D700 highlight clipping

I shot with my new D700 over the weekend, and used my beloved Nikkor 28mm f2.8 AIS lens, hoping for some great

results. Inside was OK but outside in the bright sun I got a very strange result. The highlights are clipping

severely. I don't think my D300 would have done this, but the D80 would have. I'm pretty shocked to say the least

that a pro camera from Nikon would do this! I did not shoot a RAW of this scene, I was just out shooting JPGs.

 

Has anyone else noticed this behavior with the D700, and is this a bug? It's not the fault of the lens, to my

knowledge.<P>

 

<img src="http://hull534.smugmug.com/photos/420724234_ZdEJh-L.jpg"><P>

Could we have some more information on the file?

Metering? Aperture and shutter? Any exposure comp?

Hello Dave,

 

I am new to the D700 too and my first impression in contrasty outdoor situations is the same, although I shot raws. They can be

adequately corrected afterwards on the computer, so all is not lost. But I am convinced, there is an in-camera setting as well hidden

somewhere in the menus. Eventually I'll discover it after spending time with the manual.

 

But I agree with you, it's a strange out-of-the-box setting for a professional camera which I have never experienced with my trusty D200.

I have experienced this issues on all my cameras, D300 and D200 included (I feel I`m continuously checking and adjusting exposure), don`t know if more or less than with the D700.

 

Don`t know how the D700 metering system & contrast control works but looks like to have this highlights under control the rest of the image will probably be pushed to the dark, resulting in a too dark scene. I suppose you were using the matrix meter mode. Also, don`t know how your picture

settings are. Did you check the hystogram?

Use the Active D-Lighting mode if you have like these. The ADL mode basically exposes for highlights and applies a tone curve to the image.

 

That, or use exposure compensation.

I've had 9 DSLRs over the years and not one of them (including the D200) would have left the highlights unclipped shooting outdoors without some kind of exposure compensation intervention.

You really have a perfectly exposed shot here. The bright areas on the engine nacelles and along the fuselodge are what is called specular highlights.

 

A pola filter would have helped maybe.

 

Turn on the Active D-lighting in the retouch menu. That will help some. If that does not work, then then use the best exposure you can get and use the highlight/shadow controls in photoshop or Nikon NX2.

 

Lowering the exposure and bringing up shadows in post processing is another option.

 

One more option for what you have right now, is to make a blended exposure. Go to thelightsrightstudio.com, digital darkroom tab, ten look at the quicktime move on blended exposures.

The technique is to merge a processed underexposed version with a normal and use a luminescent mask to do auto blending.

 

Last option is HDR.

 

Nice pic of a B47. Where did you find it? It is amazing when you realize this is made from late to mid 1940`s technology.

For a camera that is said to have a 12 stop dynamic range I find extraordinary that there would be blown

highlights in what seems to me to be no more than a 5 stop latitude scene. OK, 6 stops max.

 

One could of course suggest that incorrect exposure is what is at issue here, but I could argue that the scene is

correctly exposed. The shadows look right given that there's plenty of sun and nothing in the sky look washed out

which is what would have happened if there was an overexposure.

 

Dave, you know as well as I that if you had set the camera to ADL there's almost no chance of getting blown

highlights

in this image.

 

I don't have a D700 but do have a D300 and this "problem" is consistent on the D300. That is, I sometimes get

blown highlights when ADL is off but when it is on for a shot like this I don't have any issues.

I checked Dave's image in PhotoShop, and I got the histogram attached below.

The exposure actually looks pretty good for this image.

The body of the plane is sliver/white and highly reflective while the sun is shining directly on it.

There is some specular highlight in the front part below the cockpit area so that some clipping is expected.

If you want to avoid that, reshoot when the sky is more overcast.<div></div>

When I first bought my D3 several months ago, I ran some side-by-side tests against my 5D. With hesitation, I sold my 5D as the IQ seemed pretty much identical. Yet, months later, until this weekend, I was unhappy with the overall IQ of my camera only when shooting outdoors in bright environments like your situation (for me, it is often the beach).

 

While at the beach this past weekend, I used bracketing on a number of different shots and came to realize that my D3 tends to overexpose by about 3/4 of a stop. My 5D seemed to nail the exposure virtually all of the time which is one of the reasons why its pictures look so good. I have now set my exposure compensation to -.7 [for outdoor shooting] and am finally delighted with the stunning color and high overall detail I am now getting. There is no substitute for the perfect exposure.

 

I suggest the next time you are shooting a similar subject that you bracket your shot and evaluate the results. You may be pleasantly surprised and what your camera can do for you if you get the exposure right. D-Lighting or equivalent will 'fix' the shadow areas if needed.

I don't think you should be using matrix metering on a stationary subject like this - take an incident reading or

spot meter the highlights of the plane and place it at +2 or thereabouts.

 

RAW helps a lot with dynamic range and highlight recovery. Use Nikon Capture NX2 to get the best out of the

camera in this respect.

 

Matrix metering may be less accurate on lenses that don't have a CPU since the without lens identification, the

camera doesn't know the wide open falloff pattern.

There are limits to what can be done with automated modes of reflective metering, I usually shoot in manual mode when the light is constant. That way you only need to nail the exposure once.

Here is an example of what can be done to salvage a difficult shot:

 

The top shot was -1 EV, the middle shot was as metered.

 

The bottom shot was 'fixed' in CS3. These were JPG files. You can expect even better results with RAW files.

image here:<div></div>

<i>"For a camera that is said to have a 12 stop dynamic range I find extraordinary that there would be blown

highlights in what seems to me to be no more than a 5 stop latitude scene... "</i><p>

It must be taken into account several parameters: RAW or compressed .jpg, bit depth, and in camera .jpg settings.

