Nikon D600 vs. Nikon D7100 comparison (daylight)

While I'm still analyzing the D600 and D7100 low light shots, here are more comparison shots between the D600 and D7100, this time in daylight.  For this test, I used the Sigma 35 1.4 on the D7100 and the Tamron 28-75 (at around 52mm) on the D600.  I know, your first reaction is that it's not a fair comparison because the Sigma is considered one of the sharpest lenses, whereas the Tamron is sharp in the center but it's not in the same league.



Nonetheless, I believe the "perceptual megapixels" of the two combinations is probably very close:
Nikon D600 + Tamron 28-75 = 12 Pmp.
Nikon D7000 + Sigma 35 1.4 = 11 Pmp.
Nikon D7100 + Sigma 35 1.4 = ?? Pmp.  My guess is it's not much higher than 11 (see why here -- under "Sharpness").

To keep the comparison more fair, I suggest looking primarily at the center area of each shot (the Tamron loses sharpness as you move toward the edges and corners).

Regarding the shooting conditions, the sky was cloudy and the sun was moving in and out of the clouds, hence the difference in exposures.  BTW you'll notice in the EXIF that the D7100 files are from the "D5200".  That's because I had to change the metadata to import them into Lightroom (see here).

Anyway here are the shots (full resolution available):

SET 1:

d7100

d600



SET 2:


d7100

d600

SET 3:


d7100

d600

SET 4:


d7100

d600

SET 5:

d7100

d600

OBSERVATIONS:
Sharpness.  To me, the sharpness looks about evenly matched.  This is not expected for an APS-C camera, which usually is less sharp than a full frame camera, all other factors being equal (see here). Of course, the lens makes a huge difference here.  If I had used a better lens on the D600, such as the Nikon 24-70, the D600 shot would have looked sharper (the Tamron is nowhere close to maximizing the D600's sensor).

Tonality.  The tonality is quite different between these two cameras.  The highlights on the D7100 are brighter and the shadows in the D600 are deeper, even on shots with identical exposures.  Initially I thought it could be the change in light conditions, but the pattern is very consistent and the sharpness of the shadows are identical which implies that the light conditions were the same.  Plus, if it's due to the change in light conditions, I would think that the D7100 shot sometimes shows the reverse pattern. But nope - the tonality is consistent in these shots.

I am wondering if this means that the D7100's tonal curve has a longer, softer shoulder (like the Fuji S5 - reviewed here), a quality which I like because it makes the shot more similar to that of negative film.  By contrast, the D600's tone curve is known to have almost no shoulder (see DPReview's analysis here) even when Active D-Lighting is turned on.  In other words, with the D600, you will see highlights disappear suddenly when they exceed the sensor's highlight range.  If indeed the D7100 has a longer shoulder, then highlight rolloff will be smoother and it will not be very obvious when the highlight has disappeared.

Indeed, that appears to be the case.  If you look at Set 2, specifically at the sunlit portion of the top of the boat, the D7100 looks like it has more delicate and natural-looking highlights.  (See the similarity to the Fuji S5's rendering of the porcelain bowl in our review here.)  In part 2 of my D7100 review, you'll see this as well in shots of people.

To some extent either shot can be made to look more similar to the other (as long as the highlights are not blown during capture), but it is interesting to see the cameras' natural tendencies.

RELATED POSTS
Nikon D7100 Hands-On Real World User Review
Importing D7100 Raw Files Into Lightroom
Nikon D7100 Low Light Teaser
Nikon D7100 FAQ and Helpful Links

Nikon D7100 Shadow Recovery
Nikon D7100 Real World Dynamic Range
Nikon D5200 and D7100 Band-Aid: Solutions for Banding
Sample of D7100 banding in a real world shot

Read More

Cathedral of Our Lady of Angels

Last year, I had a chance to visit the cathedral of Los Angeles, the Cathedral of Our Lady of Angels, which has amazing post-modern architecture.  Here are some photos I took (click on any photo for a higher-res version).

