. The result is of course disappointment.

I cannot see anything remarkable or strange about the examples you display. They are quite typical examples of bad lighting, bad choice of settings (aperture, shutter speeds), lack of post processing and mild lens issues. It is hard to blame the camera for that. Or in other words: If there really is an issue with your camera, it is almost impossible to tell from your examples since there are so many layers of other issues blocking the view.

Good results in photography can be achieved by combining good light with good gear and a good amount of experience. You have good gear, it is mainly the two other parts that need tuning.
 
pcm81 said:
pcm81 wrote:

Having gone from d90 to d800 myself i know exactly how you feel. Truth is:

1. Forget about "snapshot" approach to taking pictures. I used nikon f/2.8 trinity on d90 and I would get great pictures essentially machine gunning the combo of d90 and 24-70. Take time to focus, compose and take the shot and D800 will surprise you.

2. Because of bigger sensor f/2.8 on d800 is like f/4 on d90 as far as DOF / corner sharpness is concerned.

3. Calibrate your lenses and use the adjustments that d800 supports.

4. Last and most important: respect the camera or it will, with great detail, show you every bit of your poor technique.

Forget about zooming in to pixel level to see huge detail, unless yu are checking for critical focus; enjoy the picture as a whole.
Click to expand...
 
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