[quote name='soLong' timestamp='1360281971' post='21843']
..... excuse me? .... let me make myself quite clear to those of a tad poor understanding ability who might look in here from time to time....and make things up.....
1. yes, in my very own hands, with my very own eyes, at the very same time, taking quickly the very same types of pictures with both my 7D/70-300 and my friends 800/70-300 - the autofocus on the 7D/70-300 (which has been surpassed apparently by the 5D3) eats the 800/70-300 combo, no doubt about it - and as you've brought up the comparison, my friend said in passing that he has had to replace his 70-300 lens regularly due to failure, not so me with the 70-300L
.....the "D800's autofocus not worth a penny" are your words not mine, thank you
2. i don't know, and never said i did know, about the 5D1 or the 300D, although i do know that my canon friend who i trust and who also had the 5D says that in his opinion the 5D3 is a lovely camera, also in difficult situations, and the comparison of his previous and current jpeg pictures prove it
.....i do know that in my nikon friends opinion his 800 is superior to his old 200 in dark noise, if that's helpful for you....and he does make lovely pictures with the 800 (he works from raw)
3. yes i do try to make light hearted comments, even this one, so thank you for your complement - but while doing this i do also try to make sense and be accurate with my words and not talk nonsense even in my lighter vein, so.....kool.....don't be sorry....
.....and ahem, i do believe if i can recall, that the theme of my previous post was the changing of brands which would no doubt require a new set of lenses the acquiring of which i personally have found to be a very tiresome ordeal due to apparent QC problems on the part of every manufacturer no matter how grand - well, maybe the pros are better looked after, but again i don't know this re. stills work
[/quote]
You see soLong, although you stated that "...well, wouldn't like to be seen pushing one brand over another now :-) …" in your previous post, you could not escape from being a troll <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='  ' />/>...
By the way, I fully agree that switching brands (in case of having a decent set of lens at one brand) is something really worth considering in detail. So a good point regarding a discussion about switching to another brand because of DR issues. But we (including me <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='  ' />/>) could not help delving into DR issues, because it's one of the most popular topics in forums (after sensor resolution I guess).
So... @Reinier: I don't know how much of a DR difference you get between D800/D600 or 5D3, but in case I had a reasonable lens set in Canon, I would forget my DR related posts above <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />/>...
Serkan
[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1360305470' post='21844']
You see soLong, although you stated that "...well, wouldn't like to be seen pushing one brand over another now :-) …" in your previous post, you could not escape from being a troll <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />/>/>...
By the way, I fully agree that switching brands (in case of having a decent set of lens at one brand) is something really worth considering in detail. So a good point regarding a discussion about switching to another brand because of DR issues. But we (including me <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />/>/>) could not help delving into DR issues, because it's one of the most popular topics in forums (after sensor resolution I guess).
So... @Reinier: I don't know how much of a DR difference you get between D800/D600 or 5D3, but in case I had a reasonable lens set in Canon, I would forget my DR related posts above <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />/>/>...
Serkan
[/quote]
Nonsense, SoLong was not being a troll at all. he only talked about how the D800 + Nikon 70-300mm combo was performing not so well AF wise in the venue he tried it as the 7D + Canon 70-300 L he tried in the same venue. So?
The important point is that ANY camera can give enough DR for the problem reiner encountered witha white bird in a darker background with the light he encountered, provided one digs into the depths of RAW, but that one does not get that for free without PP and some knowledge. It is nonsense that one will need 14 stops of DR, one needs to realize that a normal tonal curve image shows about 8 stops.
So, what is best to help Reiner? That he gets to understand that without PP, and without artificial look (he already dislikes standard JPEG output...) A D600/800 will not be a magic pill, as the talk about bigger DR only is about what lurks in RAW data, not about the camera's tonal curve. That both Canon and Nikon have settings that widen the DR a bit in JPEG, but that you have to be careful with that as they can introduce an artificial look.
Further, it is clear that Reiner does not have money to burn for his hobby, as he states he was waiting for the 5D mk II to come down in price even more.
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1360316259' post='21846']
Nonsense, SoLong was not being a troll at all. he only talked about how the D800 + Nikon 70-300mm combo was performing not so well AF wise in the venue he tried it as the 7D + Canon 70-300 L he tried in the same venue. So?
....
[/quote]
No, I don't think soLong was trolling at all... And yes, I was just making a sarcastic / ironic remark regarding the post soLong already replied... And no, I don't think your above post makes "sense" at all...
Hi Guys,
Thanks for yor replies.
I was just wondering wether there are easy solutions to 'my problem'. It seems there are not. I am very happy with my 5D I, but wanted to know if a D800 would makes things easier for me. I was not thinking of switching brands on a short notice.
My current set is:
Canon EOS 5D
Canon 28-105mm 3.5-4.5 II
Canon 70-200mm/4.0 USM
Tamron 200-500mm
Canon TS-E 24mm 3.5 (I)
Of course I could sell the lot and go for another brand, but that's why I asked the question about the higher DR. But for now I stick with my 5D for a while. I think instead of another camera, I an thinking of buying a good laptop. With a laptop I can ly down(because I cannot sit very long periods of time) and see if I can start post processing my images this way. Because now my image are piling up because my limitations. I only haven't found a laptop with a decent viewing angle yet and don't know if they excist.
Best wishes,
Reinier
[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1360227262' post='21838']
Regarding the option to set output to jpeg in Nikon DSLRs, I would suggest you turn on ADL (normal or low), because it is meant to be used with jpeg outputs incase of (arguable) higher DR needs. And also the IQ should be set to "fine". Because "jpeg basic" uses quite higher compression ratios. What you call artificial might be because of the high compression ratio of the jpeg output.
