D800E Moire isn't issue Software NEF conversion is the surprise

[habsphoto]

<p>I have done some more tests with my D800E and posted the photos on my Flickr "Schafphoto" stream. My biggest issue with the camera is not moire which seems to be minimal, but the D800E is so sharp and well resolved that it shows all the pixel-level flaws like CA.<br>

The only way to get those amazing image files that jump off the screen/page is to take the NEF files into Nikon capture NX2.3.1 (update) this applies the Nikon lens and D800E camera parameters from Nikon's secret database and VOILA everything looks cleaner, sharper, distortions get fixed and CA vanishes.<br>

Sounds great...BUT... you must use native NIKON Capture NX2.3.1 (good but clunky) software to read Raw (NEF) files this way. That means Lightroom 4 may remain in my workflow to keep track of where the images live on the hard disk and sort but it ceases to be the RAW converter and editor that I love. A NEF file comes in to LR4 > gets sent out to Nikon NX2.3.1, default adjustments improve CA and distortion issues > it is saved as TIFF by Capture NX2 and saved back to LR4 (so I can see the changes and corrections that Nikon implements on the NEF file) Not an efficient workflow!<br>

So basically if you buy the D800E to get the outstanding quality the camera can capture you have just been drafted into the Nikon Capture NX2.3.1 software religion. (BTW, In the USA it will cost you $140 extra for CNX2, I'm using the free trial for 59 more days.)<br>

Until someone comes out with RAW conversion as good that works natively in LR... hope that's soon.<br>

My original blog about the 11 things I found with the D800E is here: The thing I didn't realize was that software would be the weak point. Schafphoto Blog: http://schafphoto.typepad.com/1k-words-on-photography/<br />-_______Stephen Schafer HABS/HAER/HALS Photographer</p><div></div>

[garypeck]

<p>Thank you for the fine work - who'd a thunk it!<br>

That last series is unbelievable - the acutance is stunning.</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>Thank you very much Steve.<br /> I have downloaded the school bus NEF file to my computer for experimenting. (BTW, it is slowed down -by much- with this huge files (MB 2,4 Intel Core2 - 4Gb), the "rainbow ball" appears every time. Don`t know if it can be fixed, if not, I`d need to add a new computer to the budget... :/</p>

<p>I see "odd areas" in the floor, distant roofs, and some other small areas. If that`s moirè, it is certainly not that bad, but is there. I don`t have installed the latest NX2 version (I have it at home) but I wonder if software can remove it without making that areas even more blurred.</p>

<p>I understand the plane of focus is on the back of the bus; from what I have read, moire could appear "removed" by out of focus blur... so it could be the case in that "odd areas".<br /> ---<br /> Edit: After a second and third look, I tend to think thas the school bus pic is plenty of moirè (maybe it`s the low quality screen I have plugged to the laptop). I don`t have a clue on this, so I`ll wait to read new comments.</p>

[elliot1]

<p>This software effect you are describing is 'normal' for Nikon DSLR images and occurs with other bodies as well. NEF files opened in other programs show the 'true' RAW file as recorded by the sensor.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p><em>NEF files opened in other programs show the 'true' RAW file as recorded by the sensor.</em></p>

<p>In all cases some algorithm must be used to calculate an RGB image and there is no one more "true" algorithm than others (the RAW file isn't displayable in itself as a color image). What Nikon does is that they develop the algorithms for raw conversion together with the optics so that they match each other to produce a pleasing result with minimal user intervention. Adobe et al. do not do this since their stuff has to work equally with any cameras and optics, thus the result requires often quite a lot of work to look good (IMHE). I don't like to use Adobe software for raw conversion (the result at high ISO is crude and it the capture sharpening is "off" and makes the images look "flat" and lacking in three-dimensional feel) but I do use Lightroom for batch ops, printing etc. and Photoshop for retouching and sharpening and printing large prints.</p>

[eric friedemann]

I use ACR, which corrects for distortion produced by Nikon lenses- ACR has a Nikon lens database that automatically

choses the Nikon lens I've shot with. I don't use the noise reduction in any RAW converter, preferring to use Neat Image

post-conversion. After noise reduction, so that I'm not sharpening noise, I use PhotoKit Sharpener for capture sharpening

and output sharpening.

[dan_south]

Eric, thanks for those tips. Are you doing all of these from within PS? Would it be possible to adapt these tools to a LR

workflow? Capture NX is not a viable option IMO except for an occasional one-off.

[eric friedemann]

<p>Yes, Dan, Neat Image and PhotoKit Sharpener 2.0 are Photoshop plug-ins. You can use a stand-alone version of Neat Image with LR. Again, I'm not an LR guy, but I believe you would also use PKS 2.0 as a stand-alone.</p>

<p>I'd mention that I've tried various versions of NX, Bibble Pro and ACR over the years. Discussions of RAW converters with their distortion correction, noise reduction programs and sharpening programs remind me of discussions of the best B&W film and paper developers years ago. At a certain point, you arrive at a workflow that will represent your preferred image processing for noise, color, contrast, B&W conversion, etc.</p>

[curt wiler]

<p>Ilkka is quite right. In this digital age, any hardware decision needs to take the impact on software and post-processing workflow into account. Buying into the Nikon system means using the Nikon software to get optimum results. </p>

[elliot1]

<p><em>"</em><em>Buying into the Nikon system means using the Nikon software to get optimum results."</em> This is not always the case. While the D800e offers new challenges, I am sure 3rd party companies are busy at work to offer their version of 'the best' software to process these images. </p>

[eric friedemann]

<p>And Elliot, I've used a fair number of different Nikon cameras at this point. To generalize, I've found that- zeroing out noise reduction and sharpening- Nikon's RAW converters produce slightly softer images than versions of the ACR converter. On the other hand, Nikon's RAW converters produce slightly better color that versions of ACR. On balance, I like ACR better.</p>

<p>I do however agree with Ilkka that there is no one absolute correct conversion of a RAW image. Any RAW converter will produce an interpretation of a RAW image. You may subjectively like one RAW conversion over another.</p>

[habsphoto]

<p>I have to admit that I have skipped Photoshop 5, as I did not see any real advantage over PS-4 in my workflow. So I cannot try the latest ACR until my Photoshop 6 arrives. I am currently using ACR 5.7.0.213 - If anyone can take my bus image into the latest ACR maybe it will look as good as CNX2. I've uploaded the bus image NEF to the FTP site at Mediafire: http://www.mediafire.com/?nt22c5nnk24b5sr<br>

At this point after shooting mini-blinds and all kinds of other subjects that I'll typically deal with and finding little moiré, I'm more interested in the CA this new 36MP chip is showing. And if there is something I'm missing, since I'm not a software engineer. I've heard that the new Adobe Camera Raw has Nikon camera and lens data baked in, so will it correct the CA in my bus image automatically if I click that lens Corrections section and select DEFRINGE ALL EDGES? Is tat the same a sauté CA correction in NX2?<br>

Lightroom 4 has a "Lens Correction" section in which I can find my 28mm lens and click Correct CA. And it works. Is it that easy? Maybe that's the answer... maybe the ACR and LR4 use the same lens algorithm when correcting this thing? Just looking for insight. Thanks? I would never have gotten this far or even clicked on "Lens Correction" Profile in Lightroom without all your help.</p><div></div>

[habsphoto]

<p>If I click the Lens Corrections section and select DEFRINGE ALL EDGES? Is THAT the same as CA correction in NX2?<br>

(dastardly autocorrect) :-(</p>

[eric friedemann]

<p>Steve, I'm on ACR 6.6 and have a similar screen to your LR 4.</p><div></div>

[eric friedemann]

<p>Then, the second "Manual" screen ...</p><div></div>

[JRCrowe]

<p>Steve, have you tried the moire' removal function of the adjustment brush in Lightroom 4. I used it on your bus photo and it worked well. It is possible to overdo it though. When I did the yellow of the bus would bleed onto the far left garage door.</p><div></div>

[jefflipsman]

<p>Steve, I downloaded your raw file and opened it in ACR 6.7 beta via Photoshop CS5. The Lens Corrections tab automatically recognized and adjusted for your Nikkor 28mm lens by removing the chromatic aberration visible in the bolts on the bus's bumper, adjusted for lens distortion, and adjusted for vignetting. It did not remove the moiré patterns on the garage doors. It doesn't recognize Nikon's Active D-Lighting either.</p>

<p>So it looks like you can open D800 and D800E NEF files with ACR 6.7 beta and correct Nikon lens-specific CA, distortion, vignetting without using Capture NX2.3.1.</p>

[habsphoto]

<p>Thanks for all the help! I took the D800E out today and did some more photography of moiré prone subjects and expected to get at least one bad moiré from the bunch. No luck in my second safari, the moiré seems more elusive than I expected. I have uploaded all 23 different subjects to Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/schafphoto/<br>

I corrected these in LR4 with the lens calibrations set for the 20mm AF-D prime lens. They looked like crap in LR4 before I clicked the little Lens Corrections profile and remove CA box. This may work inside LR4 yet. </p>

[jose_angel]

<p>I don`t want to be a bore, maybe it`s the CA correction, overcorrection, maybe it`s the lens, the overcast day, handheld, my screen, whatever... but I think there is <strong>something wrong</strong> in this photos. I`m checking all your photos at 100%, and I see the very same "odd looking" in all of them.</p>

[habsphoto]

<p>Here's 23 more and another blog of mine to be bored by:<br>

New blog about these photos: http://schafphoto.typepad.com/1k-words-on-photography/</p>

[habsphoto]

<p>Here's 23 more and another blog of mine to be bored by:<br>

New blog about these photos: http://schafphoto.typepad.com/1k-words-on-photography/</p>

[habsphoto]

<p>Here's 23 more and another blog of mine to be bored by:<br>

New blog about these photos: http://schafphoto.typepad.com/1k-words-on-photography/</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>Which lenses are you using? Time ago, the first lens I discarded for digital was my 20/2.8AiS for the ugly results. The EXIF data in some of them says that you`re using a 20mm prime.</p>

[habsphoto]

<p>Used a new AFs 24-120, a Nikon 28 AF-D and the aforementioned 20mm AF-D same software-correctable CA issues. The 20mm was in hibernation until this new FX body made it relevant again... now after CA correction it looks good again. A new Nikon 16-35 should be here next week to give me a wider angle on FX.</p>

 

[michael_matthews3]

<p>As to various forms of CA, a look at Eric Chan's recent contribution to Adobe's Lightroom Journal site may be interesting.</p>