Nikon d850 "in development"

ryanyboy said:
I would expect the 100% crop to look better than that to be honest Mike. Although I appreciate the forum might be doing strange things to it.
Click to expand...
There’s not a huge amount of light on the woman’s face though so that would affect sharpness. Plus F11 is in diffraction territory.
 
ryanyboy said:
I would expect the 100% crop to look better than that to be honest Mike. Although I appreciate the forum might be doing strange things to it.
Click to expand...
Agreed looks pretty soft. It’s strange as this forum seems to over sharpen my images yet others suffer from if softening the images :confused:
 
mike weeks said:
Might want to read this, f11 and diffraction unlikely and if face had more light then the whites of the scarve would burn out, https://fstoppers.com/studio/fstopp...raction-and-when-does-diffraction-happen-6022

Mike
Click to expand...
I’m not criticising the image Mike but as you know yourself if you shoot a model with flash and plenty of light you get a very crisp result. If you shoot a black cat in a coal hole at night regardless of lens and camera combo it ain’t ever going to look sharp.

Of course diffraction isn’t going to have a major role but yes technically the men’s will be diffracting hence why I mentioned it. I was in two minds, wish I hannt now!
 
Brazo said:
There’s not a huge amount of light on the woman’s face though so that would affect sharpness. Plus F11 is in diffraction territory.
Click to expand...

That’s not right, you can focus on a subject even in pitch dark from the camera (focal plane mark) to the subject manually if you know the subject distance. That will not effect the subject sharpness.
 
first impressions are that this is an amazing camera. Loving the low light focusing. And silent shooting live view is a winner (although i wish it were as fast to focus in live view as my olympus omd1 mirrorless!) It's focusing better than my d810, especially on the outer points. I've had a good play with it and i've decided i will be taking it to the wedding tomorrow - although i might use it sporadically for the less pressure shots so to speak, as i haven't had enough time to fully get used to it. I shoot the vast majority of the time with single point AF using CAF and back button focus any way, and my tests have proved it's very good in this regards. Feels fantastic in the hand with an 85 1.4g :D
 
Blank_Canvas said:
That’s not right, you can focus on a subject even in pitch dark from the camera (focal plane mark) to the subject manually if you know the subject distance. That will not effect the subject sharpness.
Click to expand...

Your confusing focusing with sharpness.

Compare for yourself. Shoot a face with flash and then shoot that same face in the dark without flash. See which one appears sharper.

The first you’ll be able to see every eyelash.
The second will be a smudge!
 
Last edited:
Brazo said:
Your confusing focusing with sharpness.

Compare for yourself. Shoot a face with flash and then shoot that same face in the dark without flash. See which one appears sharper.

The first you’ll be able to see every eyelash.
The second will be a smudge!
Click to expand...

No confusion. I was talking, in focus and tack sharp by using the Focal Plane Mark (FPM) to the measured subject distance. That’s the little symbol on the pentaprism which looks a bit like the London Underground symbol It doesn’t matter if you add a light source or not, the addition of the flash is a secondary action, if you rely on this alone on automatic then you can expect to get an inferior result. It’s a technique used in forensic photography and also used by a number of serious macro photographers but can be applied to any other shooting situation.
 
Last edited:
mike weeks said:
Might want to read this, f11 and diffraction unlikely and if face had more light then the whites of the scarve would burn out, https://fstoppers.com/studio/fstopp...raction-and-when-does-diffraction-happen-6022

Mike
Click to expand...
Diffraction is generally preventing an increase in resolution/sharpness at apertures smaller than ~ f/6.3 with the D850; and beyond ~ f/11 there will be a decrease in resolution of fine details (diffraction limited). But it does not prevent an increase in resolution/sharpness for larger details (DOF) as you continue to stop down, nor does it prevent an increase in sharpness due to correcting optical errors (i.e. between f/5.6 and f/11). BTW, this is as it relates to the sensor... it can change depending upon display size/viewing conditions.

Blank_Canvas said:
That’s not right, you can focus on a subject even in pitch dark from the camera (focal plane mark) to the subject manually if you know the subject distance. That will not effect the subject sharpness.
Click to expand...
Perceived sharpness is much less about resolution/detail than it is about contrast... and contrast requires light.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
No confusion. I was talking, in focus and tack sharp by using the Focal Plane Mark (FPM) to the measured subject distance. That’s the little symbol on the pentaprism which looks a bit like the London Underground symbol It doesn’t matter if you add a light source or not, the addition of the flash is a secondary action, if you rely on this alone on automatic then you can expect to get an inferior result. It’s a technique used in forensic photography and also used by a number of serious macro photographers but can be applied to any other shooting situation.
Click to expand...
Well I wasn’t talking about focus so yes your confused.

By all means quote the word focus in one of my Initial posts!
 
Last edited:
Brazo said:
I’m not criticising the image Mike but as you know yourself if you shoot a model with flash and plenty of light you get a very crisp result.
Click to expand...

Never found a model yet that would rather have a bitingly sharp face, warts and all (not that she has any) over smooth skin, so look at the fine hairs on the rear right collar or texture in the scarve

Mike
 
mike weeks said:
Never found a model yet that would rather have a bitingly sharp face, warts and all (not that she has any) over smooth skin, so look at the fine hairs on the rear right collar or texture in the scarve

Mike
Click to expand...
TBH Mike even the hairs or scarf texture isn't sparkling, can't help think the upload's crushing the quality as the whole image looks on the soft side to me.
 
Brazo said:
Well I wasn’t talking about focus so yes your confused.

By all means quote the word focus in one of my Initial posts!
Click to expand...

