Reading mode: Light Dark

D2H Samples from Madison Square Garden

  • Thread starter Thread starter edbetz
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
that second one is not a puck it is dust on the sensor. A really big piece of dust.
skimmel said:
Mike Goebel said:
EdwardBetz said:
Without a doubt - the toughest lighting I face at a professional
arena in the NY Metro area is at Madison Square Garden. The light
is Tungsten and there isn't much of it. Here are two images from
tonight - one from the D1H and one from the D2H. Both are shot at
1000 iso and all other settings should be similar.

D1H first



D2H second



I've cropped the images about the same size - but they are
otherwise untouched.

My actual shooting experience was much different then what you see
here. The first problem is that the light falls off in the corners.
The D1H handled this much better in my opinion the the D2H does. If
you are underexposed and try to bring a D2H image up - you are
going to have problems.

The editor on the desk noticed the increased noise, and commented
on it. Never a good sign.

While there isn't much more noise in the D2H image - it is less
pleasing - If you look closely in the blacks (the puck) or dark
blues, the noise adds unwanted colors. Browns greens and yellows.
This isnt good news.

One other thing I can report. I heard tonight from one photographer
that his newspaper - A large daily in the NY Metro area - (and I'm
not a liberty to say who) had ordered a bunch of D2h's and after
about a week sent them all back. If true (and I have no reason to
doubt this well respected photographer) this is another bad sign.

Having said all of that, I must say, I really like this camera. Yes
there are noise issues at high iso's (starting at about 800), but
it performs so well otherwise I think I can live with the noise.
I'm currently working with some different filters to see if I can
control the noise in my production better. If I'm successful, I'll
post some more here.

It's such a shame that we loyal Nikon users should even be forced
to discuss this...

Tomorrow night is basketball at Madison Square Garden. The light is
even worse the hockey (they use less lights and there is no ice to
lighten the players). I'll post that stuff, but based on what I've
seen so far, I'm a little worried about how it will look.

--
Ed Betz
http://www.edbetz.com
Click to expand...
--
http://www.mikegoebel.com
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Let me start by saying - Yes, there is more noise then I hoped for and No, its not the only factor in what TOOL to choose. It is after all just a TOOL!

I now own a D1H a D100 and a D2H. I'm going to keep all three. For some jobs, the D1H is the TOOL I'll need, for others the D2H and for yet others it will be the D100.

It all depends on what I'm shooting and what I need.

Having said all of that, I wish there were less noise, and I hope NIKON is reading this stuff here and elsewhere. I hope they here me (or us as the case may be). Not only because I want a D2H with less noise, but because I think their survival is at stake if they continue making products just a little behind Canon.

I'm not unhappy I bought the D2H and I didn't post these pictures with the intent that others cancel their orders. I posted them so people know what they are getting and so that Nikon can see how we all feel about it.

Nothing gets me more annoyed the the people who haven't spent the money for one - or who have one on order and just don't want to hear it, and then defend the noise. Its there - its an issue and hopefully Nikon is working on it.

--
Ed Betz
http://www.edbetz.com
 
Question out of the blue here, doesn't anyone question anything else than the sensor here ? I mean... maybe it would look better this way:

save the file to hard drive, open it in photoshop and hold down these buttons: CTRL-SHIFT-B (auto color).

Voila, the picture suddently is color corrected in the wrong way, but (and behold) there's an incredible increase in exposure... I figured with the curves that it's lacking about 2/3s of a stop...

Now even then the noise issue in intolerable, but I find the noise easier to cope with when the image is brighter.

Meanwhile, I'll keep waiting for a D2x that will hopefully not have those problems... or any problem at all for that matter!
EdwardBetz said:
Without a doubt - the toughest lighting I face at a professional
arena in the NY Metro area is at Madison Square Garden. The light
is Tungsten and there isn't much of it. Here are two images from
tonight - one from the D1H and one from the D2H. Both are shot at
1000 iso and all other settings should be similar.

