More D2X images

[paul_sokal___dallas__tx]

In my portfolio, I've now created a folder for D2X images saved as

jpeg for web. As before you really can't judge the beauty of these

pics at this resolution but what I've done is uploaded full frame

photos and then cropped photos so you can see the quality of the

resolution in a relative sense. These are test images and not meant

to represent photgraphic art, i.e. the pics ain't nothin' special.

I also included one of my pics from the Div III Hockey Championships

shot the same weekend. I haven't done any sports shooting since

high school (35 years ago) and never hockey, and frankly I seem to

suck at it. Not to mention the conditions sucked with poor lighting

and there were no photog cutouts in the glass as at major arenas and

thus I was shooting through the glass which was very marred up.

(Want some cheese with that whine?) This image was shot RAW

compressed (as were all the images in the folder now--I've only got

4.5 GB of CF cards), ISO 800 with normal high ISO noise reduction,

1/200 @ F4.5 with the 18-70 DX at 55mm. The camera was a great

sport shooter. The guy pushing the button leaves something to be

desired.

[paul_sokal___dallas__tx]

BTW I timed how long it takes to move these images around. In Capture, it takes a minute or so for things to settle down and then only 5-15 sec for raw adjustments. TO open it up in PS CS and take upwards of two minutes! I think Capture is the major drag and I can't wait for the Adobe raw update for the the D2X. Currently Capture is the only way to open the file. (I'm running an HP notebook, P2.4 with 1GB DDR2700 RAM with a 60 GB HD)

[dan_brown14]

Thanks Paul, they look very good to me.

 

I'd like to see some detail of a carefully shot image (landscape) at 100%. Use a prime lens,

tripod, f8-11, infinity focus. Shoot it raw, crop out a 500 pixel by 333 pixel section from

the center and post that (along with the whole image resized to 500 x 333 pixels). That

will give us a good feel for the capability of the D2x, and the lens you use.

 

BTW, that storefront 18mm shot really shows the barrel distortion of that lens. And, after

doing my own testing at the long end, I'm becoming less and less impressed with it.

 

I bet the 17-55/28 AF-S Nikkor would be right at home on your D2x.

 

And thanks for sharing, it's appreciated.

[juan_su]

Thanks for the update Paul. I at first I wasn't sure what you were trying to show but after more careful look at the crops, I was quite impressed. If you could do some macro tests of flowers or subjects with alot of details, that would be wonderful. Keep them coming!

[laurie_m]

Paul, Since everyone is placing requests....here's mine.

 

If you haven't already tossed your D70, would you mind shooting the same image with the D70 and the D2x (with the same lens etc.) Then post the images along with crops for comparison? I don't know if the difference is visible in a compressed jpg. Still, I wouldn't mind taking a look.

[vivek iyer]

Thanks, Paul. Much appreciated.

[cham_saranasuriya]

Thanks for taking time to post the photos.

[paul_sokal___dallas__tx]

Will do guys. Unfortunately it'll probably be a while as work has got me bogged way down.

[bill_chiarchiaro]

Paul wrote:

 

"In Capture, it takes a minute or so for things to settle down and then only 5-15 sec for raw adjustments. TO open it up in PS CS and take upwards of two minutes!"

 

Wow, that is painful. On my notebook that has a 1.5 GHz Pentium M with 768 MB of RAM, using the ufraw program, it takes less than 4 seconds to open a D2X NEF and display the preview image. Individual adjustments take less than 1 second each. Processing and saving the final image as a TIFF (8 or 16 bits per sample) takes about 26 seconds.

 

--Bill

[kaiyen]

Has anyone considered posting these files at full size? I know it'll be a huge file, and certainly much bigger than what photo.net allows, but pbase, for instance, lets you upload as big of a file as you want.

 

Just a thought. I can throw it up on my pbase gallery, if it helps.

 

allan

[kelvinphoto - arlington, t]

Any notebook will be suck for photo or video work because graphic card is too slow and hard disk speed is below minimum. it doesn't matter if you have the fastest ram or cpu speed, your system will be suck if your hard disk speed is slow or graphic card is slow or slow motherboard. I can't believe you guy spend thousand and thousand of dollar in a camera and you don't have a decent desktop to do your post processing!!! Using notebook for post processing is just like taking 6x7 film and cut it in 35mm format to do your processing. Do yourself a favor and get at least dual cpu, 2gig ram, and raid/scsi with speed at least 7200 or 1000rpm.

 

Paul, thanks for posting the d2x image. they look great.

[chris haake]

Ah, once again Kelvin pops in with something constructive.

 

Thanks for the images (and the work that goes into them), Paul. Hope you've had fun with your new toy!

[walterh]

@Kelvin - a dual cpu -? you think about Apple G5? or is there any advantage for PSCS at a windows machine with 2 processors? how would loading an image from a card reader or RAW conversion profit from 2 processors? I see the point of a fast HD or array.

[kelvinphoto - arlington, t]

@WALTER ... 2 Brains is better than 1 and more horse power for application.

[phule]

<< 2 Brains is better than 1 and more horse power for application >>

 

Only if the software is written to take advantage of multiple processors. Thankfully Photoshop CS is.