Posted by Larry Fischer on October 24, 2012 at 8:50 AM
I was looking for a screw to repair an old lens yesterday at a local photo shop. I engaged in a friendly talk with one of the old-time employees and ended up looking at his photos.
I was blown away with clarity and edges contained within the photo. He related that the D90 had a sensor and program that did not alter the photo. Cameras by Nikon since then apparently tweak the photo slightly. He basically has never purchased another camera based on that alone.
Of course lenses make a difference. He basically used Tamron [sp?].
I understand the D800e has no anti-aliasing filter and makes me ask will this begin to duplicate the D90 performance in a larger format sensor.
My last thought: It would appear that as far as sharpness photographers have been placed in a disadvantage based on a decision that, for me as an fairly non-technical person, makes me wonder why?
His photos were knockouts, and he did most of his processing in camera.... landscapes, people, weather, etc. .... go figure.
Observations appreciated. I know nothing but the D300 and D700 performance. How do they compare with the D90?
the fisch
Posted by Carol Hyman on October 24, 2012 at 12:20 PM
Larry, I found this article. I'm sure there are many more.
Posted by David Bostedo on October 24, 2012 at 5:22 PM
He related that the D90 had a sensor and program that did not alter the photo. Cameras by Nikon since then apparently tweak the photo slightly.
Larry - That statement makes almost no sense to me. Raw is raw, and different sensors do behave slightly differently. But anyone who says Nikon did something to improve the D90 raw data is just guessing (and pretty wildly at that).
The D90 is very good, but there's no reason it would be better than newer sensors of the same class. There is some variation in anti-aliasing filter "strength" that could contribute to one camera model being sharper than another, but that's a different matter, as good sharpening technique can mostly reduce this difference to where it's not noticeable. "Weaker" does not mean "none" in that case.
His photos were knockouts, and he did most of his processing in camera.... landscapes, people, weather, etc. .... go figure.
Do you mean he just shot JPG? In that case, I'd say that the D90 JPG engine is very good. Remember, if you're doing Raw processing, you're doing the same things that the camera does to produce its JPGs. And since Nikon would be intimately familiar with the sensor data, it stands to reason that it would produce very good JPGs. Perhaps the team that developed the D90 algorithms was particularly good.
And keep in mind that Raw processing doesn't necessarily produce better images than the camera's own JPG; I've definitely had cases where I couldn't produce a file I liked as much as the cameras JPG.
One last note : You have to be careful that when you say the images were sharper - sometimes that's a matter of subject matter, exposure, and post-processing; Those things may make a photo be interpreted as "sharper" when it's really a matter of contrasts and good exposure control. It's not necessarily a sharper camera - it might have just been better used with better processing!
Posted by Bill Maile on October 25, 2012 at 2:17 AM
D90 rocks for the price! ;) I'll leave it to others to get into your real questions. lol.
Posted by Larry Fischer on October 25, 2012 at 8:03 AM
Nikon makes soooo many camera models I may have the wrong number; will check today.
I don't know if Danny was shooting RAW. He did processing 'in camera'. He did say Nikon tweaked future cameras
to automatically take away sharpness to a slight degree; whatever camera he was using did not.
And I was looking at his BEST photos on his I-Pad; maybe my best photos might not look so bad stacked end-to-end....??
Of recent times I think I keep my photos too bright trying to show shadow detail. Playing around I think dropping the brightness does make contrast and perhaps the appearance of sharpness. Dark shadows, if they were supposed to be dark, may not be a bad thing....
To congtinue, I presume moire was the issue such as some say is possible with the D800e.
And I've seen on one reputable website that Nikon's CaptureNX2 automatically reduces sharpness a bit and it was suggested
to "turn off" that feature. [I can't find the turn-off feature on my Capture NX2].
I'm using CaptureOne Pro for my RAW processing followed by Capture NX2.
So, appreciate the comments and will call Danny today. He's a very long-time employee at the last surviving camera store in Topeka.
I don't know how much he knows but I would presume he knows something that I did not relate correctly.
Back to you soon.
the fisch
Posted by Larry Fischer on October 25, 2012 at 10:48 AM
OK, how about a Nikon D70? with the same comments.
Danny was not working today but he said Danny's current camera is a D300S and his previous camera was a D70.
Sensor issues with the D70 instead of what I wrote with the D90?
Does that change anyone's answers?
the fisch
Posted by Larry Fischer on October 25, 2012 at 11:00 AM
My quick research... large pixels....
FYI and does this affect anything I saw on my original post?