D1H first



D2H second



I've cropped the images about the same size - but they are
otherwise untouched.

My actual shooting experience was much different then what you see
here. The first problem is that the light falls off in the corners.
The D1H handled this much better in my opinion the the D2H does. If
you are underexposed and try to bring a D2H image up - you are
going to have problems.

The editor on the desk noticed the increased noise, and commented
on it. Never a good sign.

While there isn't much more noise in the D2H image - it is less
pleasing - If you look closely in the blacks (the puck) or dark
blues, the noise adds unwanted colors. Browns greens and yellows.
This isnt good news.

One other thing I can report. I heard tonight from one photographer
that his newspaper - A large daily in the NY Metro area - (and I'm
not a liberty to say who) had ordered a bunch of D2h's and after
about a week sent them all back. If true (and I have no reason to
doubt this well respected photographer) this is another bad sign.

Having said all of that, I must say, I really like this camera. Yes
there are noise issues at high iso's (starting at about 800), but
it performs so well otherwise I think I can live with the noise.
I'm currently working with some different filters to see if I can
control the noise in my production better. If I'm successful, I'll
post some more here.

It's such a shame that we loyal Nikon users should even be forced
to discuss this...

Tomorrow night is basketball at Madison Square Garden. The light is
even worse the hockey (they use less lights and there is no ice to
lighten the players). I'll post that stuff, but based on what I've
seen so far, I'm a little worried about how it will look.

--
Ed Betz
http://www.edbetz.com
Click to expand...
 
Ron Baskin said:
Ron Baskin said:
If you have a 2H and enjoy it I'm happy for you. The posters on
Click to expand...
this thread aren't saying the camera isn't right for YOU (it
obviously is). What we're saying is that it isn't right for us!
Apparently, organizations who spend lots of money purchasing them
in bulk feel the same way.
Click to expand...
Ron

... if the D2H doesn't suit you, move on. Apparently, the D2H suits a lot of people. So, we are trying to make sense of the camera, and finding ways to optimize the camera.

--
Jim
 
Hans Giersberg said:
The larger image isn't going to make the noise look worse. That's
absurd. Take a 500 x 500 pixel patch out of both originals so you
have an apples to apples comparison, and you'll see that the D2H
image is still noisier. Actually, by subsampling the D2H image,
you've somewhat hidden the noise (any time you downsample, the
noise gets averaged over several pixels). Subsampling is a crude
form of noise reduction. The ONLY valid comparison is to look at
both images at 100%.
Click to expand...
I don't see what's absurd about this. Just because the camera resolution increased doesn't necessarily mean that the newspaper will print larger images. If you keep the print size constant and increase source resolution, you increase PPI and get the effect of downsampling, because more pixels occupy the same physical space.

That said, I do agree that people were expecting better noise when compared to D1h shots at full resolution. There's no point in having extra resolution if you can actually take advantage of it do more aggressive cropping or bigger images.

IMO, the noise is pretty comparable at 100%, which does imply somewhat greater cropping/enlargement options. However, some people could justifiably have hoped for more given Nikon's press materials and the level of the competition.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/
 
And they say there are no upgrades to firmware in the near futures for announcement and they dont accept there is a problem with noise and they say they have not had any great amounts of complaints or returns about the noise subject......

hmmmm - my guess is either

a) there isnt a problem
b) they arent listening

Peter
 
Peter Dove said:
And they say there are no upgrades to firmware in the near futures
for announcement and they dont accept there is a problem with noise
and they say they have not had any great amounts of complaints or
returns about the noise subject......
hmmmm - my guess is either
a) there isnt a problem
b) they arent listening
Peter
Click to expand...
I just received a reply on my mail regarding the noise issue. The Dutch distributor invites me to test the D2h and compare it with the D1h etc. I will call them later this afternoon so that I can test it this weekend at a Danko Jones concert in (hopefully) very worse light conditions...

