Do you need a D3? (taken from dpreview)

[psychobiologist]

I am not sure if it is the camera or the software.

Here, I used NX2 on the image captured by a D300. Arguably, it is the same generation as a D3, although definitely not in the same class.

But after looking the dpreview.com thread, it certainly caused me to retrieve this shot from my discard pile and give it a second go.

Similarly, I metered for the sky, leaving the clouds overexposed and the foreground underexposed in the original.

I don't have to go through the HDR process (that is what I'd do anyway, to save time).

I didn't even realise so much data existed in the original file (RAW format, of course).

I am not sure but I believe that one needs to post-process less if the D-lighting is activated, reducing the advantage of S5Pro.

I like a saturated look, so definitely some will disagree with the processing.

Perhaps some CSer with another camera can have a shot and upload pictures too?

Before
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3017/3052030004_a0e89148bb.jpg?v=0
After
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3136/3051191097_94b9ae6142.jpg?v=0

well, advantage of 14bits i suppose.

 

[pisduck]

Before

After

actually if you look at after, the foreground is in the sunlight. There is NO reason that is should be completely blocked out in the before picture....

a better picture is perhaps taking from indoors out of a window with sunny bright clouds.

Or Bright clouds with areas in deep shade.

 

[jnet6]

I am not sure if it is the camera or the software.

Here, I used NX2 on the image captured by a D300. Arguably, it is the same generation as a D3, although definitely not in the same class.

But after looking the dpreview.com thread, it certainly caused me to retrieve this shot from my discard pile and give it a second go.

Similarly, I metered for the sky, leaving the clouds overexposed and the foreground underexposed in the original.

I don't have to go through the HDR process (that is what I'd do anyway, to save time).

I didn't even realise so much data existed in the original file (RAW format, of course).

that's a very good example..
for ppl like you to go and test yr the cam and post the results.

so every1 can go get D300.. n D700/D3 for Dx/Fx

 

[lsisaxon]

actually if you look at after, the foreground is in the sunlight. There is NO reason that is should be completely blocked out in the before picture....

a better picture is perhaps taking from indoors out of a window with sunny bright clouds.

Or Bright clouds with areas in deep shade.

If you look properly, the entire foreground is in the shadows. There is only a strip in the middle which is in sunlight.

 

[lsisaxon]

that's a very good example..
for ppl like you to go and test yr the cam and post the results.

so every1 can go get D300.. n D700/D3 for Dx/Fx

I believe even D90 is capable.

 

[blue_quartz]

I believe even D90 is capable.

But only 12-bit RAW... I think shadow recovery (or maybe just in extreme cases) is where the D90 will lag behind its D300 brother...

 

[lsisaxon]

But only 12-bit RAW... I think shadow recovery (or maybe just in extreme cases) is where the D90 will lag behind its D300 brother...

I shoot JPEG for both and there is a whole lot of details in the shadows already. For the kind of contrast, I would probably have to burn and dodge like crazy (or use an ND-Grad) in the darkroom if I were shooting film.

 

[pisduck]

If you look properly, the entire foreground is in the shadows. There is only a strip in the middle which is in sunlight.

ok whatever, even the strip in the middle is blocked up in the "before" picture....

the point is such a scene cannot be considered high DR cuz there are a LOT of reflected light from the sky and clouds, etc. U need some regions of deep shade (tall buildings, etc) and bright clouds.

It is really misleading that every time someone will post and low DR pic that has blocked shadows and then "recover" it and claims the DR is wonderful.....

 

[Danntbt]

If you feel you need it, you will find a reason to need, but if you cannot afford it you will find a reason not to need it but still lust for it.....and you get pissed off when people can afford it and you feel they don't need it.....life sucks....but that's life......you just have to accept it....one day you will be able to afford it as technology advance makes it cheaper....but you need people to be able to afford it first before the manufacturer find it viable to chase technology.....so the moral of the story is - just wait if you cannot afford it now......encourage those who can afford it to BBBBBBBBBBBBBBB

 

[psychobiologist]

If you feel you need it, you will find a reason to need, but if you cannot afford it you will find a reason not to need it but still lust for it.....and you get pissed off when people can afford it and you feel they don't need it.....life sucks....but that's life......you just have to accept it....one day you will be able to afford it as technology advance makes it cheaper....but you need people to be able to afford it first before the manufacturer find it viable to chase technology.....so the moral of the story is - just wait if you cannot afford it now......encourage those who can afford it to BBBBBBBBBBBBBBB

very true! hahahaha.

 

[lsisaxon]

ok whatever, even the strip in the middle is blocked up in the "before" picture....

the point is such a scene cannot be considered high DR cuz there are a LOT of reflected light from the sky and clouds, etc. U need some regions of deep shade (tall buildings, etc) and bright clouds.

It is really misleading that every time someone will post and low DR pic that has blocked shadows and then "recover" it and claims the DR is wonderful.....

Ok. point noted, I get what you mean. ;p But how many actually can cover the entire range of dynamics from under the cupboard to the bright clouds illuminated by the sun?

 

[acpical]

ok whatever, even the strip in the middle is blocked up in the "before" picture....

the point is such a scene cannot be considered high DR cuz there are a LOT of reflected light from the sky and clouds, etc. U need some regions of deep shade (tall buildings, etc) and bright clouds.

It is really misleading that every time someone will post and low DR pic that has blocked shadows and then "recover" it and claims the DR is wonderful.....

Pisduck, I don't believe I claimed my camera has high DR. Did I mislead you?

My point is that I am unsure if the pictures in the dpreview thread was due to hardware or software. But it allowed me to think twice about a picture I'd have condemned to the bin originally.

Anyway, I cannot really describe it to you (could be some clouds above me causing shade or something, cannot remember exactly) but I can assure you the foreground was in the shade when I took it. Of course, that I metered the sky made the ground look darker than it really was.

D-lighting is not a replacement for dynamic range but it lightens the shadows and one has to post-process to a lesser degree. Call it perceived DR if you will.

 

[jnet6]

Cool down ppl, the purpose of this thread is to show how gd D3 is. or the newer DSLR can perform. If you can do it, why not post the pictures taken by yr camera and edited rather then talk.

I've found last time D200 intro picture with recovery of details inside a chruch.
I'm closing this thread, Pls start a new 1 for detail recovery on your DSLR if you find it amazing.