A
asabet
Guest
Thanks Greg! This will be very interesting to see. Regards, Amin
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
GreggHere you go. Roughly the same FOV on both. D300 used the Tamron 28-75 and D3 with Nikon 70-200 VR - both extremely sharp lenses at f8:
D300:
http://www.mediafire.com/?dkcddcybki2
D3:
http://www.mediafire.com/?iodnmgzyjzm
Thanks,
Greg
Hi Woody,Gregg
Thanks for the posts.......very helpful.
It may have been a bit more meaningful if you had used the 70-200 on both bodies. I find that different lens brands show different contrast, both micro and macro, and different colors as well. The comparison would be easier if the same glass were used on both bodies. Anyway thanks for the effort to bring the data to the entire forum. Great stuff
Woody
Hi Steen,Hi Greg, I have now looked at your nice D300 and D3 sample files. As a first step I put White Balance to Daylight in both of them for equalizing them in this regard. What I found was the following.
I think the D3 file shows better Dynamic Range, which is of course to be expected from the larger photosites.
And the D3 file has a more narrow Depth Of Field at the identical Aperture which is again to be expected due to the larger focal length for identical framing with the larger sensor (105mm on D3 vs. 75mm on D300 acc. to Exif).
A bit more surprising is the difference in colors.
The D3 file has more sparkling, warm and saturated colors but I don't know how much of this is due to the different glass ? Do you use identical in-camera settings ?
All in all I like the D3 file better, it has a nicer glow, but with equalized White Balance the D300 file holds up rather well. It would be interesting to see a similar comparison with identical glass (and identical in-camera settings as well).
Thanks a lot Greg, very interesting test :thumbup:
Firefox runs circles around IE and Safari, but for downloads, nothing beats Opera. So I use Firefox for surfing and Opera for downloads.For some reason I can't download NEF files with my "Internet Explorer 7".
And robmac told me that "Safari" has a similar problem with NEF downloads, and that one possible solution is to install and use "Firefox" for the purpose. This browser gives you the choice to save (download) the NEF file to disk instead of just trying to open the file.
No problem, it's interesting to get a handle on the differences. I just took some outdoor shots with the 70-200 on both bracketed over -4 to +4. I have to run at the moment but I'll package them up in a zip file and post them in a few hours. I think I'm going to start a new thread showing the dynamic range differences between the two when I post them. Haven't had a chance to scrutinize the files yet so it should be interesting.Greg
Really appreciate the input. Ignoring the slight difference in color cast which could easily be due to the different lens coatings, the files are close. I tend to prefer nice fat photo cells, but the cameras are close than I expected.
Hate to impose, but if you ever get the chance to shoot with the same glass - and maybe toss in a gray card ? Remember the old military adage - NEVER volunteer for anything.. ;>
My NX trial ran out, so sadly can't really pull that extra out of the files that I think NX would give. Think I'll try them thru RD and C4 next.
Ok, posted the comparison in this thread:VERY much appreciated.