Ruut
 
For all those giping about Nikon's promise about noise, please, please reread their literature. From the copy I have in fron of me, absolutely NO mention is made about high ISO noise levels. The literature refers to the fact that Dark Current Noise has been vastly improved (which indeed it has) and also that Fixed Pattern Noise has been virtually eliminated (which it has).

People have constantly misread the literature and applied their own interpretation as to what Nikon has said. This is NOT Nikon's fault - it is all down there in Black and White. Again I ask you to reread the literature and stop slating Nikon for something which they never laid claim to.
--
Carol
 
c) The only place that people are complaining is on forums such as this.

As I mentioned in an earlier posting, the working pros and NPS members probably pull more weight with Nikon than the rest of us. If the complaints are not being made to Nikon, but simply here on the 'Net, I wouldn't expect Nikon to listen. And, of course, it goes without saying that the complaints have to be backed up with samples as well.

One thing I have found out the older I get, is that people are much more prone to complain on a public forum then they are to spend the hours, yes it talks a lot of time, on the phone beating your way through to people in a corporation who can affect a change.

Sometimes the folks who see the problem, and who can quantify it, don't have the time, so I am not knocking them either. Just trying to point out that it may not be that Nikon is "ignoring" the issue at all, just that they are not going to take "anecdotal evidence" from public forums such as this as gospel.
Peter Dove said:
And they say there are no upgrades to firmware in the near futures
for announcement and they dont accept there is a problem with noise
and they say they have not had any great amounts of complaints or
returns about the noise subject......

hmmmm - my guess is either

a) there isnt a problem
b) they arent listening

Peter
Click to expand...
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
 
Peter Dove said:
I would love to see a DFINE'd image at 3200 at full size so I can
print it and see how it would look.

Cheers

Peter Dove
Click to expand...
Yes, I would. Depending on the workload today, I will try to upload one from the bunch of stuff that's been posted here, unless you'd be willing to donate a file to use.
--
Karen

...but if you try sometimes, you just might find, you get what you need.

http://www.e-designarts.com
http://www.edaphoto.com
http://www.pbase.com/kecohen/sports_action
 
Peter Dove said:
And they say there are no upgrades to firmware in the near futures
for announcement and they dont accept there is a problem with noise
and they say they have not had any great amounts of complaints or
returns about the noise subject......

hmmmm - my guess is either

a) there isnt a problem
b) they arent listening

Peter
Click to expand...
That's SOP. On the release of any new camera they deny the existence of any problems and strangely have "never heard of such a complaint." 6 months to a year later, out comes a firmware upgrade that either fixes or improves a problem that never existed in the first place.

Here's what I find really amazing. The shot that Ed posted here, at 1000 ISO isn't all that bad. If I could shoot indoor sports at ISO 1000, I'd be delighted. I generally have to shoot at 1600-3200, although at 3200 even with the D1H I'm not wanting to do much enlarging.

--
Karen

...but if you try sometimes, you just might find, you get what you need.

http://www.e-designarts.com
http://www.edaphoto.com
http://www.pbase.com/kecohen/sports_action
 
Ron Parr said:
You can read Nikon's press release here:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/pr/nikon_07222003_d2h_pr.html

Here's what they say about high ISO performance:

"A high signal-to-noise ratio combined with high-level image
processing offers enhanced performance at high ISO settings. "

Perhaps they meant something different by, "enhanced,"...
Click to expand...
Yes indeed. "Enhanced performance at high ISO settings" could mean more detailed information retained at high ISO, or lower noise level, etc. :-)
 
I have to agree with jeff-c. nowhere in that line is it said that it improves NOISE. it speaks of the signal-to-noise ratio, but doesn't way the noise itself is cleaner.

that being said, I still want it reduced to convince me
jeff-c said:
Yes indeed. "Enhanced performance at high ISO settings" could mean
more detailed information retained at high ISO, or lower noise
level, etc. :-)
Click to expand...
 
