Nikon D3, D700 image processing problem explained.

[Deadtrees]

There has been many discussions regarding image processing problems of D3, D300, yet nobody was able to come up with solid reasons.
(Two of the main problems are: 1. too much saturation in certain situations 2. Low and no color information topped with high grain noise in certain situations.
Low and no saturation has been the main concern of users as it, in many cases, produces gray face when shooting portraits. Even worse, you can't post-process it to fix it as there's no color information) http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...um&desc=asc&no=1545198


A Korean user named Z3000 found reasons of the problems and the bad news is that it can't be fixed by a simple firmware update.

(About Z3000: Nobody really knows much about him but he must be an engineer in that area, otherwise his crazy knowledge and engineering equipments don't make sense.
He also has adjustment softwares of all the camera brands although he does not work for any of those companies. Using those softwares, he uses his own fine tuned cameras.
And he once developed "1:1 converter" that makes your cropped sensor cameras to become a FF camera. Production samples were out but it couldn't hit the market due to paetent issues)

I wish I could clearly translate what he said but even in Korean, I can't really understand what he's saying; it's too technical thus I couldn't fully translate the whole thing.
Anyway, this is my best shot.

"The problem is caused by CMOS gain control and ISO sensivity. The boost rate of signal in the given current and the dealy time of ISO sensivity must be fixed to avoid the problem.
In other word, the dealy time of CMOS getting the light and the sensivity of the CMOS....
Current ISO sensivity must be down by -1EV. By doing so, the color information in the shadow and detail will be normal.
ISO 200 must go down to ISO 100. The shutter speed also must be fixed following the ISO level.

(I changed Canon cameras' settings to be like Nikon D3/D300 and the same problems occured)
Picture Control can help to reduce the problem but it's only marginal.

By changing ISO sensivity and CMOS -1EV gain will give more time for CMOS to be exposed to the light.
(Unlike D3/D300, the reason why Canon didn't set their CMOS gain and ISO sensitivity higher is because the contrast goes up too much.
Some of you may like contrasty images but adjusting contrast level is better to be done in software. Otherwise, the tonal reponse takes the damage too much.
Contrast gained by setting high CMOS gain is different on each RGB channel. It causes too much high saturation or low saturation.

Using Active D-lighting sets even more ISO sensivity. Active D-lighting works by boosting ISO sensivity then balancing out the light and shadow.
That's why it greatly damages shadow details in shots taken in where there aren't enough light.
In that case, Canon did a good job of selecting the right ISO sensivity as their cameras keep the detail while maintaining DR.

Now, some you must be confused about CMOS gain and ISO sensivity.
Think about CCTV cameras that don't have apertures. On those cameras, the exposure level is controlled by CMOS gain coltrol and ISO sensivity.
Exposure on Cell phone cameras are adjusted by the same way.

I found out that the image problems of D3/D300 can be fixed by adjusting those values.
Much improved tonal reponse and shadow detail can be achived by adjusing ISO sensivity by -1EV.

The result is that Nikon went too aggresive and boosted CMOS sensivity to the extreme level.
I don't think High ISO-Low noise is more important <when it come with these problems>"


Regarding this post, many people asked questions and here're some of this replies:

"Canon also lied about ISO sensivity but it was the other way around.
ISO sensivity of Canon has been improved due to the expansion of CMOS miro-lens but, unlike Nikon, they lowered it for the sake of shadow and high ISO detail."

"The lost color information and detail can't be brought back in JPEG. RAW is similar but it's much better than JPEG"

"The reason why it can't be fixed by firmware upate is because every cameras have different CMOS gain levels.
For an example, some camera's working CMOS voltage is 3.2v and some others can be 3.25. This difference is adjusted in the manufacturing process and
a general firmware update will not handle it. It will require per-camera calibration"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's how I understood:

So the problem is that Nikon sensor isn't really getting enough light for the sake of high ISO performance. To make up for it, it boosts the lack of information by using software boost.
This wouldn't be a much problem if all the RGB sensors receive the same amount of light thus generating same amount of signals(G channel being the worst offender in this case) However, it is not the case thus creating the current problems of D3/D300.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Link of the original post: http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=37519

Sample pictures:

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=37487
http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=37521
http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=37517
http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=37518
http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=35923

 

[ElFenix]

so it's basically amplifying something it doesn't have a color signal for?

 

[tdawg]

I honestly haven't seen anybody talking about this issue. All the guys in the Nikon forum at fredmiranda.com would have been discussing this if it were a big issue. I know you like your Canon's, Deadtrees, but your time would probably be better spent doing pretty much anything else, rather than looking for flaws in Nikon's offerings. Just because Nikon introduced the D3, D300 and now D700, doesn't make your Canon, or anybody else's less capable of producing nice images than they were before the announcements.

 

[Deadtrees]

Originally posted by: tdawg
I honestly haven't seen anybody talking about this issue. All the guys in the Nikon forum at fredmiranda.com would have been discussing this if it were a big issue. I know you like your Canon's, Deadtrees, but your time would probably be better spent doing pretty much anything else, rather than looking for flaws in Nikon's offerings. Just because Nikon introduced the D3, D300 and now D700, doesn't make your Canon, or anybody else's less capable of producing nice images than they were before the announcements.