Probably, shooting 14bit RAW and adjusting exposure we could have an almost perfect shot. Don`t expect 12 stop

latitude shooting with different settings. Shooting .jpg, and with whatever the contrast setting selected that range

could be reduced to your 5-6 stop range (lower contrast=higher range, higher contrast=shorter range). That`s

absolutely normal, don`t burn your D700s till now... ! :)

Looking at the hystogram provided by Shun, I`d underexpose a bit, and adjust contrast during PP if needed.<p>

What Elliot says.

I found this too and wonder why Nikon chose such a contrasty default tone curve. I shoot RAW, though, and use Neutral

Picture Control with slightly boosted saturation. I adjust in post to achieve whatever tone curve is appropriate for the shot.

 

If you want maximum dynamic range, shoot RAW.

Thanks for all your responses. I was shooting only JPG as I go to the Museum of Flight near Seattle often and these are just informal test photos. I had the camera Active D-Lighting set to 'Auto', no EV adjustment, ISO 200, aperture priority, Matrix metering.<P>

 

Here's another photo, equally troubling. I shot for a year with my D300 and never got these kinds of results that I can remember. Same camera settings.<P>

 

<img src="http://hull534.smugmug.com/photos/420723811_FFYkv-L.jpg"><P>

It could just be that for whatever reason the camera overexposes by one full stop with 28mm f2.8 AIS, though my Nikon D300 made perfect exposures with it. I shot the same airplane six minutes later, granted from a different angle and the sun may have been a little more diffused, with the Nikon 50mm f1.8 AF-D and got this result:<P>

 

<img src="http://hull534.smugmug.com/photos/420726674_JsV2z-L.jpg"><P>

Overexposed, period. I mean, to have so many details in the shadow under the plane (second photo) you have to overexpose

the highlights in such a contrasted scene. The camera meter is not magic. In some extreme conditions, you have to interpret and

compensate, using CW or Spot. Many people have settled to a permanent -1/3 to -1 full stop with the D700. That's the nature of the beast.

Try

this same photo with slide film, you'll probably get even worse results. But, who said the D700 has a 12 stops dynamic range? I've never

seen that. Isn't that the equivalent of being able to correcty meter a scene which would require, say, f:2.8 at 1/60 for the shadows all the

way to f:22 at 1/250 for the highlights, or thereabout?

<i>I found this too and wonder why Nikon chose such a contrasty default tone curve. </i>

<p>

The reason is that many people love punchy, high-contrast, saturated photos. It sells cameras. Nikon is able to

use a contrasty curve because of the low noise of the camera. If you want a lower contrast result you can always

adjust the picture control settings (either in camera or in post) and the lowest contrast settings available are

<i>really</i> low contrast. In addition you can use the active D-lighting feature. I usually don't - I go for a

high contrast result a lot of the time, but that's just my personal preference.

<p>

Dave, this is a theory that I led to believe in after I realized that only the central spot meter is available

when lenses without CPU are used. The reason Nikon doesn't allow the peripheral spot meter points to be used (the

indicator moves but measurement is always through the center point) is that there is a lens- and

aperture-dependent "coupling coefficient" which describes how the camera has to compensate the peripheral spot

meter readings for each lens and aperture. With each Nikon lens that has the correct CPU in it, the lens is

identified and the compensation applied. With the CPU data, the matrix meter is more accurate and off-center

spot meter points can be used. This is one reason I am not so hot about "chipping" lenses as the correct

information might not be given to the camera (when the wrong chip from another lens is used). I believe it's one

of the main reasons why Nikon has been reluctant to allow matrix metering on non-CPU lenses. Many users insisted

on matrix metering with MF lenses and Nikon finally gave in, but the consistency of the matrix meter is not the

same as with CPU lenses.

<p>

I don't think this is a big deal really. When I use the matrix meter I understand that the result is not

completely predictable and I shoot RAW so I have some headroom for post-processing adjustments. Whenever I am

shooting still subjects I use the spot meter though - it measures through the center of the lens which is the

least affected by possibly less than nominal transmission at wide open aperture.

You are shooting a highly reflective surface in direct sun. A specular highlight is a point/spot in a scene that directly reflects a light source (sun) into the camera. In this case, entire lengths of curved surfaces of polished aluminum along the planes are functioning as specular highlights.

 

The general rule is to ignore speculars when metering as they are basically pure white and contain little to no detail. Your camera seems to be doing a pretty good job of this on matrix (and I'm sure you can get more detail out of raw). If you actually spot metered for the specular highlights, the rest of your image would be very very dark. Point your camera directly at the sun and spot meter. Then do the same for a dark object in shade. You will indeed see well more than 12 stops of range. As Shun said, if you want no portion of a shiny reflective surface in your shot to hit pure white, photograph on an overcast day. Another option is to do HDR bracketing.

Dave, your 2nd example (posted at 11:05) looks fine to me. Only a couple of areas with specular highlights are clipping. You can easily verify that with thresholds in PhotoShop (I am attaching it below). See it shows the clipping areas.

 

Your 3rd sample posted at 11:13am is simply underexposed, as the silver/white plane looks gray.

 

In these situations, I would spot meter the bright areas of the plane and make sure that it is 2 to 3 stops over medium. In the old days when I shot slide film, it would have been 2 stops over.<div></div>

Thanks for your replies. The airplane is grey, not silver or white, so the photo taken with the 50mm looks correct to me. Here is a photo taken in 2007 with my D80:<P>

 

<img src="http://hull534.smugmug.com/photos/166099940_eFz2J-L.jpg"><P>

Dave, since only you were there, you should know best. But those images (including the one from the D80) look underexposed to me.

Not only does the plane look unnaturally gray, the sky, the lawn, the wheels, etc. all look underexposed.