Any crop mode 12bit vs non crop 12 or14bit raws around?

Started Apr 8, 2013 | Discussions
Adventsam Veteran Member • Posts: 4,983
Any crop mode 12bit vs non crop 12 or14bit raws around?

Just wondering if anyone has tried any wildlife or long distance test shots with the 1.3 crop against the normal aps-c raws, any review sites out there with a similar comparison? thanks for you help.

Mako2011
MOD Mako2011 Forum Pro • Posts: 24,579
wouldn't learn much

Adventsam wrote:

Just wondering if anyone has tried any wildlife or long distance test shots with the 1.3 crop against the normal aps-c raws, any review sites out there with a similar comparison? thanks for you help.

I'm not sure it would be a worth while comparison as you could take any full size NEF and crop out the outer 30% in PP and get the exact same results. Letting the camera do the cropping in camera (1.3 crop mode) saves time though so that would be the only thing to compare

-- hide signature --

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)

OP Adventsam Veteran Member • Posts: 4,983
Re: wouldn't learn much

Mako2011 wrote:

Adventsam wrote:

Just wondering if anyone has tried any wildlife or long distance test shots with the 1.3 crop against the normal aps-c raws, any review sites out there with a similar comparison? thanks for you help.

I'm not sure it would be a worth while comparison as you could take any full size NEF and crop out the outer 30% in PP and get the exact same results. Letting the camera do the cropping in camera (1.3 crop mode) saves time though so that would be the only thing to compare

-- hide signature --

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)

Mako, after seeing more images today and looking at the raws from the d7100 against the OMD raws am right on the fence as the OMD seems every bit as good if not better. If the d7100 essentially is quicker and faster in 1.3 crop than normal mode then 400mm lens's that become 800mm lens and 500 that become 1000mm is very interesting for wildlife and the extra crop will help framing and detail imo at such distances. I was just looking for any 1.3 crop raws just to see that they arent a total mess?

Reilly Diefenbach
Reilly Diefenbach Forum Pro • Posts: 12,445
Re: wouldn't learn much

You've been gone for a while, for some reason :^)  So now you're going from maybe buying a D5200 sometime in the future to a D7100 and a 500mm lens?

 Reilly Diefenbach's gear list:Reilly Diefenbach's gear list
Nikon D500 Nikon D850
wildlifr
wildlifr Senior Member • Posts: 1,610
Re: wouldn't learn much

Adventsam wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Adventsam wrote:

Just wondering if anyone has tried any wildlife or long distance test shots with the 1.3 crop against the normal aps-c raws, any review sites out there with a similar comparison? thanks for you help.

I'm not sure it would be a worth while comparison as you could take any full size NEF and crop out the outer 30% in PP and get the exact same results. Letting the camera do the cropping in camera (1.3 crop mode) saves time though so that would be the only thing to compare

-- hide signature --

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)

Mako, after seeing more images today and looking at the raws from the d7100 against the OMD raws am right on the fence as the OMD seems every bit as good if not better. If the d7100 essentially is quicker and faster in 1.3 crop than normal mode then 400mm lens's that become 800mm lens and 500 that become 1000mm is very interesting for wildlife and the extra crop will help framing and detail imo at such distances. I was just looking for any 1.3 crop raws just to see that they arent a total mess?

I own both cameras, (although I've already sold the panasonic 100-300mm lens) and while a detailed pixel peeping analysis might reveal one being better than the other, I think they are very close in terms of IQ and high ISO noise performance. I primarily shoot in 1.3x crop mode with the D7100, but I do that for file size, image processing time, and buffer impact. I'm not sure I follow you with regards to framing and detail at long distance since the OVF FOV isn't magnified in 1.3x crop mode.

 wildlifr's gear list:wildlifr's gear list
Nikon D7100 Nikon D750 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E II +11 more
BlueBomberTurbo Senior Member • Posts: 1,389
Re: wouldn't learn much

I'll be doing some low/mid high ISO tests today/tonight in all modes to see if anything is being lost.  The D7000 had a very insignificant difference, only in deep shadow, and mainly chroma information.

