D200 on Full-Frame Nikkor lenses; follow-up

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by ttdaomd, May 29, 2006.

  1. ttdaomd

    ttdaomd Guest

    So for those interested, I had asked this January on this NG about loss
    of resolution when using a full-frame lens on a smaller detector
    (essentially you are cropping out resolution). Anyway, I bit the dust
    and ended up getting a D200 with SB800. Very satisfied. No banding
    problems. The portrait setting produces color which most approaches
    what I was used to with my F4s SB24 and Fuji NPS. I had a D50 for 10
    days (still delaying and praying on a full-frame Nikon digital camera)
    but wasn`t happy with the color so swapped it in for the D200. I have
    tried my 20-35 f2.8 and 105 f2.8 so far and have not noticed
    appreciable loss of resolution although I am sure there must be some
    loss. It is just not noticeable so far. At the same price as my old
    F4s, and from what I can see on these 2 lenses, and considering
    adjustments for inflation, it is worth the purchase. It has
    rejuvinated my interest in photography. If there are any sitting on
    the fence on this camera, I would like to encourage you to take the
    risk. I can`t wait to try it on my 600 f4. Will keep you posted.

    Tien
     
    ttdaomd, May 29, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. ttdaomd

    bmoag Guest

    Would not the perceived performance of full frame lenses in most instances
    seem to improve with the small dSLR sensor which is concentrated more in the
    sweet spot of the image circle?
    Rather than using settings like "portrait" and, I presume, jpeg image
    processing I would recommend, if you have not already done so, learning
    about RAW images and post camera processing. You can gain far more control
    over the final image and learn to imitate any film emulsion characteristic
    you admire. In fact there are plug-ins for Photoshop that promise to
    recreate the look of particular films.
     
    bmoag, May 29, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. ttdaomd

    JPS Guest

    In message <ZtEeg.35903$>,
    Not necessarily. Since you are using a smaller crop of the focal plane,
    in order to get your full image, you have to spread everything 1.5x or
    1.6x as wide, which means resolution decreases, CA gets wider, etc,
    relative to image size. It really depends on how fast the quality falls
    off in the 35mm corners, compared to the APS corners. In the center,
    you will always get the spread and loss with the crop (although, if the
    refcording medium is the main limit of resolution, you may not see the
    loss).
    --
     
    JPS, May 29, 2006
    #3
  4. ttdaomd

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    I don't think that's quite what you meant...
     
    Jeremy Nixon, May 29, 2006
    #4
  5. ttdaomd

    Tien Dao Guest

    Yah, biting the bullet may have been better, but it is a reflection of my
    emotional resignation and acceptance of the sub-full-frame sensor. :((
    Everything is a compromise. This is just one of the sweeter ones, was my
    real point.

    BTW, I just tried this on my Nikkor 600 f4 AF and it is OK. I think there
    is a bit of loss of resolution overall. This lens was pretty good on film
    and didn`t have much resolution fall off from centre (then again, it didn`t
    have all that much resolution to begin with, say compared to a 105 mm f2.8
    micro.

    I could get in easily 10 frames at high fire rates with (RAW+Fine-jpg)
    suggesting it has a pretty fast bus and buffer.


    Tien
     
    Tien Dao, May 30, 2006
    #5
  6. ttdaomd

    Tien Dao Guest

    As another person mentioned, the improvement would really be found if at
    all, at the edges. If the drop off in resolution was worse than 0.67x
    (i.e.1/ 1.5) centre resolution at the edges, then you might see some
    improvement at the edges. The centre will always be less sharp (assuming
    the film was outperforming the lens at the centre and that max resolution of
    the film and sensor in terms of lpm are the same).
    Yah, just that the Nikon RAW image software is another 100 bucks (and I was
    pissed-off it wasn't included) and I don't have ADOBE PHOTOSHOP (atleast not
    the professional variations) either. I have to get the Nikon Capture 4
    software sometime anyway and maybe try to get by with my other MS Digital
    Image 2006 manipulation software.