Marco Birri said:
I have to agree with jeff-c. nowhere in that line is it said that
it improves NOISE. it speaks of the signal-to-noise ratio, but
doesn't way the noise itself is cleaner.
Click to expand...
I was actually kidding in my comment about different interpretations of, "enhanced." SNR directly affects our perception of noise.

If you want to play word games, you could say that they meant only the signal part improved and not the noise. Of course, this would still imply a less noisy looking image, but it might be technically correct. The thing is that Nikon has already claimed lower, "dark noise," which means that they did indeed claim to improve the N part of the SNR. (Note that dark current noise will be the same at different ISOs. The difference at higher ISO is that signal is weaker.)

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/
 
jeff-c said:
Ron Parr said:
You can read Nikon's press release here:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/pr/nikon_07222003_d2h_pr.html

Here's what they say about high ISO performance:

"A high signal-to-noise ratio combined with high-level image
processing offers enhanced performance at high ISO settings. "

Perhaps they meant something different by, "enhanced,"...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
As far as I remember, there was press-release and news release. Both were issued on July 22, at the moment of announcement.

News release mentioned dark noise, real-time noise reduction in one-shot mode (no need of black frame to subtract), and elimination of need for fixed pattern noise correction due to LBCAST technology. 4-page booklet issued also July 22, mentioned dark current noise and fixed pattern noise.

I haven't seen any other promises from Japanese web site.
 
Bill Dewey said:
Sometimes the folks who see the problem, and who can quantify it,
don't have the time, so I am not knocking them either. Just trying
to point out that it may not be that Nikon is "ignoring" the issue
at all, just that they are not going to take "anecdotal evidence"
from public forums such as this as gospel.
Click to expand...
EVERY review of the D2H is pointing out the painfully obvious poor high ISO performance, relative to its 2-year-old competitor that isn't that good itself.

If Nikon requires proof, they have it in spades!

Brendan
--
Things that make you go, hmmmm...
 
Well, first of all, you are wrong. I haven't seen a comprehensive review to date. Point me to all the reviews that unequivocally state this. By the way, you said "review", not reports from people on this forum.

Second, once again this is all anecdotal, and the reviewers are not the people who buy, and use, lot's of Nikon gear in the pro world. If companies jumped every time that "reviewers" made comments they would all be jumping in different directions, as each "reviewer" may have something different to say.

The reality is that "squeaky wheels" do make a difference. Sadly, if this is a true issue and not simply a matter of learning the system, it may take a substantial set of high-volume pro users threatining or actually switching to Canon to get something done. On the other hand, we really have no clue as to if Nikon is or isn't working on a firmware upgrade at this time. I, for one, don't put any stock in what a regional rep or group might say as they may not even have been told by corporate at this time.
GagBagger said:
Bill Dewey said:
Sometimes the folks who see the problem, and who can quantify it,
don't have the time, so I am not knocking them either. Just trying
to point out that it may not be that Nikon is "ignoring" the issue
at all, just that they are not going to take "anecdotal evidence"
from public forums such as this as gospel.
Click to expand...
EVERY review of the D2H is pointing out the painfully obvious poor
high ISO performance, relative to its 2-year-old competitor that
isn't that good itself.

If Nikon requires proof, they have it in spades!

Brendan
--
Things that make you go, hmmmm...
Click to expand...
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
 
Regarding this review:
http://www.daveblackphotography.com/workshop/03-12.htm

Sounds to me like you simply dismiss anything that does not fit your "reality".
GagBagger said:
Bill Dewey said:
Sometimes the folks who see the problem, and who can quantify it,
don't have the time, so I am not knocking them either. Just trying
to point out that it may not be that Nikon is "ignoring" the issue
at all, just that they are not going to take "anecdotal evidence"
from public forums such as this as gospel.
Click to expand...
EVERY review of the D2H is pointing out the painfully obvious poor
high ISO performance, relative to its 2-year-old competitor that
isn't that good itself.

If Nikon requires proof, they have it in spades!

Brendan
--
Things that make you go, hmmmm...
Click to expand...
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
 
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