 BlueBomberTurbo's gear list:BlueBomberTurbo's gear list
Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG Macro HSM II Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* E 24mm F1.8 ZA +12 more
ajamils1
ajamils1 Senior Member • Posts: 1,801
Re: wouldn't learn much

wildlifr wrote:

I own both cameras, (although I've already sold the panasonic 100-300mm lens) and while a detailed pixel peeping analysis might reveal one being better than the other, I think they are very close in terms of IQ and high ISO noise performance. I primarily shoot in 1.3x crop mode with the D7100, but I do that for file size, image processing time, and buffer impact. I'm not sure I follow you with regards to framing and detail at long distance since the OVF FOV isn't magnified in 1.3x crop mode.

If I'm understanding it correctly, you mean that there is not much IQ difference between OM-D and D7100 ?

 ajamils1's gear list:ajamils1's gear list
Sony RX10 IV Sony Alpha a7R III Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 28mm F2 +1 more
wildlifr
wildlifr Senior Member • Posts: 1,610
Re: wouldn't learn much

ajamils1 wrote:

wildlifr wrote:

I own both cameras, (although I've already sold the panasonic 100-300mm lens) and while a detailed pixel peeping analysis might reveal one being better than the other, I think they are very close in terms of IQ and high ISO noise performance. I primarily shoot in 1.3x crop mode with the D7100, but I do that for file size, image processing time, and buffer impact. I'm not sure I follow you with regards to framing and detail at long distance since the OVF FOV isn't magnified in 1.3x crop mode.

If I'm understanding it correctly, you mean that there is not much IQ difference between OM-D and D7100 ?

That's my feeling, yes. At least with comparable lenses (panasonic 100-300 vs. nikon 70-300?) I think the biggest differences between the two will be seen due to lens selection, which is clearly in favor of the D7100, at least for longer focal lengths. Also, with regards to wildlife photography, especially BIF, (and sports photography I assume)  there is no competition to the D7100 (or recent earlier dx cameras) on the m4/3 side.

 wildlifr's gear list:wildlifr's gear list
Nikon D7100 Nikon D750 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E II +11 more
mosswings Veteran Member • Posts: 8,702
Re: wouldn't learn much

ajamils1 wrote:

wildlifr wrote:

I own both cameras, (although I've already sold the panasonic 100-300mm lens) and while a detailed pixel peeping analysis might reveal one being better than the other, I think they are very close in terms of IQ and high ISO noise performance. I primarily shoot in 1.3x crop mode with the D7100, but I do that for file size, image processing time, and buffer impact. I'm not sure I follow you with regards to framing and detail at long distance since the OVF FOV isn't magnified in 1.3x crop mode.

If I'm understanding it correctly, you mean that there is not much IQ difference between OM-D and D7100 ?

The 1.3x crop mode of the D7100 should yield images that are of roughly the same quality as the OM-D EM-5.  This is because when you put the D7100 into crop mode, it's like shooting with a u4/3 sized sensor.  The resolution is slightly lower - 15MP vs. 16MP, and the sensor is not Sony EXMOR, but it doesn't incorporate an AA filter and the tracking AF is night and day better and then there's the EVF vs. OVF issue.  So if all that you are doing is shooting 1.3x crop mode landscapes and slow moving subjects, there may be little reason for the D7100 if you're not heavily invested in the Nikon system and a great deal of weight and bulk savings if you shoot mostly primes and midrange zooms at relatively small apertures - f5.6 - f8.0 and above.

 mosswings's gear list:mosswings's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Olympus Stylus 1 Nikon D90 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +5 more
wildlifr
wildlifr Senior Member • Posts: 1,610
Re: wouldn't learn much

mosswings wrote:

ajamils1 wrote:

wildlifr wrote:

I own both cameras, (although I've already sold the panasonic 100-300mm lens) and while a detailed pixel peeping analysis might reveal one being better than the other, I think they are very close in terms of IQ and high ISO noise performance. I primarily shoot in 1.3x crop mode with the D7100, but I do that for file size, image processing time, and buffer impact. I'm not sure I follow you with regards to framing and detail at long distance since the OVF FOV isn't magnified in 1.3x crop mode.

