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/D800E/IQ180 comparison

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
The Nikon should be shot at f8 as that is the optimal aperture for it
Actually its about 5.6. If you want corner sharpness to the full degree F8 but this also is just a general rule as lenses vary a great deal, my 200mm F2 is about 2.8. Yea its that freaking good. I'm a lens slut :thumbs:
 

Bryan Stephens

Workshop Member
I agree with you on the 200mm. I have shot a ton of sports at f2 and I am amazed at how sharp it is wide open, with the ability of still maintaining a good DoF. It is awesome for baseball, especially when you are centralizing on one player, say a pitcher for example, as the background is blurred so you HAVE to focus on the pitcher.

The kids (and their parents) in my local little league all love their pictures.
 

Bryan Stephens

Workshop Member
Casual testing by Jack? That is hard to believe! LOL!!!

"my other tech lenses and all of my DF gear has been sold"... that somewhat indicates me what was the result of casual testing, but I could be wrong.

Subrata
Casual testing to Jack is what I would consider to be extreme and complete testing. :grin:
 

baxter

New member
Peter definitely knows how to use C1, so I would recommend he simply stick with that for both systems -- no sense adding un-necessary variables.
I'm not doubting that Jack and Guy.

Capture One is the control experiment which minimises variables. I am simply suggesting that if the lens/camera/software is considered as an imaging system, it just might be the case that the Nikon imaging system performs better with software other than Capture One and that this would be useful to know.

Reverse the tables and it's like comparing Hasselblad backs and Phase backs using only Lightroom.

Best wishes

Baxter
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Is there anyone in your group with a 40MP MFDB/Camera? That would be a more interesting comparison.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Is there anyone in your group with a 40MP MFDB/Camera? That would be a more interesting comparison.
Funny you mention that my brand new IQ 140 just showed up. I only have a Rodie 28mm Tech lens at the moment. :D

Trust me you don't want the Nikon against this sucker. ROTFLMAO

I plan on doing something soon here to be honest. I just need a road trip Im so sick of shooting around here right now and its hot as hell.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I'm not doubting that Jack and Guy.

Capture One is the control experiment which minimises variables. I am simply suggesting that if the lens/camera/software is considered as an imaging system, it just might be the case that the Nikon imaging system performs better with software other than Capture One and that this would be useful to know.

Reverse the tables and it's like comparing Hasselblad backs and Phase backs using only Lightroom.

Best wishes

Baxter

Honestly I used NX for a bit on the Nikon files besides being a pig in a pile of mud to work with I was not impressed with the sharpening in that software at all. Now given I am not a expert in that program so take that with a grain of salt but I am really getting excellent results from C1 the gnomes have this thing down pretty good. So I will go on record and say it is really good if you want to compare the Phase and the Nikon and I agree with you always pick the best software given the cam no question. In this case i think C1 does a really excellent job. Im actually smack in the middle of about 3k in images with processing c1. Just outputted 375 and a long way to go. LOL

Now for testing it does cut out the variables to a large degree. I did the 160 back and the Nikon and hell I was impressed with the Nikon no question its damn good. But Im not ready to give up my Phase and the tech cam there is a lot going on in its favor than just resolution that I love about it. The tonal range in my mind is better on the Phase. The DR on the Nikon is killer though. I could go on here but I really like having both right now and Nikon has **** in the extreme wides and PC lenses so Im staying put for now. My gear list is down to no freaking kidding to 2 ITEMS yes 2 . Im scared I'll have to start shopping for my wife soon here just to keep my buy button finger in tune. LOL
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Nikon NX2 generally has the ability to pull out more shadow & highlight information than C1 for difficult exposures but I would agree that it's a pig otherwise. :D
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
The thing is though Graham you almost don't have to use it for that since the DR is really good which is scary good to be honest. The biggest worry would be highlights and Im just not running into many issues with that. Im not saying don't use NX just not so sure you HAVE too to get everything out of the files, like you had too with previous Nikons. Its pretty interesting for sure. But I will say folks need to compare the raw processors and see what they can get out of them for there needs. I love C1 and I know its not a catch all too.