The CCD sensor the D70 uses is unique. It's labeled a Sony ICX453AK on the back. It's not one of the Sony-produced 6-megapixel sensors that the D100, Pentax *ist, and other cameras have started using (ICX413AK), though it ise derived from the same technology. The D70 sensor consists of a 3008 x 2000 array, and it has massive (compared to consumer cameras such as the Coolpix) 7 micron pixels. That's just one reason why the D70 can produce 12-bit RGB images with rich color and low noise. Like virtually all digital cameras, a filter array is placed over the D70's CCD. This filter has four purposes:
Provides the Bayer pattern. The Bayer pattern is named after the Kodak engineer who invented it. Basically, this is a set of color filters that results in an alternating pattern of RG (on odd-numbered rows) and GB (on even-numbered rows) pixels. The final image is rebuilt by interpolating the actual pixel values at each position.
Filters out infrared. CCDs are sensitive to infrared light, and to keep infrared energy from affecting image quality, most (but not all) of this light is filtered out.
Realigns the light. CCDs don't like light hitting them at any angle other than 90 degrees, so the filter also focuses the light rays from the lens directly into the sensors using a set of what are called microlenses.
Provides a low-pass anti-aliasing filter. Digital sampling is subject to color fringing (artifacts) when high frequency detail in a scene approaches that of the sensor pitch.
http://www.bythom.com/d70review.htm
So are these unique to the D70 or present in later models also? Other improvements on more modern cameras better, worse, same?
the fisch
Posted by David Bostedo on October 25, 2012 at 12:55 PM
None of that is unique to the D70 Larry. (Keep in mind that when Thom Hogan is saying that it's a unique sensor, he just means it's a part number not used in other cameras. That doesn't mean that it's better or worse, or even really much different; It's just a different part number.)
All camera sensors are either CCD (an older process technology type) or CMOS (newer process that enables things like live view and video). The D90 sensor is a CMOS. All cameras also have several layers on top of them :
-- Most sensors have a Bayer array (the only exceptions I can think of are the monochrome Leica M9, and any of the Sigma cameras that use Foveon sensors)
-- CCD sensors have IR filters. CMOS tends to be less sensitive to infrared, but may still have a filter for that.
-- Microlenses right on the silicon are usually used now to align/gather light rather than a filter; and big improvements have been made there in the last few years
-- All camera sensors except for the Foveon, Leica M#, and Nikon D800E have anti-aliasing filters. These CAN be different strengths, but as I said above, there's usually a minor effect to having a strong or a weak filter.
The D90 came out in late 2008, and was very very well regarded at the time. But that's about 4 years ago now, and with the recent strides made in sensor technology, there's no reason to think that more recent sensors aren't better in several ways (low light performance, noise patterning, dynamic range, etc.)
I'm not certain the same can be said for the image processing pipeline, so, again, it's possible that the JPG tuning in the D90 is particularly good.
If you want to see a comparison between the D90 and 2 newer Nikon sensors, this is a good one :
That site is pretty technical and can possibly be mis-interpreted if you don't know what you're looking at. But the APS-C cameras from Nikon have definitely been getting better.
Discussion
7 repliesI was blown away with clarity and edges contained within the photo. He related that the D90 had a sensor and program that did not alter the photo. Cameras by Nikon since then apparently tweak the photo slightly. He basically has never purchased another camera based on that alone.
Of course lenses make a difference. He basically used Tamron [sp?].
I understand the D800e has no anti-aliasing filter and makes me ask will this begin to duplicate the D90 performance in a larger format sensor.
My last thought: It would appear that as far as sharpness photographers have been placed in a disadvantage based on a decision that, for me as an fairly non-technical person, makes me wonder why?
His photos were knockouts, and he did most of his processing in camera.... landscapes, people, weather, etc. .... go figure.
Observations appreciated. I know nothing but the D300 and D700 performance. How do they compare with the D90?
the fisch
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D800-vs-Nikon_D90
Larry - That statement makes almost no sense to me. Raw is raw, and different sensors do behave slightly differently. But anyone who says Nikon did something to improve the D90 raw data is just guessing (and pretty wildly at that).
The D90 is very good, but there's no reason it would be better than newer sensors of the same class. There is some variation in anti-aliasing filter "strength" that could contribute to one camera model being sharper than another, but that's a different matter, as good sharpening technique can mostly reduce this difference to where it's not noticeable. "Weaker" does not mean "none" in that case.
Do you mean he just shot JPG? In that case, I'd say that the D90 JPG engine is very good. Remember, if you're doing Raw processing, you're doing the same things that the camera does to produce its JPGs. And since Nikon would be intimately familiar with the sensor data, it stands to reason that it would produce very good JPGs. Perhaps the team that developed the D90 algorithms was particularly good.