If I'm understanding it correctly, you mean that there is not much IQ difference between OM-D and D7100 ?

The 1.3x crop mode of the D7100 should yield images that are of roughly the same quality as the OM-D EM-5.  This is because when you put the D7100 into crop mode, it's like shooting with a u4/3 sized sensor.  The resolution is slightly lower - 15MP vs. 16MP, and the sensor is not Sony EXMOR, but it doesn't incorporate an AA filter and the tracking AF is night and day better and then there's the EVF vs. OVF issue.  So if all that you are doing is shooting 1.3x crop mode landscapes and slow moving subjects, there may be little reason for the D7100 if you're not heavily invested in the Nikon system and a great deal of weight and bulk savings if you shoot mostly primes and midrange zooms at relatively small apertures - f5.6 - f8.0 and above.

I agree with that overall assessment. Strictly regarding IQ, I think they are very close. But looking at total camera system as a whole, particularly for wildlife, they are not remotely close. Equal reach (better if you choose a lens that works well with a TC), far superior focusing, ergonomics, OVF, battery life, lens selection; all in favor of the nikon dx. In favor of the E-M5; frame rate and IBIS are the two that jump to mind. And in truth, I don't miss the 9 frames/sec of the E-M5.

 wildlifr's gear list:wildlifr's gear list
Nikon D7100 Nikon D750 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E II +11 more
ajamils1
ajamils1 Senior Member • Posts: 1,801
Re: wouldn't learn much

That doesn't help me :p. I currently own GH3 and have been trying to find reasons to switch to D7100 as it looks like a great camera and has a lot more lens options (specially for birding/wildlife)...but I don't wanna lose swivel touchscreen and ease of use.

From everything that I've read online it seems like OM-D/GH3 IQ is on par with D7100/D700 but I have yet to see example of sharp pictures from OM-D or GH3 like the ones that have been posted on this forum (for example this thread )

 ajamils1's gear list:ajamils1's gear list
Sony RX10 IV Sony Alpha a7R III Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 28mm F2 +1 more
wildlifr
wildlifr Senior Member • Posts: 1,610
Re: wouldn't learn much

ajamils1 wrote:

That doesn't help me :p. I currently own GH3 and have been trying to find reasons to switch to D7100 as it looks like a great camera and has a lot more lens options (specially for birding/wildlife)...but I don't wanna lose swivel touchscreen and ease of use.

From everything that I've read online it seems like OM-D/GH3 IQ is on par with D7100/D700 but I have yet to see example of sharp pictures from OM-D or GH3 like the ones that have been posted on this forum (for example this thread )

Sorry about not helping.  But after reading your thread, I don't know why you're hesitating, even if you assume the IQ is identical (and it seems you don't and you very well may be correct). Do you really use the swivel touchscreen outdoors? I never did; either on the G2 or the E-M5. I guess the only comparison I can give is showing you the sharpest shot, IMO, that I've made with each. I do believe the D7100 shot is sharper, but I was using a much better lens.

 wildlifr's gear list:wildlifr's gear list
Nikon D7100 Nikon D750 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E II +11 more
OP Adventsam Veteran Member • Posts: 4,983
Re: wouldn't learn much

wildlifr wrote:

ajamils1 wrote:

That doesn't help me :p. I currently own GH3 and have been trying to find reasons to switch to D7100 as it looks like a great camera and has a lot more lens options (specially for birding/wildlife)...but I don't wanna lose swivel touchscreen and ease of use.

From everything that I've read online it seems like OM-D/GH3 IQ is on par with D7100/D700 but I have yet to see example of sharp pictures from OM-D or GH3 like the ones that have been posted on this forum (for example this thread )

Sorry about not helping.  But after reading your thread, I don't know why you're hesitating, even if you assume the IQ is identical (and it seems you don't and you very well may be correct). Do you really use the swivel touchscreen outdoors? I never did; either on the G2 or the E-M5. I guess the only comparison I can give is showing you the sharpest shot, IMO, that I've made with each. I do believe the D7100 shot is sharper, but I was using a much better lens.

