Image quality and effort, D200?

Cav

Cav

Messages
21
Edit My Images
Yes
Firstly thanks to everyone who replied in the Welcome forum. You'll already know that I don't own a DSLR yet, and that I'm researching them prior to getting one this year (sometime).

I'll be asking a lot of semi-retarded questions, starting with...

(The reason I ask is that I've read several reviews outlying a greater need for Shop with Nikon, particularly with the D70).

Do you have to work harder on your RAW images when taken with a Nikon than with a Canon, and does this hold true with the D200?

Thanks in advance!
 
I had the Canon 300D & now the Nikon D70 & find no difference really in RAW processing. The quality of the shot taken by the photographer will have a much larger impact on the end result ;)

As for D200, never touched but have heard others state it is less forgiving then D70 in terms of Lenses & photographic skills. As with any hi end kit.....rubbish in rubbish out......you can just see the rubbish easier;) However if you get it right then results should be stunning :) Do a search o D200 on this forum & you'll find someone who just upgraded from D70 to one, so could answer your question in more detail.
 
Cheers Dave,

It is just that reviewers tend to lean towards the D70s having great "potential" image quality, after processing. With Canon there is no potential mentioned, nor processing.
 
Well I get the impression that the Canons get exposure and WB correct most of the time so maybe that's what they're on about.

I have no experience on Nikon stuff so can't comment. Anyway, if you're shooting in RAW it matters less as you have more flexibility.

But as Dave said, you still need to take a decent shot to begin with.
:)
 
A RAW image is just that, RAW. No matter which of the cameras you buy from that list above the raw files will still need work to get the best from them. Note that the level of work has to be measured against something for it to mean anything. What is more work, compared to what? Take the Nikon/Canon example and it could quite simply mean that to get the same amount of sharpness out of an equally well photographed RAW file, that you may have to slide one slider slightly more to the right when processing than you would on the other, it may need more “adjustment” but is that any more work in real terms?

A great deal of this post processing is personal taste though, and the best advice would be not to worry about that side of it for now and look at the cameras for what they are, how they work, their controls and how they feel in YOUR hands. Imagine buying the “best” but it feel terrible in your hands and you don’t quite like the way the menu system works, that is far more likely to affect the quality output that a slight difference in processing parameters during the RAW file conversions. This is far more important as all the models you have mentioned are very capable of producing stunning shots.

Also consider that there are many RAW file processing software packages, they are more likely to affect the way you process the files and the time it will take you than any difference in the output of cameras at this level.

Hope that helps a little :)
 
As Steve says - images differ depending on the camera you use. Identical shots taken on a canon and a Nikon will appear different when viewed due to the camera's software.
I borrowed a colleague's Canon in Iraq last month and shot a few frames off. They looked very washed-out to my eye compared to the Nikon I use.
Mine looked over-saturated to him.

It comes down to what you're used to, I guess.
 
Of course the first idea to get out of your head is that RAW is an image, it's not. It's the RAW data from which you make an image, it's because it's not an image that you can do so much with it before converting it.

Might sound pedantic but it's important (I think) :)
 
Being one of those :nut: just upgraded to a D200 I have to say I notice absolutely no difference in the processing elements between the two (D70s) - mine are all rubbish all of the time whatever the kit ! :banghead:
 
Venomator said:
- mine are all rubbish all of the time whatever the kit ! :banghead:
Click to expand...

hell yes i know what you mean, i took reasonable pictures with my S5000, but sucked ass really badly with the 300d, now i just suck...:(
 
The difference between the Nikon D1, D1x and D2x are mostly to do with image quality and colour rendition. The D2x renders colours pretty much as I remember Fuji Reala neg film used to - slightly warm, but delicious to play with.

Looking back, I've found that some of the best images I took was as a 14 year-old, using an old Pentax Spotmatic.
I think I had more fun too.
Now I'm just too jaded to be bothered to try anything new.

Find me a muse someone!
 
Arkady said:
Looking back, I've found that some of the best images I took was as a 14 year-old, using an old Pentax Spotmatic.
I think I had more fun too.
Now I'm just too jaded to be bothered to try anything new.

Find me a muse someone!
Click to expand...

Don't know about a muse but ... I may have a Spotmatic in the loft if you want to revert to your childhood daze !?! :ponders:
 
I have just upgraded from a D70 to a D200 and I have found that most of my shots look punchier and colours look better straight out of the camera..

That said, I have been using custom WB a lot more with the D200, which may explain it...
 
Arkady said:
Find me a muse someone!
Click to expand...

14861_w.jpg


EDIT: Sorry thought you said mouse LOL
 
Arkady said:
Find me a muse someone!
Click to expand...

I would suggest you come to Bath and hang out with all the pretentious arty types we have hanging around here


'There's just so much, like, history and atmos about the place. man'





But you'd probably end up killing them ;)
 
ASH said:
You can find some shots here from the 5D and the D200.
Warning large files.

http://www.potatobear.com/ND200/D200F.htm
Click to expand...
I am not convinced by any of the shots on that link, first up I don’t read/understand Japanese/Chinese or what ever language that is so I can’t gauge what other factors are supposedly involved with those shots, all of the Canon shots look like they have been processed to get the maximum sharpness, best colour and detail yet the Nikons appear as if they have just been dumped to web directly from the camera, almost 99% of the members here could take any of those supposed Nikon files and make them 100% better with just a few minutes post processing work.

