D7000 samples

[René Schuster]

Ralph:

The problem is that we're comparing Oly's flagship camera with Nikon's consumer-grade offering.

Rriley:

this is not about what noise you can see, its about what detail survives NR.

René

 

[rapick]

http://www.hwupgrade.it/articoli/fotografia-digitale/2552/nikon-d7000-primo-contatto-e-primi-scatti_2.html

... that were able to draw conclusions about performances of a new camera based on a few 'amateurish' snapshots fired using a consumer grade superzoom lens (Nikkor 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 G AF-S VR).

Exif data like this: ISO 25.600 f/18 1/1000s Hi ISO NR: Normal should actually tell something to those talking about motion blur (!) and smeared details (!).

Now what would your pics look look like from any 4/3 lens stopped down to f/18?

For those that cannot read Italian, the photo-blogger there warns that the camera he used were still with a pre-production firmware, adding that his own very first impression was D7000 to have better Hi-ISO performance that D90, He also recommends to wait for a detailed test.
What we all should better do .

BTW: It looks like the promised RAW download doesn't work. I only got a few thumbnail sized .tif.
--
Rapick
Jalbum supporter
http://www.pbase.com/rapick
http://rapick.jalbum.net/

 

[jim stirling]

http://www.hwupgrade.it/articoli/fotografia-digitale/2552/nikon-d7000-primo-contatto-e-primi-scatti_2.html

... that were able to draw conclusions about performances of a new camera based on a few 'amateurish' snapshots fired using a consumer grade superzoom lens (Nikkor 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 G AF-S VR).

Exif data like this: ISO 25.600 f/18 1/1000s Hi ISO NR: Normal should actually tell something to those talking about motion blur (!) and smeared details (!).

Now what would your pics look look like from any 4/3 lens stopped down to f/18?

For those that cannot read Italian, the photo-blogger there warns that the camera he used were still with a pre-production firmware, adding that his own very first impression was D7000 to have better Hi-ISO performance that D90, He also recommends to wait for a detailed test.
What we all should better do .

BTW: It looks like the promised RAW download doesn't work. I only got a few thumbnail sized .tif.

Now you are just being a party pooper, and all the boys were having so much fun . Faststone seems to be able to see the RAW files

 

[msusic]

... that were able to draw conclusions about performances of a new camera based on a few 'amateurish' snapshots fired using a consumer grade superzoom lens (Nikkor 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 G AF-S VR).

Why not? Sergey says it's a great lens

And it's not like most owners of that camera are going to have bucketload of primes and f2.8 zooms

What's the alternative 16-85? But it's still a "kit zoom".

Exif data like this: ISO 25.600 f/18 1/1000s Hi ISO NR: Normal should actually tell something to those talking about motion blur (!) and smeared details (!).

Yea, means there was decent light there, should've behaved even better

Now what would your pics look look like from any 4/3 lens stopped down to f/18?

Fine? Sure you would lose a bit of sharpness, but trust me on this - diffraction is the last problem for these samples.

For those that cannot read Italian, the photo-blogger there warns that the camera he used were still with a pre-production firmware, adding that his own very first impression was D7000 to have better Hi-ISO performance that D90, He also recommends to wait for a detailed test.

Maybe it does have a bit of advantage over D90, but D90 is a 3yr old camera and cheaper than D7000, but D90 got nicer photos than D7000 which has got too artificial looking results.

E-5 got much better high ISO than an E-3 (along with everything else) and it got ripped to shreds by trolls here for not having more than 12mpix and 5fps (which is mostly irrelevant).

--
Cheers,
Marin

 

[PerL]

... that were able to draw conclusions about performances of a new camera based on a few 'amateurish' snapshots fired using a consumer grade superzoom lens (Nikkor 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 G AF-S VR).

Why not? Sergey says it's a great lens

And it's not like most owners of that camera are going to have bucketload of primes and f2.8 zooms

What's the alternative 16-85? But it's still a "kit zoom".

Exif data like this: ISO 25.600 f/18 1/1000s Hi ISO NR: Normal should actually tell something to those talking about motion blur (!) and smeared details (!).

Yea, means there was decent light there, should've behaved even better

Now what would your pics look look like from any 4/3 lens stopped down to f/18?

Fine? Sure you would lose a bit of sharpness, but trust me on this - diffraction is the last problem for these samples.

For those that cannot read Italian, the photo-blogger there warns that the camera he used were still with a pre-production firmware, adding that his own very first impression was D7000 to have better Hi-ISO performance that D90, He also recommends to wait for a detailed test.

Maybe it does have a bit of advantage over D90, but D90 is a 3yr old camera and cheaper than D7000, but D90 got nicer photos than D7000 which has got too artificial looking results.

E-5 got much better high ISO than an E-3 (along with everything else) and it got ripped to shreds by trolls here for not having more than 12mpix and 5fps (which is mostly irrelevant).

