My hands on D200 experience (longish)

writes:

In message ,
"Douglas..." wrote:

With all the hype about this camera, there is a mysterious lack of
images from it. If my guess is anywhere near the truth, the CCD sensor
will restrict the contrast range unless they have done something like
they've done with the D2X and used what amounts to 2 different sensors
tied together to spread the range... (Different size photo collectors).

Can anyone besides Douglas verify this? I've only heard it from him,
and well, you how much credibity he has here ... I'm fairly certain
that I have examined some D2X raw files in the past, and all the RAW
data was within a stop for every position in the Bayer matrix in any
given area, suggesting that he is probably incorrect (you'd expect a
deep difference in every other green pixel, or something like that).

And the description sounds like the Fuji S3, not any Nikon product I
know about.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems wrote:
In message ,
"Douglas..." wrote:

With all the hype about this camera, there is a mysterious lack of
images from it. If my guess is anywhere near the truth, the CCD sensor
will restrict the contrast range unless they have done something like
they've done with the D2X and used what amounts to 2 different sensors
tied together to spread the range... (Different size photo collectors).

Can anyone besides Douglas verify this? I've only heard it from him,
and well, you how much credibity he has here ...

The dual-size photo sesor trick is Fuji, not Nikon. The D2x has a
standard Bayer matrix.

I'm fairly certain that I have examined some D2X raw files in the
past, and all the RAW data was within a stop for every position in
the Bayer matrix in any given area,

Right.

Andrew.

In article , says...

Folks, enough of the hype talk. If you can live without a full frame
sensor and you invest in DX lenses for w/a, this little camera is going
to make you extremely happy. For the price you are getting what can only
be considered a work of art. It makes the 5D and the 20D look positively
"amateur" in comparison.

I'm very glad to hear that - even though I use Canon gear. Why am I glad
to hear it? Because competition is always good for the consumer... this
just gives Canon a reason to improve their cameras and offer them at lower
prices. I still win. What a wonderful feeling.

steve



I am hoping you are right here as I have a lot in Canon glass but I
really do not like the feel of the 20D or anything under it the feel of
I hope Canon takes this into account and keeps it under 2 grand. I think
this has a lot to do with how many of us have used older film cameras
with bright veiwfinders, solid build, good balance, easy grip, etc. we
all tend to think about the bodies and not the glass or the photo.

wrote:
In message ,
"Douglas..." wrote:


With all the hype about this camera, there is a mysterious lack of
images from it. If my guess is anywhere near the truth, the CCD sensor
will restrict the contrast range unless they have done something like
they've done with the D2X and used what amounts to 2 different sensors
tied together to spread the range... (Different size photo collectors).


Can anyone besides Douglas verify this? I've only heard it from him,
and well, you how much credibity he has here ... I'm fairly certain
that I have examined some D2X raw files in the past, and all the RAW
data was within a stop for every position in the Bayer matrix in any
given area, suggesting that he is probably incorrect (you'd expect a
deep difference in every other green pixel, or something like that).

You know John... You are a total ****ing dork.
Your information is sometimes factual and often misleading, sometimes
highly inaccurate and downright deceptive and other times displays you
might have a clue about photography but you've never demonstrated that
to be true.

You post insults whenever it suits you and for some reason, seem to
think I don't know about anything about the cameras I own ...and you
have the gall to say I have no credibility because you can't be bothered
doing your own research... Well go **** yourself arsehole.

The sensor used in the D2X is the same Sony sensor used in the S3 Pro
Fuji. Go do your own research. Better still. Put your money where your
mouth is and buy one like I did. Then you might be in position to
dispute what I say. Otherwise you are just a bloody troll, spewing out
crap to suit your stand on the topic that day.

Next time you post a 1600 ISO image trying to discredit my claims they
are crap... Make sure it's in the same low light situation as my flawed
images or when you later post a message about how much noise ISO 1600
images have in the shadows, I'll drag up all the other inconsistencies
in your post over the past year and see just how much credibility you
can claim from your contradictions. Get off my case arsehole.
--
Douglas...

Douglas,

For a seemingly intelligent person you must have the thinest skin of any
person that I know.

Chill man.


"Douglas..." wrote in message
...
wrote:
In message ,
"Douglas..." wrote:


With all the hype about this camera, there is a mysterious lack of images
from it. If my guess is anywhere near the truth, the CCD sensor will
restrict the contrast range unless they have done something like they've
done with the D2X and used what amounts to 2 different sensors tied
together to spread the range... (Different size photo collectors).


Can anyone besides Douglas verify this? I've only heard it from him,
and well, you how much credibity he has here ... I'm fairly certain
that I have examined some D2X raw files in the past, and all the RAW
data was within a stop for every position in the Bayer matrix in any
given area, suggesting that he is probably incorrect (you'd expect a
deep difference in every other green pixel, or something like that).

You know John... You are a total ****ing dork.
Your information is sometimes factual and often misleading, sometimes
highly inaccurate and downright deceptive and other times displays you
might have a clue about photography but you've never demonstrated that to
be true.

You post insults whenever it suits you and for some reason, seem to think
I don't know about anything about the cameras I own ...and you have the
gall to say I have no credibility because you can't be bothered doing your
own research... Well go **** yourself arsehole.

The sensor used in the D2X is the same Sony sensor used in the S3 Pro
Fuji. Go do your own research. Better still. Put your money where your
mouth is and buy one like I did. Then you might be in position to dispute
what I say. Otherwise you are just a bloody troll, spewing out crap to
suit your stand on the topic that day.

Next time you post a 1600 ISO image trying to discredit my claims they are
crap... Make sure it's in the same low light situation as my flawed images
or when you later post a message about how much noise ISO 1600 images have
in the shadows, I'll drag up all the other inconsistencies in your post
over the past year and see just how much credibility you can claim from
your contradictions. Get off my case arsehole.
--
Douglas...

