I find the "noise" as in fine grain in the D700 not as disturbing as chroma noise.

Always wanted to do this but you need a press pass to be able to get close to the action.

---

Added on March 19, 2011, 3:18 amOh, just now only.

This post has been edited by jchue73: Mar 19 2011, 03:18 AM

What software are you using to PP?

If you're shooting NEF / RAW, there is no difference on the high ISO noise reduction setting because you can always change it to whatever setting if you're using Nikon software like Capture NX or View NX.

If you're using other 3rd party softwares like Lightroom or Photoshop, the only parameter that is recognised from the NEF / RAW file is the camera white balance. Other infos are all ignored.

The high iso reduction setting only affects if you're shooting JPG. Of course if you shoot NEF / RAW only and view the NEF / RAW files from the camera LCD screen, your camera actually views the JPG file that is imbedded in the NEF / RAW file. So that JPG file (embedded in the NEF / RAW) that you are viewing is affected.

Canon's noise reduction tends to make subjects look plasticky. To some people's eyes they look clean and better but I prefer a natural look.

Aiks, wrong section? Post lah in the diecast section.

Didn't know you collect diecast also.

Leave the camera for taking pics. Get a dedicated videocam if you want to take video.

On a side note, the photo composition is excellent. If just to nitpick, the M word on Malaysia is slightly cut off. Else, it would be perfect.

Don't be sad. I don't know if there is a real difference in colour between the D and G but you can always play around with the curves and picture settings in the camera to alter the final result if you're shooting JPG. With NEF / RAW, the things you can do is limitless.

Which cinema? Federal or Rex?

Should give you the Darth Vader title.

WB looks good.

Big space? 1TB and 2TB drives are cheap nowadays.

I take it you shoot under the same lighting condition for your products? If that's the case, whatever you tweak and change on the WB can be saved and re-used again to apply corrected WB on the other files if you're shooting RAW.

Strange thing is he says his WB changes. As far as I know, the WB does not change unless you tell LR to change the WB.

Vivid is usually not good for skin tones. But of course if you use LR to PP, it'll ignore the in-camera settings and your NEF files will look normal without any settings applied.


Getting WB right in the camera is important not just because you need less PPing. It has got to do with noise. Wrong WB will give more noise after WB correction.

Sure they do since it's a Nikon camera. So long as you pay of course. No need receipt because the product itself is out of warranty.

Perhaps what you can do is ask for them to access the damage and come back to you with a quote. If acceptable, proceed. If not, just keep the camera.

If your repair is close to 2k, might as well junk your camera and get a new one. Not worth it.

Yes, difficult to get correct. Trying to get the right WB is tricky especially under mixed lighting. Getting your flash to match the mixed lighting was difficult too. Nowadays, the current Nikon DSLRs have very good high ISO. Minor WB tweaks is fine and not so apparent unless you shoot extreme Sunny WB and change to Tungsten under low light.

Yup. Back when before D3 and D700 were available, it is a common trick to overexpose and then PP back to the right exposure to reduce noise.

I think he's referring to Capture NX 2? Anyway, I don't think you can change WB and Hue for JPG in Capture NX 2. On the other hand, I heard that in Lightroom, it is possible.

I agree.

---

Added on March 22, 2011, 10:51 amYup. I have accumulated a few bags myself. Anybody know where's a good place to get Thinktank Photo's bags around KL/PJ? I know J-One has them. Anywhere else?

---

Added on March 22, 2011, 10:52 amLOL. That's a good analogy.

This post has been edited by jchue73: Mar 22 2011, 10:52 AM

Saving it, yes. Name sake only. But whether it saves all data that was captured originally? Don't think so.

I believe that's some sort of calibrated profile. Sort of reverse engineering.

Yes.

I'm quite pleased with mine. Perhaps it needs some lubrication service.

The best conversion you get from Nikon's NEF is still from Capture NX2 unfortunately.

I suspect you may have reached and pass the limit of the minimum focusing distance (MFD) of the lens. What lens are you using? How close are you to the subject?

Pinjam? So good ah your friend?

Thanks for the info. I will call them up and look for them.

I just checked. You cannot.

Compare between real NEF and NEF that is saved from JPG.

You can also ask around if you think I'm wrong.

You have better connections with Nikon. Ask them.

For volume and speed, I would use Lightroom. For quality, it's NX2.

Nope.

What makes you so sure I have not tried Capture One?

Good find. The review done was on noise reduction. I thought the original discussion was about the best RAW/NEF convertor.

Anyway, the best noise reduction ever to come out from Nikon is the D3s/D3/D700.

There's no such thing as best software. Depends on what you are willing to trade off. Speed or quality.

Sorry. I don't think I'm qualified to answer as I'm neither a client or somebody who shoots for a living. I personally think it depends on the client. If the client is picky, then he has the right to say that your prints are not up to standard and you don't get paid. Else, the client accepts it and you're happy.

Besides like what Agito666 said, if they do not have a something to compare, how are they going to complain?

To get the best, use NX2 and convert your NEF to TIFF. Open the TIFF file in Photoshop and do your magic there and flatten / apply colour profile / convert to JPG.

In my opinion, the route above is only when you want the photo to become something special and more arty. You would probably select the best few of them and probably run them through skin softening etc. If you shot your photos correct, I don't see a reason for using Photoshop.

