Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: elitegroup on February 11, 2009, 04:36:59 am
-
I'm considering buying a D3x for the wider dynamic range (at ISO 100-600) but the main reason for the switch is the AF is supposed to be faster and more accurate. I've read the D3x has no problems locking focus in low light/contrast areas and has a higher hit rate. I think James also mentioned he uses a 1Ds III but finds the Nikon to be much more reliable in the AF department.
My question is what's the best raw processing software for the D3x files? I'm a canon user and usually process in DPP then straight into photoshop. Is Nikon NX2, LR or Capture One the best way to go? in terms of getting the best out of the files?
Also what about shooting tethered? is NX2 very stable/fast/reliable in this regard? or is LR a better option for tethering the D3x
I'm also looking at purchasing a good all-purpose zoom for fashion/portraits/catwalk/studio/location etc. is the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR a nice sharp optic?
Any help/advice would be much appreciated
-
My question is what's the best raw processing software for the D3x files? I'm a canon user and usually process in DPP then straight into photoshop. Is Nikon NX2, LR or Capture One the best way to go? in terms of getting the best out of the files?
Also what about shooting tethered? is NX2 very stable/fast/reliable in this regard? or is LR a better option for tethering the D3x
I have been using C1 Pro 4.6 with excellent results except for a rather poor correction of purple fringing with some lenses (still looking into that). Raw Developper is also good.
NX2 is also good, but I am getting better detail with C1, and prefer their shadow/highlight recovery capability. Obviously there is no local modification availalbe in C1, so it sometimes means that one still has to rely on multiple conversions and overlaying in PS to handle some cases.
Having never shot thethered I cannot comment on your second question.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I have been using C1 Pro 4.6 with excellent results except for a rather poor correction of purple fringing with some lenses (still looking into that). Raw Developper is also good.
NX2 is also good, but I am getting better detail with C1, and prefer their shadow/highlight recovery capability. Obviously there is no local modification availalbe in C1, so it sometimes means that one still has to rely on multiple conversions and overlaying in PS to handle some cases.
Having never shot thethered I cannot comment on your second question.
Cheers,
Bernard
The D3x focuses and locks *very* fast, in low light, but will sometimes lock on hi-contrast subjects in the background which the Canon doesn't do.
If you are thinking of getting a D3x to use in low light, you might find it better to get a D3 because the better Hi-ISO means it will probably be almost equivalently sharp at 1600 ISO, and the D3 can do much better at really high ISO. The D3x seems to be at its best at around 100-400 ISO, where I believe it offers the best image quality presently available on a dSLR.
C1 is good. I cannot get NX2 to work on my Mac for some reason.
As for the purple fringing, I can even see it in-camera at 100% !
Edmund
-
I have been using C1 Pro 4.6 with excellent results except for a rather poor correction of purple fringing with some lenses (still looking into that). Raw Developper is also good.
NX2 is also good, but I am getting better detail with C1, and prefer their shadow/highlight recovery capability. Obviously there is no local modification availalbe in C1, so it sometimes means that one still has to rely on multiple conversions and overlaying in PS to handle some cases.
Having never shot thethered I cannot comment on your second question.
Cheers,
Bernard
The D3x focuses and locks *very* fast, in low light, but will sometimes lock on hi-contrast subjects in the background which the Canon doesn't do.
If you are thinking of getting a D3x to use in low light, you might find it better to get a D3 because the better Hi-ISO means it will probably be almost equivalently sharp at 1600 ISO, and the D3 can do much better at really high ISO. The D3x seems to be at its best at around 100-400 ISO, where I believe it offers the best image quality presently available on a dSLR.
C1 is good. I cannot get NX2 to work on my Mac for some reason.
As for the purple fringing, I can even see it in-camera at 100% !