The windows are made of alabaster

Those are not paintings... they're tapestries! (i.e. they're woven, not painted)

The cathedral's park / playground

EQUIPMENT USED
Nikon D3 (reviewed here)
Tokina 10-17 Fisheye (reviewed here) Note: the Tokina 10-17 is designed for APS-C cameras but can be used on full frame at 14.5mm or longer.
Fuji S5 Pro (reviewed here)
Tokina 11-16 2.8 (reviewed here)

Read More

Nikon D600 vs. Fuji S5 Pro highlight dynamic range

Many recent DSLRs from Nikon have been tested to show a very wide highlight range.  For example, DPReview reports that the Nikon D800 has as much as 5 stops highlight range with Active D-Lighting at Extra High.

The D600 looks to have promising highlight range.  The D600 has been tested by DXO to have a dynamic range similar to that of the D800.  In my own testing, the D600 also appears to have a fairly wide highlight range, based on the latitude I have seen for recovering highlights.

In this post, I compare the highlight dynamic range of the Nikon D600 with that of the Fuji S5 Pro, a unique DSLR that has unparalleled highlight range.  I wanted to see whether the Nikon D600 has met or even surpassed the S5's highlight dynamic range.

TEST

I setup several objects of varying degrees of specularity (reflectiveness) indoors.  I prepared three hotshoe flashes - one SB-800 on-camera acting as a master, another SB-800 as a slave, and a YN-565 as a second slave.  All flashes were firing at the same manual power level, bounced toward the ceiling.  I then took shots of the objects at these settings:

- flash only at 1/4 power

- flash only at 1/2 power

- flash only at full power

- full power flash + ambient normally exposed

- full power flash + ambient +1 exposure

All shots were taken at base ISO (100 for both the D600 and the S5) in raw, converted to DNG for processing in Lightroom 4.

NOTE:  In the case of the D600, there is no raw support yet from Adobe so I used the workaround of tricking Lightroom into thinking that the D600 files were from a Nikon D4.  Blogged here.  The resulting files are cropped.  Not only that, the crop is from the top left corner therefore the cameras' perspectives are slightly different.  Moreover, no one knows whether the D600 files with true raw support will be the same or better than these "fake" D600 DNG files.

FUJI S5 RESULTS

First, I took a baseline shot that was deliberately underexposed so that it would fall within the dynamic range of both cameras.  I removed the ambient (100 ISO, 1/200, f/5.6), and fired all three flashes at 1/4 power.

As you can see, detail is visible everywhere.  For example, even the specular highlights of the ribbons are not clipped - they have color.  The metal disc held by the bear has visible detail even with the specular highlight.

Having established a baseline, I then took the progressively brighter shots.  I first examined the brightest shot:

I applied a correction of -3EV to make it easier to observe whether the detail was retained:

It appears that the S5 was able to retain detail everywhere.  I was not able to exceed the S5's highlight range with this test.

D600 RESULTS
As with the S5, I took 5 test shots.  In the first two shots, the D600 clearly was able to retain all detail.

I took a look at the middle shot (flash only at full power):

I applied a -3EV correction to make the details in the specular highlights more observable:

It appears all detail was retained, though the specular highlight of the red ribbon seems almost ready to lose color.

I took a look a the fourth shot.

With a -4EV correction:

It looks like a little detail was lost in the metal disc, in the red ribbon's specular highlights, and above the bear's nose and left paw (camera right):

I also looked at the fifth shot.  As expected, a little more detail was lost:

ACTIVE D-LIGHTING
I also tested whether Active D-Lighting would improve the D600's result.  Note: the slave flash positions got moved slightly by accident.  Anyway, here is the 5th shot with Active D-Lighting set to Extra High:

With the same correction applied above:

It appears to have more detail than the 5th shot above.  Though not as good as the 3rd shot, the ADL might even be better than the 4th shot, though there is a lot of lost detail above the bear's nose.  Because the flash positions got moved I can't be absolutely certain.  My son was pulling me away to play with me before I could re-run the tests for ADL.

CONCLUSION:
Clearly, the aging Fuji S5 Pro still has substantially more highlight range than the Nikon D600.  Because I was not able to reach the S5's limits, I can't say exactly how much better the S5 Pro's highlight range is compared to the D600.  Without Active D-Lighting, the S5's highlight range advantage over the D600 appears to be well over 1 stop.  With Active D-Lighting at Extra-High, the S5's highlight advantage is reduced but I couldn't say for sure by how much.

