Lives in Austria Austria
Joined on Dec 19, 2007


Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5
In reply to:

nir-vana: It's interesting to compare the moon shot to a shot I took with A7RII + 100-400GM
At 400mm cropped to 100% you see more details than with the Nikon 3000mm eqiv.
Yes I know it's a different league and price. And yet with almost X8 digital zoom for the 42mp Sony image it's still better.

I do not like this sample moonshot either, because its too much compressed jpg. But you can only compare if you shoot side by side, as atmospheric turbulence can be hefty.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 08:52 UTC
In reply to:

thx1138: So I compared the shot at 3000mm of the moon to one I took with 500 f4 + 2x TC on a DSLR and the difference was night and day, far far less detail with the Nikon and frankly horrible IQ, more like a water painting. There is no free lunch. Would have been better moving to a 1" sensor and sticking to say a 1200mm effective FL @ say f/5.6. Camera would have still been smaller most likely with far better IQ.

no. dont agree. moon is limited by atmospheric scintillation, in all cases when resolution is good enough. Compared to a Celestron 8 edgeHD + FF DSLR one can see more artefacts on P900, but the visible detail is similar.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 08:50 UTC
In reply to:

Ace of Sevens: By my calculations, the effective resolution for a 1/2.3 sensor at F8 should be less than 1MP. Even at F2.8, the diffraction limit is a bit under 16MP. Is that right?

10.8µm Airy disk diameter at f/8 and 1.3µ pixels thats right, but do not forget the need to oversample to get a finer grid for your details. An audio studio usually works at 192kHz to record what? Up to 20kHz details. Using proper processing (e.g. Deconvolution by a PSF) even big oversampling can yield useful sharp images. I hope we will see less compressed sample shots soon.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2018 at 23:40 UTC
On a photo in the Nikon Coolpix P1000 official samples sample gallery (3 comments in total)

I would like to check out a less compressed pic if available - a "fine" jpg should be around 5-7MB for this 16MP chip.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2018 at 21:28 UTC as 2nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Fuzzzydog: I am surprised at the number of negative comments about this camera and even Nikon in general. This is a niche camera- if you try to compare it to the latest and greatest DSLR with a $10000 lens, of course it will fall short. If you are going to critique the camera, do so within the context of its intended use and abilities. I am so close to pulling the pin on a preorder. I just have never been a big fan of being first in line for anything as there are invariably bugs to be worked out. On the other hand, if I wait there will likely be supply issues as there was with the P900. I have a P900 and it is an excellent camera for my purposes which is general wildlife photography. I like the addition of snapbridge compatibility and RAW shooting as that is something I have wanted to explore. The control ring on the barrel and enhanced features available via the remote are great improvements to the P900. Mostly I amlooking forward to the extended reach of the 3000mm lens.

While the laws of optics say the diameter of the airy disk at f/8 is 10.7µm and the 1.3µm pixel of this camera would fit 8x into one airy disk - we also have the well proven fact that a certain oversampling is healthy to have your sampling grid represent the reality more closely (audio studios use 192kHz reguralrly now), and in astronomy we use regularly 4 to 6x oversampling for shooting the planets). But it all depends on the processing, deconvolving (sharpening by applying a PSF function) is nowadays available to amateurs, so surely Nikon would be able to use it on their machines. I am user and fan on the P900 (6x oversampling), for daytime photography it outperforms even my Eos77d plus a diffration limited 560mm lens (100-400L-II + TC, I measured the combo interferometrically). However, looking at the sample pics provided by Nikon, I was expecting better pics, not so outwashed and softened. But the pics size is about 2MB, so I suspect this is partly because of the compression used.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2018 at 21:20 UTC
Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5