Edmund
Thanks Bernard and Edmund, it seems C1 is the better raw processing engine. regarding the purple fringing is there a filter in C1 that will alleviate this problem or do you have to use another application to handle this issue? I've never seen this problem with the 1Ds III
I prefer the IQ of the D3x at 100-400 ISO (D3 not enough resolution) which is my standard range for most situations.
Can anyone comment on the speed/reliability of tethered capture with NX2 or LR?
I want to gleen as much info from D3x users on the strengths/weaknesses of the camera before seriously considering a platform change.
Cheers
-
I want to gleen as much info from D3x users on the strengths/weaknesses of the camera before seriously considering a platform change.
The D3x has been a very reliable tool so far. I love the results I am getting with the Zeiss 100 mm f2.0 macro. Here is a recent hand held sample at f2.0. Auto ISO is an amazing asset in such situations (set minimum shutter speed to whatever you feel comfy with - 1/100s in this case), the max ISO you would prefer not to go above (1600 ISO here) and the camera just comes up with the lowest possible ISO required to meet you shutter need needs...
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3505/3271985970_34d87a67c0_o.jpg)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
David, I have been quite happy creating a workflow that starts with CNX2 and then hands over to Photoshop CS3 for final polish. Now, granted I have not worked with D3X files, but almost any file Nikon has made up to this point and every time I keep coming back to this combo for my own personal style of Conversion and PP.
Good luck with whatever you choose and the D3X if you decide to go that way.
Roman
-
I'm considering buying a D3x for the wider dynamic range (at ISO 100-600) but the main reason for the switch is the AF is supposed to be faster and more accurate. I've read the D3x has no problems locking focus in low light/contrast areas and has a higher hit rate. I think James also mentioned he uses a 1Ds III but finds the Nikon to be much more reliable in the AF department.
My question is what's the best raw processing software for the D3x files? I'm a canon user and usually process in DPP then straight into photoshop. Is Nikon NX2, LR or Capture One the best way to go? in terms of getting the best out of the files?
Also what about shooting tethered? is NX2 very stable/fast/reliable in this regard? or is LR a better option for tethering the D3x
I'm also looking at purchasing a good all-purpose zoom for fashion/portraits/catwalk/studio/location etc. is the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR a nice sharp optic?
Any help/advice would be much appreciated
The Canon is a good camera, at least the 1ds3's. They focus well, they just don't track focus as well as the nikons or find low, low light areas to focus on as well as the Nikons, but overall the Canons are very good, especially on skintones.
Capture NX or whatever it is called processes the Nikon files very well, so does c1 4.6, though NX is a little better, though a very confusing program and somewhat slow even on a killer mac tower.
But if you really are thinking about switching systems get your hands on a D3, d700, d3x and yes even an N90 and shoot the way you shoot in your conditions and look at them. Also use your Canons.
You might not notice any difference.
Honestly I've processed files from about everthing in about everything and all digital cameras today are good, some work better in some situations than others, but they're all good.
Now, nobody is going to believe me on this, but I find the little Nikon n90 to be an amazing little camera. In real world, where people are moving, light is changing and everthing is not shot locked down with 10,000 watts of strobe I have a very very hard time telling the difference between the n90 and a 1ds3. In fact I love the out of the camera color of the n-90 and maybe it was just the situations I shot it in, but the color is really pretty all from a camera that costs $900.
All of these cameras have their strengths and weakness, especially with lenses. The Canon 35mm 1.4 even wide open is just an great piece of glass and the Nikon 85 1.4 and 200 F2 are far and above two of the finest lenses I've every shot with. The 200mm especially is just crazy sharp and pretty. It's a save the day type of lens.
I know everyone talks megapixels as the holy grail and but I really don't think it matters that much, at least not as much as the forums will lead you to believe. Lens sharpness, in focus, color all have much more to do with the look of what I do than uber detail.
