Yes, I can get soft images from my lenses. But I'm taking about tact sharp image that will show when I pixel peep on my computer.
I read from reviews that it is significant improvement on the sharpness.
D750 or D800E
- Thread starter Campy
- Start date
Yes, I can get soft images from my lenses. But I'm taking about tact sharp image that will show when I pixel peep on my computer.
I read from reviews that it is significant improvement on the sharpness.
Wow i'm scared now. If shooting with D600 and the trinity lenses also considered soft, then my images shot with D610 (used to be D600) paired with my 24-85 VR kit lens considered super-soft?
I do agree with ray_stinger on this. If your images are soft, either your lens is faulty (you shld go Nikon Service Centre for warranty), or you shld relook at your shooting techniques. Moving from D600 to D810 without rectifying softness caused by lens or bad shooting technique makes your 36MP image 1.5x softer than that on 24MP. If you think that your lenses and shooting technique are correct yet you still get soft images, perhaps 35mm format isnt suitable for you. Time to move on to medium or large format cameras.
Looks like I have much lower standard / expectation than you when it comes to sharpness.
I used to get tack sharp images from my Canon 10D and non-L lens, and that was about 10 years ago. Pretty sure sensor and lens technology have come a long way since then, that's why I'm inclined to think that D600 w/ trinity should yield superior image quality.
Having said that, the sharpest images I've seen from digital 35mm camera are from my M9 with 50mm Lux. Even my M240 now doesn't give me that level of sharpness I used to get with the M9. This could be something you want to consider if sharpness is of utmost importance.
I used to get tack sharp images from my Canon 10D and non-L lens, and that was about 10 years ago. Pretty sure sensor and lens technology have come a long way since then, that's why I'm inclined to think that D600 w/ trinity should yield superior image quality.
Having said that, the sharpest images I've seen from digital 35mm camera are from my M9 with 50mm Lux. Even my M240 now doesn't give me that level of sharpness I used to get with the M9. This could be something you want to consider if sharpness is of utmost importance.
Wow i'm scared now. If shooting with D600 and the trinity lenses also considered soft, then my images shot with D610 (used to be D600) paired with my 24-85 VR kit lens considered super-soft?
I do agree with ray_stinger on this. If your images are soft, either your lens is faulty (you shld go Nikon Service Centre for warranty), or you shld relook at your shooting techniques. Moving from D600 to D810 without rectifying softness caused by lens or bad shooting technique makes your 36MP image 1.5x softer than that on 24MP. If you think that your lenses and shooting technique are correct yet you still get soft images, perhaps 35mm format isnt suitable for you. Time to move on to medium or large format cameras.
There may be a third reason - AF fine tune. Check the photos (hopefully not brick wall but a real scene) and see if there are areas that are "tact sharp".
To do a definitive check, setup the camera on a tripod, on a bright day, setup with shutter speed high (like 1/125), get something like f/5.6 (using the f/2.8 Nikkors) or f/8, VR turn off, and do comparison of shots - with AF and with live view. If none tact sharp - there could be lens misalignment (i.e. faulty lens, goto NSC). If tact sharp for the LV shot and not the AF shot, then do AF fine tune - until the 2 becomes the same, tact sharp. Then shot under the same setting hand held, if tact sharp, problem solved. If not tact sharp, time to work on your technique.
And yes I agree that if you move from 24mp to 36mp hoping the shot gets tact sharp simply by moving, it may magnify the problem 1.5x. OTOH it may solve the problem, as the new 36mp camera may have less AF error on that particular lens so it would appear to the casual observer that problem solve (but in reality different problem set). Heck changing to another D600 or D610 may give different sharpness due to the variability of the AF module.
Hope this helps.
That's why I sold my 24-85VR for the 24-70. But tact sharp images hit rate was like 70%.
When I used my FM2 previously, the sharpness was superb. Even my wife also said so.