    Tien
     
    Tien Dao, May 30, 2006
    #6
  7. ttdaomd

    DoN. Nichols Guest

    According to Tien Dao <>:

    [ ... ]
    You want something free which does it? Look at dcraw. The
    version which I downloaded, compiled, and installed on April 13th of
    this year works with the D200. I know because I took an empty CF card
    to the photo shop (Penn Camera, if anyone cares) and took a couple of
    shots on it in RAW mode with their demo camera. I then brought the CF
    card home, loaded the images into my computer, and verified that it
    decodes the RAW images without problems.

    That happens to be version 8.13, if you care, but if you don't
    yet have dcraw, what you download will be at least that new.

    To download it (for free -- and no registration required),
    visit:

    http://www.cybercom.net/~dcoffin

    and follow the links to the program. I download the source, but I
    believe that he has links to other sites where someone has compiled it
    for Windows.

    Click on the linux link, and scroll down to the FAQ section at
    the bottom of the page, where there are links to the Windows versions.

    And -- for another free program which should be as good as
    Photoshop for you, check into "The GIMP" (GNU Image Manipulation
    Program). Again -- it was written for unix variants, and ported to
    Windows by others.
    Try "dcraw" and "The GIMP" and you should be fine.

    Good Luck,
    DoN.
     
    DoN. Nichols, May 30, 2006
    #7
  8. You know: Bits, sensors, dust ;-)

    -espen
     
    Espen Stranger Seland, May 30, 2006
    #8
  9. The latest version of Pixmantec's Raw Shooter Essentials works just fine
    http://www.pixmantec.com/products/rawshooter_essentials.asp
     
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), May 30, 2006
    #9
  10. ttdaomd

    Paul Furman Guest

    Yes, RSE is pretty good and the basic version is free. It's fast &
    convenient though I'm not at all sure about the quality of the results.
    Nikon Capture is probably optimized for their data but that program just
    makes me mad, it's slow, awkward, etc. Photoshop Elements is probably
    the best option, I just like PS for workflow but if you don't process
    large numbers of shots maybe you could tolerate Capture. DCRAW is an
    interesting option but is command line so impractical with no visual
    feedback, no sliders & tedious abstruse documentation. I'm just delaying
    getting a full $600 version of CS2 after forking over for the D200 so
    I'm using free RSE for the moment.
     
    Paul Furman, May 30, 2006
    #10
  11. ttdaomd

    DoN. Nichols Guest

    According to Paul Furman <>:

    [ ... ]
    If you want a graphics front end, it is available with "the
    GIMP" (using a plugin which can be downloaded with the source for
    dcraw), or one of the number of other programs which have been built
    around dcraw's algorithm's as image processing tools or as frontends to
    other tools.

    I run dcraw from a shell script for which I determined which
    options I wanted most of the time, and just process (in batch mode) to a
    format which I then process using "the GIMP". Some of these days, I
    will compile my own copy of "The GIMP, and have the right libs on hand
    to link it with the plugin which runs dcraw.

    I can understand being "camera poor". :)

    Enjoy,
    DoN.
     
    DoN. Nichols, May 31, 2006
    #11
  12. ttdaomd

    ttdaomd Guest

    Excellent advice. Thanks!

    Tien


     
    ttdaomd, May 31, 2006
    #12
  13. ttdaomd

    ttdaomd Guest

    Espen Stranger Seland a écrit :
    Well, as luck would have it, while checking for banding, I have
    discovered atleast 3 visible dead pixels creating a "+" artefact.
    Nikon says it will take anywhere from 5 hrs to 1 day to remap the
    sensor. :((

    Tien
     
    ttdaomd, Jun 1, 2006
    #13
  14. Photoshop Elements also uses the RAW conversion plug-ins. If you want to
    go extra whacky, you could use Adobe DNG converter, then load those
    into Photoshop Elements.
     
    Brion K. Lienhart, Jun 3, 2006
    #14
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.