D7000 Histogram

SAYE said:

I come from a Fuji x10 to a D7000, and regret the loss of pre-exposure histogram data on Nikons. On the Fuji (which, in my view, has a much more user-friendly menu and display system) one could, on the half-press, view the histogram prior to capturing the image. This 'pre-view' allowed one to adjust the EV as necessary via the convenient thumb wheel. It seems to me that viewing the histogram post-capture is being wise after the event, which, if you then want to adjust the EV, may no longer be the same event that you were hoping to capture. Question: is there a way of determining the best EV with the D7000 prior to capture rather than after it ie as one can with the X10? V. grateful for any pointers. Thank you

Click to expand...

The x10 is mirror-less so you can integrate a rough histogram pre-exposure because the sensor is actually seeing the whole scene prior to exposure so you have the data to work with to generate a histogram that approximates the final capture. It won't be exact though unless the scene is static and the camera is on a tripod (or similar). A DSLR is viewing the scene (liveview exception) via the low resolution RGB meter. In that case a pre-exposure histogram would be pretty rough and perhaps not nearly as useful as the post capture histogram. Also note...with the x10 you have to half press the shutter release to see the histogram then study it. You can do the exact same thing with the D7000 by simply taking the shot. You then have to study the histogram in either camera so no time loss. The x10 histogram is only relevant (as it relates to the actual exposure) if the lighting and framing does not change between studying it and taking the shot...same with the DSLR method of "take a shot and adjust". In that way...final result is the same. In practical terms...the result is near identical with both methods and no real time lost.

The D7000 implementation has an added advantage. While your busy studying the histogram and making adjustments to camera settings...if the scene is no longer available (bird fly's away) you at least have an image to take home. With the x10...your just out of luck

Thank you for your comprehensive reply. I guess the D7000's Live View metering via the LCD should be the same as that on the mirror-less system in the X10. But I can't find a pre-capture histogram anywhere on the D7000. I'm not defending the X10 against the D7000, because they are completely different categories of camera, each having their own pros and cons. In my experience, it's actually quicker to adjust the EV pre-capture via the X10 system than it is post-capture via the D7000. I guess I'm looking for the best of both worlds, and seeing if others on this forum consider it a dilemma. PS I have to confess that I'm not an experienced analyst of histograms, but I have found it useful to see, at a glance, if the 'mountain' is hard over to one side or the other.

SAYE said:

Thank you for your comprehensive reply. I guess the D7000's Live View metering via the LCD should be the same as that on the mirror-less system in the X10.

Click to expand...

The algorithms are similar but not the same many diffrences.

SAYE said:

But I can't find a pre-capture histogram anywhere on the D7000.

Click to expand...

There is no pre-capture histogram in LiveView either. Problem with having one is it would only match the JPEG (which can be misleading) and it would still not match the final capture unless tripod and unchanging scene (technically). And regards the final capture... two shots still gets you the same result in about the same time.

SAYE said:

I'm not defending the X10 against the D7000, because they are completely different categories of camera, each having their own pros and cons. In my experience, it's actually quicker to adjust the EV pre-capture via the X10 system than it is post-capture via the D7000.

Click to expand...

I completely understand but in practice do not find it a limitation.

SAYE said:

I guess I'm looking for the best of both worlds, and seeing if others on this forum consider it a dilemma. PS I have to confess that I'm not an experienced analyst of histograms, but I have found it useful to see, at a glance, if the 'mountain' is hard over to one side or the other.

Click to expand...

As you get used to "reading" it...you may find the general Luminance (big white one) histogram not nearly as valuable as the RGB histogram display. The white one (Luminance only) can look just fine only to find out you completely overexposed the red channel on that rose when you get home. And why a post capture RGB histogram might end up being a better tool. Took me a while to figure that out but depends on the scene. Watch the red channel with skin tones as well. Good Luck

Thank you; most helpful.

