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!

D3/D300 illustrated

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
Woody, it would be great if you would contribute with some of your D3 files and D300 files as well, with the different optics.
I actually was hoping you would chime in on this, as well as Ray, Kit, Patrick and other members who have these new Nikon machines :)
 

harmsr

Workshop Member
Give me some time this weekend and I'll post some from the D300. (some product shots and a few from the Phoenix Zoo Lights Festival - I was really impressed using the Live View feature for product work, and with the 2500 ISO for the night shots.) (Product shots were with the Zeiss 50/2.0 Macro + Nikon 105/2.8 VR Macro.) (Night shots were with the new 24-70/2.8 Nikon.)

Best,

Ray
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
Great Ray, looking forward to see your files !
Now let me show you three sample files shot with the ZF 85mm. First the man and the machine ...

D300 w. ZF 85mm at f/8
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
Last but not least let's take a look at what this 85mm was really meant for :)

first one stopped down to f/1.4, a flower portrait
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
and the mandatory actual pixel peep of f/1.4
not quite sure exactly where the focal plane is located :)
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
this is in no way scientific, it was pretty windy, just playing with the 85mm
stopped down to f/2.8
 

neils

New member
Woody

So you got your D3? Good for you. How are you liking it compared to the D300?

A few weeks ago Woody and I were mailing back and forth. I had sent him some D3 files, NEFs and JPGS. I think he already had a D3 on order back then.

In case some of you haven't seen other posts I've made on other forums I have some USM suggestions for those who on opening the D3 file for the first time may say HUH?, this isn't what I was expecting.

In general double the sharpening numbers you are used to with a D200 or D2X, cut the radius in half and us little to no threshold, maybe use 1. For example 250/.3/0 (1) works really really well at ISO 200-800. After 800 you need to watch that 250 sharpening number and back it off. But in general sharpen more and radius less. All that detail yo were expecting IS there.

In NX I slam the sharpening slider all the way to 100 and then use about 2-3 radius and 0-1 threshold.

At ISO 200-800 CS3 and NX files look about the same. So if you can't/won't us NX CS3/ACR is fine.

NX is a whole other world at hi ISO though and worth the demo or money for the times you crank up the ISO.

I had sent an ISO 12,800 jpg direct from NEF in NX to Woody. I just made a print from the same file. No way in H#&L an ISO file should ever look this good. I swear it is every bit as good as an ISO 1600 file from my D2HS. I'm not joking. And the D2HS was good.

It takes time to get accustomed to the D3 look 'cause it isn't a FF D2X. Images are sharp and they are detailed but they pull it off in a different way with a different look.

I need to open a gallery here and I will show some of the hi ISO snaps I have.

Have fun Woody

Neil
 

woodyspedden

New member
Hey Bondo and Neils

Thanks for the comments and I promise I'll do some posting.

I got the D3 from Jim Lakey at Brightscreen and for those interested he may have one or two left. Unlike others he is not charging a premium. Amazon had a D3 for sale and were asking $6300 compared to the list price of $4995! Crooks!

Anyway I am in Florida on vacation and so far have been shooting mostly test shots just to get a feel for the camera. So far I am very impressed. Having had a D2X for several years I agree with Neil that these files are not a ff D2X. The sensor must be quite different based on what I am seeing. I don't have the 14-24 or the 24-70 with me but I don have my older 17-35 and 28-70 so will take the shots with those two or the 70=200.

Have a happy day all

Woody
 

woodyspedden

New member
O.K.

Here are two shots taken on the beach last evening.

Don't be too critical as this was hand held with the 300 4.0 and ISO 1000 just as the sun was beginning to set. As I said, these were really test shots and there is noticeable camera shake involved.

Enjoy for what they are worth

Woody
 

harmsr

Workshop Member
Bondo,

I had the Zeiss 85/1.4 but sold it. My issue was that it was just too difficult to focus fast on the D200 or D300, although the D300 was better. You seem to do well with it.

I also sold the Zeiss 35/2 (which was a very nice lens) in favor of using the new 24-70 Nikon. However, the Zeiss 50/1.4 and 50/2.0 Macro did stay.

Best,

Ray
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
Woody, they are really tack sharp, within the shallow 300mm DOF. The second 300mm one shot at 1/320 sec. according to the exif - you definitely have a more steady hand than I have.