Im just happy Im not being shoved into NX since the workflow is not to my liking.
 

baxter

New member
I too am of the persuasion that NX2 has large portions of porcine characteristics. I have it, it remains almost totally untouched. However, if it was found to be advantageous to use, I'm sure that it would be ok for small numbers of select images, but not bulk processing. I wouldn't relish the prospect though!
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Agreed about not wanting to be stuck using multiple tools. I'm in that position myself today with my X-Pro1 and Phase One back. In a couple of weeks I'll be able to test out my own 800E with UV/IR so that'll be fun. Kicking NX2 to touch in favor of a single processor would be great if the highlights & shadows are living up to the feedback. I can only speak historically of the challenges of pulling back highlights & shadows from D3/D3x files in C1 that NX2 handled effortlessly. Times change so :thumbs:

Btw, that'll be an interesting comparison too between my D800 with full spectrum clear filter on it - not even the weak OLPF that the D800 has. I can't wait.
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
I have to say, and it really p****s me off when I run a test and people do this, but I think your methodology might not tell you very much. The 24PC-E has a lot of sample variation and is very hard to use in terms of tradeoffs between DOF and diffraction for getting sharpness across the frame. The 35XL has to be treated with great care and a CF used, and not too much shift. The 35 3.5 does not have a great rep.

You can draw conclusions about the cameras by using more evenly matched lenses - for example the 110 LS versus maybe the 85 f1.8 or maybe the 150 LS versus the Zeiss Makro Planar 100 F2. And if you have a good copy of the Nikon PC-E and really know how to use it, fine, but I have my doubts.

In terms of 'forget the individual components, we're comparing systems' you are still somewhat stymied. The D800/E has better shadow pull abilities, the IQ180 other strengths.

So we'll all be fascinated by the results but it's going to be a tough gig...whether you make one system look better than the other in terms of people's reactions to a large print will be as much to do with your methodology and lens choices as it will be to do with any inherent benefits to one system rather than the other. If you want to test movements and have access to the glass, an SK 120 TS versus a Nikon PC-E 85mm might be the fairest test I can think of...
 
P

petercoxphoto

Guest
Thanks for the great response to the query. We'll be using C1 to process the images as a way to eliminate variables.

The 35mm Schneider was selected as the closest to a 24mm lens that I have. It has many issues on the IQ180, but sharpness unshifted is not one of them.

We're using the 24mm PC-E on the Nikon as it seems to be the best of their 24mm lenses and it's also what's available to us. We will likely be using tilt in the test for front-back sharpness (for some images), but we won't be using shift as the 35mm is not usable on the IQ180 without being perfectly centered - LCC problems.

The 35mm Phase One lens is being thrown in as I have it and have never done a direct comparison against the 35mm Schneider. I'm aware it's far from being the best lens for the Phase system - the goal here is to see just how much poorer it is!

We'll be tweeting over the course of the test - follow #bigtest to keep in the loop. We'll also be discussing it on next week's Circle of Confusion podcast (The Circle of Confusion). The video and full report will probably be out late next week or early the following week.

I'll keep monitoring this thread in the interim, and look forward to sharing the results with you!

Cheers,
Peter
 

FredBGG

Not Available
It would be very interesting if you could do a bokeh test. Maybe a landscape with a foreground object and a blured background so as to see what the "look" of the lens is
like. Stopped down most lenses look quite similar. How a lens renders the out of focus elements can be drastically different.
From a visual impact stand point it can be more important than sharpness.
 

Wayne Fox

Workshop Member
Hi Peter,

Looking forward to seeing your results! Obviously I have done some casual comparisons for myself and since they were only casual I have refrained from posting them until I had time to do a more thorough job. At present I still have my Arca tech cam and my favorite lens, the 40, but my other tech lenses and all of my DF gear has been sold...
Interesting ... so you're only current MFDB option is the tech camera with one lens?
 
Top