Coming back to raw outputs: I believe before focusing on DR characteristics, achieving correct metering is essential. In case of D800, two options (maybe also two of them at the same time) can be considered:
1) Using UniWB in the camera's WB setting. There a few UniWB files for the D800 on the net. I assume there will be more in the near future. The UniWB setting basicly cancels the in camera tweak of the RGB channel settings. Consequently, if you know what you're doing, based on the scene you get more leeway during PP in terms of tonal range and DR. So if you are meticulous about exposure, DR and TR, UniWB is something that can be considered. But of course in your case, I wouldn't suggest it easily, because time needed for PP is considerably longer (change WB and tint to match with the natural colors for instance). And also if you use UniWB, the image you see on your camera's LCD would be greenish (you have to check the histogramm to evaluate the photograph, which Nikon can make you do it in a quite easy way).
2) In case of D800 (at least mine is so ![[Image: smile.gif]](http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) />), underexposure of 0.7EV in average can be applied. Especially when used with manual focus lenses & matrix metering, my D800 (also my old D700) tend to overexpose. And lost highlights are simply lost, and there's no recovery. Until I got used to check histogramm instead of checking the image itself on LCD, I shot a lot of overexposed images with my camera. It's so simple with nikon to check the luminance histogramm and check the histogramms for all 3 channels, and it is simply useful and effective. Because the image itself on LCD (which is a jpeg format by the way) does not tell a lot.
So, if the aim is to decrease PP time, I would suggest (with D800):
- use the correct metering option based on the scene. Matrix metering works quite well on D800 but on some specific cases you have to be careful and not count on the very intelligent matrix algorithms.
- underexpose a bit (based on the scene DR)
- check histogramm right after the shot and avoid hightlights (especially red channel)
You see if you want to do less during PP, you have to do more before the shot />...
Serkan
[/quote]
Serkan, have you tried the uniwb?
[quote name='borisbg' timestamp='1360704741' post='21916']
Serkan, have you tried the uniwb?
[/quote]
I tried this version:
http://www.markusfelix.de/2012/05/d800-uniwb.html
There are not so many alternatives on the net, but I expect to see more in the future (T.Hogan had also promised to publish another one...)
Honestly, I think using UniWB without a proper exposure setting would be useless, it's not a magic cure. I had the chance to try this WB setting only once when I took pictures of my little daugther. Since I had the skin tone as a tonal reference and I actually knew the colors of the dresses on her, I could achieve to find the correct tint setting during PP easily. But even so, it takes considerable time. And one more remark, I haven't tried it on challenging red biased flower close ups.
So all in all, based on the lighting of the scene I believe these are the keys for what you can get from your raw files: proper WB setting + proper exposure setting + checking the RGB histogramms after the shot...
Serkan
[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1360736069' post='21917']
I tried this version:
http://www.markusfelix.de/2012/05/d800-uniwb.html
There are not so many alternatives on the net, but I expect to see more in the future (T.Hogan had also promised to publish another one...)
Honestly, I think using UniWB without a proper exposure setting would be useless, it's not a magic cure. I had the chance to try this WB setting only once when I took pictures of my little daugther. Since I had the skin tone as a tonal reference and I actually knew the colors of the dresses on her, I could achieve to find the correct tint setting during PP easily. But even so, it takes considerable time. And one more remark, I haven't tried it on challenging red biased flower close ups.
So all in all, based on the lighting of the scene I believe these are the keys for what you can get from your raw files: proper WB setting + proper exposure setting + checking the RGB histogramms after the shot...
Serkan
[/quote]
I downloaded the file you mentioned and used for landscape photos it does help to recover highlights and push shadows. You are absolutely correct it doesn't do miracles, but is helpful. I also did one autoWB on each scene I used the uniWB, and can say that in most part is the better setting. The down side is the extra work. I will upload some pictures to share at the end of the week.
[quote name='borisbg' timestamp='1360740277' post='21918']
I downloaded the file you mentioned and used for landscape photos it does help to recover highlights and push shadows. You are absolutely correct it doesn't do miracles, but is helpful. I also did one autoWB on each scene I used the uniWB, and can say that in most part is the better setting. The down side is the extra work. I will upload some pictures to share at the end of the week.
[/quote]
This UniWB is supposed to work well with high contrast scenes with highly saturated red and blue channels. Because UniWB cancels the R and B channel tweaks and shows more accurate histogramm on the LCD of the camera. And also for this purpose, the in camera presets (saturation, hue, sharpness etc.) has to be set to 0. Because they effect the jpeg we see in preview and thus the histogramm. The main idea is to see more accurate RGB histogramm with the cost of greenish previews. In total, I think it might be useful depending on the scene, because for instance, red channel histogramm might show non-blown out highlights on camera LCD although in raw data it is already out of the limit (and vice versa).
Serkan
Guess the question started a lot of technical discussion. Let me answer this simply from a D800 users point of view. The D800 DR is incredible. I also, shoot a D700, Leica X2, and Fuji XE-1. And in conditions of high contrast (white clouds, and forest or clifs), backlight situations... well frequently, you can make huge adjustments, pulling the details out of the shadows in PP. I've fiddled with the special camera funcitons and prefer to use post processing to adjust the hightlights and low lights. From everything I have heard at the moment, Canon has nothing like it. I am sure that will be temporary, but for now the D800 is an incredible camera and the light gathering power and resolution is absolutely worth every penny. JD
The Sony Alpha a7R II, released later, also offered competitive dynamic range performance, but many users still found the D800 capable of handling a broader range of lighting conditions. Hole IO
|
