My D300s samples, worried about noise and lack of sharpness

[david_ionescu]

<p>

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" width="100%">

<tbody>

<tr>

<td ><br /> </td>

<td width="100%">

<p >Hello,<br /><br />Here is a link to zip file with some full resolution samples with D300s and 16-85 VR.<br /><br /><a href="http://dl.fisier.ro/files/arnmr3cf31mjijo/My_Pictures.zip.html" target="_blank">http://dl.fisier.ro/files/arnmr3cf31mjijo/My_Pictures.zip.html</a><br /><br />Please tell me what you think in terms of noise and sharpness,<br />there are some ISO 200 samples which I found to be very noisy and not sharp and I don't like them... I am worried.</p>

<p >Standard picture control, developed from raw with capture NX2, save as full quality jpeg.</p>

<p ><br />Thanks.<br />David</p>

</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

</p>

[ArthurRichardson]

<p>David,<br>

I wonder how many people are willing to download a Zipfile.... I know I wont.<br>

I'd like to take a look at your results, so perhaps you can post some of your work on a website.</p>

 

[gogu]

<p>Posteaza aici niste poze care crezi ca arata cel mai bine problema pe care o intimpini.<br>

No one will ever download a zip file just to check your pictures!</p>

<p>rgrds</p>

[david_ionescu]

<p>OK, here are some direct links, the zip contaied all samples:<br>

<a href="http://dl.fisier.ro/files/jboe7iojhrhp37o/DSC_0393_2.jpg.html">http://dl.fisier.ro/files/jboe7iojhrhp37o/DSC_0393_2.jpg.html</a><br /><a href="http://dl.fisier.ro/files/nea2m7mbga3d8hk/DSC_0902.jpg.html">http://dl.fisier.ro/files/nea2m7mbga3d8hk/DSC_0902.jpg.html</a><br /><a href="http://dl.fisier.ro/files/h5omdm8317rof4p/DSC_0715.jpg.html">http://dl.fisier.ro/files/h5omdm8317rof4p/DSC_0715.jpg.html</a><br /><a href="http://dl.fisier.ro/files/72d77rpnkl1r7or/DSC_0380.jpg.html">http://dl.fisier.ro/files/72d77rpnkl1r7or/DSC_0380.jpg.html</a></p>

[kenneth_rosenstroem]

<p>File looks fine to me.</p>

[david_ionescu]

<p>Forgot to mention:<br>

ADL is set to OFF, HIgh ISO NR Low (iso 200 or 250 or 400 is not high , right ? ), JPG from 14 bit raw exported with Capture NX2, Sharpening 3 in Picture Control Standard</p>

[david_ionescu]

<p>@<a href="/photodb/user?user_id=5056768">Kenneth Rosenstroem</a><br>

Sorry, just look for example at the DSC_0902.jpg, at FULL SIZE, in the shadow areas and not only there is plenty of grainy noise ! And remember, this is ISO 200...<br>

Is the camera faulty ? Is it me too "pixel-peeper" ?<br>

Look also at this image: <a href="http://dl.fisier.ro/files/35maip8ad32j2jg/IMG_0472.JPG.html">http://dl.fisier.ro/files/35maip8ad32j2jg/IMG_0472.JPG.html</a><br>

This is what I call noise free, razor sharp. from the good old 5D (yes, Canon) and 70-200 f/4 L IS USM.<br>

Maybe I am comparing apples and oranges but the difference is HUGE.</p>

[jeannean_.]

<p>I'm not sure what the answer is, but I see what you mean. Not sure if it's just my monitor, but I'm seeing horizontal lines through all of them, including the one with the 5D (although not as bad). The 2nd pic seemed ok except DOF seemed a little off for the background. Maybe too much flash?</p>

[david_ionescu]

<p>They don't have "banding" effect or horizontal lines - at least on my LCD monitor fortunately :) Only noise...</p>

[gogu]

<p>Noise -if existent- should be apparent more or less everywhere and not only in the blacks (where of course it's much more pronounced).<br>

To use a term from the film days, what you see in the blacks I'd call it "grain".<br>

Also please note that a DX and an FX camera (Canon 5D) hold noise differently...</p>

<p>Salutari!</p>

[geoffs]

<p>David. I do see what you are describing....they are not sharp and also quite noisy.<br>

For a D300.I would have thought they should be better.Have you tried shooting some large file sized jpegs,with low iso and using your camera on a tripod.<br>

If they look good then the problem lies in the processing...if not then it has to be the camera,if your lens has a good track record..</p>

[david_ionescu]

<p>@gogu<br>

Salutari :) from Romania :)<br>

I agree, it's grain. I said it...I also agree that full frame cameras have lower noise levels.<br>

But what I see in thpse samples seems uinacceptable to me... I did bought a top of the line DX SLR camera not a compact. </p>

[art_tatum]

<p>5+ MB photos to critique?</p>

[niccoury]

<p>If anyone has problem with noise at base ISO's on Nikon's modern slr's (D300(s), D700, D300), your standards are wayyy too high. There I said it.<br>

You're looking wayy to close at this stuff. If the world's top photogs are able to make award-winning prints, images, etc., you'll be fine.<br>

As for sharpness, they look fine, granted the 16-85 isn't the sharpest lens in the world.</p>

[wogears]

<p>Do you realize you are looking at a 40x60 print at 16 inches?</p>

[johnw63]

<p>To be honest, after looking at the first two, I'd say you were shooting at a fairly wide aperture and missed the focus, by a little bit. It's easy to do, when the DoF is very shallow.</p>

<p> </p>

[andylynn]

<p>I agree with Nic. The grain is low enough for almost anything. Even if you print large you won't see it. Heck, I just ran a 13x19 of a photo I took on 35mm Plus-X film and scanned with a thoroughly obsolete scanner made by Minolta and the grain in <em>that</em> is barely noticeable.</p>

<p>This, on the other hand, looks a lot like the output from my D90 - which is less grainy than Plus-X and an obsolete scanner. I don't see any hard testing data yet, e.g. DXOMark, but I expect the D300s will come out a least as good as a D90, which I'm pretty sure is the current leader among 1.5 crop cameras in SNR and several other things. Meaning that if you want less grain than you're getting, you need a D700.</p>

[colincross]

<p>The second photo looks out of focus, which would of course affect sharpness... looks like the grass might have been moving as well. Like so many situations, it looks like operator error. Sadly, buying the clubs that Tiger Woods uses doesn't mean you can play the same game of golf as him...</p>

[david_ionescu]

<p>Maybe they're OOF a little. For me, the big problem is the noise.<br>

It is not possible !!<br>

A compact camera (not a usual one, one with a 10x or 20x zoom lens !) is completely beating<br>

the D300s at noise and sharpness. and think about their lens and the size of their sensor.<br>

The standard has been set by compact cameras, look here:<br>

<a href="http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canonsx1is_samples/originals/img_0169.jpg">http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canonsx1is_samples/originals/img_0169.jpg</a><br /><a href="http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canonsx1is_samples/originals/img_0159.jpg">http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canonsx1is_samples/originals/img_0159.jpg</a><br>

@<a href="/photodb/user?user_id=4802905">Andrew Lynn</a> "The grain is low enough for almost anything"<br>

Not agree, not for me. Even if I resize them at 6MP, it is stll a problem.</p>

[carlwakefield]

<p>I think the 5D shots are really a class in front and would suggest you get a second one if you need a second body and just sell the D300.</p>

[gogu]

<blockquote>

<p>Salutari :) from Romania :)<br />But what I see in thpse samples seems uinacceptable to me... I did bought a top of the line DX SLR camera not a compact.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Salutari din Constanta;-)<br>

Well, in that case you should know the "limitations" of the format you are buying!<br>

My D90 produces <strong><em>*a little*</em></strong> better grain in the shadows but that's all; I'm also almost sure that all DX format Canons will show the same or similar grain! If you want less pronounced grain then FX format is the way to go.</p>

<p>rgrds</p>

<p>PS<br>

I let the Noise Reduction always OFF (not even at Low); try this and shoot some test shots again.</p>

[hawkman]

<p>David,<br /> I looked at your files, I have a few suggestions for you.<br>

1) The flower shots are obviously OOF and therefore not sharp.<br>

2) The rest of the photos are normal, sharpness is not bad, for what matters you can see individual hair strands in the hairdresser photo. The amount of grain is also typical of a D300 NEF file processed with Nikon Capture NX2, it is not intrusive but a bit coarse. I suggest you use Adobe LightRoom and run the NEF files through, you will notice that LR does a good job of removing grain from uniform surfaces and produce an overall sharp clean image, but the white balance and colors may not be as accurate as NX2. Try it out and see if you like the cleaner looking photos it produces. <br>

3) the examples of compact camera you provided are crawling with noise and digital artifacts, your D300 photos actually have a much more natural look to them!<br>

4) If your tolerance for noise is low and you want the cleanest files possible you need to look into getting a full frame camera. </p>

[paolop]

<p>Did you try to change the lenses ?<br>

May by a good telefoto (e.g. 70-200 2,8 Nikkor) works much more better form the noise point of view then the lenses you used. As I have seen, the 5D photos you did where realized with very good lenses.</p>

 

[chris_letts]

<p>is this another of those "I just bought a new camera and the pictures aren't as sharp as my old XXXX" ??<br>

Last week it was the D700 and this week the D300.<br>

I did bother to download the zip and I can't see any problems with any of the pics - they look sharp enough with minimal 'grain' and pretty much what I'd expect..<br>

You say you've post-processed them (i.e. produced jpegs from raw) - are you sure you haven't introduced the 'problem' at that stage...</p>

[kuzzy]

<p>Frankly Dave I have no idea what you are talking about. I looked at the hairdresser photo and can see the pores in here skin. Those areas that are out of focus due to DOF show no "noise" to me. I think when you look at almost any photo from any camera at 100% on the computer you can find things that you do not like. The compact cameras photos are not even close to my eye. I think your expectations of what a camera can do are unrealistic. Make some prints and see how they come out and then make your judgment. Good luck.</p>