And keep in mind that Raw processing doesn't necessarily produce better images than the camera's own JPG; I've definitely had cases where I couldn't produce a file I liked as much as the cameras JPG.
One last note : You have to be careful that when you say the images were sharper - sometimes that's a matter of subject matter, exposure, and post-processing; Those things may make a photo be interpreted as "sharper" when it's really a matter of contrasts and good exposure control. It's not necessarily a sharper camera - it might have just been better used with better processing!
I don't know if Danny was shooting RAW. He did processing 'in camera'. He did say Nikon tweaked future cameras
to automatically take away sharpness to a slight degree; whatever camera he was using did not.
And I was looking at his BEST photos on his I-Pad; maybe my best photos might not look so bad stacked end-to-end....??
Of recent times I think I keep my photos too bright trying to show shadow detail. Playing around I think dropping the brightness does make contrast and perhaps the appearance of sharpness. Dark shadows, if they were supposed to be dark, may not be a bad thing....
To congtinue, I presume moire was the issue such as some say is possible with the D800e.
And I've seen on one reputable website that Nikon's CaptureNX2 automatically reduces sharpness a bit and it was suggested
to "turn off" that feature. [I can't find the turn-off feature on my Capture NX2].
I'm using CaptureOne Pro for my RAW processing followed by Capture NX2.
So, appreciate the comments and will call Danny today. He's a very long-time employee at the last surviving camera store in Topeka.
I don't know how much he knows but I would presume he knows something that I did not relate correctly.
Back to you soon.
the fisch
Danny was not working today but he said Danny's current camera is a D300S and his previous camera was a D70.
Sensor issues with the D70 instead of what I wrote with the D90?
Does that change anyone's answers?
the fisch
FYI and does this affect anything I saw on my original post?
The CCD sensor the D70 uses is unique. It's labeled a Sony ICX453AK on the back. It's not one of the Sony-produced 6-megapixel sensors that the D100, Pentax *ist, and other cameras have started using (ICX413AK), though it ise derived from the same technology. The D70 sensor consists of a 3008 x 2000 array, and it has massive (compared to consumer cameras such as the Coolpix) 7 micron pixels. That's just one reason why the D70 can produce 12-bit RGB images with rich color and low noise. Like virtually all digital cameras, a filter array is placed over the D70's CCD. This filter has four purposes:
Provides the Bayer pattern. The Bayer pattern is named after the Kodak engineer who invented it. Basically, this is a set of color filters that results in an alternating pattern of RG (on odd-numbered rows) and GB (on even-numbered rows) pixels. The final image is rebuilt by interpolating the actual pixel values at each position.
Filters out infrared. CCDs are sensitive to infrared light, and to keep infrared energy from affecting image quality, most (but not all) of this light is filtered out.
Realigns the light. CCDs don't like light hitting them at any angle other than 90 degrees, so the filter also focuses the light rays from the lens directly into the sensors using a set of what are called microlenses.
Provides a low-pass anti-aliasing filter. Digital sampling is subject to color fringing (artifacts) when high frequency detail in a scene approaches that of the sensor pitch.
http://www.bythom.com/d70review.htm
So are these unique to the D70 or present in later models also? Other improvements on more modern cameras better, worse, same?
the fisch
All camera sensors are either CCD (an older process technology type) or CMOS (newer process that enables things like live view and video). The D90 sensor is a CMOS. All cameras also have several layers on top of them :
-- Most sensors have a Bayer array (the only exceptions I can think of are the monochrome Leica M9, and any of the Sigma cameras that use Foveon sensors)
-- CCD sensors have IR filters. CMOS tends to be less sensitive to infrared, but may still have a filter for that.
-- Microlenses right on the silicon are usually used now to align/gather light rather than a filter; and big improvements have been made there in the last few years
-- All camera sensors except for the Foveon, Leica M#, and Nikon D800E have anti-aliasing filters. These CAN be different strengths, but as I said above, there's usually a minor effect to having a strong or a weak filter.
The D90 came out in late 2008, and was very very well regarded at the time. But that's about 4 years ago now, and with the recent strides made in sensor technology, there's no reason to think that more recent sensors aren't better in several ways (low light performance, noise patterning, dynamic range, etc.)
I'm not certain the same can be said for the image processing pipeline, so, again, it's possible that the JPG tuning in the D90 is particularly good.
If you want to see a comparison between the D90 and 2 newer Nikon sensors, this is a good one :
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/801|0/%28brand%29/Nikon/%28appareil2%29/680|0/%28brand2%29/Nikon/%28appareil3%29/439|0/%28brand3%29/Nikon
That site is pretty technical and can possibly be mis-interpreted if you don't know what you're looking at. But the APS-C cameras from Nikon have definitely been getting better.