The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

d800 vs. d800e measurements and analysis

LumoLabs -- Nikon D800 AA filter vs. D800E -- Whitepaper

This is interesting. Confirms the impressions posted here. In summary,

"A Bayer-AA filter strength of ~75% is moderate. In an ideal situation (low ISO, sharp lens, no shake, good focus etc.) it leaves enough contrast at the Nyquist frequency to recover all detail a sensor with the same resolution but without a Bayer-AA filter could have captured. On the other hand, it cannot completely eliminate the risk of false color moiré, only reduce its likelihood and visibility."

and

"As a rule of thumb, we found that (assuming 100% amount, in Lightroom terms) subtracting about 0.5 px from the sharpening radius used for a D800 image produces comparable sharpness and acceptable results. In practice, one may of course combine this with a larger radius and lower amount etc. "

Same site has the closest thing to a explanation of the autofocus sensor problem, and Nikon's internal reactions.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
From the article:
>>As a consequence, the difference between a D800 and D800E isn't as large as one may think: in a controlled environment, the D800 images can be sharpened to the level of the D800E. The downside is that it can produce some false colors too, although less likely and to a lesser extent.<<
and
>>As a final note, let me say that it really does not matter so much: The 36 MP of the D800 means that the full pixel quality does not matter anymore in 95% of cases. So, for the most part, the differences between a D800 and D800E can probably be ignored.<<

So they pretty much confirm what I've been saying all along; the D800's OLPF being weak and near ideal, and therefore one is able to sharpen out the effects and essentially mitigates any significant differences between the two cameras.

The one point they miss however, is in-cam jpegs -- which should be slightly more detailed out of the E unless Nikon has some very good on-board processing...
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
Confirms what I see as well.
Changed only one thing in my workflow and that instead of applying my sharpening style at import, I so it post import since I am less likely at that point to pick the wrong style.
-bob
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
In cam jpegs at normal settings on the D800 compared to the E are the D800 was softer. Maybe need to bump the sharpness up a touch in the menu options. My issues more are D800 E profiles are not in C1 and going by the D800 so I made adjustments and either import that or created a style for it. Clarity I'm still in debate on
 
C

cornishman

Guest
So if you sharpen a d800e shot by the same it would be better still, sharpening do's little good to a shot it is much better to get SOOC making the E the better body if you want the sharpest images.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
So if you sharpen a d800e shot by the same it would be better still, sharpening do's little good to a shot it is much better to get SOOC making the E the better body if you want the sharpest images.
Nope. This is a common misconception. If you sharpen an OLPF file optimally, it removes the effects of the OLPF. (And the amount it removes is based on how optimal the design of the OLPF is for the sensor in question, and the D800's OLPF Is near ideal, so most all of the OLPF effects can be removed.) However, if you apply that same level of sharpening to a similar file without an OLPF, you introduce deleterious artifacts the degrade the image significantly.

So the ONLY good comparison is after sharpening both files OPTIMALLY, and this requires different settings for each, and in fact requires different settings based on lens used, image content and even ISO; then again for the intended output. All in all, a lot of variables to normalize when comparing.

Cheers,
 

usathyan

New member
Their very last statement made me smile...
plain simple stupid use of time. Just shoot some pictures....
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Their very last statement made me smile...
plain simple stupid use of time. Just shoot some pictures....
Seriously, as it relates to comparing these two cameras, "It doesn't matter, just shoot pictures!" is the best answer!
 

D&A

Well-known member
If we consider just base ISO and use of RAW files, then based on this analysis, what exactly is one getting for their $300 in a "E"? In some respects, they could have made the regular assembly line the "E" version at $2999 and the more limited assembly line the non"E" at $3299, simply because it requires manufacture of the sensor with an AA.

Nikon could even advertise that the newly designed OPLF in the non "E" model was designed to address most issues of moire, while at the sane time being virtually non destructive to the image as compared to the AA less "E" model, hence the $300 premium in price.

Dave (D&A)
 
C

cornishman

Guest
I had both bodies and found the E for me (landscape) much superior SOOC encouraging me to sell the 800.
 
Top