Thanks for your suggestion and guidance. Will try it out. Care to explain how does the sharpness problem being magnified? Is it due to more details, and showed out more if I do the pixel peeping?
Sorry to TS for the OT. But I want to know more before jumping in.
Last edited:
Just go rent D810 or D4s, see if its sharp enough for you..else maybe its time to switch as your requirements are higher than most..no nd buy lah..
Degree of pixel peeping may differ as well.
Last edited:
If sharpness is superb on FM2, which is manual focus, and only 70% on AF, then it is quite certainly due to AF fine tune or variation due to dynamic-area AF. AF fine tune, in simplistic language, allows for sample to sample and lens to lens variations to be catered for. If the camera is set for dynamic-area AF then it may not focus on the area where you are looking for the tact sharpness. I am now ruling out technique as you said it is superb on FM2, but did you account for the difficulty in pixel peeping the output of FM2?
OK, pixel peeping - I will say this is viewing at 100% on the computer screen, i.e. 1 image pixel is represented by 1 screen pixel.
For argument sake say your screen resolution is 1680x1050, and the imaging program you use is showing 100% over an area of say 1200x800.
So if we take a photo from a 12MP camera, say D3s (resolution 4,256 x 2,832) and you view it to 100% (over a computer screen area of 1200x800), you are seeing 1200/4256 ~28% of your image captured (the other axis 800/2832 ~28% also).
Now go to 24MP, say D610 (resolution 6,016 x 4,016), at 100% you are seeing 1200/6016 ~ 20% of image captured.
At 36MP, say D810 (resolution 7360 x 4912), at 100% you are seeing 1200/7360 ~ 16% of image captured.
You are magnifying a smaller and then smaller area of the image captured so it gets harder and harder to be "tact" sharp, given the same focusing / handling technique.
Or what looks sharp on 12MP could become less sharp on 24MP and then even less on 36MP, if say lens quality is not up to scratch (not your issue), or handling technique (not perfectly still when squeezing the shutter release), or focus on the nose instead of eyes.
Hope this helps. If it helps you do report back.
Last edited:
Really appreciate for your detail explanation with facts and figures. I now understand why higher resolution can magnified the 'soft' issue on computer screen.
As for the FM2, I must admit that it is not a fair comparison, as the image is not digital, and my largest images then were 8"x10". I probably should print on the same size.
In a manner of speech, switch to DX and you'll (almost) have a D7000, mp count wise.
Oh! I see what u meant. I mis read and mis interpret, d800/e has d7k built (as in built quality)
Last edited:
D7k has built quality of d600. D800's build quality is that of d700. Very different. Even some of the cables and connectors used are different
Sorry for bumping up this old thread.
I'm considering the purchase of a new DSLR to upgrade from my old D300s (yes its really really old).
I have the 14-24mm f2.8 and the 24-70mm f2.8 currently. Plus a old AF-D 50mm f1.8.
I also have the Fuji X-Pro1 with 18-50mm + 35mm + 60mm lenses (main body now).
As I'm moving overseas and camera prices are significantly cheaper here, I was thinking that it is a good time to upgrade my old system. Having used a friend's full frame, I'm tempted to move back to Nikon. I will probably buy a 20mm f1.8 lens to stick it on most of the time (quality / price trade off, plus I use 20mm a lot).
I shoot mainly landscapes / architecture and basically everything your everyday enthusiast would use the camera for. Video is not much of a concern for me.
I've read some comparisons and was wondering if there were any D800E to D750 converters who could share the reasons why you decided to switch? I'm having trouble deciding to go with either D750 or D800E since they are at the same price point.
I'm considering the purchase of a new DSLR to upgrade from my old D300s (yes its really really old).
I have the 14-24mm f2.8 and the 24-70mm f2.8 currently. Plus a old AF-D 50mm f1.8.
I also have the Fuji X-Pro1 with 18-50mm + 35mm + 60mm lenses (main body now).