On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 06:24:18 +1000, "Douglas..."
wrote:

wrote:
In message ,
"Douglas..." wrote:


With all the hype about this camera, there is a mysterious lack of
images from it. If my guess is anywhere near the truth, the CCD sensor
will restrict the contrast range unless they have done something like
they've done with the D2X and used what amounts to 2 different sensors
tied together to spread the range... (Different size photo collectors).


Can anyone besides Douglas verify this? I've only heard it from him,
and well, you how much credibity he has here ... I'm fairly certain
that I have examined some D2X raw files in the past, and all the RAW
data was within a stop for every position in the Bayer matrix in any
given area, suggesting that he is probably incorrect (you'd expect a
deep difference in every other green pixel, or something like that).

You know John... You are a total ****ing dork.
Your information is sometimes factual and often misleading, sometimes
highly inaccurate and downright deceptive and other times displays you
might have a clue about photography but you've never demonstrated that
to be true.

You post insults whenever it suits you and for some reason, seem to
think I don't know about anything about the cameras I own ...and you
have the gall to say I have no credibility because you can't be bothered
doing your own research... Well go **** yourself arsehole.

The sensor used in the D2X is the same Sony sensor used in the S3 Pro
Fuji. Go do your own research. Better still. Put your money where your
mouth is and buy one like I did. Then you might be in position to
dispute what I say. Otherwise you are just a bloody troll, spewing out
crap to suit your stand on the topic that day.

The fuji uses a CCD with two distinct sensors per photosite
that function like a 6 meg sensor.
The nikon uses a CMOS sensor with 12m square pixels.
How do you figure they are the same, and both Sony?
Neither is a Sony HAD sensor.
-Rich

"Zed Pobre" wrote in message
...
Douglas... wrote:

You know John... You are a total ****ing dork.
Your information is sometimes factual and often misleading, sometimes
highly inaccurate and downright deceptive and other times displays you
might have a clue about photography but you've never demonstrated that
to be true.

On the whole, I've found John's information to be highly reliable...
much more so than yours, unfortunately. As in this case. In fact,
that last paragraph I find to be more applicable to you.


You post insults whenever it suits you and for some reason, seem to
think I don't know about anything about the cameras I own ...and you
have the gall to say I have no credibility because you can't be bothered
doing your own research... Well go **** yourself arsehole.

The sensor used in the D2X is the same Sony sensor used in the S3 Pro
Fuji. Go do your own research.

I just did the research. The D2X is using a CMOS-based 12.8 MP sensor
with an absolutely standard rectangular pixel layout:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Niko...2x-1mmx1mm.gif

The S3 Pro is using heaxagonal pixels on a *CCD*-based system. It's
not even the same material!

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0402/04...ifilms3pro.asp

I hunted around on Google for a bit just to see if DPReview completely
missed the boat, and found no references to the D2X using the Fuji
sensor. Since the Fuji SuperCCD is a fairly unusual technology, I'd
expect to to be widely noted if it were present in the D2X.

The difference between John and yourself is that when he has a claim
that is under dispute, he actually posts some evidence -- generally
fairly compelling evidence.


The two things that I wonder a

Does anybody believe any of the crap that Douglas spews?

When is he going to stop spewing his crap on the Internet?

Greg

wrote:

Can anyone besides Douglas verify this? I've only heard it from him,
and well, you how much credibity he has here ... I'm fairly certain
that I have examined some D2X raw files in the past, and all the RAW
data was within a stop for every position in the Bayer matrix in any
given area, suggesting that he is probably incorrect (you'd expect a
deep difference in every other green pixel, or something like that).

What Douglas said is absolutely, positively, unequivocally incorrect.
Flat-out wrong, untrue, and not even based in reality.

Pretty much like everything else he says in this group.

--
Jeremy |

Douglas... wrote:
wrote:
In message ,
"Douglas..." wrote:


With all the hype about this camera, there is a mysterious lack of
images from it. If my guess is anywhere near the truth, the CCD
sensor will restrict the contrast range unless they have done
something like they've done with the D2X and used what amounts to 2
different sensors tied together to spread the range... (Different
size photo collectors).


Can anyone besides Douglas verify this? I've only heard it from him,
and well, you how much credibity he has here ... I'm fairly certain
that I have examined some D2X raw files in the past, and all the RAW
data was within a stop for every position in the Bayer matrix in any
given area, suggesting that he is probably incorrect (you'd expect a
deep difference in every other green pixel, or something like that).

You know John... You are a total ****ing dork.
Your information is sometimes factual and often misleading, sometimes
highly inaccurate and downright deceptive and other times displays you
might have a clue about photography but you've never demonstrated that
to be true.

You post insults whenever it suits you and for some reason, seem to
think I don't know about anything about the cameras I own ...and you
have the gall to say I have no credibility because you can't be
bothered doing your own research... Well go **** yourself arsehole.

The sensor used in the D2X is the same Sony sensor used in the S3 Pro
Fuji. Go do your own research. Better still. Put your money where your
mouth is and buy one like I did. Then you might be in position to
dispute what I say. Otherwise you are just a bloody troll, spewing out
crap to suit your stand on the topic that day.

Wrong, Douglas!!!
It uses CMOS!
-Not a CCD of ANY brand name!
Sheesh. You really stuck your foot in it this time...

Mark² wrote:


Wrong, Douglas!!!
It uses CMOS!
-Not a CCD of ANY brand name!
Sheesh. You really stuck your foot in it this time...


It's a Sony sensor with dual photo receptors. Get it right too Mark.

--
Douglas...
Specifications are good to read but
When it comes to judging Digital Cameras...
I'm in the "how do the pictures look" category.