-
You need NX anyway to tether. LR does not 'do' tethered shooting in itself. What it does is set up a watched folder and as soon as the image pops into the folder via the tethering software LR displays the photo and adds Metadata, applies specific presets or whatever. LR does not have the actual software to do the tethering, that is done via the manufacturers software. EOS Capture for Canon and NX for Nikon. Given that LR is adding a further step to the process which slows down tethered shooting (7 secs from my 5D's to display in LR for RAW files) I think it's only useful if you are working with a LR workflow. That said as an ACR user it was very good on location when I needed to get photos to clients fast. I could test exposures based on my usual preset, apply the metadata and have all the settings standerdized (including a DNG profile/WB I'd just made before starting) as the photos came into the computer and then could export to jpg and hand to the client immediately. Was perfect for a recent college shoot, headshots of 250 people. Having the bigger 'preview' to check for close eyes or whatever was just a plus.
-
You need NX anyway to tether. LR does not 'do' tethered shooting in itself. What it does is set up a watched folder and as soon as the image pops into the folder via the tethering software LR displays the photo and adds Metadata, applies specific presets or whatever. LR does not have the actual software to do the tethering, that is done via the manufacturers software. EOS Capture for Canon and NX for Nikon. Given that LR is adding a further step to the process which slows down tethered shooting (7 secs from my 5D's to display in LR for RAW files) I think it's only useful if you are working with a LR workflow. That said as an ACR user it was very good on location when I needed to get photos to clients fast. I could test exposures based on my usual preset, apply the metadata and have all the settings standerdized (including a DNG profile/WB I'd just made before starting) as the photos came into the computer and then could export to jpg and hand to the client immediately. Was perfect for a recent college shoot, headshots of 250 people. Having the bigger 'preview' to check for close eyes or whatever was just a plus.
Thanks for the info Ben, is appreciated
The Canon is a good camera, at least the 1ds3's. They focus well, they just don't track focus as well as the nikons or find low, low light areas to focus on as well as the Nikons, but overall the Canons are very good, especially on skintones.
Capture NX or whatever it is called processes the Nikon files very well, so does c1 4.6, though NX is a little better, though a very confusing program and somewhat slow even on a killer mac tower.
But if you really are thinking about switching systems get your hands on a D3, d700, d3x and yes even an N90 and shoot the way you shoot in your conditions and look at them. Also use your Canons.
You might not notice any difference.
Honestly I've processed files from about everthing in about everything and all digital cameras today are good, some work better in some situations than others, but they're all good.
Now, nobody is going to believe me on this, but I find the little Nikon n90 to be an amazing little camera. In real world, where people are moving, light is changing and everthing is not shot locked down with 10,000 watts of strobe I have a very very hard time telling the difference between the n90 and a 1ds3. In fact I love the out of the camera color of the n-90 and maybe it was just the situations I shot it in, but the color is really pretty all from a camera that costs $900.
All of these cameras have their strengths and weakness, especially with lenses. The Canon 35mm 1.4 even wide open is just an great piece of glass and the Nikon 85 1.4 and 200 F2 are far and above two of the finest lenses I've every shot with. The 200mm especially is just crazy sharp and pretty. It's a save the day type of lens.
I know everyone talks megapixels as the holy grail and but I really don't think it matters that much, at least not as much as the forums will lead you to believe. Lens sharpness, in focus, color all have much more to do with the look of what I do than uber detail.
Thanks James,
You're right, I'll ask my local camera store for a trial on the D3x with the 1Ds III for a side by side comparison under my working conditions. I've asked one place in Perth but they were unwilling to loan out their D3x I'll keep asking around
-
David, I have been quite happy creating a workflow that starts with CNX2 and then hands over to Photoshop CS3 for final polish. Now, granted I have not worked with D3X files, but almost any file Nikon has made up to this point and every time I keep coming back to this combo for my own personal style of Conversion and PP.
Good luck with whatever you choose and the D3X if you decide to go that way.