SAYE said:

Thank you for your comprehensive reply. I guess the D7000's Live View metering via the LCD should be the same as that on the mirror-less system in the X10. But I can't find a pre-capture histogram anywhere on the D7000. I'm not defending the X10 against the D7000, because they are completely different categories of camera, each having their own pros and cons. In my experience, it's actually quicker to adjust the EV pre-capture via the X10 system than it is post-capture via the D7000. I guess I'm looking for the best of both worlds, and seeing if others on this forum consider it a dilemma. PS I have to confess that I'm not an experienced analyst of histograms, but I have found it useful to see, at a glance, if the 'mountain' is hard over to one side or the other.

Click to expand...

It doesn't have one. Even though Mako has a few points, other dlsrs have it and I find it should be there, even if just a rought histogram, especially for someone like me that use manual controls. I loved it in the Canon G9.

rhlpetrus said:

SAYE said:

Thank you for your comprehensive reply. I guess the D7000's Live View metering via the LCD should be the same as that on the mirror-less system in the X10. But I can't find a pre-capture histogram anywhere on the D7000. I'm not defending the X10 against the D7000, because they are completely different categories of camera, each having their own pros and cons. In my experience, it's actually quicker to adjust the EV pre-capture via the X10 system than it is post-capture via the D7000. I guess I'm looking for the best of both worlds, and seeing if others on this forum consider it a dilemma. PS I have to confess that I'm not an experienced analyst of histograms, but I have found it useful to see, at a glance, if the 'mountain' is hard over to one side or the other.

Click to expand...

It doesn't have one. Even though Mako has a few points, other dlsrs have it and I find it should be there, even if just a rought histogram, especially for someone like me that use manual controls. I loved it in the Canon G9.

Click to expand...

I'm looking forward to mirrorless that offers intelligent histogram based exposure programmes. I want a camera that does 'preserve highlights' 'preserve shadows' 'middle'. I'd happily go back to using programme modes if these were options.

Member said:

I want a camera that does 'preserve highlights' 'preserve shadows' 'middle'.

Click to expand...

They already do that. Nikon's ADL (Active D-Lighting) does exactly that and all three at once.

Mako2011 said:

jkjond said:

I want a camera that does 'preserve highlights' 'preserve shadows' 'middle'.

Click to expand...

They already do that. Nikon's ADL (Active D-Lighting) does exactly that and all three at once.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, not convinced. So you never need to use exposure compensation with active d lighting?

jkjond said:

Mako2011 said:

jkjond said:

I want a camera that does 'preserve highlights' 'preserve shadows' 'middle'.

Click to expand...

They already do that. Nikon's ADL (Active D-Lighting) does exactly that and all three at once.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, not convinced. So you never need to use exposure compensation with active d lighting?

Click to expand...

If the goal is to preserve highlight and shadow detail while keeping midtones were they belong... It really is surprisingly effective and I find I don't often need to play with EC very often. Trick is to gauge the scene and choose the best ADL setting to match. You can even set the camera to bracket ADL in 2 or 3 shots and really cover the bases. I also shoot RAW so have plenty of flexibility in post as well. YMMV, not every one like ADL and I don't use it with flash.

--
My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Mako2011 said:

jkjond said:

Mako2011 said:

jkjond said:

I want a camera that does 'preserve highlights' 'preserve shadows' 'middle'.

Click to expand...

They already do that. Nikon's ADL (Active D-Lighting) does exactly that and all three at once.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, not convinced. So you never need to use exposure compensation with active d lighting?

Click to expand...

If the goal is to preserve highlight and shadow detail while keeping midtones were they belong... It really is surprisingly effective and I find I don't often need to play with EC very often. Trick is to gauge the scene and choose the best ADL setting to match. You can even set the camera to bracket ADL in 2 or 3 shots and really cover the bases. I also shoot RAW so have plenty of flexibility in post as well. YMMV, not every one like ADL and I don't use it with flash.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. I've never seriously considered ADL as I don't use nikon software and a firm raw shooter. The idea of matching ADL to scenes doesn't hold a lot of appeal (non, to be accurate). If coupled to an easy grab custom setting I might warm to it, though if I had a custom dial I'd set one for flash and one for no flash as a priority.