Don't understand your question. How do you get from NEF to Photoshop without NX2? You use ACR?

ACR does not interpret NEF files the best. NX2 must be in the equation when you open NEF files.

You're lucky you get to do that. People who have to work, no choice. Only weekends.

Aiyoh... Please don't start to play with words and take sentences out of their context.

Yes, it's the best software for NEF conversion if you're basically comparing output only. That's what the original discussion was about. Then came in issues like noise reduction and speed.

Of course like camera and lenses, softwares likes NX2 and Lightroom are tools of the trade. It's not for everybody lah. What works for one does not mean it would work for another. For volume work like wedding photography, speed and volume is more important. This is why many are still not using NX2. You need a powerful CPU and lots of memory and at times, the software will still hang.

Of course this does not also mean that people who do not use NX2 automatically give lousy photos. I've seen people with Lightroom who do wonderful photos.

Yes, he has the experience and background education but that does not mean that he cannot be misinformed?

If somebody tells me I'm wrong, I will go back and find out for myself and see if I'm indeed wrong. I will humbly admit and move on to say that I've learned something new today if indeed what I said earlier was incorrect. Perhaps being at where he is makes it harder to take it from a nobody like me? Being stubborn is clearly not the way the way forward. If he chooses to differ in opinion, I'm perfectly fine with it.

I don't think it's a misunderstanding. If you look at his original post and my reply, it's clear what he was referring to and what I replied.

So now I'm the offender and you're playing police?

Which were the past cases where I was wrong? DoF? Best UWA lenses?

---

Added on March 23, 2011, 10:31 amI'm told that for simple NEF to JPG conversion (exposure compensation etc), they are the same as NX2 as the View NX2 uses the same engine.

Ok. Like I mention, for best quality, open NEF under Capture NX2. You can convert straight to JPG or if you want to PP further under Photoshop, save NEF to TIFF under Capture NX2 and open the TIFF file in Photoshop. Was warn you that the TIFF file will be huge.

This post has been edited by jchue73: Mar 23 2011, 10:34 AM

I'm a hardware person myself. Don't like software but nowadays cannot live without it.

What strap? D3X?

Have you tried Shashinki?

Anyway, speaking about softwares and View NX2, the US website already has updated to latest version 2.1.2.

http://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/17278

Nikon Malaysia / Asia website is still at 2.1.1.

http://nikonasia-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/162

Yup. it's ok to make mistakes but I think the more important part is to be able to learn from it. My daily goal in life is to try and learn something new everyday. Sometimes I succeed but more often than not, I don't. But sometimes in the pursuit for knowledge, it means more money spent.

Hmmm, yes on paper this looks good. But ideally, it does not work always and fast enough to be correctly executed for every shot. It it was, it'll be D3 type focus caliber and everybody will buy the D90 instead of the D3.

I have not installed View NX2 but if you install Capture NX2, you'll automatically have the capability of viewing thumbnails in your folders. Oh, it's 32bit only BTW.

Aiks ! How can you say that?

I think in this case, the Nikkor since it's relatively cheaper than the Sigma if I'm not wrong.

At the time when I wanted to get the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 vs Nikkor 35mm f/2.0 (the 35mm f/1.8 wasn't available), I choose the Sigma as it was 1 stop faster and was equal in performance to the Nikkor on the DX body IF YOU CAN GET A GOOD SAMPLE. The reason why you hear a lot of horror stories with the Sigma is that they have a very high sample variation which can lead you to getting a good copy or a copy that front / back focuses. If you must get the Sigma, have a test. If it's not performing, you can ask the Sigma distributor if you can send in the lens for calibration. Perhaps you might want to do some background checking on this.

Anyway, looking around, I found a review of both lenses;

http://dslr-video.com/blogmag/?p=1479

You can see that the Nikkor and the Sigma is also almost equal in the centre until you compare corner sharpness at wide open which the Nikkor wins.

If you want to play safe, the Nikkor is a better bet since it's cheaper and lighter unless you want 5mm wider, and 2/3rd stops faster lens which the Sigma will give you.

I think you're delusional. I don't know why you have to re-edit my quoted message in the spoiler and delete your own message in your reply above. Some hidden agenda?

Please go back and read your original post where you made reference that Capture One manages to extract more detail that you cannot with NX and ACR.



Congrats.

This one?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/WyLuxx/

Yup. ACDsee is a very fast viewer. Is it 32 or 64bit?

Your reply does not need to be rude or condescending. My question was genuine. I know what you're trying to imply that the SB800 is a dinosaur after SB900 is out. I own one and the SB800 is still a much sort after Nikon speedlight. Disco speedlights would fall in the category of SB28/SB26 etc.

Such a lame attempt. I'm sure you can do better?

Somehow, instead of shooting people down and making sarcastic remarks, please make yourself useful and do more to help people even if it means doing some research on yourself. You might never know you learn a thing or two.

Yes, to which I implied that was incorrect because Capture NX2 does a better job than Capture One.

Am I the one who needs to prove something? I think if you do not believe, it's fine by me. Move along and use Capture One. It's a fine software BTW.

Oh, as far as I know, you're the one who claims Capture One gives more details. Got any proof ah?

This post has been edited by jchue73: Mar 24 2011, 09:30 AM