DPreview: Nikon D3 Review Just Posted!

[GTaudiophile]

Starts Here!

 

[xanis]

How I wish I had $5Kto get that beauty.

 

[andylawcc]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Starts Here!

your 401k Ends Here.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Holy crap the extended dynamic range of the RAW files are almost off the chart!

 

[xanis]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Holy crap the extended dynamic range of the RAW files are almost off the chart!

Yeah and did you see the ISO range on that thing with the boost?

 

[ElFenix]

i see that they're still testing with default settings, so no NR on canons and 'normal' NR on nikons. wtg dpreview :roll:

edit: sharpening and clipping differences too

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: Xanis

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Holy crap the extended dynamic range of the RAW files are almost off the chart!

Yeah and did you see the ISO range on that thing with the boost?

Yup. This thing is like a dream camera for people who shoot in difficult lighting.

 

[soydios]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: Xanis

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Holy crap the extended dynamic range of the RAW files are almost off the chart!

Yeah and did you see the ISO range on that thing with the boost?

Yup. This thing is like a dream camera for people who shoot in difficult lighting.

read: night sports, indoor available light, and stage photography.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: soydios

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: Xanis

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Holy crap the extended dynamic range of the RAW files are almost off the chart!

Yeah and did you see the ISO range on that thing with the boost?

Yup. This thing is like a dream camera for people who shoot in difficult lighting.

read: night sports, indoor available light, and stage photography.

I would even add scenes where there is a wide dynamic range. Wedding photographers who historically have always had trouble with blowing out the whites in the bride's dress, for example. I know wedding photographers really like Fuji SLRs for this reason, and now that the D3 is so close to the Fuji S5 in DR...

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

I would even add scenes where there is a wide dynamic range. Wedding photographers who historically have always had trouble with blowing out the whites in the bride's dress, for example. I know wedding photographers really like Fuji SLRs for this reason, and now that the D3 is so close to the Fuji S5 in DR...

what are you looking at? the S5 has a >1 stop advantage in dynamic range at it's 100% setting, and a >3 stop advantage at it's 400% setting. and that's at ISO 100, which seems to be more sensitive than the D3's sensor is natively.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

I would even add scenes where there is a wide dynamic range. Wedding photographers who historically have always had trouble with blowing out the whites in the bride's dress, for example. I know wedding photographers really like Fuji SLRs for this reason, and now that the D3 is so close to the Fuji S5 in DR...

what are you looking at? the S5 has a >1 stop advantage in dynamic range at it's 100% setting, and a >3 stop advantage at it's 400% setting. and that's at ISO 100, which seems to be more sensitive than the D3's sensor is natively.

Oh, there's no denying that the S5 is still king, but regardless, the D3's DR would still be quite enticing to the wedding photographer because it's pretty close and offers a LOT more than the S5 to boot.

 

[Deadtrees]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

I would even add scenes where there is a wide dynamic range. Wedding photographers who historically have always had trouble with blowing out the whites in the bride's dress, for example. I know wedding photographers really like Fuji SLRs for this reason, and now that the D3 is so close to the Fuji S5 in DR...

what are you looking at? the S5 has a >1 stop advantage in dynamic range at it's 100% setting, and a >3 stop advantage at it's 400% setting. and that's at ISO 100, which seems to be more sensitive than the D3's sensor is natively.

Oh, there's no denying that the S5 is still king, but regardless, the D3's DR would still be quite enticing to the wedding photographer because it's pretty close and offers a LOT more than the S5 to boot.

But then again, though it's gotton better, Nikon still hasn't managed to fix(?) highlight clipping/gradation clipping problems. Well, I'm not sure whether I should call it a problem or not as it might just be the way it is in the world of Nikon.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Oh, there's no denying that the S5 is still king, but regardless, the D3's DR would still be quite enticing to the wedding photographer because it's pretty close and offers a LOT more than the S5 to boot.

are we looking at the same thing? the D3's dynamic range looks the same as canon's and the D300's. there is no revolution here according to the chart supplied by dpreivew.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Oh, there's no denying that the S5 is still king, but regardless, the D3's DR would still be quite enticing to the wedding photographer because it's pretty close and offers a LOT more than the S5 to boot.

are we looking at the same thing? the D3's dynamic range looks the same as canon's and the D300's. there is no revolution here according to the chart supplied by dpreivew.