Roman
NX2 into CS3/4 seems like the most streamlined way to go. I'll have to download the software and give it a go
Cheers Roman
-
You need NX anyway to tether. LR does not 'do' tethered shooting in itself. What it does is set up a watched folder and as soon as the image pops into the folder via the tethering software LR displays the photo and adds Metadata, applies specific presets or whatever. LR does not have the actual software to do the tethering, that is done via the manufacturers software. EOS Capture for Canon and NX for Nikon. Given that LR is adding a further step to the process which slows down tethered shooting (7 secs from my 5D's to display in LR for RAW files) I think it's only useful if you are working with a LR workflow. That said as an ACR user it was very good on location when I needed to get photos to clients fast. I could test exposures based on my usual preset, apply the metadata and have all the settings standerdized (including a DNG profile/WB I'd just made before starting) as the photos came into the computer and then could export to jpg and hand to the client immediately. Was perfect for a recent college shoot, headshots of 250 people. Having the bigger 'preview' to check for close eyes or whatever was just a plus.
Doesn't the latest version of Capture One 4.6 allow for tethered shooting for Nikons. Or is it only for the D3?
Clive
-
I would never consider a total switch of camera system based on comments on a forum. With respect to all who posted, we all use cameras differently and have expectations. Rent or borrow a lens/camera combo and use it for a few days. You then have lots of time to see image quality, processing workflow etc. Even better, shoot your test images with both systems to really get relevant answers. A few hundred dollars might turn into a bargain if things turn out different than expected. The choices are much simpler for those of us with legacy systems, we are only adding one lens or body. Peter
-
Agreed, you've gotta try these cameras out. While youre at it, you should try an A900. It doesn't have a sophisticated outer af point system, but it's center point is the best out there, and you could add the system to your Canons for a relatively low price. Plus, you'll love the ZAs.
-
I too work with NX2 & then CS3. It really does work great. I find NX2 quite intuitive. Though I haven't used other softwares, but I can assure you, I am not a Mensa member either.
-
I too work with NX2 & then CS3. It really does work great. I find NX2 quite intuitive. Though I haven't used other softwares, but I can assure you, I am not a Mensa member either.
I'm a Ph.D, and have been unable to get NX2 to work on my Mac. Yuck.
Edmund
-
I'm a Ph.D, and have been unable to get NX2 to work on my Mac. Yuck.
Edmund
I first tried to run Nikon Capture 4, then Capture NX on a Windows machine. I could go for coffee while it opened a .nef file. Now I'm running on a Mac and it is fast.
-
I'm a Ph.D
Wouldn't that be the problem?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Bernhard,
Which exam do you need for NX2?
I have an MSc. in mechanical engineering so I guess the Leica M3 is the camera I'm certified for, or possibly a Linhof ;-)
Best regards
Erik
Wouldn't that be the problem?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I'm a Ph.D, and have been unable to get NX2 to work on my Mac. Yuck.
Edmund
Permanent head Damage?
-
I have an MSc. in mechanical engineering so I guess the Leica M3 is the camera I'm certified for, or possibly a Linhof ;-)
Same thing here, and I am mostly able to use NX2... although in the end I mostly don't.
You should be fine the day they decide to support Sony files.
Cheers,
Bernsrd
-
Bernhard,
Which exam do you need for NX2?
I have an MSc. in mechanical engineering so I guess the Leica M3 is the camera I'm certified for, or possibly a Linhof ;-)
Best regards
Erik
I have my Master's in Structural Engineering, but checking out the structures of models thru' my camera is all I am allowed by Mrs.
I run NX2 on PC, as I am more on PC, then on my iMac.
-
Permanent head Damage?
Piled Higher and Deeper.
-
Piled Higher and Deeper.
I don't think it's knowledge or lack of ability that makes some of the software flaky. All of the newer software I use seems to be computer and even on the day specefic.
I can run many thousands of files in C1, or huge multiple files in ps4, without issues for days, then all of a sudden, even with a restart everything just seems to get flaky or bog down.