Please recall the flaws I mentioned at the beginning.  I plan to retest this when the D600 gains real raw support, and this time I will try harder to find the S5's limit, and will test ADL more rigorously.

Read More

A Lighting Opportunity You Shouldn't Miss

The spot above shows one of my favorite kinds of photo opportunities.  It allows me to get dramatic lighting effortlessly.  Hit the jump for a few samples.

BACKLIGHTING
I love backlighting because it emphasizes the subjects and allows them to stand out from the background.  The kind of backlighting I like best for this purpose is one where the light is not directly behind the subject, but is instead above and behind the subject (sometimes called separation light or shoulder light).

To get that kind of light with flash normally requires using at least a tall light stand, if not a boom stand (so that the light stand won't be visible in the shot), so it's not often that I have the chance to shoot with it.

One of the few occasions when I was able to add separation light to a casual portrait.
(Funny how fat I was back then.  Thank goodness for Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu!)

Fortunately, sometimes nature does the work for us.  When the sun is at a sufficiently low angle (not directly overhead), I often position the subject to use the sun as backlight.

The effect is most noticeable when there is a dark background, which makes the separation light prominent.  That's why I like areas like the spot at the beginning of the story.  It is a backlit area next to a shaded area.  As a further bonus, the dark background tends to reduce the dynamic range of the scene (compared to a backlit shot without a shade).  Finally, if the backlit area is a light-toned surface such as concrete, it can reflect light into the subject, adding a bit of fill.  In short, instant studio-style lighting, without any effort at all.

On this particular morning, it was a "costume day" at our kids' school, and my wife asked me to take a shot of the kids.  I looked out at the backyard, saw the shaded and backlit area and did an internal fist pump. :)  I chose to use the Fuji S5 and Sigma 50-150.

To position the subject, I have the subject in the shaded area, facing away from the light, close to the sunlit portion so that they're casting a shadow.  The part of the subject that is casting a shadow will be the part that has a separation light.  It could be the whole subject, or just the head, or anywhere in between.  (BTW the light doesn't have to be behind the subject.  It can be at an angle for effect.)  And here's what that light did for my shot:

When the subject has hair with volume (e.g. frizzy or curly hair), or is wearing something translucent, then the effect is even better.

EXPOSURE
One challenge with backlit shots like this is that a camera may be fooled into underexposure.  The correct exposure will depend on your camera and your intent.  Some cameras will seriously underexpose backlit shots, while others will do fine.  In this case, I was using the Fuji S5, which has a tendency to underexpose.  With that tendency in mind, I set the exposure compensation at +1.3EV but when I processed the shot, I found that I had to add another +0.85EV.

FLARE
Something else to watch out for with a strong backlight is flare.  Flare can reduce the contrast of the image, making it look washed-out.  Depending on your lens, you may also see ghosting.  To minimize these issues, use a lens hood (or use your hand to shade your lens) and if you have a choice, consider using a longer focal length.  Alternatively, instead of avoiding flare, you can allow flare into the shot for effect.

RELATED POSTS
Using Midday Sunlight
Turnabout is Fair Play
Fill Flash: Summer Pool Party

--

Happy Labor Day and have a great weekend!

(BTW, did you notice anything different about the post-processing of these shots?  That will be something I will discuss soon.)

Read More

Choosing the Exposure for Dynamic Range

Over the weekend, we visited Knott's Berry Farm, one of the first theme parks in the U.S.  What I like about Knott's is that the lines are much shorter than those of Disneyland therefore we get to experience more rides within the same amount of time.  I also think Knott's has a more interesting variety of rides for young children like our 5-year old, and has more thrill rides (though not as many as Magic Mountain).  Although the production value is not as high as that of Disneyland, it is still quite high.

During our visit the heat was intense, reaching 95°F (35°C), just one degree below the all-time record of 96 for that area, and 10 degrees hotter than the average for this time of the year.  With the sun blazing overhead, the dynamic range was very wide.  I used two different exposure strategies to deal with the dynamic range.