Also what lenses have been used (same for each shot or Canon on the Canon and Nikon on the Nikon?), did he use custom white balance, we don’t know the settings?

But after all this I still suspect something more serious is not right here, if you look at each shot carefully, the Nikon/Canon ones are identical, every hair, every leaf, the way the models are stood, were their eyes are looking, the way her fingers are relaxed, even the wonky horizon on one set…down to the very last detail they are identical, how can that be as surely to take two shots of the same subject using different equipment would show at least some minor differences? To me I wouldn’t trust any of the information there on face value.

Much better getting full size examples direct from Canon and Nikon and comparing those, sure they will be the absolute best that is possible from any set camera but at least if that is good enough for you, it will give you some goal, something to aim for.
 
Hi Steve, I can't say I took much notice of them as I just posted them on after finding the link on another forum, but after looking at them again I can see what you mean.

So I saved one of each to my pictures and opened them in Microsoft raw image viewer, and then went into the properties to have a look at the exif.

The exif does say 5D or D200 but I suppose that could have been altered some how, and as you say maybe only one set has been processed.
 
He may be a while in responding, IIRC he's overseas at the moment.
 
The Pond said:
Arkady, your photo gallery is down?
Click to expand...

It can be found at http://www.tpfgallery.com/gallery2/members/arkady/

We moved all the Galleries recently to a seperate sever and domain to cope with the higher demand as we are growing. It is likely that as Arkady works away a great deal and has to take extended breaks from the site that he missed all the announcements

HTH :)

EDIT To everyone else that is still linking to the old galleries, it won't be long now before we completely delete them, please update your links (in sigs etc) to your new gallery URLs so that they don't break.

Cheers
 
Got all that now.

Back to the Nikon/Canon thing - had the opportunity to have an extended play with a Canon EOS1Ds Mk11.

I think it really will come down to ergonomics at the end of the day - I think that undoubtedly that the EOS produces a better-looking image than the D2X (and those of you who know me will appreciate how hard that was to say)...but...

And it's a big but... I would still buy a Nikon if I was spending my own money, for the simple reeason that it 'feels' right in my hands. All the controls fall (to me anyway) naturally under my fingers and it's very intuitive in the field - I almost never miss a shot due to camera 'fumbles'.

The Canon felt angular and awkward after the D2x and the method of selecting focussing zones was ridiculous - press this, scroll that...argh!
Nikon - left, right, up, down - sorted.

I think if you want ultimate image quality, buy a 17.2Mpi Canon.
If you want a robust, simple camera that delivers the goods in a tough environment, get a Nikon.

All this applies to the top-end Cameras - I reckon at lower price points there will be no discernable difference in image quality and ergonomics.
 
Thanks very much Rob, particularly that last post. I had a chance to play with a D70 recently and as you allude to I found it very easy to use initially and was quickly using the functions intuitively in near zero light. It says a lot that a DSLR newbie can achieve "good" results in near pitch black.

For me though, outside work, I still think it'll be a Canon, if only due to the anticipated price drop of the 20D now that the 30D looms. But them Nikons are sweet to handle.

Does anyone know if the 20D has any issues with moisture/dust penetration during general use?

Cheers, I'll be back in week...duty calls...yawn!
 
Cav said:
Does anyone know if the 20D has any issues with moisture/dust penetration during general use?

Cheers, I'll be back in week...duty calls...yawn!
Click to expand...
Durning normal use none of the manufacturers cameras will have any issues with dust or moisture, including the 20D or D70. I have a 20D and have used it in conditions that range from dry and windy at beaches through to heavy continuous rain at airshow and have never had a problem, however remember that both the cameras you have mentioned are not weather sealed so you will have to use a little common sense and not throw caution to the wind ;)
 
My advice would be to get the camera's of choice in your own hands.
Try to get about 10mins use at least, with each one.
This will help you decide which one is more ergonomically suited to you.
If you have the option of a battery grip try that aswell.

The last thing you want to do is spend lots of money to then find
you're having difficulty using/holding the camera you've bought.

When I was upgrading, I was fortunate enough to have access to different
camera bodies before making my choice.

Even though the camera I was looking at would have met most of my needs,
I couldn't hold it for long periods of time, because I would get cramp in my fingers.
So I had to look at others.

Ideally the one you decide on, will last you for many years to come. :thumb:

Good luck.
 
Having been a Canon user I was influenced by having EOS gear before going digital. the 350D is more comfortable to use that the 300D but with any of them be suspicious of the bundled lenses as they are manufacured to a price. I noticed the difference moving to Sigma but would still like a Canon L lens - dream on! Miss my 1.4 50mm on the A! which would make a nice 80mm portrait on the 350D.

Go for what feels right in your and a viewfinder that suits - important if like me you wear glasses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top