As I'm moving overseas and camera prices are significantly cheaper here, I was thinking that it is a good time to upgrade my old system. Having used a friend's full frame, I'm tempted to move back to Nikon. I will probably buy a 20mm f1.8 lens to stick it on most of the time (quality / price trade off, plus I use 20mm a lot).
I shoot mainly landscapes / architecture and basically everything your everyday enthusiast would use the camera for. Video is not much of a concern for me.
I've read some comparisons and was wondering if there were any D800E to D750 converters who could share the reasons why you decided to switch? I'm having trouble deciding to go with either D750 or D800E since they are at the same price point.
Last edited:
My opinion is since you shoot mainly landscapes and architecture, pick the D800E.
Is the price the same for a new D750 and a new D800E?
What's your thought on the x-pro1 compared to Nikon DSLR? I'm thinking of getting one to switch usage between it and the Nikon DSLR.
Is the price the same for a new D750 and a new D800E?
What's your thought on the x-pro1 compared to Nikon DSLR? I'm thinking of getting one to switch usage between it and the Nikon DSLR.
I don't mind grabbing a second hand D800E tbh. Its only going to be used a few years.
X-Pro 1 is sharp and light (main benefit). TBH its good for a lot of uses and I generally travel with it (holiday, etc).
I have shot with both briefly and decided to keep the D750.
In short:
1) If you need megapixels - D800/E
2) If you need more reliable AF in low-light - D750
3) If you don't want to see camera shake being accentuated (unless you do tripod work a lot) - D750 - this is coming from D700
4) If you shoot in studio most of the time and don't need high fps - D800/E
5) If you require slightly longer battery life per charge - D750
6) If you prefer a deeper grasp (without battery grip) - D750 - one of the best grip for prosumer FF imho
In short:
1) If you need megapixels - D800/E
2) If you need more reliable AF in low-light - D750
3) If you don't want to see camera shake being accentuated (unless you do tripod work a lot) - D750 - this is coming from D700
4) If you shoot in studio most of the time and don't need high fps - D800/E
5) If you require slightly longer battery life per charge - D750
6) If you prefer a deeper grasp (without battery grip) - D750 - one of the best grip for prosumer FF imho
Landscaper and Distance Shooter and Cropper = D800E
All Arounder = D750 or even D610
Street and Low Light and Retro Traditional Operation = Df
IMHO
I would like to add this if no one minds...these newer cameras are not like your older cameras. They are touchy finicky very precise and require the proper know how and experience to make them perform to spec particularly with regards to focusing. Simply speaking they are semi pro and pro level cameras with state of art guts.
All Arounder = D750 or even D610
Street and Low Light and Retro Traditional Operation = Df
IMHO
I would like to add this if no one minds...these newer cameras are not like your older cameras. They are touchy finicky very precise and require the proper know how and experience to make them perform to spec particularly with regards to focusing. Simply speaking they are semi pro and pro level cameras with state of art guts.
Last edited:
Decided on D800E second hand.
Landscapes usefulness won me over. Don't need the newest and shiniest toy, just a functional one will do for me. Not earning any money from this hobby anyway.
Edit: Coming from the X-Pro 1, the D800 + 24-70mm WEIGHS A TON!
Might consider changing to f1.8 primes (20 + 35 + 50 + 85) and a travel zoom.
Edit 2: Totally forgot how mechanical shutters feels like after sticking with the X-Pro1. Love them! But a little loud on the D800E.
Landscapes usefulness won me over. Don't need the newest and shiniest toy, just a functional one will do for me. Not earning any money from this hobby anyway.
Edit: Coming from the X-Pro 1, the D800 + 24-70mm WEIGHS A TON!
Might consider changing to f1.8 primes (20 + 35 + 50 + 85) and a travel zoom.
Edit 2: Totally forgot how mechanical shutters feels like after sticking with the X-Pro1. Love them! But a little loud on the D800E.
Last edited:
