Any idea if D300 has a weaker AA filter?

[turgut_tarhan]

<p>The recent samples on the internet make me think if D300 has a less

aggressive anti-aliasing filter; since they look sharper & more detailed at

pixel level when compared to D200, contrary to what one may expect a less

sharper image at 100% magnification because of increased resolution from 10 to

12mp.<br>

<br>

Good news if so; while D200's strong AA filter ruined some of the details that

could be useful in landscapes, for the sake of (possible) moire. Though more

difficult, moire may be tamed in postprocessing instead; but it's not possible

to regain details once lost by that filter.

Interesting, <a href="http://www.maxmax.com/nikon_d200hr.htm">this company</a>

removes AA filters from stock D200 and calls it D200HR; the results shown look

very promising.<br>

<br>

I almost always photograph raw (though not the only reason, but Nikon's in-

camera jpg interpretation is lossy vs Canon's), use apertures around f/8, show

best effort to eliminate any possible softness caused by shake or poor focus,

set the sharpening to max. and apply extra USM (eg. 100,1,0) as much as the

image may accept after upsampling to double-spread size. <br>

<br>

My short-term aim is to see a photograph printed on the magazine matching 645

Velvia-scan in terms of color reproduction, detail & dynamic range. Therefore,

I'm impatient to get one D300.</p>

[vivek iyer]

Turgat, see this thread initiated by Ellis Vener:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00MrJd

 

I would think that it would be more difficult to remove the AA/IR cut filter from the D300 since it also has a dust reduction contraption on the AA/IR cut filters.

 

When you say 645 Velvia scan, which camera/lens do you have in mind?

 

Why would you want to ruin the colors from a D300 by removing the filter pack on the sensor?

 

Are you very interested in producing images in red/magenta? I have made magenta captures on Velvia in low light and not taking care of reciprocity factors. So, I know it is doable. :)

[lahuasteca]

No need for a separate post, so a friendly question to go along with Turgut's - which has the

weakest AA filter of the three - D80, D200, or D300? My current camera is a D70s, which

has a weaker AA filter than the D200. My style of shooting is outdoors, overland trekking

stuff, landscape and people - usually good light and ISO 200-400 so I really don't worry

about moire. The strength (or better phrased) weakness of the AA filter is the deciding

factor.

 

The D300 would seem to be the camera I'm looking for, but the grenading U.S. dollar might

put it out of reach, so I may have to consider the D80.

[ellis_vener_photography]

"Nikon's in- camera jpg interpretation is lossy vs Canon's"

 

JPEG compression is by it's nature a lossy process.

[gy]

Ellis, sure the jpeg compression is lossy by its nature but what Turgut tried to mention is

Canon does a better job of jpg process than the Nikon..If you check dpreview's comparison

tests, it is easily evident that there is a clear difference.. jpeg's from Canon are more close to

what you can get from Raw conversion in terms of sharpness. Nikon's jpeg's are more soft

and lacks the "punch" which I also experience with my D80..

 

And Turgut, I dont think this will change with D300 as well.. in camera jpeg's still looks soft

to me from the samples I have seen..

[chris hughes]

Not to be a dick but... in my opinion, anyone doing in camera jpeg processing gets what

he/she deserves. You want good images? You have to do your own post processing. Same as

back when we were shooting film. You could go get a Polaroid or have the local FotoMat do

your printing but if the prints came out bad, you'd have no one to blame but yourself. With

digital, if you're not doing your own post processing in Photoshop or similar software then

don't expect excellent results from Canon OR Nikon.

[lahuasteca]

As Shun pointed out to me in another post, D300 has minimum ISO of 200. I need the ISO

100 (waterfalls and background blur for street candids) - looks like I get the D200. Found

one new for $1,379 at Cameta.

[joseph_hart2]

D300 has a low ISO 100 setting,

[mars790]

Joseph, the D300's native low ISO is 200. The ISO 100 is an enhanced setting and on the

D300 it's called Lo 1. I have seen examples and i can safely say that there will probably be

a slight loss of dynamic range and highlights blown more easily as the whites are

exaggerated a bit. Maybe it will produce nice waterfall images, who knows?

 

I'm curious to find out many things about this camera and I should have mine tomorrow

and start tinkering. I'm hoping you're right about the weaker AA filter compared to the

D200. Actually, I was thinking about what i should do with my D200 (after i get

comfortable with my new beauty of course). Having the AA filter removed is intriguing

although I'd like to hear from several daring photogs who have no regrets. Then i could

have my D70 converted for IR and have a unique trifecta.

 

Anyone experienced with AA removal on the D200 and do you think that it would be

beneficial for interior work?