Maybe this stuff is very ram dependent, or maybe the new apple computers only work well under a full moon, but if you asked me on one day if NX software was easy and realtively stable I'd say sure, a week later I'd say no., so there is something more to it than just general issues.
-
NX2 leaks at a rate of about 1GB/min after a few dozen changes to a file. I use NX2 right now because ACR and Lightroom do a very bad job with the color in D3 and D3X files.
-
The Nikon 70-200 VR was designed at a time when Nikon had no FX sensor. It's a phenomenal lens on a crop sensor, but the corners leave something to be desired on full frame. I have a feeling the D3X might really be too much for that lens. I've never shot a D3X though myself, so I could just be full of hot air.
The lens test on dpreview is pretty depressing for owners of the 70-200 and any FX Nikon.
-
I'm using Capture One 4.6 into Photoshop CS4 with D3x files, and I'm quite happy with it. The only quirk is that the file appears slightly desaturated in Photoshop, compared to how it looked in Capture One (only if the profile is ProPhoto RGB - Adobe RGB transfers fine for some reason). I generally apply a slight curve that increases the saturation after the transfer from C1 to PS, and the files print fine from PS (looking as they did in PS, not as they did in C1). I wonder why C1 is oversaturating the display of ProPhoto files slightly?
-Dan
-
I'm a Ph.D, and have been unable to get NX2 to work on my Mac. Yuck.
Edmund
Hello,
This is on a Mac with 10.5.6
When I got the NX2 disc and installed it, it was V2.0, and would not open a D3X file. I then ran "update" and it went to v2.1. It would still not open a D3X file.
For whatever reason I hit "update" again, and it went to v2.11. It would still not open a D3X file.
Then I ran "Software Update" on the Mac and needed to re-boot the machine. After re-booting NX2 would open the D3X files.
Maybe you tried all that, but thought I'd share in case not. It definitely did not install like typical Mac software.
-
The Nikon 70-200 VR was designed at a time when Nikon had no FX sensor. It's a phenomenal lens on a crop sensor, but the corners leave something to be desired on full frame. I have a feeling the D3X might really be too much for that lens. I've never shot a D3X though myself, so I could just be full of hot air.
The lens test on dpreview is pretty depressing for owners of the 70-200 and any FX Nikon.
I did some tripod, MLU, carefully focused test shots with the 70-200 VR and 70-300 VR on the D3x.
The 70-200 VR was unbelievably bad on the outer third of the frame. Leaf detail would simply be gone compared with the center.
To my surprise the 70-300 VR (a consumer grade lens) looked really impressive and handily beat the 70-200 at the same apertures.
I'm hoping that Nikon sees this hole in their lineup and releases an updated 70-200 VR soon.
-
Hello,
This is on a Mac with 10.5.6
When I got the NX2 disc and installed it, it was V2.0, and would not open a D3X file. I then ran "update" and it went to v2.1. It would still not open a D3X file.
For whatever reason I hit "update" again, and it went to v2.11. It would still not open a D3X file.
Then I ran "Software Update" on the Mac and needed to re-boot the machine. After re-booting NX2 would open the D3X files.
Maybe you tried all that, but thought I'd share in case not. It definitely did not install like typical Mac software.
Hi Steve.
Thanks for the pointer. I did as you indicate, and installed update, and update. until I got 2.11. And it still wouldn't open the files.
And I refuse to install 10.5.6 because it breaks DDC and thus won't run some of my own software and also breaks some third party profiling tools
10.5.6 seems to be a "Hurt Me" update.
POST UPDATE: I hadn't rebooted the machine. I just checked and now it runs! Thank you very much for your help. I have no problem admitting publicly that I'm a total idiot
UPDATE UPDATE: So pretty, so unusably slow.
Edmund
-
UPDATE UPDATE: So pretty, so unusably slow.
Edmund
It is slow. And you need to use View NX to see the 100% crops.
People keep saying that NX2 has the "je ne sais quoi" that makes it worthwhile for D3X files, but it is simply not a usable solution to processing a lot of images in 2009. Maybe in 2007, but not today.
I've been very happy with ACR and will continue to use that until someone can show me definitive results that make the awkwardness of NX2 worthwhile.
-
POST UPDATE: I hadn't rebooted the machine. I just checked and now it runs! Thank you very much for your help. I have no problem admitting publicly that I'm a total idiot
No need for that Edmund, you already admitted you are a Ph.D
-
No need for that Edmund, you already admitted you are a Ph.D
Admitted? I publicize it
By the way, I find that Gimp 2.6 gives very nice color with the D3x. It seems to be based n UFRaw, I'm going to see if there's a way to get UFRaw independently and write 16-bit files. Then of course, there's RPP etc. So much software, so little time.
Edmund
-
Admitted? I publicize it
By the way, I find that Gimp 2.6 gives very nice color with the D3x. It seems to be based n UFRaw, I'm going to see if there's a way to get UFRaw independently and write 16-bit files. Then of course, there's RPP etc. So much software, so little time.
Edmund
Edmund,
Could you tell us what your Ph.D thesis was about? If it was about the cultural influences of 13th century Persian pottery, for example, then that might explain the irrelevance of your Ph.D to Mac operating systems .
-
David:
16 years ago, the TS line of lenses were main subject for me to switch from Nikon to EOS. Nowadays, the new TS line of lenses might keep me away of switching back to Nikon.
My 2 centavos
Eduardo
-
I use Nikon Capture NX2 almost exclusively for my NEF raw processing from the D700 & D3X. The advantage for me is the beautiful colour rendering and superb CA correction with not just current Nikon glass but also my Zeiss ZF lenses and older AIS glass.
The workflow takes a little getting used to, that I would definitely admit. The way that the application works by stacking adjustments (beyond the base camera/quick adjust/lens adjustments) can be quirky and confusing for new users, particularly compared to the way that ACR/LR/Aperture hide this. The other issue is the way that if you go up the adjustment stack and make a change you need to re-enable the stacked changes to render the full image. Not a problem once you know how it works.
The downside is that this rendering of raw through various transformations is pretty CPU intensive and they don't seem to cache to speed things along. On my 3GHz MacBookPro it is definitely not a fast process, although I find it usable when working on single images that I consider 'keepers'. On my 8 core MacPro it's a whole lot more usable. For rapidly processing a pile of files, other than sticking to the base adjustments, I'll sometimes use Aperture instead (I have no love for ACR's colour rendering, also Aperture doesn't support D3X yet natively).
As mentioned by another poster, for viewing your captures Nikon View NX does a pretty decent job and renders D3X 14bit NEFs quickly. It's much faster than the browse feature in NX2. There's a nasty bug in the current version though that sometimes produces an error 'File Format Not Supported' in certain zoomed/flip between images mode. I have to close the app and reload and it's fine - Nikon/Nik need to fix that NOW.
In summary, for me at least, Capture NX2 renders the nicest images in terms of colour, detail with essentially no CA. It is fair to call it slow, especially compared to the competition. It is however very usable and I find I can go through a standard workflow very rapidly just within NX2 for most images without need for further work in CS4. The local colour/contrast correction tools in NX2 mean that my Photoshop time is minimal and only needed where specific custom work is required.
$0.02.
-
The Nikon 70-200 VR was designed at a time when Nikon had no FX sensor. It's a phenomenal lens on a crop sensor, but the corners leave something to be desired on full frame. I have a feeling the D3X might really be too much for that lens. I've never shot a D3X though myself, so I could just be full of hot air.
The lens test on dpreview is pretty depressing for owners of the 70-200 and any FX Nikon.
I have both Nikon and Canon 70-200 f2.8, yes the Canon is better, yes the Nikon corners are poor but not so bad you can't use it. Plus the focus issues I've had with the Canon kind of make lens quality an unusable luxury.
Kevin.