You were talking about ‘sharpness’ right? Which means that the subject is in focus. If the image is ‘sharp’ it’s not out of focus is it.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
You were talking about ‘sharpness’ right? Which means that the subject is in focus. If the image is ‘sharp’ it’s not out of focus is it.
Click to expand...
No mate they are two different things.

It’s quite possible to have an image in focus that isn’t as sharp as another that is in focus. This could be Lens dependant or lighting dependant. Lighting plays such a big role in sharpness but is overlooked by so many photographers. A kit lens with a flash will give sharper results than the best prime in poor light levels.
 
I can see the skin and the tiny dimples. And I keep cleaning the screen thinking I might be seeing dust. Whatever...
 
Brazo said:
No mate they are two different things.

It’s quite possible to have an image in focus that isn’t as sharp as another that is in focus. This could be Lens dependant or lighting dependant. Lighting plays such a big role in sharpness but is overlooked by so many photographers. A kit lens with a flash will give sharper results than the best prime in poor light levels.
Click to expand...

I think we are getting into semantics now and a bit of knowledge creep but I know where you are coming from. Lots of factors come in to play here.
 
TLR-330 said:
I can see the skin and the tiny dimples. And I keep cleaning the screen thinking I might be seeing dust. Whatever...
Click to expand...
What browser are you using, maybe it's browser specific?
 
snerkler said:
What browser are you using, maybe it's browser specific?
Click to expand...
Firefox current version, win7 pro, Lenovo L530 running at 1600x900 resolution. Since your question, I downloaded the image and used Nikon's View NXi and I am looking at the image at 100%. The skin I looked at is from the corner of the lips down to the bottom of the chin and back to the head gear she is wearing (a rectangle). I can see her skin. I can see that in the same rectangle there are some of her hair I can see there are hair ... I really do not know how much sharper I would expect to see things.

Another strand, first time I peeped that much in a photo, the light reflection in her left eye, If I get really close to the screen with the reading part of my varifocals I can see the pixelation of my screen. So my glasses work.

Not sure if it helps.
 
Looking at the larger image my impression is that the crop is not from the point of focus, that appears to be at the center of the frame IMO. But being that it was 20mm f/11 it is well w/in the DOF.
 
markyboy.1967 said:
Im split between buying one or not. I like the idea of a smaller body but like the 9 fps as well. I know i wont be bothered taking it on or off but have the D4s for the high frame rate so not sure whether to buy a grip or not tet.
Click to expand...

Coming from the D810 I am more than happy with the 7 fps increase over 5 as is it does make a difference.

Having to unless like you already owning the D4S or D5 could not justify the investment of having to buy the £££££ D5 battery and charger (although there are third party D4/5 chargers) on top of the already expensive grip
 
markyboy.1967 said:
It may have been mentioned before but what is actually the buffer like as I’m seeing several are only getting 21 shots before the camera slows down which is a big drop from the quoted 51 shots.
Click to expand...

That video which started all the rumours was a farce a certain someone did? He used uncompressed raw which are 100mb a file and then he did compressed but also writing to a SD card which obviously will slow the system down writing to 2 cards

There now a few that have done as it should be 14bit compressed lossless which are about 60mb a file and getting near to as advertised?

I never got near that many with wildlife, it would have be something special to fire 40-50 shots off haha! But I have done a few bursts of action shots and it never slowed down where the D810 you had think about your shots with the smaller buffer
 
Has anyone tried this with the Tamron 150-600mm yet?
 
Now managed to get a one off stonking deal on a brand new unopened D850 through a friend so it should be with me soon. Just noticed that the prices of XQD cards has gone up for the faster cards, mostly these things come down in price( i have a few already for my D4s) so whats happened to the prices?
 
So XQD cards are in a bizarre and problematic limbo at the moment, and nobody really has a clue what's going on.

Lexar have been in all sorts of trouble, and the sony ones appear in short supply at the moment too. Amazon UK doesn't appear to have ANY.

It appears that there is currently a global shortage, but Lexar are working on it https://petapixel.com/2017/11/02/lexar-will-keep-making-xqd-memory-cards-cfexpress-future/

Apparently a name licensing issue means that there's a huge supply of xqd cards somewhere in a warehouse that can't be passed to retailers pending that licensing to be sorted out. https://fstoppers.com/gear/future-x...ing-hoodman-may-start-cfexpress-future-201911

All a mess.
 
Last edited:
itsdavedotnet said:
So XQD cards are in a bizarre and problematic limbo at the moment, and nobody really has a clue what's going on.

Lexar have been in all sorts of trouble, and the sony ones appear in short supply at the moment too. Amazon UK doesn't appear to have ANY.

It appears that there is currently a global shortage, but Lexar are working on it https://petapixel.com/2017/11/02/lexar-will-keep-making-xqd-memory-cards-cfexpress-future/

Apparently a name licensing issue means that there's a huge supply of xqd cards somewhere in a warehouse that can't be passed to retailers pending that licensing to be sorted out. https://fstoppers.com/gear/future-x...ing-hoodman-may-start-cfexpress-future-201911

All a mess.
Click to expand...

Cheers all of which means its the public who suffer in the mean time..looks like my backup xqd card for the d4s will be getting used in the D850 till supply outdoes demand.
 
Last edited:
markyboy.1967 said:
One last question on XQD cards-on average how many images( full res) should we expect from the D850, this will give me an idea if i need to but another 64gig or go for a 128 gig card
Click to expand...
just formatted a card, the camera remaining counter guesses at 633 14bit raws on a 64gb card, actual number slightly above that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top