This has been a big issue for especially those who shoot portrait shots. Just because you didn't see it, it doesn't mean it's not there and people don't care.
This kind of imaging problem is a big issue as much as Canon's 1D Mk3 AF problems.
http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...um&desc=asc&no=1545198

I need to keep the track of what I'm being called for. Sometimes I'm being called as a Nikon fanboi, sometimes Canon, sometimes some other brands.
I point out the known and on-going problem of certain cameras and people like you think that I have an agenda. How silly is that?

I do like my Canon camera but I do adress problems/weak side this camera has. It's not like I work for Canon nor I hold some stocks. What I want is a good camera from any brands.
As a consumer, I look at flaws in any brands offerings. As a consumer, I was excited when Nikon announced D3/D700 as it means FF competition is really taking off.
As a consumer, I want Nikon to fix the problems especially when the hard facts are revealed; At least, I'd expect Nikon to not make same mistake in the future.
Why? Because I'm a consumer/photographer who wants to use solid products from any brands. D3/D700 is such a solid camera and problems like that shouldn't be there.

Anway, if I hurt your feeling by pointing out the hard facts, I'm sorry but "your time would probably be better spent <reading> pretty much anything else" that don't talk about problems of Nikons'.

 

[soydios]

eh, give him credit, he's better than punchkin.

anyway, I've been out of the loop for about a month (all that I've taken time to read is the D700 press release), so can someone fill me in on what this controversy is and why it's important?

 

[tdawg]

Originally posted by: Deadtrees

Originally posted by: tdawg
I honestly haven't seen anybody talking about this issue. All the guys in the Nikon forum at fredmiranda.com would have been discussing this if it were a big issue. I know you like your Canon's, Deadtrees, but your time would probably be better spent doing pretty much anything else, rather than looking for flaws in Nikon's offerings. Just because Nikon introduced the D3, D300 and now D700, doesn't make your Canon, or anybody else's less capable of producing nice images than they were before the announcements.

This has been a big issue for especially those who shoot portrait shots. Just because you didn't see it, it doesn't mean it's not there and people don't care.
This kind of imaging problem is a big issue as much as Canon's 1D Mk3 AF problems.
http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...um&desc=asc&no=1545198

I need to keep the track of what I'm being called for. Sometimes I'm being called as a Nikon fanboi, sometimes Canon, sometimes some other brands.
I point out the known and on-going problem of certain cameras and people like you think that I have an agenda. How silly is that?

I do like my Canon camera but I do adress problems/weak side this camera has. It's not like I work for Canon nor I hold some stocks. What I want is a good camera from any brands.
As a consumer, I look at flaws in any brands offerings. As a consumer, I was excited when Nikon announced D3/D700 as it means FF competition is really taking off.
As a consumer, I want Nikon to fix the problems especially when the hard facts are revealed; At least, I'd expect Nikon to not make same mistake in the future.
Why? Because I'm a consumer/photographer who wants to use solid products from any brands. D3/D700 is such a solid camera and problems like that shouldn't be there.

Anway, if I hurt your feeling by pointing out the hard facts, I'm sorry but "your time would probably be better spent <reading> pretty much anything else" that don't talk about problems of Nikons'.

My feelings aren't hurt. I'm just basing my opinion on what I've seen of your posts in response to Anandtech's latest reviews of Nikon's releases and they sure seemed Anti-Nikon / Canon fanboi-ish.

Regarding this 'huge' issue, I would think that at least one of the many Nikon users at fredmiranda.com that picked up a D3 as soon as it became available would have pointed out this problem, or at least asked others about issues they are facing. We'd probably also see something from Rob Galbraith, Thom Hogan, or any of the many other established Nikon pros regarding this, so I guess until I see something more official...

Also, unfortunately, I cannot read Japanese (looked Japanese to me, but I could be wrong; guess it's Korean given the info in the original post.), so your link doesn't really help. So I'll wait until this issue turns up from established sources, or at least from pros that I know are using the D3, before I give this issue much credit.

Sorry.

 

[Deadtrees]

You think I was being Canon fanboi when my replies on Anandtech reviews made the reviewer to think that I'm a Nikon/Canon fanboi who are against Sony?
Again, I'm fair when pointing out the problems of any cameras. That makes me being called as (insert any brands here) fanboi from people like you who can't take it.
Just do a simple search. I was the one who firtst brought the D3/D700 information before it was announced. I was the one who pointed out the greatness of those cameras in the first place.
Even so, you accuse me of being Canonfanboi who worry about the vaule of my Canon camera after the introduction of D3/D700.

You think that the problem doesn't exist or doesn't matter as nobody at fredmiranda.com talked about it? Look, users of D3/D300 in other places have been talking about this issue. Offical letters have been sent to Nikon long time ago.
Sample pictures are even provided. Cause/explanation of the problem using Nikon's own engineering software is even included. What are you afraid of? Your Nikon Ego?
People like you remind me of those who were so upset when D200's banding problem surfaced. At first, some people like you also couldn't take the facts and the only thing they could do was deny until it became offical. (Edit: BTW, it's those who are at www.slrclub.com who first pointed out the banding problem of D200)

Just go to sites like www.pbase.com and look at images taken by D3/D300, you'll see the problems. Well, if you still think that nobody you mentioned talk about the problem, it doesn't exist, I got nothing more to say. Happy living in the world of denial.

 

[Deadtrees]

BTW, the solution is to shoot in RAW and use Lightroom.
(This will fix low saturation problems. 'Black-hole' problems can't be fixed as there's no data.

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2...dnum&desc=asc&no=23427