--
Cheers,
Marin

--
http://dslr-video.com/blogmag/

 

[rapick]

Now what would your pics look look like from any 4/3 lens stopped down to f/18?

Fine? Sure you would lose a bit of sharpness, but trust me on this - diffraction is the last problem for these samples.

According to DPR graph in the Zuiko 50/2 test the sharpness loss at F/18 is over 40% .
OK you are the expert and this is the last problem for you.

Cheers.
--
Rapick
Jalbum supporter
http://www.pbase.com/rapick
http://rapick.jalbum.net/

 

[stimmer]

I've shot with a few Nikons and they are famous for being buttery soft right out of the camera, especially JPG.

I still believe they had a great thing going with 12 megapixels and should have kept to it instead of trying to keep up with Canon. Minimal gain in resolution and a lot to lose.

 

[dgrogers]

Show me some good samples then -- if you can find any......

 

[PerL]

Show me some good samples then -- if you can find any......

And where are the ISO 25600 from Oly? I have never seen anything above 3200, and those have not impressed.
--
http://dslr-video.com/blogmag/

 

[rapick]

I've shot with a few Nikons and they are famous for being buttery soft right out of the camera, especially JPG.

Shooting ISO 1000+ 90% of the times, I always go with RAW, and deal with noise in PP (Lightroom 3.2 now) JPEG out of the camera is nonsense to me.
And yes, my 5 years old D200 is not the best choice for low light...

I still believe they had a great thing going with 12 megapixels and should have kept to it instead of trying to keep up with Canon. Minimal gain in resolution and a lot to lose.

Let's wait and see what is actually gained and lost.
--
Rapick
Jalbum supporter
http://www.pbase.com/rapick
http://rapick.jalbum.net/

 

[msusic]

I wasn't talking about that, but 3200 and 6400, 25600 is FUBAR anyway.

Who needs that high iso anyway? With fast lenses you don't need more than 3200 on 43rds anyway.

Show me some good samples then -- if you can find any......

And where are the ISO 25600 from Oly? I have never seen anything above 3200, and those have not impressed.
--
http://dslr-video.com/blogmag/

--
Cheers,
Marin

 

[Claus A]

Rapick,

Exif data like this: ISO 25.600 f/18 1/1000s Hi ISO NR: Normal should actually tell something to those talking about motion blur (!) and smeared details (!).

Now what would your pics look look like from any 4/3 lens stopped down to f/18?

There were ones at ISO values like 800 or 3200, apertures like f/10 or f/8, slower shutter speeds (down to 1/60) etc.

Of course there is motion blur in the one at f/8, 1/60 (as expected [exclamation mark]). Of course there is smeared detail in those at ISO 25600 (as expected [exclamation mark]). And noise (...etc....).

What's your point?

"Don't judge a camera by first photos on an internet site?" Yawn.

"The D7000 is a great camera?" Hmm, by your own logic you can't know this, yet... grin).

Pipe down, it's Photokina, everybody is peeping at pixels (coming from not yet released cameras) right now...

Cheers,

Claus.

--

... when the photograph annihilates itself as medium to be no longer a sign but the thing itself...

 

[John King]

Gidday Folks

I hate to say this, but the first ISO 6400 doesn't look all that much better than my E-1 at higher ISOs. It is certainly not hugely superior to images from my E-30 at ISO 3200 ... For that matter, it may even be worse ...

Here is one from my E-1 at ISO 800, in a whole lot darker environment than this obviously was:



Now, I have PP this image. But still, it is taken with my E-1 ... :|

--
Regards, john from Melbourne, Australia.
(see profile for current gear)
Please do not embed images from my web site without prior permission
I consider this to be a breach of my copyright.
-- -- --

The Camera doth not make the Man (or Woman) ...
Perhaps being kind to cats, dogs & children does ...

Gallery: http://canopuscomputing.com.au/gallery2/main.php



Bird Control Officers on active service.

Member of UK (and abroad) Photo Safari Group

 

[rapick]

[...]

Who needs that high iso anyway? With fast lenses you don't need more than 3200 on 43rds anyway.

I do need for what I do (and use f/1.4 - f/2.0 primes)
--
Rapick
Jalbum supporter
http://www.pbase.com/rapick
http://rapick.jalbum.net/

 

[rlpruitt]

the lack of detail doesn't look at all like it's due to NR.

Check the hair in the ISO 1600 shot - there's the same lack of detail there.

It looks to me like a lens problem - most likely the weakness of a consumer-grade super zoom.

Ralph

 

[rapick]

Rapick,

[...]

Of course there is motion blur in the one at f/8, 1/60 (as expected [exclamation mark]).

Really expected? With focal length in the WA range? Now, unless the photographer had the VR switched off... or been bumped by the crowd while shooting...

Of course there is smeared detail in those at ISO 25600 (as expected [exclamation mark]). And noise (...etc....).

Of course, but showing an f/18 image should tell something about the photographer's part in the result.

What's your point? [..]

If you can't get it: you shall come to Oly SRL talk Forum to read "awful!" about a different brand camera based on a couple of casual snapshot taken at a photokina booth.

What is it all that about? D7000 is consumer grade' at Nikon!!!

Claus.

--

... when the photograph annihilates itself as medium to be no longer a sign but the thing itself...

--
Rapick
Jalbum supporter
http://www.pbase.com/rapick
http://rapick.jalbum.net/

 

[rapick]

Gidday Folks

I hate to say this, but the first ISO 6400 doesn't look all that much better than my E-1 at higher ISOs. It is certainly not hugely superior to images from my E-30 at ISO 3200 ... For that matter, it may even be worse ...

Here is one from my E-1 at ISO 800, [...]

What is it to demonstrate?

I hate to say but there are some badly clipped highlight there, that you were not able to recover in PP. Original shot JPEG or RAW?
--
Rapick
Jalbum supporter
http://www.pbase.com/rapick
http://rapick.jalbum.net/

 

[Claus A]

Rapick,

[...]

Of course there is motion blur in the one at f/8, 1/60 (as expected [exclamation mark]).

Really expected? With focal length in the WA range? Now, unless the photographer had the VR switched off... or been bumped by the crowd while shooting...

Motion blur means the subject (the blond guy) is moving. Even VR can't help with that.

Of course there is smeared detail in those at ISO 25600 (as expected [exclamation mark]). And noise (...etc....).

Of course, but showing an f/18 image should tell something about the photographer's part in the result.

If you don't have a ND filter at hand, this is the only way to quickly check the quality of high ISO performance if you can't change the light.

What's your point? [..]

If you can't get it: you shall come to Oly SRL talk Forum to read "awful!" about a different brand camera based on a couple of casual snapshot taken at a photokina booth.

You shall come to every forum at the moment to read awful! about any camera (even the camera with the forum's brand name) at the moment)

Claus.

--

... when the photograph annihilates itself as medium to be no longer a sign but the thing itself...

 

[rapick]

(...etc....).

Of course, but showing an f/18 image should tell something about the photographer's part in the result.

If you don't have a ND filter at hand, this is the only way to quickly check the quality of high ISO performance if you can't change the light.

No, in this case he didn't note that there was still 3 EV headroom in shutter speed (D7000 goes to 1/8000) so that he could have reasonably used f/8 or even wider.

Then it is the photographer (or casual shooter).

At f/18 with a DX sensor all that you can expect to check is diffraction!
--
Rapick
Jalbum supporter
http://www.pbase.com/rapick
http://rapick.jalbum.net/

 

[John King]

Rapick

Gidday Folks

I hate to say this, but the first ISO 6400 doesn't look all that much better than my E-1 at higher ISOs. It is certainly not hugely superior to images from my E-30 at ISO 3200 ... For that matter, it may even be worse ...

Here is one from my E-1 at ISO 800, [...]

What is it to demonstrate?

That a seven year old camera can take an image with a mere 3 stops difference ( ... ... ) that cleans up OK ... I suppose the fact that my f2/50 lens is around 3 stops faster helps a bit ... .

The ISO 6400 shot from the D7000 does not clean up well at all ... AND there is precious little detail in it to start with ...

NOW do not get me wrong. I am staggered that one can take a piccy at all with dSLRs at these ISOs. With film, ISO 1600 was enough to destroy almost all detail ... ISO 3200 was downright ugly (worse than ISO 3200 of my E-1 ... )

I hate to say but there are some badly clipped highlight there, that you were not able to recover in PP.

The light was appalling. The "clipped highlights" you refer to are actually specular glare from the overhead Xenon (or similar ... ) downlights. There was mixed light from at least three different kinds of light source. That is one reason why the WB is not "perfect", lol ...

Check the EXIF data in the image: ISO 800, f/2 @ 1/20th hand held, no support, no IS ...

Original shot JPEG or RAW?

RAW.

My point being that even with a touch of NR, the detail is still there in my shot ...

I have downloaded the full JPEG from that D7000 site and checked it out with PS5. All levels of NR cause the detail (such as it is ... ) to smear to plastic. I was going to download the .NEF file, but it turns out that they are all actually TIFFs, not NEFs ... .

--
Rapick
Jalbum supporter
http://www.pbase.com/rapick
http://rapick.jalbum.net/

--
Regards, john from Melbourne, Australia.
(see profile for current gear)
Please do not embed images from my web site without prior permission
I consider this to be a breach of my copyright.
-- -- --

The Camera doth not make the Man (or Woman) ...
Perhaps being kind to cats, dogs & children does ...

Gallery: http://canopuscomputing.com.au/gallery2/main.php



Bird Control Officers on active service.

Member of UK (and abroad) Photo Safari Group