Ray, you are absolutely right about the 85mm MF lens being difficult to accurately focus with the D300. I took several shots at each aperture and just picked the best ones to show here. And unfortunately the D300 matte screen isn't designed to be easily interchanged by the end user. This is exactly where the coming Leica DSLR comes in. "Wide open" optimized optics plus a Manual Focus optimized viewfinder (hopefully) ? Seems nowadays to be the last chance company for that in the 35mm arena ...
(You really sold the 2/35mm, isn't it considered one of the top two or top three ZFs ?)
It would be very interesting if Nikon announces a new 85mm AF-S in a few days from now.

Neil, thanks for the advice about the postprocessing, very usefull information and inspiration. So far I've been too chicken to even try to crank up the sharpening as much as you suggest. I'll try it out for sure. We (or at least: "I") need a thread about good postprocessing suggestions of these files.
I use Nikon Capture NX. I still hope to be rescued by Lars Vinbergs "Joey" program concerning post conversion processing :)

By the way, I just realized that unfortunately I loaded up the wrong files for the actual pixel crops of the above rose shots. Crops yes, but not at all 100 %. It's a bit of a pity that the "Edit" option disappears in the posts ?
Nevertheless, I won't bother you with posting new actual pixel crops, the full res jpeg samples are temporarily uploaded to a webpage as mentioned in post # 5 if you want to peep the rose shots - anyway it's not all that important, in no way controlled examples.
 

neils

New member
Bondo

I just now made some out of camera size prints (@9.5x14 300dpi) in NX from some ISO 200 and 400 files. I use an Epson 2200 and I printed on Luster paper for a good sharp look.

I wanted to see in print some of my own suggestions. The prints are very sharp but smooth. It is so hard to describe smooth. Compared to what I think the same file from my D200 would look like the D3 files have loads of detail but look less "digital" or overly saturated. Bad description on my part as saturation is wildly adjustable. And what does digital look like anyway.

I had the D3 set to Neutral, but in PP I set it to Standard as this image could use it. I had the ADL set to low. All I can say is the D3 image is different than the D200. the D200 is no dog. In the fall of '08 a parody cookbook my wife wrote and I did the photos for will be on the shelves. It is all shot with the D200 and nobody is disappointed. The book bought the D3:)

I printed at a few different USM settings in NX. 100/3/2, 100/5/3 and 80/3/2.

Know what? In one shot the 80/3/2 looks better than the 100/3/1 shot and in the other the 100/5/3 shot is still very sharp but smoother in the way the 70'sish womens skin looks. But still all the differences are extremely small. But I stand by what I say about lots of USM and very little radius compared to what you would think is right. Sharpen alot and then take the edge off with radius and threshold.

Try some prints at those settings. It's only paper and ink.

BTW the USM setting for a 12,800 image with in camera NR set to Low (recommend that), in camera B&W conversion and in camera USM turned off was 35/2/2 in NX.

Neil
 

harmsr

Workshop Member
Bondo,

Yes the Zeiss 35 is a very good lens, but also somewhat long in size. The other thing that really convinced me to let is go, is just how good the new 24-70/2.8 is. The D300 is a "hold me over" camera until a higher resolution D3 becomes available, it will then move into back-up mode. Considering that I want to move to full-frame and am a big fan of the 50 focal length, that is why I kept the two Zeiss 50s and sold the 35 & 85.

My lens line-up is the 24-70/2.8 Nikon, Zeiss 50/1.4, Zeiss 50/2.0 Macro, 105/2.8 VR Macro Nikon, and 70-200/2.8 VR Nikon.

The other thing that really pushed me over the edge to selling the Zeiss 35, is that I prefer to shoot the M8 in that focal length.

Best,

Ray
 

woodyspedden

New member
Here are a few with the D300 and 24-70 from yesterday.
Good Stuff Ray

I am attaching a few images from both the D3 and the D300 so folks can see (or not see as the case may be) the differences in the imagers. I was using both the little Voightlander 40 2.0 and the great Nikon 17-35 on both cameras. As all are aware using the same lens interchangeably on both bodies is not easy due to the 1.5 crop of the D300.

Anyway, for what it is worth here are three images from each taken on a casual beach stroll yesterday

Enjoy

Woody


These first three are from the D3
 
Top