If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
As suspected, D4 not as clean as D3S
RichA wrote:
Downsize the D4 images or whatever, but the output from the D3S is still the best of any DSLR. http://tinyurl.com/7mmbmkq Perhaps your subjective opinion is... eerrrrrr, less that valid? Here's something a little less difficult for you the analyze. See if you can tell us in what way it supports your bull**** opinion? http://actionphotosbymarianne.com/TestIm/ISO200snr.gif http://actionphotosbymarianne.com/TestIm/ISO3200snr.gif http://actionphotosbymarianne.com/Te...SO12800snr.gif What you are most interested in, since you probably don't know, is where the graphs show different cameras in each ISO at the -6 EV and lower. Specifically the D3S is the light green color, while a normalized to 12 MP D800 graph is in red and a normalized to 12 MP D4 graph is in blue. In all cases, but particularly at ISO 200, the D4 and D800 both have better SNR than the D3 and D3S. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
As suspected, D4 not as clean as D3S
On 3/03/2012 6:03 p.m., Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
wrote: Downsize the D4 images or whatever, but the output from the D3S is still the best of any DSLR. http://tinyurl.com/7mmbmkq Perhaps your subjective opinion is... eerrrrrr, less that valid? Here's something a little less difficult for you the analyze. See if you can tell us in what way it supports your bull**** opinion? http://actionphotosbymarianne.com/TestIm/ISO200snr.gif http://actionphotosbymarianne.com/TestIm/ISO3200snr.gif http://actionphotosbymarianne.com/Te...SO12800snr.gif What you are most interested in, since you probably don't know, is where the graphs show different cameras in each ISO at the -6 EV and lower. Specifically the D3S is the light green color, while a normalized to 12 MP D800 graph is in red and a normalized to 12 MP D4 graph is in blue. In all cases, but particularly at ISO 200, the D4 and D800 both have better SNR than the D3 and D3S. This information (collated by Marianne Oelund, Bill Claff, and others) just ain't going to "get through". The forums on DPReview are full of it. I'd hoped the 5dIII would have been near enough to 36mp to quell inter-brand BS on what "perfect pixel density" is. Dammit, now the Canon 5DII apologists will be arguing for exactly what they argued against when Canon had more pixels. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
As suspected, D4 not as clean as D3S
On 3/3/2012 12:47 PM, RichA wrote:
On Mar 3, 12:03 am, (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote: wrote: Downsize the D4 images or whatever, but the output from the D3S is still the best of any DSLR. http://tinyurl.com/7mmbmkq Perhaps your subjective opinion is... eerrrrrr, less that valid? Here's something a little less difficult for you the analyze. See if you can tell us in what way it supports your bull**** opinion? http://actionphotosbymarianne.com/Te...SO12800snr.gif What you are most interested in, since you probably don't know, is where the graphs show different cameras in each ISO at the -6 EV and lower. Specifically the D3S is the light green color, while a normalized to 12 MP D800 graph is in red and a normalized to 12 MP D4 graph is in blue. In all cases, but particularly at ISO 200, the D4 and D800 both have better SNR than the D3 and D3S. -- Floyd L. Davidsonhttp://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) Then why is there more "visible" noise in the D4 images on Dpreview? http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/141858950 And why do you persist in bull****ting and complaining, about cameras that you have no intention of ever using. Do you really believe that anyone spending real money on a camera would consider YOUR opinion. -- Peter |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
As suspected, D4 not as clean as D3S
On 2012-03-03 09:47:39 -0800, RichA said:
Then why is there more "visible" noise in the D4 images on Dpreview? http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/141858950 The thing which is most interesting is your on-again off-again love affair with DPreview. In one breath you deride them as toadies incapable of providing anything but opinions favoring their advertisers. In the next, you use test images from their tests which you claim as biased, as the foundation for one of your arguments. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
As suspected, D4 not as clean as D3S
RichA wrote:
Then why is there more "visible" noise in the D4 images on Dpreview? http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/141858950 You don't seem to be able to tell what is "more" and what is not. I personally can't tell from those image if there is more noise or not. All I can tell is that the images are *clearly* not comparable by visual inspection. They are not taken with exactly the same light, they are not normalized to the same pixel dimensions, and visual inspection cannot determine differences that close anyway. The worst part is that the D4 image actually *doesn't* look noisier! Look at the letters where it says "Thursday", and notice that there is more contrast in the D4 image than in the D3S image. But the big clue that the images are not comparable is the different shadows/reflections that show up from the face of the watch. The point of course is that your original claim is nothing but an emotionally ignorant rant. If instead we look at the work done by people with credibility who have actually *measured* noise in ways that is comparable... the graphs I referenced done by Marianne Oelund distinctly show how the D4 compares to the D3S, without requiring viewer judgment of what they are seeing. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
As suspected, D4 not as clean as D3S
Rich wrote:
(Floyd L. Davidson) wrote in : RichA wrote: Then why is there more "visible" noise in the D4 images on Dpreview? http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/141858950 You don't seem to be able to tell what is "more" and what is not. I personally can't tell from those image if there is more noise or not. All I can tell is that the images are *clearly* not comparable by visual inspection. They are not taken with exactly the same light, they are not normalized to the same pixel dimensions That is a B.S. tactic. "Normalized." Take a 500,000 pixel area from BOTH cameras, the D3s is CLEANER. If you can't see it in the images, you are blind. Learn something about it before you spout off. I can't see it in the images because it isn't there! One is bigger than the other, so how do you compare? One clearly has shadows/reflections that the other does not have. How do you compare them? The one you say is noisier clearly has more contrast than the other, how do you compare them? Well, in fact there *are* ways to make *valid* comparisons. And when that is in fact done... the D4 images that have been seen so far are cleaner than D3S images. The images also confirm what Nikon has said. Your "take a 500,000 pixel area" idea is hilarious. The simple fact is that if you take the best images you can of a scene and then print them both at some large size (the same size for images from both cameras)... that will provide a useful visual test, and it will verify what the scientific tests, on normalized images, are showing. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
As suspected, D4 not as clean as D3S
On 4/03/2012 4:43 p.m., Rich wrote:
(Floyd L. Davidson) wrote in : wrote: Then why is there more "visible" noise in the D4 images on Dpreview? http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/141858950 You don't seem to be able to tell what is "more" and what is not. I personally can't tell from those image if there is more noise or not. All I can tell is that the images are *clearly* not comparable by visual inspection. They are not taken with exactly the same light, they are not normalized to the same pixel dimensions That is a B.S. tactic. "Normalized." Take a 500,000 pixel area from BOTH cameras, the D3s is CLEANER. If you can't see it in the images, you are blind. No it isn't. If you scale the D3s image to 4928 pixels on the long side, it's very clear that there's more image noise in the D3s sample. here (converted from original raw files): http://i39.tinypic.com/2v26yxu.jpg This also reveals another problem with DPReview, there is someone there who is "on the ****" (colloquialism = "likes to have a drink, understatement"), and wasn't very careful with hiding their tracks. This might explain their sloppy test technique: The D3s sample was taken with the 85mm f1.4 d @ f8 The D4 sample was taken with the new 85mm f1.4 "g" @ f11 The camera settings were different (D3s image even has high ISO NR toggled on and other differences), but result from raw would depend on what software they used for raw conversion. It seems that some sharpening was applied to the D3s image (not by me in scaling). I could go further into this, and do another raw conversion, removing all "camera settings", but I can't be bothered wasting any more time. I've seen enough to show that the comparison shots between camera models at DPReview aren't very useful. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
As suspected, D4 not as clean as D3S
"Bruce" wrote in message ... [] You're wasting your breath, Rich, by arguing with people who postulate from theory but don't ever seem to look at the images being discussed. They argue that a DSLR with an AA filter gives sharper and more detailed results than one without despite the evidence of images that show the complete opposite. Not so. With an AA filter the results will be more accurate, but will appear /less/ "sharp". This has been explained many times. They argue that people who buy a DSLR without an AA filter will forever be plagued with moire and aliasing, when the truth is that these affect only a tiny proportion of images, in all probability less than 1%, and can be easily avoided or, in extremis, dealt with in post-processing. The way they talk, you would think that 99% of images were thus affected when the truth is the complete opposite. With the higher resolution of the sensor, you will be less likely to see aliasing, so if your experience is with top-end high megapixel cameras, and others are comparing their results using lower megapixel count cameras, it's hardly surprising that aliasing is more of a problem for them. Some of the effects produced by aliasing /cannot/ be removed by post-processing, without compromising the rest of the image. In any case, you now have the choice with the D800E - to have a camera with "no" anti-alias filter, should you prefer the results. David |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
As suspected, D4 not as clean as D3S
"Bruce" wrote in message
... [] Not so. With an AA filter the results will be more accurate, but will appear /less/ "sharp". This has been explained many times. But always in theory, and never on the basis of images that tell a very different story to the ones that theorists peddle. Plenty of published images tell the tale. Perhaps one day you will be able to own some of the professional grade equipment that you pontificate about. Perhaps then you will be able to tell us the truth based on what you see, rather than what your precious theories tell you might be the case, but isn't. Not for the first time, I caution you about extrapolating your limited experience of using junk zoom lenses on an obsolete consumer-grade DSLR into areas that are far beyond your practical knowledge of photography. Of course your *theoretical* knowledge knows no bounds, but when applied to the real world, it is just plain wrong. You don't seem to appreciate that aliasing is /more/ likely on lower resolution sensors, and therefore the choice of AA filter strength was arguably more important in the past than is is today, as the sensor's resolution approaches and perhaps surpasses that of the lens. As I already said, if you prefer images without an anti-alias filter, that is your prerogative, and with the Nikon D800E you can now fulfill that desire, so there is no need for your personal attacks. Cheers, David |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
As suspected, it's crap | Bowser | Digital Photography | 3 | December 9th 10 06:03 PM |
What is the best way to clean lenses | Dave | Digital SLR Cameras | 12 | January 13th 06 10:24 AM |
how to clean a lens | pug brian | Digital Point & Shoot Cameras | 13 | November 14th 05 08:08 PM |
SUSPECTED FRAUD WARNING! | Frank Malloway | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 6 | July 4th 03 09:17 PM |
SUSPECTED FRAUD WARNING! | Frank Malloway | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | July 3rd 03 04:36 PM |