Good comparisons Wildlifr, I think the OMD holds its own here but as you say for wildlife the Nikon is a superior system, and has better reach, in theory, which is what I was hoping to establish with some original 12bit 1.3 crop raw files, oh well.

OP Adventsam Veteran Member • Posts: 4,983
Re: wouldn't learn much

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

You've been gone for a while, for some reason :^)  So now you're going from maybe buying a D5200 sometime in the future to a D7100 and a 500mm lens?

Well 300-400mm probably and yes I am still on the fence with the d7100 and the 5200. I have almost completely ruled out the 5200 on the basis that it doesn't have the 1.3crop and the af system now stretches to f8 on the d7100 like the d4, meaning the fairly light-compact new 70-200 f4 vr with the 1.7 provides a nice 680mm f6.8 option. Alternatively the legacy 80-400vr seems more than adequate but the 70-200f4 seems a very flexible high iq tele to carry around. I do find it annoying that Nikon has designed very few lenses for Dx though, a 16-70 f4 would be nice to match the 70-200, I could live with that combo for everything, maybe a macro and a fast prime to complete the set. However, the Nikon 17-55 is probably what I'd want to pair the 70-200f4 with if they made it a vr lens!.

Mako2011
MOD Mako2011 Forum Pro • Posts: 24,579
EXIF

wildlifr wrote:

ajamils1 wrote:

That doesn't help me :p. I currently own GH3 and have been trying to find reasons to switch to D7100 as it looks like a great camera and has a lot more lens options (specially for birding/wildlife)...but I don't wanna lose swivel touchscreen and ease of use.

From everything that I've read online it seems like OM-D/GH3 IQ is on par with D7100/D700 but I have yet to see example of sharp pictures from OM-D or GH3 like the ones that have been posted on this forum (for example this thread )

Sorry about not helping.  But after reading your thread, I don't know why you're hesitating, even if you assume the IQ is identical (and it seems you don't and you very well may be correct). Do you really use the swivel touchscreen outdoors? I never did; either on the G2 or the E-M5. I guess the only comparison I can give is showing you the sharpest shot, IMO, that I've made with each. I do believe the D7100 shot is sharper, but I was using a much better lens.

Good comparisons Wildlifr, I think the OMD holds its own here but as you say for wildlife the Nikon is a superior system, and has better reach, in theory, which is what I was hoping to establish with some original 12bit 1.3 crop raw files, oh well.

There really will be no difference between a full APS-c D7100 NEF file cropped in post vs cropped in camera (1.3 crop mode) The only difference will be the EXIF data
--
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)

baloo_buc Veteran Member • Posts: 9,517
Re: wouldn't learn much

The sensor is the same. In a crop mode you are taking information from the center of it but that doesn't make the sensor any worse. If the crop is made hardware or software is irrelevant for sensor performance.

 baloo_buc's gear list:baloo_buc's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL5 Nikon D7200 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Tokina AT-X Pro 12-24mm f/4 DX II Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +14 more
Reilly Diefenbach
Reilly Diefenbach Forum Pro • Posts: 12,445
Re: wouldn't learn much

My take is that whichever camera or mode you choose to take the picture that 3200 pixels long edge is the bare minimum to get good detail and low noise on a bird shot. 4800 is better.  Lower than that gets mushy, although it can be viewed casually at lower res, obviously.

 Reilly Diefenbach's gear list:Reilly Diefenbach's gear list
Nikon D500 Nikon D850
OP Adventsam Veteran Member • Posts: 4,983
Re: wouldn't learn much

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

My take is that whichever camera or mode you choose to take the picture that 3200 pixels long edge is the bare minimum to get good detail and low noise on a bird shot. 4800 is better.  Lower than that gets mushy, although it can be viewed casually at lower res, obviously.

Is it best to shoot "birds" in portrait mode then?

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads