Reading mode: Light Dark

D2H is a disappointment

Go to last post
AdWiser said:
AdWiser88638 said:
AdWiser said:
If an image deserves an award nobody will refuse it because the
image is noisy - at least in PJ
I don't get your point at all, you are very proud of still shooting
film, now how about some iso 1600 samples?
--
------------------------
regards,
AdWiser
Click to expand...
--
I thought it was obvious, from the samples posted by new owners of
the D2h, there is a question about the promis and delivery of high
quality and improved noise levels at high ISO. What was posted is
of a lesser quality than from either the D1 series of cameras or
the now almost two year old and discontinued "other" digital PJ
camera. The issue is a technical one, but just because to some it
is "good enough" it does not change the noise level present. And
there is always the "other" camera that proven itself for many
different aplications for the past year and half.Tony K
Click to expand...
--
------------------------
regards,
AdWiser
Click to expand...
--
No,

I am looking forward of making my own decesion about the image quality of the D2h, as it would or could decide one way or another my investment into a future digital platform, since the Canadian price for the 1D is beyond what I consider a good investment for my needs. Not to mention that it is discontinued, (too soon)and my dealer could not get one new.

On a final note, my prints from a modern 120 negs of ISO800 and up with tranies as well, are virtually grain and noise free at prints 10x10 or 11x14, so a lesser quality image and less flexability even in an award winning body like the D2h is a a step down.

Having suffered trough the Fuji S1 workflow, or having wondered at the missguided software like PhotoDesk, I was ready for the Nikon point of view, with a new camera no less. But... it seems nobody can even remotly catch up or pass Canon's mature system.

It is funny how camera manufacturers were great at designing tools, but mostly fall flat when they are about to dable into image quailty.

Oh, is it true, that one can "develop" a D1x file to some 10. something MP file size??
Tony K
 
If you want to see the Toyota Red go look at the hatch of a Red 2003 Toyota Matrix XRS and I think you'll see that I wasn't making this up.

So this makes the Tone curves better, the Auto White Balance for daylight and shadows better and the fill factor better as more detail clearly showed up better on the D100 shots (look at the dirt spots that are very present on the D100 shots, just like in real life).
Isaac Crawford said:
Pete Perry said:
wiet4free said:
To me the 10D's red looks much more realistic.
The D100's red looks a bit oversaturated.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I always love how people consider some colors or skin tones "more
realistic" even though they have never seen the actual person or
scene. I really wish that they would use the term "I prefer the
colors...".:-)

Isaac
Click to expand...
--

'The only real currency in this bankrupt world is what we share with each other when we're being uncool.' -- Cameron Crowe
 
Not to be an idiot but anyone can post images and claim they're from some other camera if no exif data is present.
Jolly Roger said:
Click to expand...
--

'The only real currency in this bankrupt world is what we share with each other when we're being uncool.' -- Cameron Crowe
 
I don't but these images manage not to have any! If I'm going to tell you the truth and show you my images while proving one is worse then the other then I'll make an effort to leave the Efix data embedded.

I know, some can probably change the data but why remove it at all.
Iliah Borg said:
no text
Click to expand...
--

'The only real currency in this bankrupt world is what we share with each other when we're being uncool.' -- Cameron Crowe
 
Pete Perry said:
I don't but these images manage not to have any! If I'm going to
tell you the truth and show you my images while proving one is
worse then the other then I'll make an effort to leave the Efix
data embedded.

I know, some can probably change the data but why remove it at all.
Click to expand...
What strikes me is that the images have different color profiles, even Frontira profile is embedded.
 
All images are processed. Some are processed for a Frontira; some are processed for web sites; and some are processed for other media.

I use Photoshop for my processing, and by default, after the conversion, the EXIF data is lost.
Iliah Borg said:
Pete Perry said:
I don't but these images manage not to have any! If I'm going to
tell you the truth and show you my images while proving one is
worse then the other then I'll make an effort to leave the Efix
data embedded.

I know, some can probably change the data but why remove it at all.
Click to expand...
What strikes me is that the images have different color profiles,
even Frontira profile is embedded.
Click to expand...
 
Jolly Roger said:
All images are processed. Some are processed for a Frontira; some
are processed for web sites; and some are processed for other media.
Click to expand...
Just convert to sRGB before publishing for web, please. Otherwise people need to save an image and open it in Photoshop to have proper perception :)
 
Only a few hundred people in the entire world have production units in hand as of right now.

When you test out a production model and can produce images to support your assertions, you will have something meaningful to say. But, not until then.
 
Hi snowwrestler

This is a good point. Instead of "disappointed by camera" should read "disappointed by images posted".

--
------------------------
regards,
AdWiser
 
Just a couple of weeks ago he was ripping the 1D that he is now saying is better than the D2H....I don't know what makes this person happy.

Teski
Jolly Roger said:
From all of the images I've seen from various users on this forum
regarding the image quality and the amount of noise, the D2H isn't
even on par with the Canon 1D.

Even the Canon 10D has less noise than the Canon 1D - there's
virtually no noise at all on the Canon 10D at ISO 800, yet the
Nikon D2H is full of noise.

Perhaps the only good thing to come to Nikonians is 8fps @ 4MP with
a kickass flash system?

Am I the only (fading) Nikon Fan who is disgusted with the images
we've seen so far?
Click to expand...
 
I'll have to disagree with you on this one. In my experiences the 10D is a very well built camera. I do agree with you that without doubt the D2H is a heck of a better built camera than the 10D designed for more demanding environments and use.
Dennis S said:
The problem with the 10D is that it falls apart...shutters go..etc.
So we can probably add that the D2H is a stronger camera with a
bigger buffer and fast write times and of course 8fps and no
shutter lag.
Click to expand...
--
Stephen Reed



http://www.pbase.com/domotang
 
Teski said:
Teski
Jolly Roger said:
From all of the images I've seen from various users on this forum
regarding the image quality and the amount of noise, the D2H isn't
even on par with the Canon 1D.

Even the Canon 10D has less noise than the Canon 1D - there's
virtually no noise at all on the Canon 10D at ISO 800, yet the
Nikon D2H is full of noise.

Perhaps the only good thing to come to Nikonians is 8fps @ 4MP with
a kickass flash system?

Am I the only (fading) Nikon Fan who is disgusted with the images
we've seen so far?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/mnewco/inbox
See my profile for equipment
I have an email. Use it but be nice!
 
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