Extending DR is no concern, nor is metering for landscapes where I've all the time in the world, but for quick fire wedding moments a foolproof meter system would be ideal. Its too easy to be between two sets of action in different light.

jkjond said:

Mako2011 said:

jkjond said:

Mako2011 said:

jkjond said:

I want a camera that does 'preserve highlights' 'preserve shadows' 'middle'.

Click to expand...

They already do that. Nikon's ADL (Active D-Lighting) does exactly that and all three at once.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, not convinced. So you never need to use exposure compensation with active d lighting?

Click to expand...

If the goal is to preserve highlight and shadow detail while keeping midtones were they belong... It really is surprisingly effective and I find I don't often need to play with EC very often. Trick is to gauge the scene and choose the best ADL setting to match. You can even set the camera to bracket ADL in 2 or 3 shots and really cover the bases. I also shoot RAW so have plenty of flexibility in post as well. YMMV, not every one like ADL and I don't use it with flash.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. I've never seriously considered ADL as I don't use nikon software and a firm raw shooter. The idea of matching ADL to scenes doesn't hold a lot of appeal (non, to be accurate).

Click to expand...

Why? You select the correct metering mode for the scene or desired outcome...why wouldn't you select the right ADL setting for the scene or desired outcome? It only takes a sec to change settings if you have the camera set up optimally to do that. You could also choose the ADL Auto setting...it's surprisingly good (way better than older gen ADL) at picking the best setting.

Member said:

If coupled to an easy grab custom setting I might warm to it, though if I had a custom dial I'd set one for flash and one for no flash as a priority.

Click to expand...

U1/U2 lets you pretty much do exactly that.

Member said:

Extending DR is no concern, nor is metering for landscapes where I've all the time in the world, but for quick fire wedding moments a foolproof meter system would be ideal. Its too easy to be between two sets of action in different light.

Click to expand...

Fool proof...is often a pipe dream. ADL often gets me closer to fool proof (in relative terms). Again, just another tool to consider.

Mako2011 said:

jkjond said:

Mako2011 said:

jkjond said:

Mako2011 said:

jkjond said:

I want a camera that does 'preserve highlights' 'preserve shadows' 'middle'.

Click to expand...

They already do that. Nikon's ADL (Active D-Lighting) does exactly that and all three at once.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, not convinced. So you never need to use exposure compensation with active d lighting?

Click to expand...

If the goal is to preserve highlight and shadow detail while keeping midtones were they belong... It really is surprisingly effective and I find I don't often need to play with EC very often. Trick is to gauge the scene and choose the best ADL setting to match. You can even set the camera to bracket ADL in 2 or 3 shots and really cover the bases. I also shoot RAW so have plenty of flexibility in post as well. YMMV, not every one like ADL and I don't use it with flash.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. I've never seriously considered ADL as I don't use nikon software and a firm raw shooter. The idea of matching ADL to scenes doesn't hold a lot of appeal (non, to be accurate).

Click to expand...

Why? You select the correct metering mode for the scene or desired outcome...why wouldn't you select the right ADL setting for the scene or desired outcome? It only takes a sec to change settings if you have the camera set up optimally to do that. You could also choose the ADL Auto setting...it's surprisingly good (way better than older gen ADL) at picking the best setting.

Click to expand...

I never change metering mode. I'm a manual for everything man, just two dials to play with, three if you count iso. I can't use auto any more as the camera doesn't think the way I do.

Mako2011 said:

Mako2011 said:

If coupled to an easy grab custom setting I might warm to it, though if I had a custom dial I'd set one for flash and one for no flash as a priority.

Click to expand...

U1/U2 lets you pretty much do exactly that.

Click to expand...

D300/700, I'd love a U1/U2 option - the 4 custom modes on the 300/700 are barely useable as the camera resets them every time you use them... what's the point in that?