I'm looking at the "RAW Headroom" section.

D3 compared to the D300: can resurrect about the same level of highlight data but can bring out a lot more detail in the shadows than the D300.

D3 compared to the 40D (which Canon camera are you talking about?): Can resurrect more data in both the shadows and highlights.

The D3 compared to the S5: The S5 is just crazy. It's default dynamic range without any pushing or pulling is already about the same as the D3 WITH pushing and pulling. I mean, the thing can recover data from parts of the picture that are pure white...

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

I'm looking at the "RAW Headroom" section.

D3 compared to the D300: can resurrect about the same level of highlight data but can bring out a lot more detail in the shadows than the D300.

D3 compared to the 40D (which Canon camera are you talking about?): Can resurrect more data in both the shadows and highlights.

The D3 compared to the S5: The S5 is just crazy. It's default dynamic range without any pushing or pulling is already about the same as the D3 WITH pushing and pulling. I mean, the thing can recover data from parts of the picture that are pure white...

'dynamic range compared'


tbh, i skip a lot of the review on dpreview anymore. i usually skip over the raw headroom bit that you've been looking at as they've got so many warnings that it's almost useless.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

I'm looking at the "RAW Headroom" section.

D3 compared to the D300: can resurrect about the same level of highlight data but can bring out a lot more detail in the shadows than the D300.

D3 compared to the 40D (which Canon camera are you talking about?): Can resurrect more data in both the shadows and highlights.

The D3 compared to the S5: The S5 is just crazy. It's default dynamic range without any pushing or pulling is already about the same as the D3 WITH pushing and pulling. I mean, the thing can recover data from parts of the picture that are pure white...

'dynamic range compared'


tbh, i skip a lot of the review on dpreview anymore. i usually skip over the raw headroom bit that you've been looking at as they've got so many warnings that it's almost useless.

I would hardly call RAW headroom useless. The default dynamic range without pushing or pulling is worthless by virtue of the fact that they are all the same. It's how pliable the RAW files are that actually matters and what sets the cameras apart. Being able to bring back data from the shadows and the highlights is so useful on so many occasions. In fact, this is one of the main reasons for even shooting in RAW in the first place.

There are times when you are forced to underexpose in order to get a proper shutter speed. Having a camera where a lot of data can be brought back from the shadows would really help here. Likewise with the highlights. White wedding dresses. Interiors of buildings where the windows always seem to get clipped. Having a lot of RAW headroom has significant practical value in tough shooting conditions.

Obviously there are going to be warnings by pushing and pulling your files. Added noise. Whites tend to go magenta if pushed too far. Sometimes color balance can go off. There are all things that you can avoid to a good degree with proper pushing and pulling.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

I would hardly call RAW headroom useless. T

i'm not, i'm calling dpreview's normal 'test' of it useless

'hey we can get 6 stops of room but only if we fvck up the colors!' is useless.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

I would hardly call RAW headroom useless. T

i'm not, i'm calling dpreview's normal 'test' of it useless

'hey we can get 6 stops of room but only if we fvck up the colors!' is useless.

dpreview gets their RAW headroom values by going just before the colors go crazy. That is, their numbers are what you can hope to get and still have accurate color.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

dpreview gets their RAW headroom values by going just before the colors go crazy. That is, their numbers are what you can hope to get and still have accurate color.

(although with no guarantee of color accuracy)

that doesn't say color accuracy to me.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

dpreview gets their RAW headroom values by going just before the colors go crazy. That is, their numbers are what you can hope to get and still have accurate color.

(although with no guarantee of color accuracy)

that doesn't say color accuracy to me.

Where does it say this?

 

[ElFenix]

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/page20.asp

raw headroom section, last line of the second paragraph. then there is this warning:

WARNING: Although ACR was able to retrieve the 'luminance' (brightness) of wedge steps which were previously clipped there's no guarantee of color accuracy as individual channels may clip before others. This can be seen fairly clearly in the examples below, on the right the negative digital exposure compensation has revealed some more detail in the background but this soon turns into gray as one or more of the color channels clips.

note that the example has been pushed 3 stops