PROTECTING HIGHLIGHTS
When the ambient is very bright, it is very easy to exceed the highlight range of a digital camera and blow the highlights.  I used to not care so much about it myself.  In the shot below, you can see that the highlights from the sunlight-as-kicker have no detail at all.

However, when I started learning about shooting film, I became more attentive to highlights. With print film (negative film) I have tremendous latitude for exposing highlights, and it's almost impossible to blow highlights.  With digital, once a certain threshold of light is reached, the sensor can't record any more details, and all I suddenly get is white (i.e. blown highlights).  Blown highlights are therefore one indicator that the image was shot digitally.

(BTW there's nothing wrong per se with looking digital.  It's just a personal preference.  I grew up during a time when digital video was used mostly for lower-budget movies and shows.)

On this occasion I was using two cameras, the Fuji S5 Pro and the Nikon D90.  They have different amounts of shadow range and highlight range therefore I used different exposure strategies.  In the shots below, I took some test shots to show the effect of the exposure strategies.  For the S5, I took a baseline shot using its 'standard' dynamic range mode, and another shot at the same exposure but this time activating its full 400% dynamic range (you can ignore the absence of a highlight on the neck of the baseline shot -- the sun was going down and a shadow fell on the cheek and neck of the mannequin head).  I also took a pair of shots with the Nikon D90: first a baseline shot with a normal exposure, and a second shot that was deliberately underexposed by two stops.  BTW these were at ISO 400, the widest dynamic range for the D90.

In postprocessing I adjusted the shots to recover the highlights and in the case of the underexposed D90 shot, to normalize the exposure as well.  Here is the result:

With the S5's standard mode, there was almost no highlight recovered.  Conversely, with the 400% dynamic range mode, all highlights were fully recovered.  There was not a single pixel that was blown.

With the D90's normal exposure, I was able to recover a few of the highlights but you can see large patches that were blown (the temple, cheekbone and the entire side of the neck).  However, with the deliberately underexposed shot, most of the highlights could be recovered.  There is only a patch of lost highlight near the base of the neck.  

Full resolution S5 400% DR with adjustment (click to download)

Full resolution D90 -2EV with adjustment (click to download)

The downside of this deliberate underexposure is the greater amount of noise in the midtone and shadow areas (after all, I needed to increase exposure 2 stops in postprocessing to compensate for the underexposure).  For me, I usually prefer having extra noise (and using noise reduction) than losing relevant highlights.

---

Back to Knott's Berry Farm.  The sky was cloudless for most of the afternoon, so with the S5, I used manual exposure and set the exposure for the shadow.  Here's a sample shot, straight-out-of-the-cam:

Looking only at the LCD screen, the bright patch of pavement might seem worrying (IIRC it was blinking), but I was confident that most, if not all, of the highlights would be recoverable with the S5, so I concerned myself with getting an adequate exposure of shadow areas to minimize noise.

And here's the adjusted shot (not a single pixel was lost).

As for the Nikon D90, I set the exposure to avoid losing highlights as much as possible.  First, when judging the exposure I paid attention to the blinkies and histogram, dialing down exposure as needed.  Second, I used the 'Extra High' setting of Active D-Lighting, which meant that the camera would underexpose slightly to avoid losing highlight detail.  For JPEGs, it would also boost the shadow and midtone areas to compensate for the underexposure.   However, I was shooting raw, so the boosting would be done in postprocessing.  Here's a sample shot, SOOC:

If I looked only at the LCD screen, it would look very underexposed.  However, I knew that for my purposes, this was the 'correct' exposure.  Here's how the shot looked after adjustment in post-processing.

Most of the highlights were preserved.  There is only a small patch lost, near my wife's elbow.

Here are a few more shots from our visit.  I used two lenses, the Tokina 10-17 fisheye (paired with the S5) and the Nikkor 28-105 3.5-4.5 AF-D (with the D90).

For when my kids are a little older

Knott's has a Peanuts-themed area for younger children, Camp Snoopy

A junior version of the elevator drop

We didn't spend as much time as we wanted because of the scorching heat, but we still had fun.

Read More