Mako2011 said:

Mako2011 said:

Extending DR is no concern, nor is metering for landscapes where I've all the time in the world, but for quick fire wedding moments a foolproof meter system would be ideal. Its too easy to be between two sets of action in different light.

Click to expand...

Fool proof...is often a pipe dream. ADL often gets me closer to fool proof (in relative terms). Again, just another tool to consider.

Click to expand...

True, but a histogram based metering system is what I know best, so if the camera exposed automatically to the way I use the histogram, then it should rarely get a result I wouldn't have aimed for myself. The three ways I meter with the histogram bring me back to my stating point... Most of the time my only concern is not blowing highlights, though there are times when they simply have to go.

jkjond said:

Mako2011 said:

jkjond said:

Mako2011 said:

jkjond said:

Mako2011 said:

jkjond said:

I want a camera that does 'preserve highlights' 'preserve shadows' 'middle'.

Click to expand...

They already do that. Nikon's ADL (Active D-Lighting) does exactly that and all three at once.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, not convinced. So you never need to use exposure compensation with active d lighting?

Click to expand...

If the goal is to preserve highlight and shadow detail while keeping midtones were they belong... It really is surprisingly effective and I find I don't often need to play with EC very often. Trick is to gauge the scene and choose the best ADL setting to match. You can even set the camera to bracket ADL in 2 or 3 shots and really cover the bases. I also shoot RAW so have plenty of flexibility in post as well. YMMV, not every one like ADL and I don't use it with flash.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. I've never seriously considered ADL as I don't use nikon software and a firm raw shooter. The idea of matching ADL to scenes doesn't hold a lot of appeal (non, to be accurate).

Click to expand...

Why? You select the correct metering mode for the scene or desired outcome...why wouldn't you select the right ADL setting for the scene or desired outcome? It only takes a sec to change settings if you have the camera set up optimally to do that. You could also choose the ADL Auto setting...it's surprisingly good (way better than older gen ADL) at picking the best setting.

Click to expand...

I never change metering mode. I'm a manual for everything man, just two dials to play with, three if you count iso. I can't use auto any more as the camera doesn't think the way I do.

Click to expand...

Hmm...you wanted a hightlights middle shadow option...I just pointed to a possibility and you did say program mode might have appeal later...if. ADL can be a Manual setting just like aperture.

Member said:

Member said:

Member said:

If coupled to an easy grab custom setting I might warm to it, though if I had a custom dial I'd set one for flash and one for no flash as a priority.

Click to expand...

U1/U2 lets you pretty much do exactly that.

Click to expand...

D300/700, I'd love a U1/U2 option - the 4 custom modes on the 300/700 are barely useable as the camera resets them every time you use them... what's the point in that?

Member said:

Member said:

Extending DR is no concern, nor is metering for landscapes where I've all the time in the world, but for quick fire wedding moments a foolproof meter system would be ideal. Its too easy to be between two sets of action in different light.

Click to expand...

Fool proof...is often a pipe dream. ADL often gets me closer to fool proof (in relative terms). Again, just another tool to consider.

Click to expand...

True, but a histogram based metering system is what I know best, so if the camera exposed automatically to the way I use the histogram, then it should rarely get a result I wouldn't have aimed for myself.

Click to expand...

That's actually what I find with the way I setup and use ADL.

Member said:

The three ways I meter with the histogram bring me back to my stating point... Most of the time my only concern is not blowing highlights, though there are times when they simply have to go.

Click to expand...

We have the same goal...I just have a solution that works well for me and may not for others.

Good Luck and happy shooting!!

... that the displayed histogram is based on the JPEG, not the NEF, even if you are shooting RAW.

IMHO a better approach than depending on the histogram on the LCD is to automatically bracket exposures, then evaluate the NEFs in software like CNX2 that, as I understand it, displays a histogram based on the raw data, not the JPEG.

Of course, that assumes you're shooting NEFs and not just JPEGs, but if you're concerned enough about exposure accuracy to be evaluating histograms, NEFs would seem to be the way to go.